Here are the reasons people gave for choosing the most useful of the four reports. I was surprised at how few people took the opportunity to make the choice; I was also surprised at how many of the reasons seemed to me to have nothing much to do with usefulness. Comments, for example, about editing and consistency, which really do have some importance, don't have much to do with whether the report is useful; comments about whether the writer liked or agreed with the report are much more about the writer than about the report. If you count up the nominations, the report on Swift wins. For what it's worth, I agree with that choice, though not often with the reasons.

I think the wiki on Swift is the best of the four. It goes above and beyond what I had expected to be reading. It was a tad bit too long, however, they had to include two texts; so it can only be expected to be long.

My nomination goes to the group that worked with Paine's Common Sense. It is likely that this report had a great deal of time spent on the editing and arranging process, as it is the "cleanest" wiki of the four. It has a constant voice throughout, and it flows really well. It also followed the most closely to the prompt and dealt with many aspects of the work, while keeping them relevant to both the course and their collective report.

I thought I the report on swift was the most helpful. Collectively they give a good sense of what the works are about. The majority of my questions were answered within the report and they sparked my interest in the reading.

The report I found most helpful was Swift's, because it seemed to touch any possible questions I could have thought to ask. I have done research on Swift before this class and in this class, so this is why I found this one so well done.

I personally like the Report on Thomas Paine because it is organized, easy to read, and gives me a good sense of what was going on in 18th Century politics.

The second report I found most helpful was Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, because they seemed to cover a lot. The way they organized was pretty good, too. I did not find myself having many questions afterwards besides if they thought we should carry on or finish here with her.

Jonathan Swift because I agree with the report on the further recommendations of what we should read next on Swift. ("Argument Against the Abolishment of Christianity" & "Modest Proposal") Swift is a important satirical writer from the eighteenth century so therefore, I think the class would benefit in reading more of his non-fiction works.

I found the group that covered "Swift's Letter and Argument" was extremely thorough in their explanation of both works, as well as answering some questions I also had. They also went into great deal about the relationship between Ireland and England, and also discussed the voice used in Swift's work (which was very informative on an academic level).

I found the report on Locke's *Letter Concerning Toleration* to be the most useful. I feel as though it is almost unnecessary to read it because of the well structured summary. The quotes supplemented the well written overview of Locke's argument.

The Wiki report I thought was the best was on Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's Letters. I found that the other reports were really confusing, and I found myself jumping from one topic to the next, then back again. The other reports had too many subtitles which kind of got confusing and I ended up losing focus. The report on Lady Mary was very clear and easy to follow. They had a FEW subtitles which clearly separated questions they were going to answer which made it easy to follow. I also liked how group members put their individual interpretations of Lady Mary's letters, this allowed me to see different views and compare their differences in interpretations (Not everyone reads the same way, so getting multiple interpretations was great!). This report had good format and they properly cited their sources. They also didn't pile a bunch of quotes into their report, which I thought was good because just copying and pasting quotes isn't really putting much effort into the report and isn't really giving their interpretations of the letters.

I am picking this on what drew my interest the most, which was Tom Paine. I enjoyed this report because I found it very informative and well laid out, making me understand a piece of Paine's work with out even reading it. I am excited in learning more about Paine, this report did an excellent job at giving me all the answers that I would be generally inclined to know about. Their categories flowed together nicely and they didn't have unnecessary information that made it boring, this concluded with me as a reader to stay focused on the report, ending with a good grasp on *Common Sense* and it's main purpose.