Peer Feedback

Blog (3.11.17): Make it kind, make it specific and make it helpful. This is Ron Berger's model we followed to give each other feedback on our 2 min draft compositions (see also Berger, Rugen & Woodfin, 2014). There was no "but", rather "you could consider". The outcome of this was that you still felt good about putting yourself on the line, sharing your own composition with all it's faults but had specific ideas on what to do next to improve. My specific feedback was to:

• Consider having the cello continue the pizzicato I had in the first section instead of only for the first two bars to create additional interest, especially in a performance content.
• Some notation areas for the violin to fix and to include the violin in the final bar that I had accidentally left out!
• This also made me think more for the violin part as for the player, it wasn't a very large or interesting part, so I included a much bigger role in the last section for where currently it had nothing.

Berger, R., Rugen, L., Woodfin, L. (2014). Leaders of their own learning. John Wiley & Sons Retrived from Models of Excellence

Following these changes, I felt I was ready to get into the recording studio to see what would eventuate from having my composition played by real people and real instruments! I think this step, despite what might be logistically more difficult to execute than composing at home, is so important to hear how it will actually play and if the lines work for each instrument. Also to get specific feedback (kind and specific) on any areas that need to be addressed related to their part and instrument.