I learned from my partner how to strengthen my argument by going further into detail about the opposing side and then refuting it. He also pointed out phrases that may have been clear to me as a writer, but were confusing as a reader.
I specifically need work with discussing both sides of my argument and then using stronger more sound evidence to prove why my side is right. My paper would be a lot stronger if I discussed both abstinence-only and safe-sex education and then elaborated on why abstinence-only is wrong and safe-sex is right.
I knew before the peer editing process that my paper needed a lot of work and that my major issue would be that my paper seemed only to discuss one side of the argument. Peer editing did help point out smaller flaws that I did not notice or looked over.
My partner did not help me see a different side to my paper. He agrees with my side 100% but we did discuss how I should incorporate the opposing side
I am willing to chance anything about my paper to make it better.
There were minor things pointed out that I disagreed with like how I word choice or punctuation. Sometimes his choice of wording did not agree with the point I was trying to get across. For the most part I thought the peer editing helped me see flaws in my paper that I had not noticed.
In Matt's paper, I saw that he did a great job thoroughly researching his topic and he made it very clear what side he was on which is something I feel I did well in my own paper. We both had the same problem sometimes with the way we worded things. I think this mutual problem is something that is very common; often times what you write makes sense to you because it is your own work but it is unclear to others.
I did not use the peer review sheet but if I had a hard time finding flaws in the paper myself I'm sure it would have been helpful in guiding my editing.
Now that I have read the sheet and edited someone else's paper, it is easier for me to find the mistakes that I have made in my own and what areas need work.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Observation 6: Peer Review Process
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment