With these peer edits I really liked the three to a group idea. The questions were good, but almost too broad. I guess they let us point out anything we like, but it was hard to make suggestions when it comes to rewording things or changing sentence order. While we could pretty easily edit content and give back a broad idea of what we'd like to change, we couldn't really dig into the paper.
I would have liked to find a way to actually edit each other's papers. Grammar may not be quite as important to content to some, but I think it is an essential part of peer-edits. Sometimes I like to circle a sentence just to point out that it's a little rough to read. Being able to go through and suggest those tiny changes can, in the end, greatly effect how the paper flows as a whole. Furthermore, I felt like I wasn't giving back my full impression of the paper (or getting back the full impression others had of my paper). I couldn't leave comments in the margins, which I like to do as I go through the paper, which left me writing about it as a whole instead of really doing a sentence by sentence (or even point by point) edit.
I'm not sure how we could change this exactly, but I don't love the current setup.
Secondly, feedback is essential. I will use it to look at any suggestions made, but once again the comments are so broad I can't pinpoint what people really didn't think was I well-formed thought. I ended up with comments like I need to edit grammatical things. I should put in more personal relations. I have nice quotes. While this gives me an idea of what I can look at, it is NOT the full picture.
As for why I will use these edits, it is because this paper is not about me. It is meant for others to read, so it needs to flow for others and not just myself. And it is a first draft, it will have errors, they all do. Getting someone else to give me a fresh look at what I've written is priceless when it comes to any kind of writing. There will be things people suggest that I don't change, but at least I know it's an issue for someone out there and I am taking a risk by keeping it how it is.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Saturday, October 2, 2010
The Paradoxical Nature of Peer Assessment...
is that when you don't get substantial feedback you are sort of on yr own for the revision process, but if you get a lot of good feedback, it generally means you have a lot of work ahead of you...both the mental work of sorting through the suggestions and deciding what is useful for you, and then the work of actually revising the paper based on what you decided to take to heart.
I usually hate writing workshops, which is weird, because I actually love them conceptually. I think it might just have to do with the environments I have experienced them within. Generally, I don't feel like I get substantial feedback. Rarely, I do luck out and get that attentive reader who can both see what I am trying to do and offer me ways to do it more effectively; this reader, however, always signals more work for me to do, so it is not a completely exciting experience, either. ;) I think the problem for me must just be that peer assessment/writing workshops are like taking the whole writing process and making it kind of public. I find writing really intimate, so I don't always want to share my writing with whoever is assigned to my assessment group. I do understand, however, that it is a great tool for improving writing. I also think it can make the writing process more intimate, by opening it up and having an honest, uninhibited discussion. In certain situations, it might actually extend the inherent intimacy of the writing process.
I felt like the online peer assessment method we used worked, for the most part. I felt like I was able to get a pretty decent draft turned in, although I did have to take the day off of work to do so. Initially I didn't understand some of the feedback I got from my reviewers, but at this point I have contemplated it and feel like both of them offered me some useful bits of guidance for steering my next revision. I agree with Ashley that it would really help if the forums were not closed after the deadline, especially in the peer assessment discussions but also in general. For example, maybe Alyssa or I said something to Ashley in our feedback that bothered her and it would have taken a simple back-and-forth exchange to disambiguate what we were saying. This seems pretty important; I would also be in favor of leaving them open always, because sometimes I notice a post that I should respond to a lot later, for example a professor responded to a post I made on D2L in May and I just saw it last month, a summer after the class over and I had already been graded and everything. I still responded to it, and then I e-mailed him to let him know it was there. The conversation shouldn't end just because the assignment or the unit or the class or the degree program does.
I don't think any kind of sychronous chat tool is necessary. I felt like written feedback and using notes in Word was effective for our group -- we could make notes on specific sections as we went along, and then writing out our final analysis gave us a good ability to think out our responses thoroughly. It seems better in ths kind of critical setting to have more response time, not less. :)
Well, my peers gave me a lot to think about going forward. Both of my reviewers thought I should add more summary to my paper, but I felt like both of their papers had too much summary, so I am wondering if my summary is truly not substantive enough or if this is just a sylistic difference. It is a short paper, so I would much rather focus on analysis and connecting the ideas of the authors to my personal experience. I felt like I got a lot of feedback that was interesting, but that I don't think I can act upon necessarily in such a short paper, for example, Ashley thought I should go into not only experiences from my schooling, but what approaches teachers used that produced them. It's a good thought, I'm just not sure it is necessary or possible to fit into a page of such short length.
