Blog #9 Peer Review Recap, Part 2

The peer review for essay two using the Wet Paint environment was just as challenging as the first peer review using Google Docs. Getting instruction on how to use a new program right before a project is due is a big first hurdle. I think if we had initially, (like at the beginning of the semester) been instructed on how to use all of these new programs and had a chance to get comfortable using them and learning about some of the features, then the rest of the writing and peer review process wouldn’t have been so nerve-racking.

The turn around time for getting the assignment and coming up with the draft seems unfairly short. One of the problems is that the instructions for doing the essays have been vague – it’s really hard to figure out exactly what we are supposed to be doing. And secondly, the focus is so narrow and specific that it makes it seem like everyone is forced to write about nearly the same thing using the same limited resources. It gets a little confusing and causes a lot of frustration.

As for getting to the peer review process itself – due to the short amount of time that we have to compose a quality document (not), we are unable to make the most of our peer reviews because many students are getting their rough drafts and outlines peer reviewed – not the last draft before final revision. This has not been helpful – just a lot of crazy-busy work.

Getting to be the first person to edit the document is good, however it gets more annoying to peer review after multiple reviewers add more comments with the different colors of text. It interrupts the flow of the reading and I personally find it to be irritating. At least Google.docs had a highlighting label feature that kind of offset the comments.

Also it was time consuming to have to look through everyone’s files to find out if they had five reviews or not – but then it was time consuming looking for reviews to come through the email with Google.docs as well.

I think using an electronic peer review system is a really good idea – to save trees and everything, but we just need to find a system that has the features that work for this classroom. Maybe Dr. Krause is designing one or searching for the perfect peer review system as we write.
I wished that I had more time to work on my essays to get them to the point where peer review was actually worthwhile – but there simple isn’t enough time. For the short time we used the Wet Paint Wiki, it seemed that it was similar to Google.docs, except Wet Paint didn’t have the live update feature of Google.docs. I really enjoyed working with both environments, I just wish we had more time to learn how to really use and make the most of them.