Peer Review 1

            For this blog I'm going to cover my first peer review process for Project 1. For this first peer review I graded Michaela Harrington's Quick Reference Guide which can be found here. The rubric I used to grade Michaela's QRG can be found here.

JC ajcann.wordpress.com. "Peer Review" 5/23/2008 via Flickr.
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License.

            After reviewing Michaela Harrington's first draft of her QRG, it had me thinking a little about the quality of writing for my Quick Reference Guide. In her guide she really sets the scene for readers and is descriptive and that is a key feature in keeping the reader interested. I think my draft is pretty strong because I included key features of the QRG such as pull-out quotes, images, and graphics so it helps give me an idea of what my final product will look like. I feel like I need to cover a few more subjects to inform the reader more and maybe cut down on some of my writing. Emily Bond reviewed my QRG and seems to think I currently have a strong foundation. Two mistakes that I noticed my peer made in the QRG was over-telling the story and being too stocky with the posts as in it seems monotone (especially at the evaluating the stakeholders). The QRG is meant to be descriptive, short and informative and all subheadings along with their paragraphs should flow. Two things that I admire from Michaela's post, however, is (like I said before) her amazing descriptions of the story, providing background and her thorough evaluations of each of the stakeholders.