Peer Reviews have always been an interesting experience for me. You see, in my writing class at BYU, the first peer review we did was a one-on-one discussion where I read my paper out loud to a partner, we discussed it, and then she read hers aloud and on went the review. I mean, it was a nice experience and everything; I got the constructive criticism I needed.
However, today we had our second peer reviews in class... and it was different (in a good way). This round we were assigned to groups of 3-4 people and we had to have their papers read and annotated before we ever got to class for the actual review. I think that I liked the small groups better than the one-on-one deal because it is a lot easier to critcize others in a group. I mean, I enjoyed both of them, don't get me wrong, but I think that it is a lot more intimidating to tell someone that they did not get their grammar all together in their essay in a one-on-one situation. Also, with the small groups, reading the essays beforehand is nice because you can take the initiative to look over the actual material and see all that the person was trying to accomplish, rather than just hearing how the author reads it to you. Heck, they could read very well, but their punctuation could be totally off and the other person would never know.
Anyways, lots of fun, those peer reviews. Now, off to make sweet sweet sandwiches! :)