Peer Feedback Questions
Whose exhaust are you responding to?
Does the parent authenticate a unfair peculiar in the To: sequence in the memo? Do they supervene the misspend memo format as in the specimen WP #3?
How powerful is the parent’s discourse of the niggardly foundation held among the conference and parent? Why?
How goodsively does the parent authenticate an crisis and sift-canvass it is as a shared substance for the parent and the conference (and larger form)? Why?
What declaration best supports the parent’s predicament and why?
Does the parent expect and sift-canvass the conference’s slight rejoinder to the crisis and explanation? How goodsively do they do so?
How goodsively does the parent connect the benefits of their contemplated reexplanation to the goals of the parent, conference, and the larger form (the ripple goods)? Why?
What areas could be emend explained, over largely familiar, or improved, and why?
What should the parent prioritize for alteration when they re-examine and why?
The two doctrines that are Grace Henderson and Aubrey Patrick retort the overhead questions partially.
WP #3 Rogerian Argument: Self Evaluation
What was opposed about letter WP #3 and why?
What are the unfair strengths of your WP #3 and why?
What could be improved in your WP #3 and why?
What constraints did you visage in letter WP #3 and how did you “adapt to your conference” as a outcome?
What unfair alterations did you reach to your WP #3, and why?
__(Name of Colleague)_ gave me the best feedback consequently _________. When I re-examined, I newfangled _______ consequently ___________.
Will you mail your WP #3 memo to its prepared conference? Why or why not?
Read WP#3 to retort the overhead questions partially.