Research Question/Roadmap
1. Does it pose a question? Does the paper identify tensions? Does it say what it’s going to do and what its point is?
a. This ethnography poses a question about why throwers do the sport that they do. Is it because they love the sport? It also asks if they conform to the typical stereotype
Theme
2. What is the quality of the content of the writing: the ideas, perceptions, and point of view? In your words, what is being said? Is it more than a collection of thoughts and observations? According to the author, why does this whole thing matter?
a. I feel that the content is good, but it go more in depth. Your interviews seem to only seem to scratch the surface. Maybe you could try to go more in depth.
3. Is there too much abstraction or generalization? Underline or circle this language in the paper. In other words, are there so few details, examples and explanations that it ends up dull, empty, impossible to experience? Or, perhaps even impossible to understand? Explain.
a. I think there is to much distraction. There is not much detail. How did you become an insider? Again, try to g more in detail.
4. Is there too little abstraction or generalization and too much clutter of details, examples, and explanations? Too little standing back for perspective? Too little forest per tree?
a. Again, there needs to be more detail about the interview and things like that.
5. What is the practical significance of the artifact? What idea does it represent?
a. There is no artifact that is even mention
6. What is the significance of Interview 1?
a. This is someone who has been throwing for a long time, so she can get god information from this person.
7. What is the significance of Interview 2?
a. The significance of this interview is that is someone who is very open and willing to talk about things that pertain to this subculture
8. Are all 3 required scholarly sources developed in the conclusions?
a. All three of her scholarly sources are brought into the paper
9. Is all source material cited according to MLA, both parenthetically and in a Works Cited?
a. There was no works cited page
10. Do the conclusions satisfy the issues the study raises with complexity? How so?
a. The conclusion that is given answers the original question, but could still go into more depth with this paper.
Structure
11. Is the whole thing unified? Is there a central idea to which everything pertains? What? Are there loose ends that don’t seem purposefully so, but accidently overlooked?
a. I think that it is unified, everything seems to relate back to the research question in one way or another.
12. Are the parts arranged in a coherent, logical narrative sequence?
a. I think that the sequence is good for the most part, however I think it could better in some spots.
13. Were the paragraphs really paragraphs? Could you tell what each one was saying? Did they function as helpful and comfortable units of thought, not too much, not too little? Mark any that seem too short or too long.
a. Not all the paragraphs are correct. Some could be either combined or shortened
Language
14. Are the sentences clear and readable? Underline with a wavy line any that you find incorrect or confusing.
a. Not all sentences are clear and some are very difficult to read
15. Are the words used correctly? List any misused words.
a. There are a few words that used incorrectly
16. Is it succinct enough? Not too long, repetitious or dull? Mark any areas for deletion.
a. You repeat a few things a couple times.
17. Is it full enough? Or does the writer squeeze out the juice of human communication and spoken discourse? Is the language, even if correct, dull and indigestible? Does the writer sufficiently use the language of the subculture?
a. I do not think this paper is very full. There could definitely be more language used in the subculture.
18. Does the diction, mood and level of formality fit with ethnography?
a. The mood seems to fit with the ethnography, it seems very energetic
Readerly Response
Describe what was happening to you as you read. Tell which words or phrases stuck out or resonated.
• Due to the lack of detail, I was very bored while I was reading this paper
What happened and what are the implications?
• During this paper many things were happening, Delia had a one on one with some of the throwers. She also did some research of herself on the issue with scholarly articles
What ideas or beliefs or feelings were brought into this piece? How do multiple points of view contribute to your understanding?
• It think that interviews help gain a new point of view so that it is not a one sided paper
What understanding of the culture do you have from reading this piece? What gave you this understanding?
• I have learned that there are many different types of girls that can be throwers. It is not just bigger girls that can do this sport.
The writer has introduced him/herself to you. Describe that meeting. What’s your impression? Did he thrust out his hand for you to shake? Did she sidle up next to you, but fail to look you in the eye? Did he send you a letter bomb or put his arm around your shoulder? Does it seem like the writer is standing on a cliff talking down to an audience below? What sense of the writer do you have? Formal? Casual? Intimate? Jocular? Arrogant? Are you with the writer, against her, or unsure since you don’t really know him?
• I think that Delia is very confident, I think that she would shake my hand and we would be able to have a very god conversation
Is the writer giving in?
• I do not think that she is giving in, she is simply statin her research
What do you want, need, or wish for?
• I would like to see much more detail on what Delia is feeling throughout the paper.
