This week in class we learned that the first step to peer reviewing is to check for content. Through the 2 paragraphs we read during class, we noticed that to have a good paragraph one must expand on what they wrote and go into details. In addition, different topics should be separated into different paragraphs. With this I can read my classmate’s writing and focus on content in order to help them improve their essays where necessary. In addition, I will use this too, to revise my own essay.
Wikipedia doesn’t allow articles created about your own information or promote advertising. When gathering references, the sources should be reliable. We should never copy other peoples work and put it into our article if it is not cited. Generally anything that is written from a neutral perspective and excludes things that relate to oneself is okay to write about.
I chose the topic straw chewing because I noticed that I have a habit of doing that and I also see many others who do the same thing. Some subtopics would be scientific name, causes, effects, other similar habits and reasons for this habit.
From McClure’s article, I learned that going straight to Google or Wikipedia increases the risk of having non credible sources, issues on accuracy, and bias in sources. In addition, it also provides more sources than needed and causes the student to become overwhelmed with the amount of links that pop up. The research done on Susan and Edward helped them realize that switching to using information provided at a library or an academic data base made sure that the information was credible, accurate and current. It was also as quick as if you were to search on Google or Wikipedia. From reading this article, I will plan on trying to use the resources that are provided for me at our school library to search for credible information, in addition to using credible sites.