Peer Reviews

I reviewed Cynthia’s and Malik’s rough draft. I learned a lot about including the counter argument, presenting your own credibility, and using genre conventions from reading through their work. It’s always interesting to read other people’s work to learn about your own.

Peer Review A

I reviewed Cynthia Morton’s “Project 3 Script Rough Draft”. I did a content review of her rough draft because she seemed to have a pretty good handle of form. I tried to help Cynthia with various local revisions she could make. Most of these were ideas for expansion or little bits of wording she could change. I helped her to expand her ideas and reflected what I understood or did not understand from her essay. I incorporated the distinction between global and local revision from pages 63-64 in the Student Guide in my review. I focused mainly on local revisions and gave her my impression of the global message I got from her script. I really admired Cynthia’s understanding of her genre conventions. She seamlessly incorporated video clips into her own speaking.

Peer Review B

I reviewed Malik Bullock’s “Rough Cut Project 3”. I chose to do a content review as well because he seemed to have a good handle of the form. I did a global revision, described on pages 63-64 of the Student Guide. I helped Malik understand the information that his audience is left wondering like how he is credible and what his stance is. I helped him to make his argument more clear by asking questions that could help clarify and expand his argument. I was really impressed with his knowledge of the counter argument. He very educatedly explains all the intricacies of the counter argument which shows his well roundedness.