The following is a critical reflection upon the commentary on my essay. I have reviewed it using my own assessment and the peer’s and the instructor's, of my strengths and weaknesses as a writer, as a guide so as to make more effective.
Peer assessment is where students comment on and judge their colleagues work to help them make the necessary corrections to the current work and improve on the subsequent ones. As a writer, one is supposed to take comments from other people on his work positively and pledge to work on the issues raised. Many are times that we convince ourselves that we are good when we are not. We need other people’s assessment to know just how good we are. We should also be able to assess ourselves, maybe in comparison with other people’s work.
One way I find useful when assessing my strongholds and otherwise, as a writer, is to read through assessments by my instructor on my essays carefully as I take a few notes. By having a thorough understanding of the assessment, am able to produce a quality argument, in terms of grammar and structure, in the subsequent writings.
Also, pivotal in self-assessment is research in order note what others have to comment about the piece that I wrote. This can provide one with a few ideas about how to assess the piece of writing one is addressing. I then write down a list of the strong and weak areas of my discussion so that I can refer to them in my subsequent works. Developing an outline for essay, serves as a guide as I write. The outline reflects what the essay will contain and should include an introduction, a body and a conclusion. The introduction bit is supposed to inform the reader about the main topic of the paper.
The instructor has pointed out my weak areas and pointed out the corrections I should make. As such, am in a position to take note of the areas in which I ought to improve on. For example, the instructor has pointed out grammatical errors, misuse of punctuation, flaws in the use of tenses among others as areas in which I ought to improve upon. I take the comments positively and work on them.
The current assessment differs from my earlier ideas about writing in almost all aspects of grammar and stylistic styles. For instance, I was not sure about the spelling of the word alien, though, after reading the peers comments, I looked it up in the dictionary and confirmed that I had been wrong. Still from the peers assessment I noted that I had a very poor choice of words and used confusing word arrangement. For instance, instead of ‘over-satisfied,’ under dissatisfied would have been a better term considering the shortcomings I highlighted about the movie.
Also, I was of the view that the introduction part should be more like a trailer in a movie, which summarizes the whole movie. The instructor seems not to agree, noting that I was supposed to summarize simply what the movie is about in just a few sentences. It should be more like coming up with a thesis statement.
Also, the instructor’s assessment of my grammar will go a long way in improving my subsequent essays. I have to review the whole essay because from the assessment by my peer and the instructor, the essay is full of grammatical errors, ranging from misuse of prepositions and articles, misspelling, omissions and misuse of punctuation. This is quite evident in the first paragraph where I have misused conjunctions and prepositions and lack flow. The introduction should have been an overview of what the body of the essay entails. I should have articulated a very precise summary of what my discussion is about.
After the assessment, I think the introduction should have looked something close to: “Super 8 movie, produced by Steven Spielberg, is a great movie full of alien adventure and has astounding visual effects. The movie has a well written script and is beautifully filmed. It is one of the best movies that I have watched this year.”
I ought to have concluded the essay by providing a summary of what I had already written. A summary that leaves the reader feeling satisfied having received a full and complete assessment of the story.
From the instructor’s assessment, I have also learnt that I have to proofread my work carefully so as to correct mistakes such as omissions, misuse of tenses and any other minor flaws that compromise the quality of my work. As such, I can make my work more effective and it also appeals to the audience. This assessment has also enlightened me about paragraph structure. Each point has to be elaborated independently in its own paragraph. Put that way, the reader can understand my arguments without contradiction.
In paragraph three, there are quite a number of mistakes, mostly grammatical and am glad the instructor noted in his assessment of the essay. I had written it as follows, ‘It kind of creeps’ viewers out at times with some stuff and hanging, but it gives couples the mystery coupled with the excitement. When one attempts to make a way out from leaves the theatre, everyone who watches the movie ever gives opinions on the movie that describes it precisely.’ Here, other than the grammatical errors, I think I had addressed my audience, being as young as me, with a language to which they can easily relate. A sentence like, ‘It kind of creeps’-viewers out at times with some stuff…’ can be understood and enjoyed better by the youth than would, older people. This is one of my strongholds that I know the kind of language my target audience would prefer.
One grammatical issue that has been raised by the instructor is my use of the phrase ‘land marked,’ in the sentence, 'Steven Spielsberg, this movie’s director, he land marked the sci-fi films of the 1970s and the 1980s…’ What I meant was actually that Steven Spielsberg featured in the Sci-fi films of the 1970s and 1980s, where he left a significant mark due to his prowess in filmology. Such a correction is paramount because it relates directly to the main topic of the essay which is selling the movie to the fellow peers. Current works by a producer are usually judged from his previous works. Such mistakes are not noticeable to most readers and it ends up being propagated. Its correction is paramount to me, as an aspiring writer, so that English is not corrupted through such simple things.
Another thing that I have learnt from the assessment is that I should always proofread my work before publication in my subsequent essays. This offers me the chance to correct silly mistakes such as unnecessary repetition, omissions and simple grammatical errors such as incorrect punctuation and misuse of prepositions.
Lastly, though quite erroneous in some aspects, the essay was also appealing in others as agrees the peer. If I take the assessment positively, it should go a long way in improving my writing standards to present my point of discussion to the readers effectively. A good piece of writing ought to have a precise introduction, body and a conclusion. It should be devoid of errors in grammar, misuse of stylistic devices or omissions. To be a good writer one has got to know how to review their work before offering it to the readers. Also, it is good to have the audience in mind when preparing a piece of work.
The peer assessment has assisted me in my quest to perfect my writing skills. It gives me a chance to improve on the different weaknesses as pointed out by the instructor and the peer. I believe that even the peer learns a lot through assessing my work. Though quite erroneous, subsequent essays will be much better than this.