Peer Revision Reflection

When we break into groups of 3 (normally only one group) I think this works best. This gives each person 2 different views at the same time. Also, I think openly discussing and actively addressing the issues helps more than having someone simply answer questions. Typically people are (or seem to be) "afraid" to criticize their peers. Due to this I feel one doesn't get accurate feedback. So openly discussing in a group of 3 helps bring to light the real issues, without the "padding". Actively revising helps in multiple ways as well. It gives the writer a chance to acknowledge the criticism, fix it, peer revise it, fix it again, etc, etc. Due to time constraints in a group of 3, the groups have to move swiftly but accurately through each of the assignments to get all 3 done on time. This may be a challenge to some groups (*cough cough*).