Peer Reviews
My initial understanding of peer review is the process of reviewing a piece of writing. I perceived it to involve pointing out the weaknesses and strengths of a writer. The end objective is always to verify if a writer’s work is compliant with the regulations of writing and the needs of the target audience.
From the videos, the most outstanding ideas are the dimensions of global and local aspects of peer-reviewing. The global aspect focuses on the totality of a piece of writing. It links the writer with the audience of a text. Therefore, the reviewer has a task to read through the entire text and provide the feedback afterwards. A reviewer cannot start commenting on some work at first sight before getting into the details. However, the local aspect looks into the tiny details of the text. It highlights the spelling mistakes, punctuations and the use of words. Thus, it works on the final outlook of a text
Moreover, the most useful concepts that Straub presents in his paper includes the influence of knowledge on the writer and the elements to address in comments. The knowledge of a writer’s background and personality can assist in the selection of response criteria. For instance, when a writer has a confident and outspoken personality, I can look for details to challenge her. It can include the concepts she left out to improve her work. Also, understanding the areas to consider as I give my comment is vital. It enables focusing on the few important details.
The challenges that might arise as I give my comments are in the extent of my comment and how to sound in my delivery. Giving so many details while giving my comment can depict a text as it has so many corrections. Similarly, a comment can come out and sound like that of a teacher.