Peer Review 10a

 This blog post concerns peer revision of Gabby's outline about Flint, Michigan water crisis, titled "The Flint Water Scandal".

This peer review concerns thoughts regarding an outline revision suggestion.

I expressed that Gabby's outline was rich in detail. It was in the form of a tree, with the title of the work centered in the page, and all sorts of branches stemming that give potential real examples. I told her she did an extremely good job laying out so many facts. I also indicated that the information may have been a little TOO plentiful to condense and leave a lasting impression if there was so much detail. In the current state it looks like an information overload. I tend to take the minimalistic approach, but the thing is that she and I have such drastically different styles that me telling her how to operate is silly.

As far as incorporating from the student guide, I mentioned rhetorical situation, which is the keystone of the whole entire project. The question posed above was in response to me asking, "who will read this?" "Sean." He will only have a brief amount of time to read each document, and he might respond in 1 of 2 ways, if not both....

"Lots of detail, must have worked extremely hard on this!"

-or-

"Boring.. too long!"

One thing that I took away was that I don't have NEARLY enough examples to substantiate my claims. I don't have my topic set in stone, but even on past projects, I have focused more on the quality of my examples, even at the cost of not having enough voices contributing to the overall message.