RESEARCH PAPER PEER REVIEW

Part 1: Self Assessment:

Name: ___________________________________________

Please answer in complete sentences.

1. What is your topic? Why did you pick it?

2. What specifically are you arguing? Write a statement that includes the word "because" to show what specific point you want the reader to believe based on your argument. This statement should do more than simply restate the topic or only list topics to be discussed: it should tell the reader what central idea they should get from reading your paper.

3. What do you need to do more research on to further support your claims in the paper?

4. What remains to be done in order to have a complete paper to show in your conference?








Part 2: Peer Review #1

Please give a copy of your essay and this page to your first partner. Your partner should then complete the following questions:

Name of reviewer:

Please read and mark the author's paper and then answer the following questions.

1. Without reading the author's self-assessment, write out in your own words what you think the author is trying to argue. Then comment on if this argument is specific enough for Dr. Halbert's expectations.













2. Now read the author's self-assessment statement on what he or she hoped to argue. How close did he or she get? What can he or she do to improve the introduction and paper as a whole to further strengthen the argument?

 

 

 

 

3. Is the author putting citations next to information that is not quoted but clearly came from a source? Indicate places on the draft itself where he or she may need to put citations.

 

 

 

4. What mechanical, format, or grammar errors did you see in the paper more than once? Make sure you mark them on the paper as well.







5. Does the paper feel like it is a continuous argument, or is it merely informational? What could they do at the beginning of each paragraph to make it feel more like a continuous argument? What areas seem particularly unrelated to a specific claim?









6. What other advice do you have for the author to prepare for the conference besides "finish the paper and edit"?







When you are finished, give this paper and the essay to third member of your group so that he or she can also review the paper.

Part 3: Second Peer Review

Part 2: Peer Review #1

Please give a copy of your essay and this page to your first partner. Your partner should then complete the following questions:

Name of reviewer:

Please read and mark the author's paper and then answer the following questions.

1. Without reading the author's self-assessment, write out in your own words what you think the author is trying to argue. Then comment on if this argument is specific enough for Dr. Halbert's expectations.













2. Now read the author's self-assessment statement on what he or she hoped to argue. How close did he or she get? What can he or she do to improve the introduction and paper as a whole to further strengthen the argument?

 

 

 

 

3. Is the author putting citations next to information that is not quoted but clearly came from a source? Indicate places on the draft itself where he or she may need to put citations.

 

 

 

4. What mechanical, format, or grammar errors did you see in the paper more than once? Make sure you mark them on the paper as well.







5. Does the paper feel like it is a continuous argument, or is it merely informational? What could they do at the beginning of each paragraph to make it feel more like a continuous argument? What areas seem particularly unrelated to a specific claim?









6. What other advice do you have for the author to prepare for the conference besides "finish the paper and edit"?







When you are finished, give this paper and the essay to author. The three of you should then discuss each paper as a group. Once the discussion and exchange of papers has taken place, bring the papers and these sheets to him for a final review before you are dismissed.