DQ 2 :As you review feedback, how can the practice of reflective learning help you create an objective and open mind?

Describe your process as steps somebody else could follow, because the prompt asks for a process and most answers supply an attitude. A workable one: open the returned document and collect every channel of feedback in one place — margin comments, tracked changes, the rubric scores, and the summary note, which frequently contains the most important comment and is the one students read least carefully. Sort the comments into categories: mechanical and APA, structural, and substantive, because they need different work and the substantive ones are the ones that change a grade. Then make the change and, critically, record which comment recurred from the previous submission, since a recurring comment means the previous correction was cosmetic. That record is the difference between receiving feedback five times and improving once. Naming the channels matters, because the summary note is the one most students never open. The recurring comment is the single most useful thing in the whole returned document.

Answer the third sub-question honestly, because it is the one with the real gap in it: when a learner does not understand a comment, the usual behaviour is to guess or to ignore it, and both preserve the error. The alternative is to ask, specifically — quoting the comment, saying what you think it means, and proposing a change for confirmation, which is a far easier message to answer than a general request for clarification. Then reflective learning and resistance. Writing down what you feel about a comment before deciding what to do separates the reaction from the judgement. Resistance usually signals that a comment landed on something you already suspected, so treat it as information rather than as a verdict on the reviewer. The practical version is a rule: no response on the day it arrives. Naming the reaction is what stops it operating unnoticed, which is the whole use of reflection here.