In this blog I will address another peer review that I conducted for a student in another class. This review focused on the form of the podcast as well as a little bit of the content. Mostly I wanted to look at the structure of the podcast and see what went well and what didn't work as well as the author had probably wanted.
I peer reviewed Flawed Transcriptions by A.J. Makela. For this project I focused on looking at the form used in the podcast. I previously focused on the content of a podcast during my last review and as such I felt it would be necessary to go and look at the form of a podcast.
I tried to help the author by giving feedback on the way that the podcast was organized as well as how the way the podcast was structured. The podcast worked well to address an topic then move on. I felt that the way that each genre was described worked well within the form. I really wish that there was some sort different audio techniques that were used, like another speaker or some sound effects etc.
The students guide helped me look at the organization of the podcast which was a key part of the form that I was looking at. The way the organization is done is just a part of the form though, I needed to look at how things were presented. The audio before the music intro really was an interesting idea and I thought it worked really effectively.
One of the things that I took away from the podcast was that there doesn't need to be an extensive amount of talking about the specific examples to describe an example thoroughly. I think that this will help me not feel like I have to add more to my specific genre examples, all I need to do is define them completely.
No comments:
Post a Comment