Peer Review Process: 9/16

peer-review-process

  • Grade your peer’s project according to the provided grading rubric.

 

Caroline’s project:

 

Rhetorical Awareness: Competent (style is good, way facts are presented is efficient (many rhetorical questions), but sometimes predictable.)

 

Stance: Competent. (stance is clearly stated.)

 

Development of Ideas: Developing/Competent. (The first part “Peta” is really good but the second one discussing the boy’s image is missing analysis (colors, positioning, contrast…), and the 3rd could’ve been analyzed more deeply(wording pattern, rimes…)).

 

Organization: Competent/Mature. (Order is good and coherent: from the most obvious to the most personal.)

 

Conventions: Competent (no notable errors in grammar and mechanisms.)

 

Design for medium: Competent (the photo essay genre is used properly. The essay takes into consideration that there is an audience and it reaches it well: visuals are good and pleasing.)

 

 

 

 

  • 1-3 sentences describing what you learned about your writing or your project through the peer review session.

 

 

During the review process, Johnny kept pointing out that I succeeded in reaching my audience. He said that the vocab was good and researched, the tone was conversational and that the analyze work was pleasing and interesting. He added that the audience feels close to me and understands my points. I was personally surprised because I thought the tone of my writing was too formal and boring. I also noticed that the organization of the text was successful: he found using quotations realistic.

 

 

 

  • Your plan to revise to revise your project.

 

Johnny also pointed out to some tense and grammatical errors. I anticipated these errors and plan to work on them. I am also planning on developing my conclusion and find an opening question, a gesturing for future thinking.