In “Responding- Really Responding- to Other Student’s Writing,” by Richard Straub, the author aimed to exemplify what a great peer revision should be like. At certain times, peer responses can feel like chores, something you have no real interest in but you were assigned to do. Not always do we see the face behind the words, and that almost always leads to a lackluster and lukewarm edit with brief uninspiring comments. However, the author introduces to us an alternative, a method of giving a good critique without sounding like a teacher or coming off as harsh. Rather, Mr. Struab suggests a calmer way of giving our personal opinion to a paper, by relaying back to the writer what we understand from his words, and then offering either praise or advice. Wondering out loud with the writer can make all the difference in sounding like a judge versus a friend. The writer will only truly accept this critique if they feel comfortable with the diction, so if the only words relayed are of criticism and no praise, your advice is likely to be taken halfheartedly, if at all.

Another aspect that the author really touched well upon was concision. We are always told “short and sweet.” However, when it comes to giving personal understanding, explanation and detail are vital. How is the writer supposed to know what made you think to suggest the writing “needs better structure?” Short and sweet must be sacrificed for length and detail in these responses, as understanding is key to getting your point across.

Lastly, a critical device the author touches on is being able to identify revisions based on the stage of the draft. For example, when the writer needs to have more focus on the direction of the paper in his rough draft, do not start crossing t’s and dotting i’s. Understanding when to make certain suggestions along the timeline of a draft is imperative to gaining the writer’s trust as a peer. Just like diction is important to make sure your advice is even read, so to placement.

I really have not looked at peer response this way before, and Mr. Straub introduces great points to us and revisionists to absorb before sentencing a paper to a boring, oblique response.

I found this article to be very interesting to read. It teaches the basic do’s and dont’s of reading a classmates paper. I personally learned a lot from this article regarding how to read the paper and what to look for. Referring to what was said on page 137, subtitled “What are your goals?”, the author states, “First, don’t set out to seek and destroy all errors and problems in the writing.” I felt that specifically referred to me because when I read someone’s work, I am always quick to point out a misspelled word or a punctuation mark missing. The paragraph then proceeds with the basic concept being that writer’s write and readers read. After reading this article, I have come to the conclusion that I need to remember that I am just the reader and not the writer. I am so accustomed to reading and correcting what I think is wrong to the point where I forget the reason why I was reading in the first place.

Pages 138 to 142 are telling us as the readers what we should do to prepare reading another student’s work. It tells us the mindset we should have, what to think about, what to look out for, etc. It’s good to know that when reading a piece, I can state what I really liked and disliked about the writing without feeling as if I don’t want to hurt feelings or be too rude with what I am trying to say. Paragraph two of page 140 explains to us as the readers how exactly to word what we’re trying to say without being too verbose or not having enough words. Reading this has also taught me the questions I would want to ask while reading this and what I would want to compliment them on while also stating what I think could be changed.

Many students often have trouble writing school assignments because they are afraid that their writing will be criticized by the teacher.  I certainly am one of them.  The teacher’s comments can seem like the authoritative opinion, judging not only one particular piece of writing but also your ability to write in general.

The chief purpose of writing is expression.  Certainly there are smaller purposes, but by and large the most important is expression.  When a student really fears their teacher’s criticism, they will not feel comfortable expressing themselves.  The end result is that students learn not how to write, but how to get a decent grade.  In the end they are not any bit better at writing than they were before, and may in fact be more afraid of writing than they were before.

Richard Straub hits the nail on the head when he says that when responding to a students writing you should not seek to perfect or rewrite the piece, or even to merely point out all the errors.  Instead, you should make suggestions and try to help the reader improve the writing.

This mindset, of helping rather than judging, is applicable not only to English and Writing classes but to many other school subjects.  The problem is, of course, that most teachers focus more on judging their students work than on improving it.

I’ll admit that I’m often one of those people who sees revising an unfamiliar individual’s paper tedious.  The mentality of “get in and get out” was what I always had going into each phase of revision.  Maybe that’s probably because no one ever really gave me feedback that made me really think back on my writing and I felt obligated to return the favor, but this piece made me really rethink my whole way of going about this.