This peer review has been partially modified from peer reviews found in Peter Elbow’s Writing with Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Peer Review for Emily Bess
Research Question/Roadmap
1. Does it pose a question? Does the paper identify tensions? Does it say what it’s going to do and what its point is?
• I don’t think it really poses a question but it does show her intention by saying that she wants to know why college students sign up for facebook. Again, she says that she plans to figure out why people sign up for facebook.
Theme
2. What is the quality of the content of the writing: the ideas, perceptions, and point of view? In your words, what is being said? Is it more than a collection of thoughts and observations? According to the author, why does this whole thing matter?
• I think that she is trying to say that she thinks there are many different reasons why a person would have a facebook. I do not see many of your own thoughts until the end of the paper. Consider putting your thoughts throughout your interviews.
3. Is there too much abstraction or generalization? Underline or circle this language in the paper. In other words, are there so few details, examples and explanations that it ends up dull, empty, impossible to experience? Or, perhaps even impossible to understand? Explain.
• I think that you did a good job with your examples, but maybe you could try to go more into depth about some things (what are some of the games, what is a wall, things like that).
4. Is there too little abstraction or generalization and too much clutter of details, examples, and explanations? Too little standing back for perspective? Too little forest per tree?
• I’m not really sure if this is what this question is talking about, but you do not give much of your own thought until the end. During your interviews, maybe you could put some more controversial thoughts and your own reactions.
5. What is the practical significance of the artifact? What idea does it represent?
• The practical significance of the artifact is that it shows who the person is. It shows the identity of who that person really is (or who they are claiming to be). You can also stereotype the kind of person they are just by looking at there profile picture.
6. What is the significance of Interview 1?
• I think that the significance behind the first interview was that facebook is something that can be very time consuming, but sometimes, that is not always a bad thing. He is using it to keep in close contact with people who are very close to him such as his girlfriend and other friends. Also, I think he is showing that facebook can be something that is very bad when it comes to school work. He openly admits, like most people would, he uses it to procrastinate
7. What is the significance of Interview 2?
• I think that the significance of the next interview is that facebook does not have to be something that people are addicted to. Contrary to popular belief, people can survive without facebook.
8. Are all 3 required scholarly sources developed in the conclusions?
• I do not see any of your scholarly sources in your conclusion.
9. Is all source material cited according to MLA, both parenthetically and in a Works Cited?
• There are no sources cited in the paper or the works cited page.
10. Do the conclusions satisfy the issues the study raises with complexity? How so?
• I think that the conclusion does satisfy the question that was raised. You wanted to know why people got a facebook and you found out that they wanted to keep in touch with people.
Structure
11. Is the whole thing unified? Is there a central idea to which everything pertains? What? Are there loose ends that don’t seem purposefully so, but accidently overlooked?
• I think that there is a central idea of wanting to know why people originally got on the facebook network. You do a good job describing your findings. However, in your interview with Scott, you talk about wanting to compare facebook usage to time, but you never really go into detail about it. Maybe consider doing that.
12. Are the parts arranged in a coherent, logical narrative sequence?
• I think that it is arranged in a logical order, but I think you should try to do a better job of making it flow nicely. Right now, it is question…answer…question…answer. Expand on your thoughts about the interview a little more
13. Were the paragraphs really paragraphs? Could you tell what each one was saying? Did they function as helpful and comfortable units of thought, not too much, not too little? Mark any that seem too short or too long.
• I think there are times when the paragraphs were not complete paragraphs. There were times when your question for the informant or answer from them was your entire paragraph, which was maybe only one sentence, try finding a better transition so that you can combine the two together, and again, put your thoughts in it
Language
14. Are the sentences clear and readable? Underline with a wavy line any that you find incorrect or confusing.
• I think that your sentences are good and readable. However, see paper for more
15. Are the words used correctly? List any misused words.
• I did not notice any misused words
16. Is it succinct enough? Not too long, repetitious or dull? Mark any areas for deletion.
•
17. Is it full enough? Or does the writer squeeze out the juice of human communication and spoken discourse? Is the language, even if correct, dull and indigestible? Does the writer sufficiently use the language of the subculture?
• The paper is full length but I think that most of it is just regurgitating what the informant said, you didn’t really put your own thoughts into the ethnography and that made it a little boring to read.
18. Does the diction, mood and level of formality fit with ethnography?
•
Readerly Response
Describe what was happening to you as you read. Tell which words or phrases stuck out or resonated.
• I didn’t feel anything really until the end when you started talking about people being who they really say they are. I never really thought about that so that was interesting
What happened and what are the implications?
• I don’t think that anything really happened in this paper, it was just he said, she said, I said paper.
