Learning Outcome #4 – Peer Review
I chose my first peer review with Andrew Ouellette as not only is it special to me for being my first peer review for a college course, but also as it is the only peer review, I was a part of during ENG 110. I blame mud pits and being sick for this disadvantage. Throughout most of Andrews writing he makes some very good points that I had to agree with, such as the point Andrew makes, “For Gladwell, social media activism isn’t enough to bring real change because it doesn’t require the same commitment or risk that other and more traditional forms of activism have in the past”. Another good point he makes, “Gladwell, however, argues that technology often leads to weak interactions that doesn’t result in true engagement. He believes that the convenience of online activism makes it less likely that people will commit to the difficult work needed to create real change”. I think Andrew does a great job at making good connections throughout his paper which I commented on. The only weaknesses that were present throughout his paper that I noticed were his spelling and grammar. I highlighted every instance of a misspelling that I noticed. I was also a fan of his conclusion, specifically the quote, “Appiah believes that conversation and cosmopolitanism can help people build connections and create positive change, while Gladwell criticizes social media activism for being too shallow to drive real social movements. Although they take different approaches, both authors highlight the need for true engagement, with Appiah focusing on the potential of dialogue and Gladwell warning of the limits of online activism”. I even believe that this statement is better than some parts of my conclusion as it takes both authors points and weaves them together into one good stopping point.
