Peer Review Comments

Comments

  1. The paper itself was very well-written. There was a-lot of good information, and it does exactly what the rubric wants. There was nice flow between paragraphs from the use of transitions.

    There are a couple spots for improvement. Some minor things are just common grammar and punctuation mistakes. Another thing I found a-lot was incorrect noun verb agreement. There were times where you would talk about a plural noun, but then use a verb for a single noun, or vice verse for singular nouns. I would just go back and read the paper, and you should be able to find the mistakes. Also making sure APA format is correct. I found some citing errors in the format of your in-text cites. The reference page also needs hanging indents.

    All in all it is a well written paper with just a few common mistakes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Overall, the paper is nicely written and clearly states a thesis in the intro. It is clear that you are contrasting non-academic and academic writings. It is organized correctly and flows nicely. You also use correct grammar and APA formatting. There is some room for improvement in the analysis part though.
    One thing that can be improved in your paper is more details. In the non-academic part of the paper you had a lot of details and examples, but the academic part of the paper lacks some specific detail. So try to extend on those paragraphs. Maybe try adding more quotes from the interview somewhere in the paper. You can also try adding transition words to some of the paragraphs.
    Another thing that can be improved is the conclusion paragraph. Right now the conclusion seems to repeat a lot of the things already stated in the paper. Other than those things, your paper doesn’t need much improvement.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Topic Proposal