I like the reader-based revision. I do not think it is as devastating as the criterion-based revision. It is interesting to know what is on the reader’s mind when he or she reads my writing. But in my case with the problems I have writing, I think what is most helpful is criterion-based revision. I need feedback mostly about the mechanics of my writing. This is more of what the criterion- based reviewer would provide. I think I need the help of a strict teacher. I think if the reviewer sticks to a criteria I will know more of what is wrong with my writing when I have to write for academic purposes. Besides, I am not interested in writing English Literature essays which may be a little more creative. And I am definitely not interested in creative writing. In my studies I will be writing dryer stuff. My propensity is not to be creative or personal but more of an academic writer of subjects like history or philosophy. From my understanding criterion- based revision is more suitable to academic writing in less creative fields. It is also less subjective rather – it is objective. I am interested in writing essays which are well researched and are clearly and simply expressed with a strong argument. My aim is to be able to pick out my own errors and know why they are errors. I am less interested in the tone of my essays and more interested in being able to write confidently with a good grasp of grammar using a variety of sentence constructions.