read these 3 feedback from my peers
FEEDBACK 1
The interview was very well done! The interviewee gave very in-depth and detailed answers, which was nice. She made strong points in her answers, and you could tell the interviewee seemed very involved in the conversation as well. It seemed more personal, which is always a good thing. I think the interviewer asked some pretty good questions as well. The works cited from the questions asked are missing, but I do see one at the end of the document. The theme coding for the transcript was also missing from the interview document. I feel like the analysis could’ve had more parts, but I can’t really tell since the coding for the themes wasn’t done. In addition to the analysis, a good connection was made regarding gender bias and how the interviewee had experienced it before. Another good connection that was made was regarding Crenshaw and intersectionality, and how it ties into the interviewees’ cultural background. Overall, the project was done well, minus a couple of small things that needed to be fixed. The small changes don’t make or break the assignment per se, but in the future, the critiquing can just be used as constructive criticism. Continue with the hard work!
based on this
rate how motivational it was on a scale of 1-4 (4 being the highest) and how critical it was on a scale of 1-4
Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation motivational in 100 words, and Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation good critique in 100 words.
FEEDBACK 2
This student’s submission was good, and one of its biggest strengths was that the writing sounded natural and human rather than overly robotic or forced. The tone flowed well, and the response felt genuine and easy to read. It was clear that effort went into making the writing sound thoughtful and realistic, which helped make the assignment more engaging. The ideas were communicated in a way that felt authentic, and that made the submission stand out in a positive way.
At the same time, I do think the assignment could have been stronger with more thoroughness in certain areas. While the overall response was solid, some sections could have gone into more detail or provided more development of the main ideas. A few points felt slightly brief, and adding more explanation or stronger examples would have made the analysis more complete and insightful. More depth would have helped strengthen the connection between the interview content and the writers discussion.
I also think the transcript portion could have followed the instructions more accurately. Based on the assignment guidelines, the color coding was supposed to be included to clearly identify the themes throughout the transcript, but that was missing here. Since that was a specific part of the instructions, including it would have made the assignment more accurate and aligned with what was required. Overall, this was still a well-written and human-sounding submission, but it would be even better with more thorough detail and closer attention to the transcript formatting instructions.
based on this
rate how motivational it was on a scale of 1-4 (4 being the highest) and how critical it was on a scale of 1-4
Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation motivational in 100 words, and Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation good critique in 100 words.
FEEDBACK 3
Hi Elizabeth! Great job on your interview assignment, the questions you have presented for this assignment are very clear and encourages the participant to want to give more in-depth answers. For example, your question: Have you ever experienced or observed inequality in the workplace or school based on gender, race, or background? Was a great answer to ask because it encourages the participant to reflect on real-life experiences with discrimination and inequality. I feel like these questions allow them to reflect on personal and/or observed situations they may experience which helps to uncover how race, gender, and background and influence people’s treatment and their opportunities around them. Which when reading the transcript of your interview, it clearly demonstrated that perspective going deep on expressing their experiences on it. I feel like things that I did feel like that could be worked on is the formatting since I do know that, correct me if I’m wrong. Must include “interviewer” and “interviewee” as well as the time duration of labeling and as they speak. I do believe you were supposed to highlight the themes that were mentioned inside the interview as well. You did, however, did a great job with citing the material that connects what was tied into the questions. Overall, you did a great job on your interview assignment.
based on this
rate how motivational it was on a scale of 1-4 (4 being the highest) and how critical it was on a scale of 1-4
Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation motivational in 100 words, and Please help your peer better understand what made the content of their written evaluation good critique in 100 words.
Get this or a similar paper done in as fast as 4 hours, 24/7.
NB: We do not sell prewritten papers. All essays are written from scratch according to specific needs and instructions
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.