Here are the steps:
1. No podcast for week five.
2. Read about peer review and questions we’ll ask.
3. Answer questions for three people who are clockwise (right) from you in the circle image on CNM Learn (Blackboard).
4. Reply (by Wednesday @ midnight) to discussion board with answers to three drafts.
5. Revise your blog with the feedback you receive.
6. Post final blog to your site and link to Blackboard by Sunday @ midnight.
Peer reviewing is usually a “behind the scenes” practice. It isn’t editing but rather asking questions about the bigger issues that might show up in a draft. Because of this, we’ll work through CNM Learn (Blackboard) to answer the following questions about your peers’ blog drafts (due by Thursday at midnight). You will, however, post your final draft (Sunday by midnight) to your blog (and the link to Blackboard.)
1. Does the explanation of how the literary element is used make up most of the draft (70%). Are the summaries condensed to only about 30% of the report blog draft?
2. Quote Sandwich: After the summaries, is the evidence from the story “sandwiched” in the middle of the paragraphs? Which paragraphs need work? Don’t worry about thick paragraphs here (big paragraphs are good), even though I know some advice about blogs suggests small paragraphs (that’s more for journalism).
3. Does the blogger precisely explain what specific kinds of characterization, conflict, etc. are being used? Should they revisit the page defining that element to formulate a more precise definition?
4. Does the blogger lose focus at any point on the stories and chosen literary element? If so, where?
5. Does the blogger thoroughly explain the clear and compelling evidence from the stories (direct quotes and/or paraphrases)? Where does the explanation need to be expanded?
6. Does the blogger mention the significance of the expectations of the particular subgenre (for instance, microblogs)?
Double check the blog prompt: http://www.briankhudson.com/courses/digital-storytelling/report-blog/