What ideas or beliefs or feelings were brought into this piece? How do multiple points of view contribute to your understanding?
• The ideas that were brought up in this paper is that people have different reason for getting a facebook and different reasons why they get on it each day. This tells me that every person who is a part of this subculture, has a different motives.
What understanding of the culture do you have from reading this piece? What gave you this understanding?
• Again, I know that everyone has a different reason for having a facebook. Whether that reason may be talking to old friends, staying in touch with a friends who moved away, staying in touch with a significant other, etc.
The writer has introduced him/herself to you. Describe that meeting. What’s your impression? Did he thrust out his hand for you to shake? Did she sidle up next to you, but fail to look you in the eye? Did he send you a letter bomb or put his arm around your shoulder? Does it seem like the writer is standing on a cliff talking down to an audience below? What sense of the writer do you have? Formal? Casual? Intimate? Jocular? Arrogant? Are you with the writer, against her, or unsure since you don’t really know him?
• I think she is hesitant because she has never written an ethnography before. I think she would shake my hand but be a little shy at first..
Is the writer giving in?
• I think the writer is beginning to give in, but at the same time, not. She states that she is now a little more hesitant than she was before, but she is not going to delete her facebook account anytime soon
What do you want, need, or wish for
• I want to know the time differentiation. You said you wanted to know more about it but then never went into that topic!
This peer review has been partially modified from peer reviews found in Peter Elbow’s Writing with Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
1. Does it pose a question? Does the paper identify tensions? Does it say what it’s going to do and what its point is?
• I don’t think it really poses a question but it does show her intention by saying that she wants to know why college students sign up for facebook. Again, she says that she plans to figure out why people sign up for facebook.
Theme
2. What is the quality of the content of the writing: the ideas, perceptions, and point of view? In your words, what is being said? Is it more than a collection of thoughts and observations? According to the author, why does this whole thing matter?
• I think that she is trying to say that she thinks there are many different reasons why a person would have a facebook. I do not see many of your own thoughts until the end of the paper. Consider putting your thoughts throughout your interviews.
3. Is there too much abstraction or generalization? Underline or circle this language in the paper. In other words, are there so few details, examples and explanations that it ends up dull, empty, impossible to experience? Or, perhaps even impossible to understand? Explain.
• I think that you did a good job with your examples, but maybe you could try to go more into depth about some things (what are some of the games, what is a wall, things like that).
4. Is there too little abstraction or generalization and too much clutter of details, examples, and explanations? Too little standing back for perspective? Too little forest per tree?
• I’m not really sure if this is what this question is talking about, but you do not give much of your own thought until the end. During your interviews, maybe you could put some more controversial thoughts and your own reactions.
5. What is the practical significance of the artifact? What idea does it represent?
• The practical significance of the artifact is that it shows who the person is. It shows the identity of who that person really is (or who they are claiming to be). You can also stereotype the kind of person they are just by looking at there profile picture.
6. What is the significance of Interview 1?
• I think that the significance behind the first interview was that facebook is something that can be very time consuming, but sometimes, that is not always a bad thing. He is using it to keep in close contact with people who are very close to him such as his girlfriend and other friends. Also, I think he is showing that facebook can be something that is very bad when it comes to school work. He openly admits, like most people would, he uses it to procrastinate
7. What is the significance of Interview 2?
• I think that the significance of the next interview is that facebook does not have to be something that people are addicted to. Contrary to popular belief, people can survive without facebook.
8. Are all 3 required scholarly sources developed in the conclusions?
• I do not see any of your scholarly sources in your conclusion.
9. Is all source material cited according to MLA, both parenthetically and in a Works Cited?
• There are no sources cited in the paper or the works cited page.
10. Do the conclusions satisfy the issues the study raises with complexity? How so?
• I think that the conclusion does satisfy the question that was raised. You wanted to know why people got a facebook and you found out that they wanted to keep in touch with people.
Structure
11. Is the whole thing unified? Is there a central idea to which everything pertains? What? Are there loose ends that don’t seem purposefully so, but accidently overlooked?
• I think that there is a central idea of wanting to know why people originally got on the facebook network. You do a good job describing your findings. However, in your interview with Scott, you talk about wanting to compare facebook usage to time, but you never really go into detail about it. Maybe consider doing that.
12. Are the parts arranged in a coherent, logical narrative sequence?
• I think that it is arranged in a logical order, but I think you should try to do a better job of making it flow nicely. Right now, it is question…answer…question…answer. Expand on your thoughts about the interview a little more
13. Were the paragraphs really paragraphs? Could you tell what each one was saying? Did they function as helpful and comfortable units of thought, not too much, not too little? Mark any that seem too short or too long.
