I chose to take some of my peer review from project 2. I did this because my peer review from project 1 was all done on paper, and while I think it was cool how I used different colors to mark different types of comments I made, we were expected to do our peer review online for the rest of the semester. When offering peer feedback, our instructor has taught us to try and make more global revisions versus the local, sentence level revisions we are used to making in high school. While local revisions can be helpful, global revisions are the most valuable feedback that can be obtained from peer review. Examples of some local revisions in the peer review above are when I say, “The brief explanations of each essay are good, but you might want to consider one more sentence for each, assuming the readers have never read the essays. I.e. why does Haidt believe they are preventing kids from completing their work.” So when this peer introduced their sources, it seemed like they wrote it as if the reader had already read the sources and understood them in their entirety. In reality, we assume that the reader has not read the referenced materials and we the writer are the bridge between them. An example of a global revision was in two spots, “I could be wrong and don’t have the text up right now, but does Haidt really thing that there are absolutely no benefits at all to having phones in classrooms? Make sure you are representing the author as they would want,” and “But in his essay Haidt went over why having phones during emergency situations might actually cause more harm than good. Maybe there’s some sort of balance you could reach?” Some of what my peer was writing about seemed a bit exaggerated, and didn’t represent the thoughts of Haidt completely truthfully when they mention he didn’t think there were any benefits at all. My peer review suggests that they go over Haidt’s writing and try to come up with a balance between completely removing phones from schools and doing nothing instead of an extreme, which hopefully makes them rethink the whole paragraph.

While our focus was on global revisions, I did make a few sentence-level revisions as well, like suggesting a better transition into a quote, “You might want to consider having some sort of leading phrase for this quote: “In his essay Haidt referenced a study from 2016 which ‘found that 97 percent…'” The original was “… having your phones in school. “One study from…” A period right into a quote.

In conclusion, I think my peer review this semester met the requirements that were set very clearly during class during our discussions of peer review. Following the first peer review, I believe I transitioned to making a lot more global revisions, while still applying local revisions where I saw fit.