I think the main thing is that I am attempting to write a paper that could easily be a lot longer than this assignment, so while all of the feedback I got is good, I don't feel I can successfully act on it in my revision without being way over the oage limit. I will, however, take the legitimate criticism and use it to reshape my paper in a way that makes it stronger within the framework of the assignment you gave, with it's length requirements and everything.
I usually hate writing workshops, which is weird, because I actually love them conceptually. I think it might just have to do with the environments I have experienced them within. Generally, I don't feel like I get substantial feedback. Rarely, I do luck out and get that attentive reader who can both see what I am trying to do and offer me ways to do it more effectively; this reader, however, always signals more work for me to do, so it is not a completely exciting experience, either. ;) I think the problem for me must just be that peer assessment/writing workshops are like taking the whole writing process and making it kind of public. I find writing really intimate, so I don't always want to share my writing with whoever is assigned to my assessment group. I do understand, however, that it is a great tool for improving writing. I also think it can make the writing process more intimate, by opening it up and having an honest, uninhibited discussion. In certain situations, it might actually extend the inherent intimacy of the writing process.
I felt like the online peer assessment method we used worked, for the most part. I felt like I was able to get a pretty decent draft turned in, although I did have to take the day off of work to do so. Initially I didn't understand some of the feedback I got from my reviewers, but at this point I have contemplated it and feel like both of them offered me some useful bits of guidance for steering my next revision. I agree with Ashley that it would really help if the forums were not closed after the deadline, especially in the peer assessment discussions but also in general. For example, maybe Alyssa or I said something to Ashley in our feedback that bothered her and it would have taken a simple back-and-forth exchange to disambiguate what we were saying. This seems pretty important; I would also be in favor of leaving them open always, because sometimes I notice a post that I should respond to a lot later, for example a professor responded to a post I made on D2L in May and I just saw it last month, a summer after the class over and I had already been graded and everything. I still responded to it, and then I e-mailed him to let him know it was there. The conversation shouldn't end just because the assignment or the unit or the class or the degree program does.
I don't think any kind of sychronous chat tool is necessary. I felt like written feedback and using notes in Word was effective for our group -- we could make notes on specific sections as we went along, and then writing out our final analysis gave us a good ability to think out our responses thoroughly. It seems better in ths kind of critical setting to have more response time, not less. :)
Well, my peers gave me a lot to think about going forward. Both of my reviewers thought I should add more summary to my paper, but I felt like both of their papers had too much summary, so I am wondering if my summary is truly not substantive enough or if this is just a sylistic difference. It is a short paper, so I would much rather focus on analysis and connecting the ideas of the authors to my personal experience. I felt like I got a lot of feedback that was interesting, but that I don't think I can act upon necessarily in such a short paper, for example, Ashley thought I should go into not only experiences from my schooling, but what approaches teachers used that produced them. It's a good thought, I'm just not sure it is necessary or possible to fit into a page of such short length.
I think the main thing is that I am attempting to write a paper that could easily be a lot longer than this assignment, so while all of the feedback I got is good, I don't feel I can successfully act on it in my revision without being way over the oage limit. I will, however, take the legitimate criticism and use it to reshape my paper in a way that makes it stronger within the framework of the assignment you gave, with it's length requirements and everything.
Helpful Hints
I thought the peer revisions went really well. At first I was very iffy as to how it would work, and if I would be able to understand all of the criticism, considering it was not in person. However, this ended up not being the case at all. I thought this way of group revisions worked very well. I do wish that there was a more efficient way of making corrections on their papers. When I can read a hard copy of a paper, I seem to write all over it, leaving grammatical corrections, comments, and smiley faces all over the paper. However there was no way to do that on here. I guess it is just the teacher in me that wants to comment all over essays. I also feel like the responses back were quite broad. In the classroom, I think that it is sometimes easier for classmates to write all over a paper and hand it back, which would give me more comments. I think this way, however, worked out a lot better than I imagined it would.
