Framing Statement:

During Project #2 I worked with Liza and Thea during peer review. I found that my suggestions during peer review for Liza were most helpful than times spent with other students in the class. While reading Liza’s paper, I noticed that she needed to be a little bit more elaborate with her thoughts. For example, Liza wrote “This is how they [lobsters] spend their last moments of life before someone comes in and points at one to be boiled alive”. Although this sounded nice, and made sense as I read it, I offered her this piece of advice: “explain to the audience why they should care about what happens to lobsters/other animals.” This suggestions aided in Liza’s ability to directly answer the prompt at hand. As she was reaching the answer, she just needed a little bit of a push in order to make her essay that much better. While peer reviewing, it is important to prioritize the unity, and connectivity of one’s paper. It is easy to just throw words on the screen, but it takes a lot more effort to create a relationship between what is being said. Another example came about as Liza stated: “I know I feel guilty, but should I expect that others feel the same? Can we use guilt as motivation to make a change in the system of raising and harvesting animals?” I replied with: “the questions being asked are good, but make sure to explain and answer them, that way the reader does not have to make assumptions, and answer for themselves”. This is another prioritization while peer reviewing. Ensuring clarity for the audience is imperative to making a strong argument.