Peer Review 12a & 12b

 This blog post concerns a peer review of the rough cuts for project 3.

Peer Review 12a:

Jason's rough cut

I made a content suggestion.

I reassured Jason that his extensive usage of citations and cold, hard facts was extremely effective in framing his paper's concept. By digging up all of the quotes now, it makes it much easier to go back and focus on the details themselves.

I also discussed the importance of a hook. There seemed to be lacking an attention-grabber, and I discussed briefly how a weak hook can hurt the readability of the paper. If a reader is generally disinterested, then it will be skimmed over and the great details of the paper will go unnoticed.

The biggest thing that I learned from Jason is that more direct quotes is better. By adding these quotes, you not only command authority, but you can round out your message. It's easier to find opposing views to your own if you look at real people who have involved themselves in the field.

Peer Review 12b:

Mariana's rough cut

I made a form suggestion.

I told Mariana that I felt her usage of rhetorical questions was extremely effective in terms of organizing ideas and interesting the reader subsequently. By using these questions, we can understand the main talking points at each sub-section, which help re-grab the interest of the reader.

One suggestion I made was to cut down some of the larger paragraphs into bite-sized chunks. Instead of 6-8 line paragraphs, 3-4 is way more manageable to read on a lunch break, or even during passing period.

I learned that I could've probably picked a topic a lot less dry than San Bernardino shooting, but nothing came to mind. For my next genre, I will try to find a controversy in something eccentric, like music or arts.