• I think there are times when the paragraphs were not complete paragraphs. There were times when your question for the informant or answer from them was your entire paragraph, which was maybe only one sentence, try finding a better transition so that you can combine the two together, and again, put your thoughts in it
Language
14. Are the sentences clear and readable? Underline with a wavy line any that you find incorrect or confusing.
• I think that your sentences are good and readable. However, see paper for more
15. Are the words used correctly? List any misused words.
• I did not notice any misused words
16. Is it succinct enough? Not too long, repetitious or dull? Mark any areas for deletion.
•
17. Is it full enough? Or does the writer squeeze out the juice of human communication and spoken discourse? Is the language, even if correct, dull and indigestible? Does the writer sufficiently use the language of the subculture?
• The paper is full length but I think that most of it is just regurgitating what the informant said, you didn’t really put your own thoughts into the ethnography and that made it a little boring to read.
18. Does the diction, mood and level of formality fit with ethnography?
•
Readerly Response
Describe what was happening to you as you read. Tell which words or phrases stuck out or resonated.
• I didn’t feel anything really until the end when you started talking about people being who they really say they are. I never really thought about that so that was interesting
What happened and what are the implications?
• I don’t think that anything really happened in this paper, it was just he said, she said, I said paper.
What ideas or beliefs or feelings were brought into this piece? How do multiple points of view contribute to your understanding?
• The ideas that were brought up in this paper is that people have different reason for getting a facebook and different reasons why they get on it each day. This tells me that every person who is a part of this subculture, has a different motives.
What understanding of the culture do you have from reading this piece? What gave you this understanding?
• Again, I know that everyone has a different reason for having a facebook. Whether that reason may be talking to old friends, staying in touch with a friends who moved away, staying in touch with a significant other, etc.
The writer has introduced him/herself to you. Describe that meeting. What’s your impression? Did he thrust out his hand for you to shake? Did she sidle up next to you, but fail to look you in the eye? Did he send you a letter bomb or put his arm around your shoulder? Does it seem like the writer is standing on a cliff talking down to an audience below? What sense of the writer do you have? Formal? Casual? Intimate? Jocular? Arrogant? Are you with the writer, against her, or unsure since you don’t really know him?
• I think she is hesitant because she has never written an ethnography before. I think she would shake my hand but be a little shy at first..
Is the writer giving in?
• I think the writer is beginning to give in, but at the same time, not. She states that she is now a little more hesitant than she was before, but she is not going to delete her facebook account anytime soon
What do you want, need, or wish for
• I want to know the time differentiation. You said you wanted to know more about it but then never went into that topic!
This peer review has been partially modified from peer reviews found in Peter Elbow’s Writing with Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Research Question/Roadmap
1. Does it pose a question? Does the paper identify tensions? Does it say what it’s going to do and what its point is?
• I don’t think it really poses a question but it does show her intention by saying that she wants to know why college students sign up for facebook. Again, she says that she plans to figure out why people sign up for facebook.
Theme
2. What is the quality of the content of the writing: the ideas, perceptions, and point of view? In your words, what is being said? Is it more than a collection of thoughts and observations? According to the author, why does this whole thing matter?
• I think that she is trying to say that she thinks there are many different reasons why a person would have a facebook. I do not see many of your own thoughts until the end of the paper. Consider putting your thoughts throughout your interviews.
3. Is there too much abstraction or generalization? Underline or circle this language in the paper. In other words, are there so few details, examples and explanations that it ends up dull, empty, impossible to experience? Or, perhaps even impossible to understand? Explain.
• I think that you did a good job with your examples, but maybe you could try to go more into depth about some things (what are some of the games, what is a wall, things like that).
4. Is there too little abstraction or generalization and too much clutter of details, examples, and explanations? Too little standing back for perspective? Too little forest per tree?
• I’m not really sure if this is what this question is talking about, but you do not give much of your own thought until the end. During your interviews, maybe you could put some more controversial thoughts and your own reactions.
5. What is the practical significance of the artifact? What idea does it represent?
• The practical significance of the artifact is that it shows who the person is. It shows the identity of who that person really is (or who they are claiming to be). You can also stereotype the kind of person they are just by looking at there profile picture.
6. What is the significance of Interview 1?
• I think that the significance behind the first interview was that facebook is something that can be very time consuming, but sometimes, that is not always a bad thing. He is using it to keep in close contact with people who are very close to him such as his girlfriend and other friends. Also, I think he is showing that facebook can be something that is very bad when it comes to school work. He openly admits, like most people would, he uses it to procrastinate
7. What is the significance of Interview 2?
• I think that the significance of the next interview is that facebook does not have to be something that people are addicted to. Contrary to popular belief, people can survive without facebook.
