Peer Review 2

   I first peer reviewed Hannah Gardner's blog. This is my review. I then peer reviews Sofia Haserot's draft. This is the rubric. 

    Perhaps the most important thing that I learned about project 1 and the projects in general is that the different genres truly serve different purposes. The point of a QRG is not to describe an event or fact in a lengthy paragraph. The point is to quickly inform the reader of the subject and the events that took place. Events should not only be described by hyperlinks and bolded headings but also pictures. They provide perhaps the quickest explanation (if used correctly) to any story.

     The next thing I learned is that the explanation of stakeholders is absolutely key to any story. They most certainly make or break the story. Just explaining the details of event without the important people concerned with this makes the story seem useless. 

            The first weakness with my draft is the shallow explanation of the event. The terms being used may have not made any sense and may have even taken away from the entire purpose of the essay. I am going to thoroughly explain the event using more colloquial language and why this matters to the story.

O'Conner, Peter. "Henley-on-Thames 166: Weak Bridge" 08/26/12 via  flickr
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic 

            The second weakness is my lack of stakeholders. I only included three of the (perhaps) five to six stakeholders in my essay. I will go back and make sure to include all of the stakeholders.

            My other weakness is the explanation of the setting of the story. In fact, it is more that I do not have any details about the setting and how it relates to my story. I will go back and add in a bunch of detail about the setting/time period of the story in order to more fully develop its background.

            I believe my biggest strength to be the clear depiction of each of the stake holders. I made sure to explain exactly how they look and what they believe. The reason for doing this is because it paints a picture as to what the audience would look like for this topic. I will make sure to do provide the same detail for the stakeholders that I add in to the story.

            Another strength of mine is the clear description of the background of the controversy. I explained how gene coding started back in the 70s/80s with the success of two scientists. I will incorporate the setting relevant current events in order to develop the background even more.

            The other strength that my paper holds is its vast amount of sources. These sources help provide credibility to my essay. I will further develop my paper by adding evidence that is more accredited (than perhaps a comment from a blogger) and more often. This will further develop not only the stakeholders, but also the essay as a whole.