My earlier efforts at peer review felt like a learning curve to me. As I started to read my peers’ papers it was hard not to just mark up their essay with small grammatical fixes, but to understand to actually review the work as a whole is very important. I had to remind myself to ask questions, such as what is this whole paragraph telling me? What does their thesis mean and is it clear throughout their essay? That is exactly what we were taught in class, to prioritize offering feedback on the global work. 

My efforts for the third project, after having two peer reviews under my belt, I was able to provide feedback that really shows my development. For example, when a peer wrote “technology wants to be loved” with no citation as well, I offered the comment “in Jesse’s rubric, he includes “Work with passages (not snippets) from multiple texts in the same para at least twice (Barclay’s paras):” The quote you chose from Kelley would be considered a snippet, I would make it longer so you can analyze it better and also get the points for it.” This comment works on both global and local, because the issue is very local but its impact is majorly global and affects the rest of the writing. I know this because I made similar mistakes with my quotations and received help from my professor to fix it.

The most important part of the peer review is the final comment, which includes an overview of local and global concerns. I have definitely improved since my earlier projects, but I believe I definitely still have room for improvement with peer reviews, but I enjoy learning and growing in the area so more practice will be beneficial for me. In the future I will highlight the fact that I am commenting on a local or global concern in my final comment.

PDF of selected peer review: