My writing process came into a much clearer view after reading my peer’s papers. It was interesting to see the flow and introduction of information were different from mine. It felt nice to read the papers and know firsthand the information that was discussed. This led me to believe I was providing insightful and useful information to the author. Critiquing the paper conceptually felt useful both for the author and my own draft. However, critiquing grammar and other errors felt uncomfortable (as it always is for me).
From these peer reviews, I learned how to incorporate my counterargument better. One of my peer reviews had an eventual lead-up to controversy and I found this the most natural. There was the incorporation of context for the controversy which I found good. However, I found some components from both these essays hard to comprehend. This was mostly when the author’s presented the evidence. In this area, the authors lost me so I will incorporate more transitions to my own paper. Lastly, I will add a broader summary to my conclusions. Both papers had a lot of information presented so I feel that a summary of the evidence is necessary. It will make for a useful conclusion to the argument.