Peer Review of “Mycelium”

Name of Reviewer: Karen Okoyomon

Author: Adrianna Mroz

Title: Parenthetical, sentence, and expanded definitions of “Mycelium”

 

Great work on your definitions! I enjoyed reading about “Mycelium” despite not knowing much about biology in general. Below are my comments and suggestions regarding your assignment.

Initial Impressions:

The explanation of the assignment’s purpose was well-written and well-explained. You followed instructions well, as you wrote three definitions–parenthetical, sentence, and extended, and you identified an audience for each one. The extended definition was very detailed. The definitions were written professionally, without use of jargon or short-forms, and including good spelling and grammar. There was good use of visual aids; this was the most helpful part of understanding the definition from a non-scientific perspective.

Audience:

You’ve identified the audience as people who work in the field of biology. These definitions are very scientific, and your explanations matched your intended audience.

Organization:

From reading the extended definition, the expansion methods used that I identified were history, image, how it originated, and how it works. It may be useful to separate the methods of expansion into multiple paragraphs to make it more convenient for the reader to differentiate the points being explained. 

Image:

The image is correctly labelled as “Figure A” and includes a diagram of the term mentioned. It be helpful to include another photo of a real life “Mycelium” in addition to the diagram.

References:

There was a good use of credible sources in your definitions such as Cornell and a scientific journal. The only note I have is to title your list different to agree with APA or MLA format. This means title the sources as “References” if using APA, or “Works Cited” if using MLA format.

Overall:

Everything is very well-written and detailed. Great Job!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*