8. Are all 3 required scholarly sources developed in the conclusions?
• I do not see any of your scholarly sources in your conclusion.
9. Is all source material cited according to MLA, both parenthetically and in a Works Cited?
• There are no sources cited in the paper or the works cited page.
10. Do the conclusions satisfy the issues the study raises with complexity? How so?
• I think that the conclusion does satisfy the question that was raised. You wanted to know why people got a facebook and you found out that they wanted to keep in touch with people.
Structure
11. Is the whole thing unified? Is there a central idea to which everything pertains? What? Are there loose ends that don’t seem purposefully so, but accidently overlooked?
• I think that there is a central idea of wanting to know why people originally got on the facebook network. You do a good job describing your findings. However, in your interview with Scott, you talk about wanting to compare facebook usage to time, but you never really go into detail about it. Maybe consider doing that.
12. Are the parts arranged in a coherent, logical narrative sequence?
• I think that it is arranged in a logical order, but I think you should try to do a better job of making it flow nicely. Right now, it is question…answer…question…answer. Expand on your thoughts about the interview a little more
13. Were the paragraphs really paragraphs? Could you tell what each one was saying? Did they function as helpful and comfortable units of thought, not too much, not too little? Mark any that seem too short or too long.
• I think there are times when the paragraphs were not complete paragraphs. There were times when your question for the informant or answer from them was your entire paragraph, which was maybe only one sentence, try finding a better transition so that you can combine the two together, and again, put your thoughts in it
Language
14. Are the sentences clear and readable? Underline with a wavy line any that you find incorrect or confusing.
• I think that your sentences are good and readable. However, see paper for more
15. Are the words used correctly? List any misused words.
• I did not notice any misused words
16. Is it succinct enough? Not too long, repetitious or dull? Mark any areas for deletion.
•
17. Is it full enough? Or does the writer squeeze out the juice of human communication and spoken discourse? Is the language, even if correct, dull and indigestible? Does the writer sufficiently use the language of the subculture?
• The paper is full length but I think that most of it is just regurgitating what the informant said, you didn’t really put your own thoughts into the ethnography and that made it a little boring to read.
18. Does the diction, mood and level of formality fit with ethnography?
•
Readerly Response
Describe what was happening to you as you read. Tell which words or phrases stuck out or resonated.
• I didn’t feel anything really until the end when you started talking about people being who they really say they are. I never really thought about that so that was interesting
What happened and what are the implications?
• I don’t think that anything really happened in this paper, it was just he said, she said, I said paper.
What ideas or beliefs or feelings were brought into this piece? How do multiple points of view contribute to your understanding?
• The ideas that were brought up in this paper is that people have different reason for getting a facebook and different reasons why they get on it each day. This tells me that every person who is a part of this subculture, has a different motives.
What understanding of the culture do you have from reading this piece? What gave you this understanding?
• Again, I know that everyone has a different reason for having a facebook. Whether that reason may be talking to old friends, staying in touch with a friends who moved away, staying in touch with a significant other, etc.
The writer has introduced him/herself to you. Describe that meeting. What’s your impression? Did he thrust out his hand for you to shake? Did she sidle up next to you, but fail to look you in the eye? Did he send you a letter bomb or put his arm around your shoulder? Does it seem like the writer is standing on a cliff talking down to an audience below? What sense of the writer do you have? Formal? Casual? Intimate? Jocular? Arrogant? Are you with the writer, against her, or unsure since you don’t really know him?
• I think she is hesitant because she has never written an ethnography before. I think she would shake my hand but be a little shy at first..
Is the writer giving in?
• I think the writer is beginning to give in, but at the same time, not. She states that she is now a little more hesitant than she was before, but she is not going to delete her facebook account anytime soon
What do you want, need, or wish for
• I want to know the time differentiation. You said you wanted to know more about it but then never went into that topic!
This peer review has been partially modified from peer reviews found in Peter Elbow’s Writing with Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
1. Does it pose a question? Does the paper identify tensions? Does it say what it’s going to do and what its point is?
• I don’t think it really poses a question but it does show her intention by saying that she wants to know why college students sign up for facebook. Again, she says that she plans to figure out why people sign up for facebook.
Theme
2. What is the quality of the content of the writing: the ideas, perceptions, and point of view? In your words, what is being said? Is it more than a collection of thoughts and observations? According to the author, why does this whole thing matter?
