- My field of study is biology, so the majority of texts are extremely logic-based. Writing also follows a very standard pattern and authors adhere to the conventions VERY rigidly. While this does make an analysis a little easier as I'm confident that my examples represent the majority, it's also true that it's hard to find things to say, so I hope these things are okay.
- There are issues. Definitely. I still have genre examples to add, because my draft as it stands only discusses the primary examples in each genre. I figure, though, with spring break I can get away with carrying on a little production at the same time as global revision. I also still have all the fun stuff (sound effects, transitions, clips from interviews) to add in. This will also be done. I also want to know if my analyses are in-depth enough. I want to know if you're picking up what I'm putting down.
- I think my biggest strength is that I'm getting the point of the project. I find isolated examples of a certain rhetorical strategy and explain them clearly. If I'm wrong and it really isn't very clear, then please make me aware. But that's currently my biggest strength. Possibly my only one. Will add if I think of anything else. I just think it's very "work-in-progress"-y, and that prevents me from feeling super confident.
Sunday, March 13, 2016
Open Post to Peer Reviewers
Wheeeeeew. It's been quite the time getting any semblance of a draft up here and uploaded. But here it is, ladies and gents!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The content of your podcast is through and expansive so I'll have to focus on the form.
ReplyDeleteStarting at the beginning, you have an interesting intro to the subject but lack enough introduction to the podcast and yourself. The section intros have strong hooks, but are a bit to wordy and long to catch attention. A more direct and brief version would be more effective. Transitions between the sections could help the overall flow.
The podcast could also use revision in wordiness and word choice. The use of precise language can tighten up a section and make it easier for a listener to follow the audio. This is especially important when discussing technical points like rhetoric.
On the technical side, the background noise is disruptive. If you are using a printed script, try to print it in such a way that you aren't turning a page mid take. Evening out the volume could also help.
Music and other audio should be added to break up the monologue and add texture.
Finally a conclusion and outro would be nice.
You have an excellent podcast and could use some polish work. The cat is also excellent and should be far more included.
-A.J.
Thanks so much, A.J.! I really appreciate your thoughtfulness in reviewing my draft. You don't always get that from peer review, and I'm really grateful that you took my draft seriously. I definitely looked over my project with your comments in mind just in time to fix a few things before submission! (Also unfortunately, I couldn't get anything else out of the cat. But I'm glad you enjoyed her commentary. :) ) I just want you to know how grateful I am for your review! Hope you had a happy Easter, if you celebrate! If not I hope you had a happy day today. :)
DeleteI realize it's too late to really do anything to your draft now, so I'm really sorry that I'm still commenting.. I just haven't gotten around to my peer reviews yet, but you can totally ignore it if you want!:)
ReplyDeleteI loved your podcast, and I honestly think it was one of the most interesting I've listened to yet. It might be that you use an interesting tone of voice and that caught my attention. It's anything but monotone, and I really appreciated that:)
I only really would've had one bit of advice to add to it, and that would be an introductory bit of music. From what I've gathered, I'm pretty sure that's one of the genre conventions of a podcast.
Really, other than that it was a fantastic podcast:) You had my attention the whole time, which is a hard thing to do for this project I feel like.
Really great work!