Few words there and few words here would pretty much all you could get out of me, and I would think that’s fine because the teacher was satisfied.  Nobody ever told me what I was doing was wrong, so I never saw a need to change how I was doing things.  This piece showed me a new way of going about reading another person’s paper.  A lot of what it tells you to do conflicted with everything I’ve done in the past.   Like “Short and sweet” being often bad and commenting in full sentences weren’t enough, it even wants me to be more critical of my peer.  A first draft is when a writer is most vulnerable, so it would make sense that that is when they are most open to receiving critical feedback.  One’s thoughts on your paper might differ from what you might think, so having someone be able to point something out is valuable.  One thing I never really took into account was what exactly that person’s identity as a writer.  It’s nice to see that a lot of Jeremy’s response to Todd’s paper is what I always wanted to do, but never wanted to since the amount of effort required was too much for my liking.  If anything, this piece has shown me a new way to tackle the revising process, and for that, I am grateful.

I have always understood the importance of properly “responding” to other’s papers. The whole point of editing is to highlight and clarify the problematic areas that the writer needs to improve. So therefore, if the writer doesn’t fully understand the comments one has marked up on their paper, the reader has failed. As Richard Straub emphasized, it’s vital to not take the “stingy” route, but to explain thoroughly any comments one has. If no effort is put into helping the writer understand what she/he has done wrong or needs to improve then, in my opinion, the reader has wasted his/her time.

The sad and harsh truth is that most people, even some teachers for Christ sake, tend to brush of the editing and ignore the importance of it. Throughout my few years in high school we usually had peer editing sessions a couple days before major paper deadlines. In these sessions, we were supposed to thoughtfully edit each other’s papers and lay out a roadmap on how to improve the effectiveness of said papers. Although I personally loved the concept behind these sessions, almost 80% of the time I received back a couple grammar corrections and if I was lucky a vague statement on how to improve (Something along the lines of “add more details”). Richard Straub made a good point in his article, that even though making miniscule grammar corrections is helpful, what the readers should really focus on is the bigger picture; what the writers are trying to accomplish with their papers and how effectively have they done it.

If more people actually followed Straub’s framework for editing and commenting on papers, then these peer editing sessions would actually be an extremely useful tool. I’m excited that we were assigned read his paper because this should lead to meaningful advice for improvement.

I have a love/hate relationship with editing, and let me explain why. I am a thorough, honest reader and reviewer. When someone gives me their paper and expects help or feedback on it, I put a lot of effort to give them my best advice. So, when I write on my own, I hope for the same amount of work back from those I look to for help. Unfortunately, most experiences I have had with others’ editing my papers has been a bit disappointing, to put it straight.

The whole reason for editing a paper is to improve it, right? It’s used to enhance and polish the organization, the structure, the feel and the sense that the paper makes to its audience. Why, then, do some individuals edit solely grammar or spelling mistakes when they get their hands on an essay? What difference does that make? Of course, these aspects of a paper are highly important for a reader to understand the piece, don’t get me wrong. More importantly, though, I feel that when someone only corrects those little mistakes in a paper, they do not actually read it. They don’t get what is being said by the writer and they don’t look deeper into the ideas or push the writer to do better. They only focus on what’s on the surface. Yes, as Richard Straub stated, it is not the job of the editor to change the words or voice of an essay, because it is not theirs to do so. Such action would take away from the originality of work. But more often than not I receive little to no comments or suggestions from fellow classmates that are asked to edit my work and I find it very unproductive and, really, just pointless.

There needs to be a better way of assigning and handling classroom editing. Too often students don’t take the time to fix or tweak each other’s work when they are told to do so. If you are going to edit, make it meaningful. Show the author that you carefully read their draft and you are there for support and to help them grow and develop as a writer. This will raise connections and spirits within the writing community. Maybe time’s the issue; maybe students need more time for editing their and other people’s papers and maybe then they would put more effort into the job. Whatever the case, though, peer editing is not working, at least it hasn’t for me. I hope this changes.

