PAPER #1: FIRST PEER REVIEW

When we write, we often make mistakes or omissions that we cannot find when we read over a draft because our brain understands what we meant to say and makes the correction in our heads, not on the page. As a result, editing purely on our own often leaves papers full of mistakes or obvious holes--holes that weaken the overall persuasiveness of our argument. One way to help catch such mistakes is to have someone else read over a text and point out what works and what needs further revision, a tactic most academics and professional writers use by having colleagues or editors review drafts before publication. You can do the same with your classmates, which is why peer review will be a significant activity in this course.

Peer review accomplishes two goals: it helps the writer to see strengths and potential problems in their drafts, and it helps the reader to learn how to spot problem areas in a text, which can help improve self-editing and revision. Take this activity seriously and do the best you can, even if you are not very confident in your own writing ability: it's better to make an observation or ask a question and have the author ignore you than to remain silent. You'll be doing your partner a favor because it is far better for you to say something now than to have me downgrade the paper later.

Peer review requires several skills:

• The willingness to write reactions in the margins ("Ha!" "I don't get it," "smooth transition," "tangent," etc.)
• The ability to mark mechanical or grammatical errors, problems with content, and particularly effective portions of the paper.
• The understanding that its possible to point out issues in a paper in a helpful and kind manner, avoiding rudeness, condescension, or spite.
• The ability to communicate concrete suggestions to the writer both in a final note and orally.

PART I: Reading and Marking the Text

Exchange papers with your partner and do the following:

• Write "Read by _______" and insert your name.
• Mark any typos, punctuation errors, confusing passages, random thoughts, or sudden change in topics on the page.
• For each body paragraph, identify the key point being made and circle the key pieces of evidence.
• Check quotes for signal phrases, quotation marks, parenthetical citations, and follow-up discussions. If there are not quotes, point this out in the margin.
• React to especially strong points in the paper so the writer knows what he or she did well.
• If a counterargument or alternative view of a quote occurs to you, ask a question in the margin to see if the writer has consider it.

PART II:

Answer the following questions on your own paper. Make sure you write "Peer Review Response for _____[author of paper's name] by [your name]" at the top. Please answer in complete sentences and give a substantial response, not the shortest response you can think of.

1. Does the paper follow paper format? What changes, if any, need to be made?

2. What is the title of the paper? Is it boring or is it interesting? Can you suggest another title?

3. How does the first line of the introduction draw in the reader? Does it establish an image or an idea that is intriguing, or does it merely restate one of the questions on the essay topic handout? How could they improve the first line?

4. Reread the introduction: what is the subject and the specific thesis (claim) that is being advanced about the incident? Write it out in your own words and then copy the sentence(s) that best conveys this thesis in the introduction. Does the thesis need refinement? What could you suggest?

5. What, in your opinion, is the "before" situation of the author in relation to the core event described in the picture? What's the "after" situation? What role did the event have in shaping that change? How could the writer clarify the connections between these elements?

6. Which body paragraph is the best thus far? Why?

7. Which body paragraph is the weakest? Why? What specific suggestions do you have to make it better?

8. Write a paragraph that identifies the strengths and weakness of the draft as it stands now and recommend three specific actions the author should take to improve the paper.

Once you have both finished reading, marking, and writing the above response, discuss each paper and go over the recommendations. Then show your comments to Dr. Halbert. Make sure your partner keeps your comments about his or her paper.