I did an assignment and 4 peers evaluated me. Look at the following 4 evaluations give them a rating for both motivational and critical AND then write a 200 paragraph giving feedback for EACH peer evaluation (THAT’S 4 paragraphs total) look at the attached document to see the layout of what needs to be done
1. First, I have to say that your Analysis part is really good. You did a great job of linking Mohanty’s idea of “transnational feminist praxis” to the internet support for Ye Haiyan. It really showed that you paid attention and knew what you were talking about. It was easy to find my way throughout the text because you used five different themes, such as Cyan for gendered vulnerability and Orange for personal courage. I suggest adding a few more words to the jotting and description part. The rubric is quite clear that each part must include at least 250 words. To get that “striking ordinariness” you talked about, you may include additional “raw” comments about how the authorities looked or how the weather was to the Jottings. You could include more about how the places “feel” or even “smell” to the Description to make it more complete. In general, your Reflection part gave a really honest and deep look at what a researcher does. You definitely understand the feminist methodological arguments from our course now that you know that “objectivity is partial and always placed.” This will be an excellent submission if you add a little bit of padding to the first two sections.
2. Your analysis is strong and demonstrates a clear understanding of how to connect theory to real examples from the film. You effectively use scholars like Tarrow, Castells, and Mohanty not just as references, but as frameworks to interpret what is happening, which shows a solid grasp of course concepts. The organization is also a major strength, as each section focuses on a distinct theme, state repression, digital activism, and transnational feminism, making your argument easy to follow. Additionally, your academic tone is appropriate and confident, and you successfully link abstract ideas to concrete moments, such as censorship, media silence, and the destruction of Yes home. To improve your work further, you should focus on refining clarity and precision in your wording. Some phrases are slightly awkward or could be simplified to enhance readability. Strengthening sentence structure will make your analysis sound more polished. You should also aim to include more specific examples from the film in each section to better support your claims and make your argument more grounded. While you apply theory well, pushing your analysis further by briefly evaluating or questioning these theories would elevate your work. For example, you could consider whether digital activism is as effective as Castells suggests in such restrictive contexts. Overall, this is a well-developed analysis, and with a few improvements in clarity, depth, and specificity, it could become excellent.
3. This is one of the better versions of the Participant Observation assignments I have seen. All sections meet the required amount of 1 page except for the reflection section and analysis section. The student also thoroughly coded their jottings and description with the 4 themes. The student seem to truly understand the film the Hooligan Sparrow with how they were very detailed in their jottings even before the description. I also do believe that the coding themes also fit into the sociological theme with them being about activism, gendered vulnerability and women’s rights. However from my understanding of the assignments instructions I can be wrong though, we were supposed to use films from all three weeks (12-14) and not only pick one film from one week. This student did include all parts that were required for this assignment. They did have multiple parts highlighted in their sections of coding which is good because it demonstrates how understood what Hooligan Sparrow was truly about. All sections were welly written and made a lot of sense. I also think that by the student adding this: “Date/Setting: Participant observation of Hooligan Sparrow (2016)
Observer: Student fieldworker
Duration: 30-minute focused observation” into their assignment it gives it a more professional feel.
4. I want to start off by saying great work! I will be critiquing your description. Your description section seems quite decent compared to other components; however, it lacks a complete development of an ethnographic description. While some of the descriptions you have, provide sensory information such as the sounds of surveillance and body language, most parts of the paper appear repetitious and become inclined towards summaries instead of accurate observations. The description does not provide a concrete illustration of events taking place within the scenes. For instance, crucial factors such as direct quotes, body posture, and the chronological order of activities are lacking. Moreover, the use of similar content and duplications implies that there is a need for more thorough editing. As a result, your description does not give the reader the chance to observe the film from an in-depth perspective. Rather, it provides more of a narrative description of the film. On the contrary, your strengths lie in the analysis section where you demonstrate a good understanding of the theories covered in the course. For instance, your analysis illustrates a good comprehension of key theories by scholars such as Sidney Tarrow, Manuel Castells, and Chandra Talpade Mohanty. Overall, great work!