Really Responding

Cassie Wickliffe

Really Responding

a. This text was surprising in the tone and style of the way it's written. The author writes in a way that includes the reader with a less formal tone. The author writes about scenarios and asks the reader rhetorical questions. I'm surprised that the "What are your goals?" section is less about correcting errors and punctuation, but more about how the paper is strictly yours to read, not to change and give your opinion on.

b. The strategies in this text are very useful for a peer review. In this section "How to sound?", a very good point is made on how to not be judgmental and sound like your peer's teacher. Instead, you need to set a helpful tone that is friendly from a colleagues perspective. I see this mistake being made constantly, so I think this advice is very beneficial for any peer review. Another point that stuck out to me was in the "How much criticism? How much praise?" section emphasizing on how you need to praise and complement the writer, more than criticize. I always felt that peer reviews are for changing the paper to make it better, and less on pointing out the good parts of the paper.

c. I have done peer reviews frequently in my previous dual enrollment and AP English classes. I have had both positive and negative experiences while doing so. I've been paired with peers that take a rude approach and forget to complement my writing, which is a negative experience. However, I noticed that when my peer acts more as an equal, rather than my superior, I apply their advice better. It's always been important to me in a peer review to keep in mind that you're helping to make the writing better, not giving it a grade.