During the process I produce feedbacks on my colleagues’ blog post, I have questioned myself about the interchange of peer review that is meant that ‘you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours.’ According to Nicol et al. (2014, 102), peer review is a reciprocal process that students can send feedback reviews on the work of peers and receive comments from peers on their work. I had received superficial feedbacks of my colleagues from previous subjects, so I didn’t expect to have valuable feedback for my pitch.

On the other hand, I was surprised when my classmates sent many useful comments, mainly, they help me solve non-academic sources in my project. Furthermore, I felt happy because my feedbacks also help them improve their projects. Thus, I have interested to contribute my opinions on their beta plan. My feedbacks haven’t changed the criteria: accurate evaluation and contribution. I also focused on suggesting my colleagues’ works likely display, promotion, and concept development.

Image result for feedback
  1. Anthea Tomaras’s Game in Education:

Take a screenshot from antslifedotblog.wordpress.com.

First, I started the second round with Anthea’s beta. I used to produce feedback on her pitch, and she referred my comments effectively in her project. Thus, I want to help her improve her DA better. In the beta, she still focused on presenting ‘Game in Education,’ but she made her topic smaller about Minecraft in learning.  Anthea showed strengths in beginning her work by post the first blog and promoting it on Reddit. However, she only promoted on her Reddit and quite struggling to attract audiences. For this reason, I suggested that the best way to promote her blog posts is on Twitter. Furthermore, the display of her first blog is quite simple. Anthea needs to have some short video about how to play to illustrate the content of her DA. I provided some videos about Minecraft: education edition. I thought that the benefits of educational games are a useful argument to show people that video games can be used in school, so I recommend some academic sources for it.

2. Isabella Joannou’s Evolution of Board Game:

Take a screenshot from abearinthere.wordpress.com

The more I engaged in the process of feedback reviews, the more critical I became. I focused on commenting on an overview of Isabella’s works, rather than is her arguments in the beta. The purpose of her DA is Evolution of Board Game: Digital and Analog. In her beta, she started well when she has a good plan for the development of her platform. In addition, I give a compliment for her beta video because the display is good. However, I couldn’t see her schedule and the content of her projects. She only focused on promoting on Reddit, so I recommended that she should use her Twitter with #BCM215 to attract audiences. To make her content enrich, I searched for two sources from the website to use her example in the next blog posts.

3. Sheng Cheng’s Introduction video:

Take a screenshot from allen.video.blog.

Peer feedback reviews might advantage studying, not only because of the quantity and variety of comments from multiple peers but also because the providing and use of feedback are more tightly coupled temporally (Nicol et al. 2014, 104). Keeping that in mind, I moved on Sheng project about popular video games introduction and why are they so popular. Sheng’s strength in his pitch is the excellent choice of platform and his listening to his colleagues’ feedback. His weakness is also a simple topic. Therefore, I suggested that he can make synthesis content such as Top 5 popular role-playing games. In his beta, he didn’t show how to promote his channel. Twitter and WeChat are useful to help him advertise his video. I couldn’t imagine his topic, so I tried to find some sources that related to his project.

Overall, They have done this job well. I had thought that peer review is valuable because it helps me learn good skills from classmates to improve my project. Also, I could contribute my opinions in peers’ plans to support their projects. It also makes people interact rather than just paying attention to their exercises. I expect comments from my colleagues, and then I will adjust my project. I also hope my feedback is useful to them.


Nicol, D, Thomson, A & Breslin, C 2014, “Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective”, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 102-122.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s