Memorandum

Northeastern University ENGW3315

To: PROFESSOR MUSSELMAN
From: BEN FISCHER
CC: ANNA BECK
Date: 5/10/2019
Re: PEER REVIEW OF ANNA BECK

Summary The author begins the paper with discussing Northeastern University’s theory behind
experiential learning, and Beck goes on to refute how the theory does not actually play out
in the classroom. The author continues to comment on the method of partner coding in the
college of computer science; she mentions that the ideal situation of partner coding is social
facilitation as promoted by Robert Zajonc, but in reality social loafing occurs a majority of
the time. Beck comments on how she was required to do most of the work for her group,
and how the premise of social facilitation did not play out; she continues to comment on the
notion that Northeastern prides itself on experiential learning. Harkening back to high
school, Anna comments on how she came to Northeastern with the expectation of
experiential learning and preparation for co-op, but that is not what she has experienced in
his first year courses. She further goes on to discuss the differences between constructivism
and objectivism, and how they have affected her education. In the end, she discusses how
teaching with objectivism in lecture and incorporating hands-on labs is good in theory, but
it did not work in practice.

Major Points Beck discusses many theorists that have affected her education such as Zajonc, Darwin,
Ringelmann, Rand, and Piaget. With the exception of Piaget and Ringelmann, the other
theorists were mentioned in passing. Specifically, the effects of Darwin and Rand could be
expanded upon as they were only mentioned in one line of the essay. Possible quotations
from their works could help to show how they have affected the field of computer science.
The voice that the essay is written in is perfect for the assignment, as it is able to connect
with other students at Northeastern; also, the author did do an excellent job of incorporating
quotations that supported her personal thoughts. I do think that the essay could be improved
by moving in chronological order, beginning with high school. This could help frame the
essay with the comparison of constructivism and objectivism. Overall, the essay was well
thought out and planned, but I believe the information on some of the philosophers could
have been bolstered.
Minor Points The minor points of the commentary on the grammar and sentence structure can be found
on the essay itself. The essay will be returned to the author so that they can look at the
recommendations. Most of these recommendations deal with grammar and sentence
structure, but overall there were very few mistakes that were repeated throughout the essay.