• I think that she is trying to say that she thinks there are many different reasons why a person would have a facebook. I do not see many of your own thoughts until the end of the paper. Consider putting your thoughts throughout your interviews.
3. Is there too much abstraction or generalization? Underline or circle this language in the paper. In other words, are there so few details, examples and explanations that it ends up dull, empty, impossible to experience? Or, perhaps even impossible to understand? Explain.
• I think that you did a good job with your examples, but maybe you could try to go more into depth about some things (what are some of the games, what is a wall, things like that).
4. Is there too little abstraction or generalization and too much clutter of details, examples, and explanations? Too little standing back for perspective? Too little forest per tree?
• I’m not really sure if this is what this question is talking about, but you do not give much of your own thought until the end. During your interviews, maybe you could put some more controversial thoughts and your own reactions.
5. What is the practical significance of the artifact? What idea does it represent?
• The practical significance of the artifact is that it shows who the person is. It shows the identity of who that person really is (or who they are claiming to be). You can also stereotype the kind of person they are just by looking at there profile picture.
6. What is the significance of Interview 1?
• I think that the significance behind the first interview was that facebook is something that can be very time consuming, but sometimes, that is not always a bad thing. He is using it to keep in close contact with people who are very close to him such as his girlfriend and other friends. Also, I think he is showing that facebook can be something that is very bad when it comes to school work. He openly admits, like most people would, he uses it to procrastinate
7. What is the significance of Interview 2?
• I think that the significance of the next interview is that facebook does not have to be something that people are addicted to. Contrary to popular belief, people can survive without facebook.
8. Are all 3 required scholarly sources developed in the conclusions?
• I do not see any of your scholarly sources in your conclusion.
9. Is all source material cited according to MLA, both parenthetically and in a Works Cited?
• There are no sources cited in the paper or the works cited page.
10. Do the conclusions satisfy the issues the study raises with complexity? How so?
• I think that the conclusion does satisfy the question that was raised. You wanted to know why people got a facebook and you found out that they wanted to keep in touch with people.
Structure
11. Is the whole thing unified? Is there a central idea to which everything pertains? What? Are there loose ends that don’t seem purposefully so, but accidently overlooked?
• I think that there is a central idea of wanting to know why people originally got on the facebook network. You do a good job describing your findings. However, in your interview with Scott, you talk about wanting to compare facebook usage to time, but you never really go into detail about it. Maybe consider doing that.
12. Are the parts arranged in a coherent, logical narrative sequence?
• I think that it is arranged in a logical order, but I think you should try to do a better job of making it flow nicely. Right now, it is question…answer…question…answer. Expand on your thoughts about the interview a little more
13. Were the paragraphs really paragraphs? Could you tell what each one was saying? Did they function as helpful and comfortable units of thought, not too much, not too little? Mark any that seem too short or too long.
• I think there are times when the paragraphs were not complete paragraphs. There were times when your question for the informant or answer from them was your entire paragraph, which was maybe only one sentence, try finding a better transition so that you can combine the two together, and again, put your thoughts in it
Language
14. Are the sentences clear and readable? Underline with a wavy line any that you find incorrect or confusing.
• I think that your sentences are good and readable. However, see paper for more
15. Are the words used correctly? List any misused words.
• I did not notice any misused words
16. Is it succinct enough? Not too long, repetitious or dull? Mark any areas for deletion.
•
17. Is it full enough? Or does the writer squeeze out the juice of human communication and spoken discourse? Is the language, even if correct, dull and indigestible? Does the writer sufficiently use the language of the subculture?
• The paper is full length but I think that most of it is just regurgitating what the informant said, you didn’t really put your own thoughts into the ethnography and that made it a little boring to read.
18. Does the diction, mood and level of formality fit with ethnography?
•
Readerly Response
Describe what was happening to you as you read. Tell which words or phrases stuck out or resonated.
• I didn’t feel anything really until the end when you started talking about people being who they really say they are. I never really thought about that so that was interesting
What happened and what are the implications?
• I don’t think that anything really happened in this paper, it was just he said, she said, I said paper.
What ideas or beliefs or feelings were brought into this piece? How do multiple points of view contribute to your understanding?
• The ideas that were brought up in this paper is that people have different reason for getting a facebook and different reasons why they get on it each day. This tells me that every person who is a part of this subculture, has a different motives.
What understanding of the culture do you have from reading this piece? What gave you this understanding?
• Again, I know that everyone has a different reason for having a facebook. Whether that reason may be talking to old friends, staying in touch with a friends who moved away, staying in touch with a significant other, etc.
