Re: Peer Reviews

Subject: Re: Peer Reviews
From: Nancy Hayes <nancyh -at- PMAFIRE -dot- INEL -dot- GOV>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 1995 18:46:00 GMT

In article <9506272200 -dot- AA05114 -at- mailhost -dot- ElSegundoCA -dot- ATTGIS -dot- COM>,
>CALL FOR OPINIONS (damn sure this bunch will have opinions):
> Have any of you experienced successful peer review
> operations? Unsuccessful?

Unsuccessful, for the most part. Peer edits can catch superficial
problems, but most peer edits don't work for an in-depth edit. The
=only= time I've ever had a peer edit work was when the other writer was
also an editor--and wasn't afraid to take the time to do it right.

Other problem: It's sometimes difficult for a "peer" to be honest. Who
wants to offend the person you eat lunch with? Who wants to trash
someone's work when s/he will get to edit yours? Etc. etc. etc.

Last problem: Just because someone is a good writer, doesn't mean s/he's
a decent editor. I know several good writers that aren't good editors
(and vice-versa).

Nancy Hayes (nancyh -at- pmafire -dot- inel -dot- gov)

Previous by Author: Re: MS WORD MACRO PUZZLER
Next by Author: Re: Style Guides
Previous by Thread: Re: cliches
Next by Thread: Re: Peer Reviews

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads