The Peer Review Process

Hello All,

I agree with doing a peer review in case we can use our skill of writing, reading, listening, speaking and thinking (Mittan, 1989, p. 218). At the same time we can improve these skills of ours, and we will consider to readers more -- how to make them can read and understand our writing.

To be as a writer, I can know what my friends, not only Ajan Karnchanok, think of my writing by their responses. Somebody's responses may be different from others'. So this variety of response can be more useful than just one response.

To be as a reviewer, I can see others' writing -- what they think and the way they write. It will be useful for me too. But I am not sure how to give others responses or comments because I am not an expert of writing. And I am not sure if my responses will be correct and useful for them. And what if my responses are wrong? On the other hand, how I can know that the responses I get from others are correct and believable.

In this article, Mittan seems to suggest reviewers that their responses should be positive (p. 213). I can understand that negative responses may destroy writiers' confidence or whatever. That's not good. But how the review works if we only have positive responses. How I can let the writers know if they have some mistake and how I can know if I have some mistake too. (I may misunderstand the meaning of positive response.)

I think peer review is not an easy work, but it is good, and I should try.

See you guys in class

Have good holiday