Emily Weiss

03.03.2016

The process of editing papers has always given me slight anxiety. Having other people read and judge my work causes me to immediately doubt my abilities as a writer. I know that I am definitely not the worst, but watching someone read my paper makes me cringe. I immediately wonder what they are thinking and demand their opinion right away. I think just from the nervous look on my face, people tell me exactly what I want to hear. After reading “Responding to Other Students’ Writing”, however, I want someone to judge my paper as a reader. I want to know what they think about the paper without considering my feelings; I want to know what I could improve on and what sounds awkward. I fully believe that that is the only way that I will be able to become a better writer.

As for the editing side, I am guilty of making the mistake of acting as a “writer” instead of a “reader”. I fix little mistakes like grammar and spelling, but I tend to avoid thinking about the paper as a whole. From now on, I am going to try to give people the advice that I know I would want. Editing and revising is probably the most important process in writing. Without fixing and working on a paper, it will never become something better. I think that a lot of my essays in the past had a lot of potential, but came out mediocre due to my laziness. If someone claims that my paper is good and I should not change anything, then I have no motivation to work on it. However, if someone took the time to tell me how the paper really sounds to them, I would have the incentive to try to fix it.

After reading a chapter from “Responding- Really Responding- To Other Students’ Writing” by Richard Straub provides excellent insight into a plethora of helpful comments and tips an individual can use while reading a colleague’s work. I agree with many of the points that Straub makes because excellent feedback from a peer is how I can become a better writer, and how I can help my fellow classmates improve their papers. I am grateful that we were required to read this because I am more confident in my abilities to judge my fellow classmates work and they are able to successfully judge my work. Straub stresses that both the reader and the writer must focus on the bigger issues of the paper rather than the minor details such as grammar or spelling. I agree with the aforementioned statement because in my experience I have noticed that many professors care more about the context of your paper and your ability to successfully defend your thesis. Often times, I believe that I focus more on grammar rather than the context of the paper which I will definitely improve on because Straub made it very clear that providing comments on the context is more important to the overall concept of the paper. Another point that Straub presents which I liked was that you should always praise your colleagues work as well as criticizing it, because this is what makes them better writers. Often times, I believe I am too soft on my classmates work because I do not have the heart to criticize them but I am able to criticize the work of a friend because I am closer to them. However, this is what I would really like to work on this semester because as I previously mentioned I like to receive all kinds of feedback and I am sure my classmates would also like to receive the same kind.

Having students comment on other papers has many advantages, not just for the writer, but for the reader as well. One advantage is that it helps the reader to develop their ability to give constructive feedback. They can see different approaches from other writers and receive feedback from than just a teacher. There’s just one small problem that I have with comments from others. It’s that their comments can be irrelevant, which Straub slightly touched upon. Sometime other writers can be doubtful of receiving comments and feedbacks from their fellow peers. One reason can be that they fear the comments are not as constructive compared to a teacher’s comments. Or that they are doubtful of other writer’s ability to critique.

One of my favorite points from Straub was when he writes “Temper your criticisms.” You should never be too harsh and destructive to other people’s writing. Comments such as “How dumb” and “How stupid” is not a part of making constructive comments. But on the flip side, being too kind and nice is also not a part of making constructive feedbacks. They feel pressure from their friends, not wanting to damage relationships. But a good friend should always attempt to make as many comments as possible. A lot of comments does not necessarily mean that a paper is bad. It means that there is potential to become a masterpiece. Straub’s book does not emphasize on why responding to other’s writing is beneficial, but provides various methods on how to effectively respond to others. I’ve taken away that temperance when critiquing is important. I’ve learned to not be to self-conscience and express your opinions whole-heartedly. It will come across as more genuine and be beneficial to both writer and reader.

I found that this paper addressed a very important issue. I have many times asked a friend to look over my paper, hoping to hear honest and helpful feedback. But oftentimes people are too afraid to hurt my feelings and end up saying “It’s great! Don’t change anything!” But that doesn’t actually help me at all. My feelings are not gonna be hurt, and I would much rather receive helpful feedback as to actually improve my work. On the other hand, there are some people that don’t even consider the writers feelings and completely take apart the entire essay, rewriting it instead of suggesting revisions.

