Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3


Inquiry Module Reflection

Cody Bortle
Arizona State
Inquiry Module Reflection
1) Peer reviews have been used for a long time and allows for students to obtain feedback
on whatever project or essay they’re working on. This feedback is necessary so students
can make the appropriate changes to their work to make sure it’s in it’s optimal condition
prior to submission. Although peer reviews have been practiced for a long time not many
people know how to use it properly. For example, it's important that your feedback is
positive, but hints at what revisions you’re recommending. Also it is extremely important
for whoever is receiving the feedback to read the comments and make the changes that
are recommended.
I recently received peer feedback on one of my major assignments for EDT 180 from my
friend Brian. He suggested that for my section on Internet of Things that I should relate
Podcasts to the actual topic itself more efficiently because he felt that the way I did it was
not entirely effective. Throughout the feedback process he also stated that my research on
the Google AIY Voice Kit was extremely effective and that my research had a lot to offer
for those who were unfamiliar with the technology. Finally he mentioned about how
strong my relation of the technologies I chose to research and my subject of interest was.
Overall Briansuse of peer review in my project helped me submit an extremely well
written assignment.
2) With the revisions that I received I am only able to modify a few of them because of
time, expertise, or cost. For example, Brian suggested that I should take a different
approach with the Internet of Things section because my approach with podcast was not
completely successful. If I had enough time I would choose to change my technology
entirely to 3D Printing and the use of them within the educational environment. I feel that
3D Printing would fit better with the topic of Internet of Things way better than Podcasts
do, which would allow me to make a more compelling argument. He also suggested that I
should change the approach I took with the shortfall of the Oculus Rift being too
expensive and that I should research any other versions of the Oculus Rift that may be
cheaper. This is an extremely effective revision and would not take too much time to
3) Throughout this project I have learned a lot about the process of revision. In the past I
have completed major projects and submitted them without taking a second look.
However, since I’ve practiced peer review and revision, I feel that from now on with all
major assignments I will practice them and submit better assignments. I learned that peer
review isn’t all about the negative aspects of the assignment and that it is important to
highlight the positives so the other person can recognize what was working in the
assignment. If I were to restart this assignment I would take a different approach with the
types of technology I researched so they will match the topics better and research them
more in depth to offer more information to those who are unfamiliar.
4) Before completing this assignment I believed that the Oculus Rift was primarily used for
gaming and could never be used as an educational asset. I was unaware of what it had to
offer for educators. For example, since I would like to be either a math, art, or spanish
teacher in the future the Oculus Rift would allow me to take my students on tours of
different countries, mathematics driven structures, or even art museums. I have not taken
a class that even had this technology available for students and didn’t consider what it
had to offer from an educational standpoint.