CRT 205 WEEK 3 DAY 4 CHECKPOINT PEER REVIEW

CRT 205 WEEK 3 DAY 4 CHECKPOINT PEER REVIEW - CRT 205 WEEK...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: CRT 205 WEEK 3 DAY 4 CHECKPOINT PEER REVIEW BERNAL The response that I reviewed from one of my peers was well written. After reading their response, I felt that this person did a decent job describing the claims from the article. However, from the article I was unable to establish the claims of the host from Comedy Central. From the article I am assuming that the host had an opposing view from the scientist. I think this student did a great job of comparing the claims against his or her own observation. This person clearly expressed that they do not agree with the claims the scientist is making. I had a difficult time determining what this student intended the background information to be. In my response to a claim I read about, I used the small details provided for background information, such as the suspect’s age. I believe this student made the proper assessment about the judgment of the other; he or she stated why the author was qualified to make claims. For the feedback and peer review I used to concept of direct. Even though there was not a specific question form, feedback and peer review I used to concept of direct....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 11/28/2010 for the course CRT 205 crt 205 taught by Professor Darren during the Winter '10 term at University of Phoenix.

Page1 / 2

CRT 205 WEEK 3 DAY 4 CHECKPOINT PEER REVIEW - CRT 205 WEEK...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online