I also liked the suggestion of both writing in the margins and adding a post it at the end with more comments. The post it is a good place to put both positive comments, and issues that are overall and important and need to be addressed, and the margins are good for adressssing te smaller things to revise.

One of the things that stood out to me about this chapter is the author’s insistence that the student who is reviewing a peer’s writing is not an editor. We ought not to focus on grammar and spelling mistakes in the rough draft. I found this surprising as I always welcomed other’s to correct these minor mistakes because, at times, these small errors slide right past me. Similarly, I love the way Richard Straub posits that in reviewing each other’s works, we should respond like thoughtful classmates, and not attempt to be teachers. I think this is a very effective method of constructive criticism.

I took a creative writing class my senior year of high school, and my teacher insisted on peer review in a style that was slightly different than the standard exchange of papers. He removed our names off our papers, made enough copies for each person in the class, and instructed the class to critique the piece (with the author hidden in the audience). Under the cloak of anonymity (though it was the author who was anonymous, I guess it was easier for students to offer unrestrained criticisms without knowing who is specifically listening) students in my class often provided criticism that was not constructive in any way. They would rip apart stories on minor mistakes and failed to praise as frequently. Personally, I didn’t find this activity helpful. (Not because my story was bashed, but because I didn’t find anything to take away from the discussion.) I feel that if the class was presented this chapter prior to looking over each other’s writings, responses would have been much productive and effective.  The students would understand to praise just as much as they critiqued. Similarly, I feel as though they would focus on relevant and significant errors in writing—not just  rushed misspelled words that are missing a letter.

I instantly recall familiarity in response to the sentence of ‘just wanting to get it over with’. I often want to get reviewing papers over with. I feel as if they won’t truly value my opinion, and that my opinion is often not worth giving. I am also often scared of being too pushy. I want to be supportive; I don’t want to bring anyone down. People’s writing often feels very personal to them, whether or not the subject is personal to them (if it is then even more so) so I don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings. I am very careful with my words and I often venture too far in the realm of ‘everything’s great!’. I want to be helpful, but I don’t want to overstep my boundaries. What comment is too much? What is too unnecessary? Which suggestions are helpful to me as a peer advisor and not as a teacher, or a grader, or real critic? My harshness or seriousness in depth of my comments depends on what stage of writing the paper is currently at. I always keep in mind if it is a rough draft versus a final draft. If it is a rough draft I will make many comments and if it is a final draft I will make many comments, however the nature of the comments differs. If it is a rough draft I will make a lot of broader comments on the structure of the paragraphs or things that I would like to hear more of. If it is a final draft it would be more finishing touches, respecting the person’s stylistic choices for what they want to do with their paper. I learned from this paper to be more specific, as I always thought the short and sweet message was preferred but I realize that if you are going to be talking about something as sensitive as someone’s writing one should take the care to properly explain their opinion, you owe them that much, at least.

Since we’re starting our rhetorical analysis project I think that this article is very helpful and useful for this project as well as for other future projects. This piece by Richard Straub is very simple and easy to follow along with because of the format that it’s written in and it also sticks to very straightforward points and things to pay attention to. As someone who reviews the work of others and has their own work reviewed I found this piece to be very useful because it explains how vague, general and useless comments sometimes are. Its hard to know what to fix when the comments aren’t specific enough to understand what exactly the issue the reader is having with the writing is.

While reading the parts about how to properly respond to someone else’s writing I found myself agreeing with what he had to say. It isn’t my place or any other readers place to edit and change up the writing of someone else. I always found it weird and awkward when a person would have to read my writing in class and instead of making suggestions would write down all different types of edits and fixes. Even when I was told to edit someone’s work in class by teacher’s I always found it dreadful and didn’t want to be the one changing up the words and thoughts of someone else. I Like to receive feedback on my work, but I think it’s better not to receive any comments at all than to receive vague comments that are not going to help improve your writing at all.

