Peer review was a process improved upon between the first and last peer review. I went from finding small errors (local revision) to looking at the overall paper (global revision) to find the main points that may need to be worked upon. For my first peer review of the semester, I looked at the first draft, “Grades,” of my classmate, Mya. In the essay I looked at only surface level things like making “student” to “students” and making “there” to “their” and other surface level things like putting the punctuation before the quotation mark and making it in Times New Roman font. After practicing peer edits and looking at the big ideas of the paper, or global revision. By the last peer review I was commenting on the overall points of the paper and the big things rather than the small little errors here and there. I reviewed the first draft, “Big Data,” of my classmate, Christine. All the comments were divided into certain categories to identify certain elements in the essay. I commented, “(TS) Introduction of author should not be its own sentence. It is an incomplete sentence as there is no verb and should be connected to the quote that you will use” on her essay to notify here to introduce the source to bring credibility to it and follow the framing technique. In addition, I commented “(N) This could be the part where you can include the naysayer that is against big data as it violates privacy and you can strengthen your argument that it advances healthcare for the people” to give a recommendation of the inclusion of a naysayer. This represents my improvement of peer review from finding small errors to the overall improvement of the paper.
