Through this work we had the opportunity to evaluate and give recommendations to the work of our collaboration group. My collaboration group is made up of Ileana Cabrera, Luz Uribe and William Tavarez.

​

In these tables we can see the grades that my classmates gave me. The average score I received was 48 points. Thanks to the comments from my classmates in my Publication Outline, I was able to make improvements in my writing and this is reflected in the grades. Having the opportunity to have constructive feedback and feedforward on my work helps foster an environment of camaraderie and helps personal growth.

​

As evaluated by my peers, my ability to think critically and execute the paper is good, which is seen in my perfect scores when analyzing the critical thinking aspect. One of my classmates suggested that I consider adding a section that outlines specific examples or case studies of successful STEM programs in elementary schools. Real-world examples can provide concrete evidence of the positive impact of STEM education at an early age. Sharing success stories or showing specific projects and outcomes can make your article more relatable and convincing to educators and administrators.

Another of my colleagues gives me the recommendation is to disseminate this article widely among educators, and administrators, fostering a collective understanding of the positive outcomes of early STEM experiences. They all agree that they like my way of organizing ideas and the presentation in general.

​

In conclusion, my classmates believe that the content I decided to explore will be of great help when implemented in elementary school. Your suggestions help me continue directing and shaping my innovation project. Constructive feedback facilitated the improvement and quality of each of our work.