For this week we had to write and post our rough draft of our very first essay! When writing the essay I knew it was a very “sloppy” copy for myself. I knew it was going to need a lot of work, but was looking really forward to reading my groups feedback. After posting and reading the feedback, I feel that I have truly gained a lot of quality information on what to add to my essay. One of my group members, Molly, pointed out the fact that my topic was much different than most of the others. This made me very happy. I think as a writer, it is important to define yourself in your own way, and I really tried to do that with this piece. Because of that I based this essay around my own feelings, and those of the people around me- Writing is too rule based now-a-days! I think writing has begun to turn people away because of all of the rules we must follow. I thought that Gere and Bartholomae did a wonderful job giving points and reasoning for this, and I could really connect. After reading both posts by my two group members, I also realized that I need to add more quotes. I have always been very iffy about quotes and interpreting them. Therefore, I am challenging myself to add more quotations in my writing this semester. I feel that this would be a good time to set this goal for myself, considering I feel so comfortable in this class. Overall the feedback really did help me as a writer, not only of this essay but in general for this semester.
Peer Assessment
The peer assessment made me feel a little uncomfortable, honestly. It wasn't necessarily the fact that we had to do it (it is definitely a useful tool and I didn't feel like it was asking too much or anything...), but probably the way it was set up. One thing that I know would have really helped me is if we would have had access to the peer review questions before the draft was due. I was personally pretty rushed for time in writing my draft, but I tried to adhere to the prompt (what I understood of it) as much as possible before uploading my paper so that I could have a productive response session with my group members. Then, when I read the questions we had to answer about our peers' papers, I realized I had missed some key things, or misinterpreted some things. So I felt super awkward that I had already submitted a paper that sort of missed the mark in some aspects.
Anyway, as I assessed my peers, I spent a lot of time working on the assessments (and Erin suggested that we use the Word comment function, which I think was useful in terms of pointing out particular areas specifically) and tried hard to be very precise in my assessment. I felt then that I might come off as seeming a bit superior, which can certainly be the tendency in an online setting (things get misinterpreted all the time).
I was then conflicted because both of my other peers had approached their papers in very different ways from me, so it seemed like we all had conflicting interpretations of what the others ought to have written. I got two reviews that advised me in completely opposite directions, and while I submitted mine pretty early in the discussion to perhaps facilitate a dialogue, they were both submitted later on the day it was due, and because of other obligations I was not able to read them until the forum was closed.
I did like the idea of possibly having a longer discussion period, however I question whether this would actually work. I am taking all online classes, and in nearly every one of those classes, the tendency for most of the students is to wait until the day the assignment is due to post. This is so incredibly frustrating as discussions are expected to emerge, and most often the reason I submit so early is because the ends of my weeks are usually busy with work and other homework items, thus forcing me to do my homework early or not at all. I always hope that an early post will provoke others into doing the same, but I think a lot of times it just comes off as being overzealous (though I just want to be a good student)...
What I was thinking in relation to a longer discussion period is that it might be helpful to have a discussion forum that remains open after the assignment is due, just so students are able to have further communication all in the same place if there are questions or comments they would like to make. Switching over to e-mail is currently an option, but a hassle since all the prior dialogue is located on the forum.
Also, just a question: are we going to be given professorial feedback on our rough drafts, or are we to focus solely on our peer assessments? I don't really have an expectation either way, I am just curious. I am honestly not sure what I am going to do with my peer assessment info. There was one that pointed out flaws, but did not offer solutions, and one that gave ideas for change, but using that info would mean a substantial revision of my paper. I know I had my own ideas for revision prior to receiving the assessments... I am also going to give my paper to my boyfriend, who has been talking me through this situation (as it left me a bit distraught) and is rather proficient at academic papers, just to see how his assessment meshes with those of my peers.
An issue that I had was that I did not want to cite the paper incessantly throughout my whole paper. I felt that I summarized the two articles thoroughly, using citations as I thought appropriate, and then in my analysis portion I expanded upon the areas which I had already cited in the summaries. I did not want to re-cite the quotes I had already used, because I felt that was redundant, but somehow that led to no citations through my analysis, which I am sure was not the intention of the assignment. I also did not just want to regurgitate the two articles (B and Gere) in a juxtaposed setting; I wanted to take their ideas and make connections that were applicable outside of what they were saying. They did not state many solutions to the problems they identified, so I wanted to combine their arguments to create a solution that was not already stated in the articles.
Anyway, as I assessed my peers, I spent a lot of time working on the assessments (and Erin suggested that we use the Word comment function, which I think was useful in terms of pointing out particular areas specifically) and tried hard to be very precise in my assessment. I felt then that I might come off as seeming a bit superior, which can certainly be the tendency in an online setting (things get misinterpreted all the time).
