Peer Commentary 2

My second round of peer commentary was a lot more positive; I found the value in my comments was the praise given to things my peers had done well. as we were all concluding our digital artefacts, I felt no need to give any suggestion, we were all short on time to make serious changes to our digital artefacts. Therefore, I focused on what they had done well. As I mention in the first peer commentary, passive feedback is received better, and can therefore be more effective.

I was overall impressed by the betas; however, I just had a couple of concerns about timelines. I also found concerns as to whether students would have enough time to finish their digital artefacts on time. Perhaps this was something I should have considered more when planning my digital artefact.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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