After reading this I feel like I can be more helpful to a writer when reading their work over and having to comment on it. Instead of giving them vague feedback that won’t really help them improve at all I can now give them more feedback on specific topics within their writing. I found myself enjoying this article and agreeing with what Straub had to say about writing good comments that are helpful for the reader and I’ll also be using his advice when I have to write comments in the future.

This reading had me hooked on the very first paragraph. It started with a humorous appeal- relaying the thought process of what some students would be thinking if they were assigned the task of reviewing another classmates’ writing work. Straub connected with the audience by writing about how some students are simply interested in “getting through the assignment” (136). Straub then shifts tone by speaking to those students who “want to do a good job”, are “willing to put in the time and effort”, and actually want to “help the writer look back on the paper and revise it” (136). He then goes on to give some tips about how one can go about giving comprehensive feedback on another student’s paper. I find his choice of wording really important when he says to give advice in a “constructive” way (137). “Constructive” is a key word here. The feedback that one gives on another person’s paper should at the end of the day lead the writer to better their work- no matter if the comments are of praise or of criticism. He continues later to say that “even when you’re tough and demanding you can still be supportive” (139). Groundless comments that don’t help the writer in any way can be taken offensively, and are not the point of the peer editing.

Straub continues to go through the logistics of peer editing: how to get started, what to address in the comments, where to put those comments, what your tone should be, how much to comment, how to present those comments, etc. He even provides examples of peer edits. Overall, I found much of what he had to say was clear and obvious, and I’m sure others would agree with me. The issue with peer editing (in my opinion) isn’t about how to go about it (of course, tips are always helpful and welcomed), but an issue of wanting to put in that time and effort. But the truth is, a peer edit is almost always super helpful. It allows you to see what/where other students understood/misunderstood, liked/didn’t like, connect with/didn’t connect with your paper. So really, we should be putting in the effort. If you appreciate constructive feedback, wouldn’t you want to do the same for others?

This piece is useful for the readers who will help us edit our papers. I definitely would like someone who is honest with me. Give me as much criticism as you like. I want to improve my writing skills. I might be embarrassed about how much you commented or write. However, I know at the end of the day, what you are doing for me is helping me and that is great. It might make sense to me what I’m writing, but from the eyes of an outsider, it might not make sense to you. I like how Richard Straub mentions that readers need to focus on the big picture, instead of the minor details like grammar (136).
Straub emphasizes on do not sound like a teacher, but more like an acquaintance/ friend. I find that useful because I would not want someone giving me feedback and saying something such as “figure out yourself”, or “you can do better”. However, actually giving back feedbacks with support and suggestion, that will make the writer improve. Giving suggestions does not mean you tell the writer what to do, it is a path/ idea that the writer can take.
It is funny how Straub says do not be stingy, and write a lot of comments. I find this interesting because if I’m giving is well-written piece of paper, I will not be able to write a lot. Yet, if it’s a shitty first draft, then I will definitely write as much as possible. I also get a little pissed off when a classmate who is reading my draft and says a certain part is unclear. The reason is I do not understand why is it unclear, and it would have been better if the reader explains to me which phrases/ parts are unclear. Do fifty percent criticism and fifty percent praise (141). The comments made should be thoughtful, respectful, and reasonable.

As a student who undergoes review or is the reviewer, I have always dreaded one thing: vague comments. “Good intro”, “there’s no intro”, “needs more details”. These comments don’t really help me in my writing and I more often find myself rolling my eyes, and muttering: “well duh, it’s only a first draft”. Straub hits on these points in his writing about talking about how to respond to other’s writings. When giving such vague comments, it is better to not give those comments than to give.

In addition, Straub points out to not be a grammar Nazi, something that I admit that I am guilty of. Straub points out to take into consideration of the stage of draft. If it’s a first draft, there is a lack of need to focus on grammar. Being able to put the loose thoughts into a concrete format is of more importance in a first draft. In a sense, Straub is persuading the reader to take into consideration of kairos. There’s a time and place for everything.