The writer has introduced him/herself to you. Describe that meeting. What’s your impression? Did he thrust out his hand for you to shake? Did she sidle up next to you, but fail to look you in the eye? Did he send you a letter bomb or put his arm around your shoulder? Does it seem like the writer is standing on a cliff talking down to an audience below? What sense of the writer do you have? Formal? Casual? Intimate? Jocular? Arrogant? Are you with the writer, against her, or unsure since you don’t really know him?
• I think she is hesitant because she has never written an ethnography before. I think she would shake my hand but be a little shy at first..
Is the writer giving in?
• I think the writer is beginning to give in, but at the same time, not. She states that she is now a little more hesitant than she was before, but she is not going to delete her facebook account anytime soon
What do you want, need, or wish for
• I want to know the time differentiation. You said you wanted to know more about it but then never went into that topic!
This peer review has been partially modified from peer reviews found in Peter Elbow’s Writing with Power, New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Questions
What do you make of your experience?
I think that my experience with this sub-culture has been an eye opening experience. I went in it with a stereotype and assumptions about the people that I was going to be working with, but after getting to know some of the people, they were completely changed. They are just people like me and you that have different hobbies.
What is it like to be a part of your sub-cultures community?
When I was around my sub-culture, I had a lot of fun. People actually treated you like a friend. I had never met a lot of these people before I started doing field work and they still treated me better than some of my other friends do. They do not hold it against you if you do not participate in the same activities as them
Describe the way that you have represented them?
I know that I did not represent this sub-culture the best because of my limited time and resources. However, I think that I did a good job of trying to break the regular stereotype of those who party. I tried to show that there are more reasons that people party other than just because they want to get trashed. Granted some people do that, not all of them are that way.
Do you have the authority? Why? Why not?
I do not think that I have the authority to speak for this group because my answers are based off of my interpretations. Since I am not an active member of this subculture, I do not know all the little details. However, I tried to get opinions from the people so that I could have the best opinion that I could.
I think that my experience with this sub-culture has been an eye opening experience. I went in it with a stereotype and assumptions about the people that I was going to be working with, but after getting to know some of the people, they were completely changed. They are just people like me and you that have different hobbies.
What is it like to be a part of your sub-cultures community?
When I was around my sub-culture, I had a lot of fun. People actually treated you like a friend. I had never met a lot of these people before I started doing field work and they still treated me better than some of my other friends do. They do not hold it against you if you do not participate in the same activities as them
Describe the way that you have represented them?
I know that I did not represent this sub-culture the best because of my limited time and resources. However, I think that I did a good job of trying to break the regular stereotype of those who party. I tried to show that there are more reasons that people party other than just because they want to get trashed. Granted some people do that, not all of them are that way.
Do you have the authority? Why? Why not?
I do not think that I have the authority to speak for this group because my answers are based off of my interpretations. Since I am not an active member of this subculture, I do not know all the little details. However, I tried to get opinions from the people so that I could have the best opinion that I could.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Peer review for Sarah
Language Paper Peer Review
Your Name:
Writer’s Name:
1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples
• There were some quotes about her thought process during the interview. “Should I follow her into the kitchen” whether to ask the question about Leander leaving.
.
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
• I don’t see any
3. How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
• She does a good job describing what she was wearing maybe she could describe more of the seeing than just the buggy and horses
4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
• I think that I can get a fairly good picture of their worldview but maybe she could give me a better picture
5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
• I can’t tell a difference between the interviews
6. What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
• I don’t know if there is a thesis in this paper on not. I don’t know how to spot it in this kind of paper. sorry
7. Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
• I think that there are a lot of quotations. In the one we read in our book, there was only one quote in the paper and the rest were paraphrases.
8. For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
• I think that there is only one interview but I think she most wanted to know about the amish thoughts about Leeander leaving
9. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
• She does a good job describing the surrounding area and the people who come to greet her. I think that she could go into more detail
10. What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
• I now know hoe amish people feel about people leaving their roots, and how they feel about religion
11. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
•
12. Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
• I think it is working, it just needs another interview in the paper
13. Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
• I got a little bored reading it. Try to find a way to grab the readers attention better
14. What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before it’s graded?
• Add another interview
Your Name:
Writer’s Name:
1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples
• There were some quotes about her thought process during the interview. “Should I follow her into the kitchen” whether to ask the question about Leander leaving.
.