I was then conflicted because both of my other peers had approached their papers in very different ways from me, so it seemed like we all had conflicting interpretations of what the others ought to have written. I got two reviews that advised me in completely opposite directions, and while I submitted mine pretty early in the discussion to perhaps facilitate a dialogue, they were both submitted later on the day it was due, and because of other obligations I was not able to read them until the forum was closed.
I did like the idea of possibly having a longer discussion period, however I question whether this would actually work. I am taking all online classes, and in nearly every one of those classes, the tendency for most of the students is to wait until the day the assignment is due to post. This is so incredibly frustrating as discussions are expected to emerge, and most often the reason I submit so early is because the ends of my weeks are usually busy with work and other homework items, thus forcing me to do my homework early or not at all. I always hope that an early post will provoke others into doing the same, but I think a lot of times it just comes off as being overzealous (though I just want to be a good student)...
What I was thinking in relation to a longer discussion period is that it might be helpful to have a discussion forum that remains open after the assignment is due, just so students are able to have further communication all in the same place if there are questions or comments they would like to make. Switching over to e-mail is currently an option, but a hassle since all the prior dialogue is located on the forum.
Also, just a question: are we going to be given professorial feedback on our rough drafts, or are we to focus solely on our peer assessments? I don't really have an expectation either way, I am just curious. I am honestly not sure what I am going to do with my peer assessment info. There was one that pointed out flaws, but did not offer solutions, and one that gave ideas for change, but using that info would mean a substantial revision of my paper. I know I had my own ideas for revision prior to receiving the assessments... I am also going to give my paper to my boyfriend, who has been talking me through this situation (as it left me a bit distraught) and is rather proficient at academic papers, just to see how his assessment meshes with those of my peers.
An issue that I had was that I did not want to cite the paper incessantly throughout my whole paper. I felt that I summarized the two articles thoroughly, using citations as I thought appropriate, and then in my analysis portion I expanded upon the areas which I had already cited in the summaries. I did not want to re-cite the quotes I had already used, because I felt that was redundant, but somehow that led to no citations through my analysis, which I am sure was not the intention of the assignment. I also did not just want to regurgitate the two articles (B and Gere) in a juxtaposed setting; I wanted to take their ideas and make connections that were applicable outside of what they were saying. They did not state many solutions to the problems they identified, so I wanted to combine their arguments to create a solution that was not already stated in the articles.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Peer Assessment
My first response is that perhaps the peer assessment could be done over the course of two discussions rather than one. I would have liked to have some more back and forth with the group members about my own writing and also to have the opportunity to discuss how they felt about my assessment of their papers. Maybe other groups had this, but in my group this did not happen. More time for discussion might facilitate this, or maybe not. At any rate it would have been nice to have some kind of discussion rather than simply reading what was written about the papers. A synchronous discussion might facilitate this, but assuming that most students in online classes choose the online format for time flexibility purposes, this might not work. Since that might not work, my suggestion is a longer discussion period.
The assessments given to me contained no suggestions or much in the way of criticism, so I am not sure how I can use these assessments to improve my paper. This was disappointing to me since I am sure I have much room for improvement. This could actually become another suggestion on how to make the peer assessment better. Don't be afraid to be tough on your classmates. I was not terribly tough on the papers I read, but I actually thought they were pretty well done and completed the assignment. Maybe I could have been tougher too and that is something to bear in mind for next time. Most of us in this class are preparing to be teachers which means we will be reviewing assignments and giving out grades. Sometimes bad grades will be given. The point of tough criticism is not to be mean, but rather to offer ways for the student to find improvement. Having said that, whoever is in my group next time, look out!
It was useful to read my classmates papers however. I saw some shortcomings in my own work just by reading theirs. For instance, I now feel that my analysis paragraphs are insufficient. I have too much time spent on summary and not nearly enough on analysis. I will work to expand and clarify my analysis for the final paper.
The assessments given to me contained no suggestions or much in the way of criticism, so I am not sure how I can use these assessments to improve my paper. This was disappointing to me since I am sure I have much room for improvement. This could actually become another suggestion on how to make the peer assessment better. Don't be afraid to be tough on your classmates. I was not terribly tough on the papers I read, but I actually thought they were pretty well done and completed the assignment. Maybe I could have been tougher too and that is something to bear in mind for next time. Most of us in this class are preparing to be teachers which means we will be reviewing assignments and giving out grades. Sometimes bad grades will be given. The point of tough criticism is not to be mean, but rather to offer ways for the student to find improvement. Having said that, whoever is in my group next time, look out!
