Peer Review for Tim Wils

What this post helped me learn is what I can do to my project to improve it. It got me thinking about the weaknesses in my project and how I can make it better.

• The name of the title and author for the project you reviewed.

The title of the project is “Project 2 Final Draft and the author of this project is Tim Wils.

• A working hyperlink to the project you reviewed.

https://drive.google.com/a/email.arizona.edu/file/d/0ByqYqZAbNHpURndPMmZZdzNnYlU/view

• An explanation of the peer review activity you selected for the project you reviewed.

The review activity that I selected was the convention activity. I commented on different changes in the conventions of a podcast that Tim could make. He did a great job with this project and these suggestions could make it even better.

• An explanation of how you think you helped the author with your feedback (in other words, how did you help them make their work better?)

I think that the conventions changes that I suggested, like the addition of credits at the end of the project and the elimination of the use of music in the middle of his words, could make his project more credible. These changes will make his project seem more professional and better overall.

• An explanation of how you incorporated something from the suggested Student’s Guide readings (or any other course materials, if you’d prefer) into your feedback.

What I helped Tim with is his Conclusion and Transitions. Both of these sections being stronger will improve his project as a whole.

·        One thing about their work that you admired or think you could learn from.

I believe the strongest part of Tim’s project is his attitude and tone throughout the project. It keeps the audience interested and helps keep the project interesting during the entirety of it.