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
• I don’t see any
3. How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
• She does a good job describing what she was wearing maybe she could describe more of the seeing than just the buggy and horses
4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
• I think that I can get a fairly good picture of their worldview but maybe she could give me a better picture
5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
• I can’t tell a difference between the interviews
6. What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
• I don’t know if there is a thesis in this paper on not. I don’t know how to spot it in this kind of paper. sorry
7. Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
• I think that there are a lot of quotations. In the one we read in our book, there was only one quote in the paper and the rest were paraphrases.
8. For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
• I think that there is only one interview but I think she most wanted to know about the amish thoughts about Leeander leaving
9. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
• She does a good job describing the surrounding area and the people who come to greet her. I think that she could go into more detail
10. What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
• I now know hoe amish people feel about people leaving their roots, and how they feel about religion
11. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
•
12. Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
• I think it is working, it just needs another interview in the paper
13. Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
• I got a little bored reading it. Try to find a way to grab the readers attention better
14. What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before it’s graded?
• Add another interview
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Peer Review for Sena
Language Paper Peer Review
Your Name: Evan Beard
Writer’s Name: Sena Strong
1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples.
• You did a good job of writing how you felt during the interviews. Things like “I hope this is not going to be awkward”, “I wonder if Morgan is as nervous as I am?” and “I thought to myself how was this interview going to go”
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
• You did a very good job of describing what they were wearing and going into detail about their appearance (especially with Morgan).
3. How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
• I don’t think you characterized Morgan very well, other than her appearance which was very good. Maybe you could go into more detail about her family that she grew up in and how she came to her belief that winning is not everything.
4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
• I that you could get some of the informants beliefs out of this interview. Like you said, you can tell that Morgan is not all about winning and more about just being thankful for the abilities that she has, and Coach Gregory is all about the winning
5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
•
6. What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
• I don’t know how to indentify a thesis in a paper like this MY BAD
7. Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
• I think there is a good balance of quotes and summaries. You introduce the quotes and then summarize them in your own words afterwards
8. For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
• You really stressed the question of least and most proud moment in bowling. You did a good job of coming up with things that they may believe from this question
9. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
• You did a very good job of describing the setting in the beginning while you were waiting for Morgan. One thing that you may want to think about doing is describing the bowling alley where the interviews actually took place
10. What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
• I don’t really have any new knowledge from these interviews. One thing you might be able to ask is how close are they outside the bowling alley? Do they hang out with each other, other than practice and matches?
11. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
• Alright
12. Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
• Maybe you could find a better way to lead into your interview with the coach, but other than that it is good
13. Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
• I think you did a good job, other than just a some grammatical errors…I think
14. What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before
it’s graded?
• Again, you could describe the place where you actually did the interview rather than just while you were waiting for her and then find a better lead into your second interview rather than just go straight into it.
Your Name: Evan Beard
Writer’s Name: Sena Strong
1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples.
• You did a good job of writing how you felt during the interviews. Things like “I hope this is not going to be awkward”, “I wonder if Morgan is as nervous as I am?” and “I thought to myself how was this interview going to go”
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
• You did a very good job of describing what they were wearing and going into detail about their appearance (especially with Morgan).
3. How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
• I don’t think you characterized Morgan very well, other than her appearance which was very good. Maybe you could go into more detail about her family that she grew up in and how she came to her belief that winning is not everything.
4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
• I that you could get some of the informants beliefs out of this interview. Like you said, you can tell that Morgan is not all about winning and more about just being thankful for the abilities that she has, and Coach Gregory is all about the winning
5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
•
6. What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
• I don’t know how to indentify a thesis in a paper like this MY BAD
7. Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
• I think there is a good balance of quotes and summaries. You introduce the quotes and then summarize them in your own words afterwards
8. For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
• You really stressed the question of least and most proud moment in bowling. You did a good job of coming up with things that they may believe from this question
9. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
• You did a very good job of describing the setting in the beginning while you were waiting for Morgan. One thing that you may want to think about doing is describing the bowling alley where the interviews actually took place
10. What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
• I don’t really have any new knowledge from these interviews. One thing you might be able to ask is how close are they outside the bowling alley? Do they hang out with each other, other than practice and matches?
11. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
• Alright
12. Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
• Maybe you could find a better way to lead into your interview with the coach, but other than that it is good
13. Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
• I think you did a good job, other than just a some grammatical errors…I think
14. What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before
it’s graded?
• Again, you could describe the place where you actually did the interview rather than just while you were waiting for her and then find a better lead into your second interview rather than just go straight into it.
Monday, April 5, 2010
Box 21
The main thing that i learned from this excercise was that the question that i think is the most imporant, may not be what everyone thinks is the most important.It showed me to consider more in depth about the question, "What kind of family were you raise in?" It also made me realize that i can branch off into more questions to more in depth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)