chapter 9 response

Chapter 9 basically entailed the writing process/steps, and the efficient way to conduct a peer review. I found reading this chapter extremely beneficial because we are about to conduct a peer review. I have done various different peer reviews throughout high school, but I feel that I was never fully educated on how to conduct a thorough and beneficial review. Reading chapter 9 will really help me not only me, but as well as the student whose paper I receive during our peer review. In addition, this chapter discusses what the outcome of an efficient peer review looks like. During the peer review I will strive to achieve the efficient peer review outcome. Like the book says, it is always a good idea to get feedback on your work, but once a first draft has been created, it is the ideal time to conduct a peer review. I know for me personally, I find feedback extremely helpful. It is a great idea to conduct a peer review because the feedback comes from your fellow peers, they are in the same exact position as you, so they know what it feels like to start your first draft. Revising your original draft is crucial in writing because the first draft is all about getting your thoughts on to paper. First drafts, or “writer-based” drafts, can lack logic (not make complete sense), can be very disorganized, and have no foundation meaning the paper can be all over the place. But, this is okay! It is so important to get all of your ideas on paper with out worrying about structure because there is bound to be some lines or ideas in this draft that will turn your disorganized draft into an A+ paper! Finally, chapter 9 provided us with a checklist for peer review which will be very helpful. This checklist outlines all of the vital things the editor must do for the writer. I will for sure be using this checklist during our peer review!

Comments

  1. I agree that writers will be able to conduct a better peer review after reading this chapter. I can relate that I as well was unsure what was the "correct" way to peer review and would take on many different processes trying to find that right one as a writer. The checklist I found to be very important and should be used as a guideline for writers because I found it to be very beneficial for writers.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I do wish the chapter had included the actual criticisms/review comments that inspired the changes Gwen made in her statement. I think that would have been a great way to not just explain the structure of peer review, but give us examples of what it should look like.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts