Curation Project Peer Critique

Imagine you’re writing a report for your colleagues that will help them make a decision about moving forward with this project. The primary goal is to provide meaningful feedback that will help your peers improve their projects. The secondary goal is for you to reflect on your own project after examining your peers’. Look at the following questions and answer them thoroughly in a Word document. Feel free to use the format provided here. You should also feel free to take screen shots of their project and point to specific areas that you liked or that need improvement.

In the end, this is an informal writing assignment. So, while each review should be long (750 words), don’t feel like it has to adhere to formal academic style and tone. You’re trying to help your peers. Use language and ideas they understand.

General Impressions

  • After looking through the whole project, describe what you think it’s about? In your own words, describe its topic and summarize the story it trying to tell.
  • What is the project’s title? Why or why isn’t engaging?


  • Describe the organization of the entire project. Does the order of the pages make sense to you? Why or why not?
  • Are the pages labeled clearly? Can you find what you need? Explain why or why not.
  • Describe how you found your peers’ artifacts. How easy was this? What would you improve to make it easier?
    • How are they arranged on the site? What seems to be the organizational principle in displaying the artifacts? What would you do to improve their organization/arrangement?
  • Describe how you found the citations for each artifact. Where were they located in the webpage? Was it easy to see which citation belonged to which artifact? What could the creator do to make this clearer?

Look / Design

  • Does the design match the content? What do you like about the look of the project? Or, what do you dislike about the look of the project? What ways could the creator improve the look of their webpage?
  • What do you think about the color scheme? Does it relate to its content? Does the author need more or less color?
  • Are the secondary images (those that aren’t artifacts) high quality and useful?  Do they add to your impression of the site or merely distract?
  • Are the fonts easy to read? And/or do they add to the feel of the site? What might you change about the font choices?

Copy / Text

  • Describe where the artifact descriptions are in relation to their artifacts. Is there a clear organization? Explain why or why not.
  • Find the tags for each artifact. Do the tags adequately describe the artifact? Are they too wordy? Too vague?
  • Examine the creator’s “About Me” page. Does the author clearly explain the purpose of the webpage? Is it clear who they are? What might you do to improve this page?

Final Impressions

  • What needs improvement before this project is turned in on Friday? What areas should the creator focus on?
  • What did you like about the project? What aspects of the project should the author build on?
  • When we meet on Wednesday, talk to your peers about your impressions and what needs improvement. Remember, you’re trying to help them – this means your critique may have some negative points. That’s okay. Try to be professional and helpful.
  • Consider providing your peers with a list of 3 to 5 things that deserve their attention first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s