It was useful to read my classmates papers however. I saw some shortcomings in my own work just by reading theirs. For instance, I now feel that my analysis paragraphs are insufficient. I have too much time spent on summary and not nearly enough on analysis. I will work to expand and clarify my analysis for the final paper.
Peer Review REVIEW!
PLUSES
I think the most helpful part of the peer review was getting feedback on whether the connections I was trying to make were apparent to the reader. Sometimes I am so focused on what I 'know' I am trying to say that I assume I am making it clear for the reader as well, which is not always the case.
It was also really helpful when my group members pointed out places that I could expand on certain points to make a stronger or more comprehensible argument. Once again, I think it's really common for a lot of writers to forget that readers don't approach your paper with the same preconceptions, so it can be really helpful to get outside feedback on your paper's clarity.
MINUSES
It could be a good idea to have everybody post comments about their drafts for their group members to read prior to reviewing. That way, the writer can let people know ahead of time what particular questions/concerns they have that they'd really like feedback on, but can also make disclaimers if there are unpolished parts of the draft that the writer is already aware of. As I was reviewing, I felt on the fence about mentioning certain things, because I felt that the writer was probably aware of it (like a rough flow with the sentences, or missteps with MLA citations). It is a 'first draft' after all - I know for me, each sentence can be a huge challenge to churn out, so my focus for my first draft is just to get all my ideas on the page, knowing that I'll be able to do a lot of cleaning up for the final draft. I felt uneasy about potentially coming off as condescending, but at the same time, I felt I owed it to people to mention things "just in case" they hadn't noticed.
I think the most helpful part of the peer review was getting feedback on whether the connections I was trying to make were apparent to the reader. Sometimes I am so focused on what I 'know' I am trying to say that I assume I am making it clear for the reader as well, which is not always the case.
It was also really helpful when my group members pointed out places that I could expand on certain points to make a stronger or more comprehensible argument. Once again, I think it's really common for a lot of writers to forget that readers don't approach your paper with the same preconceptions, so it can be really helpful to get outside feedback on your paper's clarity.
MINUSES
It could be a good idea to have everybody post comments about their drafts for their group members to read prior to reviewing. That way, the writer can let people know ahead of time what particular questions/concerns they have that they'd really like feedback on, but can also make disclaimers if there are unpolished parts of the draft that the writer is already aware of. As I was reviewing, I felt on the fence about mentioning certain things, because I felt that the writer was probably aware of it (like a rough flow with the sentences, or missteps with MLA citations). It is a 'first draft' after all - I know for me, each sentence can be a huge challenge to churn out, so my focus for my first draft is just to get all my ideas on the page, knowing that I'll be able to do a lot of cleaning up for the final draft. I felt uneasy about potentially coming off as condescending, but at the same time, I felt I owed it to people to mention things "just in case" they hadn't noticed.
BLOG POST FOR SUNDAY, 10/3
Dear all,
Congratulations on completing your first online peer assessment in 201!
For Sunday's Blog post, please do the following:
First, describe as specifically as possible what worked, what did not work (or did not work easily), what was useful, what was not so useful, and so on about the process of peer assessment as we set it up for this first round. Are there ways we could try to do peer assessment differently in an online forum, for example? Would using a synchronous chat tool for each group be more helpful for discussing one another's rough drafts? Please share any ideas you have for tweaking and/or improving the effectiveness of the process.
Second, try to describe how you believe you will use the feedback you received from your group members. How will you use the feedback they gave you to revise your essay further, and why?
Throughout your Blog post, please be honest and detailed--we need you to be honest and detailed in your responses so that we can together create a peer assessment process that works as well as possible for everyone in our class.
As always, please email me with any questions, and KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
Congratulations on completing your first online peer assessment in 201!
For Sunday's Blog post, please do the following:
First, describe as specifically as possible what worked, what did not work (or did not work easily), what was useful, what was not so useful, and so on about the process of peer assessment as we set it up for this first round. Are there ways we could try to do peer assessment differently in an online forum, for example? Would using a synchronous chat tool for each group be more helpful for discussing one another's rough drafts? Please share any ideas you have for tweaking and/or improving the effectiveness of the process.
Second, try to describe how you believe you will use the feedback you received from your group members. How will you use the feedback they gave you to revise your essay further, and why?
Throughout your Blog post, please be honest and detailed--we need you to be honest and detailed in your responses so that we can together create a peer assessment process that works as well as possible for everyone in our class.
As always, please email me with any questions, and KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)