The first piece of feedback I received on our Predicting Home Value group project was to ellaborate more on our lit reviews in our introduction. My reviewer noted that our lit reviews can provide the readers of our paper with a more scientific background to our project while also validating the purpose of our research. My reviewer noted that it was clear in our project that we understood the relationship between the predictor variables and the response variable and that we did a good job laying out our structuring our data in a way that limited dependent errors. Another point that my reviewer noticed was that our writing seemed pretty choppy at points. This is most likely due to different writers contributing to different sections, so we will work to blend our written tones into a uniform and clear message in our next draft. We are hoping that our oral presentation will aid in this effort as we discuss out loud our project’s methods and conclusions. Further, our reviewer challenged us to go more in depth in our analyses, specifically, deeped beyond the model building and into relationships between predictor variables. He also suggested accompanying more graphs and charts help readers fully grasp our research findings. The final piece of advice my reviewer provided was to shift the message and tone of our paper from an R-guide teaching approach to more of an academic presentation feel. So much of our writing thus far in the semester has focused on R-guides and learning logs that aim to teach a fellow student, so we will adapt our paper to instead present our findings to an appropriate audience.