Peer Feedback notes - Good feedback comes from the needs of the person receiving it, not from the needs of the critic - Good feedback supports the author and provides reactions to the author’s text o This does not mean that you should only praise the author o No matter how critical you have to be, respect the person on the receiving end of your critique; there is a difference between the person and the person’s work, and you are not trying to “put down” the author o Bullet points or full sentences? § Bullet points good for pointing out simple mistakes § More complex feedback – the logic of your argument, the conclusion in relation to the thesis statement, or the organization of the text – requires more thorough explanation o Grammar or style? § Point out the most obvious/important mistakes in grammar or vocabulary; however, if a type of mistake is reoccurring throughout the text (for example, wrong tense, missing articles, or missing punctuation), you do not need to point out all the instances § Focus on style – how well is the argument developed? Does the organization of the text (several sentences into one paragraph, several paragraphs into one text) make sense? Does the language sound natural? General guidelines for giving feedback: - Be professional – you may be reviewing the work of your future colleagues in the academia; practicing peer review helps with your writing and can increase your knowledge of an area - Be pleasant – no matter how critical you have to be, separate the writing from the work itself; this is especially important when dealing with very bad papers - Be realistic – be realistic when it comes to the amount of possible changes; do not suggest anything that is outside the scope of the work - Be specific – focus on specific issues; generalizations are not helpful - Be direct – say what you mean; if you are too indirect, the author may not understand what you are trying to say - Be organized – giving feedback is to communicate; organizing your feedback in a logical order matters