Reflection on the peer-review process
Write: Based on the feedback you received in Week Three during the peer-review process, as well as the feedback you received from your instructor and your classmates throughout the course, address the following in your post:
- Describe the main areas of your paper that you need to work on as well as areas that your reviewers felt you did well on.
- How will/did you remedy any areas of weakness in your paper?
- Did your reviewer feel you did a solid job addressing your purpose in the personal essay?
- Did you effectively reach your audience? Why, or why not?
The peer review is below:
§ What did the writer do well in the essay? Please be specific.
This writer has a clear essay with some good details to support his main idea. The writer kept my attention throughout the essay by keeping things simple and descriptive.
§ How does the writer indicate that it will be a personal essay? Is there a clear thesis? Describe how features of the essay and thesis work and/or need work.
Because the writer is writing based upon his personal experience with the park, I feel that the essay is personal. The thesis is clear and it gives actual facts about the location at which the writer is talking about. The thesis is about Yellowstone Park and the feature describes the park from the size to what’s in it. This essay tells me how the park looks, how special it is and how attached the writer is to it.
§ Do all major points relate back to the thesis statement? In short, does the writer seem to go off topic in places? If so, how? (In other words, is the paper unified and are all points related?) If not, suggest ways to correct.
Yes, the writer kept everything based on just Yellowstone Park and he stays on the thesis though out the essay.
§ List the use of transition words and phrases that show chronology or shifts in topic. Are additional transitions needed? If so, where?
I wouldn’t say that the essay is in chronology order but it may shift because of the words he used such as he likes the park, first because of the size, and then he jumps to consequently. Overall I think he did a job.
§ Indicate where the writer uses features like concrete language, tone, or abstract language effectively.
In the essay second and third paragraphs, the writer uses concrete language to describe what he saw about the park.
§ Does the writer provide enough description, dialogue or narration so that you can
easily infer the thesis or controlling idea for the essay? Where might the writer include more dialogue, narration, or description?
Yes, there were a lot of descriptions throughout this essay I don’t think the writer needs to add any more.
§ Suggest at least one item the writer might add to this essay.
More details about why you choose this topic other than the description of the park.
§ Suggest at least one item the writer might remove from this essay.
I wouldn’t remove anything and I enjoyed it.
§ Is the concluding paragraph effective? If so, why? If it is not effective, what can be done?
It is effective but the writer needs to add more information as to why he suggests the readers visit this park. The conclusion needs to be pop a little more to leave the Yellowstone Park on their minds.
Answer not yet available
To have this questions done by our pool of professional writers, kindly send us an email.
Email to email@example.com