Peer Review Two Guideline Sheet
Insenga
Assigned: April 26
Due at my office by your class’s starting time on April 28
As with the first two Peer Reviews, please follow each of the
steps below as you examine and comment on your Peer’s complete draft. For
this Peer Review, you will need A Writer’s Resource, the assignment
sheet, the film on which your peer has written, and your detailed class notes
and Annotation Logs. Most students prefer that comments are recorded
directly on their draft to facilitate easy revising.
1. Write your Peer Review nickname to the right of
your Peer’s heading. Remember to do this, as it is the only way I
will know who completed a Peer Review and who did not.
2. Examine first your Peer’s introductory
paragraph. After your read, record answers to the following
questions on this sheet and offer specific, facilitative comments for
revision on your Peer’s draft.
a. During class discussion early this semester, we worked to
identify and practice strategies for introductory paragraphs. Which
strategy does your Peer’s essay utilize? How do you know? Does the
method interest you as an audience member and how so (or why not)?
b. Underline your Peer’s claim. Using only the
introduction and the claim, map out below what you think your Peer’s
draft will contain. That is, if we consider an introduction and claim as
parts of an essay that act as a “road map,” what will the trip through the
essay look like? If you cannot predict the structure, alert your Peer and
make initial suggestions for revision. Further, if you see that the
introduction sets up a paper that will summarize only, alert your peer.
3. Think about the
option’s assigned audience. What sorts
of concerns do you feel the author should have as s/he writes? For example, what diction level should s/he
utilize to best reach the audience members?
Why or why not? Most importantly,
what are specific beliefs and values of the audience that the writer should
make sure to consider in the essay or letter?
Below, record your analysis of this audience’s needs.
4. Next, read
through your Peer’s entire draft, keeping in mind not only the introduction and
claim and the goals set down but also the assigned audience’s needs, values,
and beliefs. Remember, you are reading
as this audience member. As you read,
put an asterisk (*) next to places where you need more clarity, support, or
attention to the audience’s needs. Put
an “X” next to places where the writer has proven his/her argument by
presenting evidence or has successfully considered the assigned audience’s
needs.
5. Finally, review
your Peer’s draft, looking at citations of evidence. We spoke last week about secondary
sources. Find your peer’s secondary
source. Using our “interrogation method”
for determining how/if the secondary source is credible:
-Who wrote the source and what are this person’s credentials?
-Where does the source appear and what are the publication’s
credentials?
-When was it written?
-Finally, work to assess the way that your peer’s paper uses the
source. How will the source appeal to
the assigned audience? Does the author
just use the source to summarize what the audience might already know? Does the source work along with the author’s
argument? How so?
6. Answer any of
your Peer’s questions at the top of the draft that remain unanswered.