My peer reviewer understood that I wanted my PowerPoint to look consistent and neat while still appealing to the audience. He could tell that I did not want a distracting slide design or template that would take away from all the information on the slides. In the peer response he stated, “consistent slide design and color”. My peer reviewer also perceived that I was trying to avoid being wordy and overwhelming the audience with too much information.
We all were required to watch the Powerpoint videos for this class, therefore I can infer that my peer reviewer knows about creating an appealing, yet simplistic slide design. My peer reviewer may believe that animations can help draw and maintain attention to certain details because he suggested adding some to my titles and graphics. My peer reviewer may how certain templates or slide designs fit with various types of presentations. He noticed that the design template that I used was very simple and consistent with the information being presented.
My peer reviewer seemed to care about the legibility of the information on the slides. On the peer review sheet, he noted that the summary was “easy to understand” and that the spreadsheet was ‘legible”. This showed me that he likes presentations that are easy to observe and digest, and suggested the use of animations and such to help exemplify the important details and points.
After looking over my peer reviewer’s suggestions, I took notice of what he pointed out that I could do to improve the quality of my PowerPoint. I thought of how the improvements suggested could help the audience better understand and perceive my presentation. I used the feedback suggested as best I could, as some suggestions where easy to improve on while others were not. My peer reviewer’s suggestions were helpful to me because on outside source, who does not me, could give impartial but productive advice as to what I could do to have a better presentation.
PowerPoint Slide [Photo] Copyright Daniel Parisi. Used with permission