How can you apply peer feedback to improve your midterm composition?

• A. Ignore the feedback and proceed
• B. Fix minor spelling errors only
• C. Replace your argument with someone else's
• D. Use the feedback to revise for clarity, coherence, and evidence; justify changes by referencing rubric criteria and reader impact

Answer: (D)

Using peer feedback to revise a midterm composition focuses on translating others’ observations into concrete improvements that make your argument clearer and more persuasive. When peers flag unclear statements, weak transitions, or claims that lack support, the best move is to revise those parts so the meaning is explicit, the ideas flow smoothly from one point to the next, and each claim is backed by appropriate evidence. Justifying these changes by referencing rubric criteria helps you align the revision with what the assignment expects—purpose, audience clarity, organization, development, and mechanics—and reminds you to consider how a reader will experience the piece. For example, you might add specific evidence or examples to strengthen a claim and explain how that evidence supports your thesis, showing a clear link to the reader’s understanding. This approach turns feedback into actionable improvements rather than into mere tweaks.

Why the other approaches don’t fit as well: ignoring the feedback wastes the opportunity to strengthen your work; fixing only minor spelling or grammar ignores deeper issues of clarity and argument strength; and replacing your argument with someone else’s strips away your own voice and the exercise of building your own reasoning.