Reflection on Project 3 Draft

Below I will reflect on my draft for project three and the peer review activity by answering questions about the process.

For this project I peer reviewed Michaela and Chad's projects. Both were very different than mine because we all used different genres and argument types, but I think both of them did really well at compiling their information and arguments.

Gideon Burton. "Peer Review Monster." Jan 1, 2009 via Flickr.
Public Domain. 

1. Who reviewed your Project 3 rough draft?

Allison and Lia reviewed my draft. 

2. What did you think and/or feel about the feedback you received? Be explicit and clear. Tell me what helped or what confused you about the feedback you got.

I really appreciated Allison's comments about audience, because I think that she's right about making it more clear in my actual paper who my audience is. I also liked Lia's honesty about some of my arguments. I think if I add a little more to the paper, it could be  lot better. The only thing that I disagree with is when Lia mentions talking about something other than math, because math education is my focus, not education as a whole. 

3. What aspects of Project 3 need to most work going forward [Audience, Purpose, Argumentation, or Genre]? How do you plan on addressing these areas? 

I need to clarify my audience, which I will do by adding in specific references to them early on. I also need to add more arguments, so I think I will include more data and numbers as well as one more argument (to make it three) about its effectiveness. 

4. How are you feeling overall about the direction of your project after peer review and/or instructor conferences this week?

I feel really good. I got great feedback from everyone, and I'm looking forward to making the project better. I liked how specific these peer reviews had to be, I think that it made it much more helpful to improve my project.