My peer review skills and ideas about how to provide and receive suggestions about how to improve a piece of writing evolved over the course of the semester from making mainly local comments on how to change the small details into working on fixing the content on a global scale instead. My Evidence will be drawn from my comments offered to your peers. In thins case I will be using the evidence from the most recent peer review I have done on a fellow student’s of mine essay on Discourse. For their paper they wrote “At first her mother doesn’t like the idea of her playing soccer because she is showing to much skin and is spending too much time on the pitch.” Now me, knowing what I think a good comment should be, one that could suggest a change that could happen to the paper was, ‘what does this have to do with discourse. Make the text-to-movie connection’. The reason I said this was because that was the thought that came to my mind when I read that sentence. On a second occasion in the same students paper they wrote “secondary discourse isn’t from being apart of something but more of the fact of being given something and learning from that”so I gave another strong suggestion that they should word it as “Now Secondary discourse, unlike primary secondary discourse, is the learning aspect. It lets you see and notice facts from the given topic and learn off of them” which really sets the stage on what they were just about to write about. I also stated in a side comment ‘Is this what you meant ? I put it so that I could understand it. This is just a suggestion to word it as such.’ Not entirely changing what they wrote but making a good comment on what they could do. However I have not received the final draft so I can only hope my advice went to good means.