Blog #5

One comment I made in regards to one peer’s thesis was, “clear thesis I like how you included your beliefs in your thesis to tie together your introduction”. This peer laid out her points to be addressed in the paragraphs to come. Her thesis nicely connects to her ideas as well as shows her own point of view. A thesis fits under the category of ideas because a thesis lays out the claim that the following paragraphs are trying to support with evidence.

Another comment I made was “Is this a direct quote? if so it must be cited if not you might want to reword and say something like “..and questioned how much good were they really doing”. Here I am referencing a quote, however the quote was not cited, but also vague and could be paraphrased to help the paragraph flow better. After stating that in my comment I gave a suggestion as to how the section could be reworded to flow easier in order to give my peer an idea of what I meant. This comment falls under the category of evidence because I am referencing a quote used to support the claim or thesis.

A third comment I made was, “maybe move to topic sentence of next paragraph because this sentence is a good transition, just not as a closing sentence for this paragraph”. I was referencing a closing sentence of one of my peers paragraphs. I could tell she was trying to transition or start to transition to the next paragraph. However, the sentence she used introduced a new idea in relation to what she had just previously mentioned rather than concluding her evidence and claim. Therefore I suggested moving the sentence from the closing of one paragraph to the topic sentence of the paragraph that followed because her sentence really was a good transition, but was in the wrong spot. This comment falls into the category of organization because it has to do with how the paragraph flows.

For me prioritizing global edits over local edits was hard. I am someone who appreciates good peer editors who pick up on things I miss, especially because it is easy to miss local edits in my own papers because I become so familiar with the words after rereading them so often. However, looking back it helps to globally edit first to make sure the foundation of the paper is there. As a peer editor I wish or would suggest then going back in a different color and doing local edits so the peer knows which is which and on a second read I might pick up on things I missed the first time.  For the future this might be another editing strategy that I use. I would benefit from global edits then local edits in two different colored pens.