Which 2 or 3 comments that you received yesterday were the most helpful for you? Why?
I received multiple comments on regarding concepts I thought I explained previously in the paper but didn't. Having someone else read it and call it out was helpful because it isn't obvious to me about what things are confusing to someone reading for the first time
What did you think about yesterday’s digital Peer/Reader Review sesh? Better/worse/same as the “old school” hard copy one? Please explain!
I think it was more effective the the first one because making comments directly onto their document makes it simpler to make corrections. Also, multiple people reading and reviewing at the same time gives more feedback.
So, in the end, how’d your WP2 paper go? What were you happy with? What weren’t you? Why? Be specific! (Remember: this is fodder for your end-of-quarter metacognitive reflection)
I think I did better in WP1 because i felt like I had more things I could write about. For WP2, I was struggling to find things to write about to make it substantial without sounding repetitive. On the other hand, I was able to find interesting sources for WP2 so it was interesting because each of the sources were so different.
No comments:
Post a Comment