 | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
(provide username)
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
You need a Lead that briefly and clearly introduces Lee Bul and what the article will cover.
The sentences are sometimes too long, drawn out, and have too many commas. Writing needs to be a bit more concise and informative rather than creative visual analysis.
There are a few words and sentences that make this piece not neutral such as calling a political figure 'tyrannical', and calling her one of the most 'radical, original' artists. You can say "this person states in this critique that she is one of the most radical artists", you just can't say that yourself.
Some things are written in a way that doesn't make sense... You state that she only worked with steel stone and then immediately say "as a result" she works with soft materials. Do you mean she was finally able to work with soft materials as she became an independent artist and she took to that? Also what do you mean by "The sculptural options"? maybe "careers in sculpture" instead? There are many references that go un-described such as 3-8-6 artists? You could use hyperlinks to keep your reader informed, i.e. for the terms Modernism and Manga. Try to read through your piece like someone who knows nothing about this topic and see if it makes sense.
Add subtitles and sections like Bio, Career, Major Works, etc.
Be careful going too far into more creative visual analysis of works, it becomes a little less neutral. You can quote or cite other biased analysis, just have many perspectives.
| Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
(provide username)
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
You need a Lead that briefly and clearly introduces Lee Bul and what the article will cover.
The sentences are sometimes too long, drawn out, and have too many commas. Writing needs to be a bit more concise and informative rather than creative visual analysis.
There are a few words and sentences that make this piece not neutral such as calling a political figure 'tyrannical', and calling her one of the most 'radical, original' artists. You can say "this person states in this critique that she is one of the most radical artists", you just can't say that yourself.
Some things are written in a way that doesn't make sense... You state that she only worked with steel stone and then immediately say "as a result" she works with soft materials. Do you mean she was finally able to work with soft materials as she became an independent artist and she took to that? Also what do you mean by "The sculptural options"? maybe "careers in sculpture" instead? There are many references that go un-described such as 3-8-6 artists? You could use hyperlinks to keep your reader informed, i.e. for the terms Modernism and Manga. Try to read through your piece like someone who knows nothing about this topic and see if it makes sense.
Add subtitles and sections like Bio, Career, Major Works, etc.
Be careful going too far into more creative visual analysis of works, it becomes a little less neutral. You can quote or cite other biased analysis, just have many perspectives.