PEER REVIEW (10% of final essay grade)[1]
For your peer review you should clearly and thoroughly address all of the questions below in a 1-2 page typed response to your peer. Before you address these questions, read your peer’s essay and make initial comments directly on their essay. These comments are your initial reaction and should be in the form of questions where you need clarity or have curiosity, as well as statements in the form of objective opinions. All comments should be in complete sentences and clearly legible. Once you have completed your initial reading and direct commenting, re-read your peer’s essay and address the below questions in your typed response.
1. The assignment. Does the draft carry out the assignment? How might the writer better fulfill the assignment?
2. The title and introduction. Does the title tell the reader what the draft is about? Does it catch the reader’s interest? What does the opening accomplish in terms of hooking the reader’s interest, establishing common ground, and establishing the writer’s ethos? How else might the writer begin?
3. The thesis and purpose. Paraphrase the thesis as a promise: “In the essay, I will…” Does the draft fulfill that promise? Why, or why not? What is the writer’s purpose? How does the draft fulfill (or not fulfill) that purpose?
4. The audience. Who is the audience? How does the draft establish goodwill with the audience? How does it capture the interest of the audience? What values does the audience hold that are different from the writer’s?
5. The exigence. What is the situation (or context) that calls for this writer’s rhetorical transaction?
6. The rhetorical stance. Where does the writer stand on issues involved with this topic? What words or phrases in the draft indicate the values the writer holds with regard to this topic? How does the writer identify his or her cause with the interests (or different values) of her audience?
7. The supporting points. List the main points, in order. Number them in order of interest to you. Which of them could be explained or supported more fully? What evidence, examples, or details might do the trick? Which of the supporting points could be de-emphasized or eliminated?
8. The paragraphs. Which paragraphs are clearest? Best developed? Which paragraphs need further development? What kinds of information might help?
9. The organization. How is the draft organized—chronologically, spatially, emphatically, or in some other way? Given the organizational pattern, could the main points be presented in a more effective way? What suggestions can you make for transitions between paragraphs that would make connections clearer and easier to follow?
10. The sentences. Choose three sentences you consider the most interesting or best written—stylistically effective, entertaining, or otherwise memorable. Then choose three sentences you see as weak—confusing, awkward, or uninspiring. Advise your peer on how to revise those three weak sentences.
11. The words. Circle the words that are particularly effective: underline those that are weak, vague, or unclear. Do any words need to be defined or replaced? Are there any potentially offensive words in the draft?
12. The tone. What dominant impression does the draft create—serious, humorous, satiric, persuasive, argumentative, or objective? Is the tone appropriate to the topic and audience? Is it consistent? Mark specific places where the writer’s voice comes through most clearly. Ask the writer if this is the intended tone—and if he or she finds your comments surprising.
13. The conclusion. Does the draft conclude in a memorable way? Does it end abruptly? Trail off? Restate the introduction? How else might this draft end? If you like the conclusion, give two reasons why.
14. Final thoughts. What are the main strengths of this draft? Weaknesses? What surprised you—and why? What do you want to know more about? What is the writer’s single most important comment or point?