After reading this, one can generally become a better reviewer/reader. Generally, the reader is like a second eye for the writer. Because the reader is not as familiar with the topic compared to the writer, the reader can have better questions. Of course, that would generally depend on how strong of a reader the person is and the medium that the reading is being presented on. Generally speaking, readings presented in a digital screen is subject to more skimming. Straub doesn’t mention this point.

I think it is a deep and helpful article. It gives us a straight forward format and points to pay attention when we are comment someone’s paper. I found this article useful and will try to use all the suggestions and tools author gave us. From previous article “Shitty First Draft” and from my papers to, I know how hard the writing is, and how much power and courage it takes from the writer. From this article, I understood the other side of the coin, how hard is to be the reader, and give comments to someone’s work without been perceived offensive, be neutral to someone’s work. It takes a lot of time not to be a critic or a teacher when you are reading someone work. This article will help me a lot in my future work when someone will ask me my personal opinion and suggestions about not only class work writing projects, but also any kind of paper (speech, business analyses, ect.)
I really enjoyed reading the essay of the kid; Richard Straub was very helpfully when he shows the technics on the specific example of someone’s work.

Usually I never give bad comments to someone’s work. If I am reading someone’s work and I feel like I disagree with someone or some ideas I just keep it for myself, and trying to find an ideas and words I like to give a positive feedback and not to offend the writer. After this article I will pay more attention to some aspects that I was disagree or not sure what author was trying to say, not to offend but to help with his work. Obviously it will be a long way with mistakes and corrections, but it is how it is works. We are learning to be not just the good writers, but the good readers as well.

While we’re getting ready to start our rhetorical analysis project, I think this article, “Responding to Other Students’ Writing” by Richard Straubs is going to be helpful. One thing that I liked about this article that he kept saying was that we aren’t teachers, editors, or writers but simply a reader. He mentioned this through his piece and I agree with it. There are other people who can help out with grammar or the structure of the writing but as a reader we’re required to give feedback sole on the writing. Often when we’re starting off we just want to jot down everything while all of our ides are coming to us, that’s when we create our first shitty drafts. But after we hand in our draft, that’s when we as readers come in and try to expand the writing or get a better understanding of the writing piece.

Another thing that I liked about the way Straubs wrote his article is that he broke sections down into different categories. He didn’t just tell the readers what to do and not to do, like a list. But he gave examples to help us give a better understanding. Back in middle school or even the first two years of high school for my English classes we often had other students read our papers and give constructive criticism. As Straubs mentioned about the comments, many students would just write small worded sentences about something in general and that wouldn’t really help me. I agree that if you want to use comments, they should be addressed in detail. We should use the margins of where the comment is relating to. I also feel like students often just left positive comments instead of giving their real thoughts of the writing piece. By not doing this, it doesn’t help the writer turn in a well developed piece. Of course, we can only suggest our thoughts.

Responding-Really Responding-to Other Students’ Writing by Richard Straub taught me a lot about writing and editing a paper. This article also showed a sense of not judging a book by its cover. Just like you should not look at a book or really anything in particular and make a full judgement about it, so too you should know every aspect of a person’s writing before making an edit. The article describes that if you were to edit someone’s paper, you would not want to change it as if it were your own. This is due to the fact that you might not understand the goal or background of the assignment. The teacher for example, could have been looking for something in particular to emphasize on, that the reader might not know about. I think therefore as an editor, it might be helpful to give your input on someone else’s work and make comments, but you might not necessarily want to change something, with or without approval. I think this assignment also brought up the fact that you also need to have a good balance of criticism but at an appropriate time and done the right way. This is similar to what we discussed in class when voicing our opinions on being in a hybrid class. A lot of our work is done online and we respond to other people’s work. This was seen in a positive light, but at the same time did have some negative aspects to it as well because you have to make sure your writing does not come off as harsh to the author. Body language is hard to get a sense of when reading, because there is no physical emotion connected to it as well and therefore when making any edit or suggestion you need to make sure it is appropriate and done only in an uplifting way.