I approached peer response on the two papers I had trying really hard to stick with the parameters I had set for myself. It wasn't more than five minutes before I was completely off track. Grammar errors made me crazy (syntax, punctuation, all of it) but I tried really, really hard not to focus on minutia and just look at the broader aspects of the papers. That aspect was excruciating for me.
Sadly I was way worse on the first paper I did and ended up generating a scribbly mess. By the second paper I was clearer. I tried to be really supportive but I also wanted to be helpful, and didn't do a very good job of either.
A professor told me last semester to always look hard at the conclusion of a draft, because it is often a really good thesis statement. I would say that was true for both of the papers I read. It was interesting to me to see how one of the papers had progressed from a draft I had seen earlier. The second paper I looked at seems more adrift. That paper would definitely benefit from some in-person peer comments. I wasn't sure a lot of the time what the author was really trying to say.
I learned that it takes a really long time to edit papers that confused me.
And I really, really, really needed to correct the grammar....but I was strong in that sense and resisted.
No comments:
Post a Comment