Peer Review 1

For the peer review, I read and wrote about Tianna's draft. I graded her work and wrote some suggestions on how I think she could develop certain elements in her quick reference guide. After reading this draft, I realised how there are certain aspects missing from my essay. I have yet to add more graphics to my essay to make my project look more like a quick reference guide. It was noticeable how my peer used the conventions from her genre appropriately which is a element I will focus on developing this week. I think what is working well with my own draft is how I address the context well by answering who, what, where, when and why. I think two mistakes my peer made in her draft was how she answered certain statements made my politicians as just true or false. I know this is just my opinion and I could be completely wrong but I was not sure if this could be used in a quick reference guide. Secondly, the context I felt was addressed overall pretty well, except that the stakeholders should have been introduced more clearly ie; a paragraph describing each stakeholder. As I said before, my peer's use of graphics such as photos and data figures shows a great amount of evidence to support the claims made in the essay. I also liked how the quick reference guide was structured, as it shows how she managed to successfully produce what a quick reference guide should be like. It is these strengths from my peer that I would like to apply in my essay.