Are there sections that you feel are particularly strong or particularly weak? I feel the paper is pretty good. I am glad we are turning it in in steps, otherwise this would be my final draft (and it would not be as good as it can be)
Do your quotations support the unit of analysis under which they are listed? I feel they do. I really searched for the right episode to emphasize my points.(which took FOREVER by the way)
Are your examples illustrative?I feel it has a readable flow, that the examples are for sure illustrative of my view point.
Do you need to include more description?no, I prob. need to describe or explane less and get to the point a bit more.
Is there something that you would like your reviewers to pay special attention to? My APA format. I suck at it and it's what really took a long time :)
How do you think this paper turned out? pretty good, way better than the last one, that's for sure.
posted by dawnemry @ 3:54 AM
3 Comments:
1.Are all sources cited appropriately according to MLA or APA standards? What advice can you offer to help with citing sources correctly? She did cite her stuff appropriately. I think I will be using what she learned. I think she would be offering me advice more than me offering her advice.
2.Does the author clearly lay out the argument that they are supporting? What suggestions do you have to improve the wording of this argument? She says where she is going, and gives examples. I think more examples would be nice, and a better explanation of the stages. There were a few stages I didn’t quite understand, especially in relationship to the examples.
3.Are the units of analysis clearly explained? How do the various units of analysis work to support the argument? Are there units that should have been included or don’t quite work to support the argument? The units of analysis are explained. They work together to explain a main argument. I think they all work.
4.How does the author balance the various units of analysis? Are they of equal length? What about the arrangement? Is there a logical order to the arrangement? Can you suggest any alternative organizational schemes? The author balances the various units of analysis well, although I think they could be expanded on. The order is definitely logical.
5.Comment on the examples used in each unit of analysis. What could the author do to make the examples more clear? How do the examples serve as proof of the presence of each unit of analysis? I think more examples clearly related to the unit of analysis might help. They serve as proof, but not as well as they could if there were a few extra tie-in sentences put in.
6.Comment on the writing. What can the author do to create better flow? Maybe not reflect on the show as much as you do, because it makes it feel more like I'm reading a critic’s review rather than a scholarly analysis. It might just be a different style though. It is a very easy style to read, but I am not sure how the grading process will like it.
7.What other suggestions can you offer to the author to improve this portion of the essay? You state opinions as facts sometimes, so maybe look into that.
1. Yes, all sources are cited appropriately... actually, better than mine.
2. No suggestions at all for this section. I LOVED the argument. It was innovative and daring, and you actually pulled it off too. This paper made me ponder.....
3. Your units are great, I would however define them in lamens terms, for teh not-so-quick people like me. Everything looks great, but maybean addition of some exapmles may help your argument.
4. Great units, great order, great job. YOur paper pulled me in to it . It was a real page turner I would even say.
5. I LOVED the examples. They were perfectly placed with the right units and really gave emphasis to your argument.
6. This paper sucked me in to it. I love how you are using the style of Carrie as your type of narrative. It is a grest touch. I love the personal level you are on with your reader.
7. No real improvments need to be made. Just maybe add some more examples and you should be set. GREAT JOB.
ROUGH DRAFT PEER REVIEW
1. The introduction is very interesting and captures me from the begining. Main arguments are there and layed out very percise and organized.
2. It is very obvious that the author is using the HBO series called "Sex and the City". I really like how you associated traditional courtship rituals with the current roles of the Manhattan Women.
3. I really think that looking at this series from a perspective of traditional courtship rituals is a great way to go. You explain the steps in a sequencial order and I think there are great correlations between these phases and the episodes.
4. Subheadings are very clear and helpful. You included a sufficient amount of examples which pertain to your artifact. Great job here. You might, however, still want to eliminate the usage of "I" in some of the wording.
5. You might want to expand a little on the conclusion section. It is still a little rough although I think you are on the right track with the past and present associations of gender roles.
6. Overall.... your not out of the woods yet. I love your writing style and your examples are concrete. A little bit more work on the conclusion and implication section, however, and you should be in the clear.
7. Like I said, I love the writing style. Although I do wish that you could write this paper in the manner like Carrie Bradshaw, I think maybe a tweak in the direction of scholarly vocab wouldn't hurt. But Overall- Its going to be a GREAT paper!!
Post a Comment
<< Home