Outcome 4 (Peer Review) – Be able to critique their own and others’ work by emphasizing global revision early in the writing process and local revision later in the process.

In my earliest attempts at peer review I often failed to comment on local revision errors in my fellow students’ papers. This was mainly out of a lack of confidence in my own writing. I honestly did not wish to critique someone else’s paper with a thousand marks that I was not confident in. In Isabella Roy’s first paper I successfully suggested a global revision in which I suggested some potential points to extend upon in her paper. “Hennick mentioned the BLM movement in his article, which was written in 2019 before this year’s protests and marches. If you wanted to expand mention how far the movement has come and how much more support it has compared to 2016,” (Gould). I was perhaps giving too much information inn my suggestion but I still stand by the idea. It was important for her to provide additional information about the current status of the Black Lives Matter Movement in order for a reader to properly understand the timeline and atmosphere that this article was being written in. As we have moved further forward inn the semester I have gained more and more of an ability to peer review properly and revise others’ works effectively. Now I find myself even making note of the smallest of errors or inconsistencies in peers’ papers, and that is not because I have all of a sudden lost my sense of empathy and want to make people feel self conscious about their writing but because through others revising my own work I have come to appreciate the massive amount of corrections to see to on my own writing. I am nowhere near a respectable writer, so I can use all of the help I can get and therefore I have chosen to do my best to provide the same for others if they chose to accept it.