Course Banner: English 102 OSC. Dr. Halbert. Summer 2020.

PEER REVIEW GUIDELINES

Background:

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.

Instructions:

After you submit your own draft by the assigned time, you are expected to read and offer a peer review to two other students. My suggestion is to read and respond to a paper by someone whose opinions or style you like for one peer review and then read and respond to someone who has no responses (or fewer responses than most people).

1. Check for Special Instructions.

Before entering the specific forum for the current draft being reviewed, check to see if there are any special instructions or guiding questions underneath the forum name to keep in mind as you read and review the paper. There may not be special instructions for every peer review, but if there are, please include them in your peer review.

2. Read the paper.

Having checked for special instructions, enter the draft forum. Click on the thread containing the first paper you intend to peer review. Click on "Quote" to respond to the paper so that you can insert comments into the paper. Hit the CAPS LOCK key on your computer so that your comments are clearly differentiated from the original text. While ALL-CAPS feels like yelling, we are going to use this method anyway to avoid confusion about who said what.

Do not fix problems directly in the text because your partner may not see the changes. Instead, if you have a comment or an issue to fix, put your cursor at the end of the line/sentence/paragraph you wish to comment upon, hit RETURN twice, and type out your comment. As you mark the text, the following skills are essential:

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.

Issues to consider as you read the draft:

Mark any typos, punctuation errors, confusing passages, random thoughts, or sudden change in topics on the page.
React to especially strong points in the paper so the writer knows what they did well.

2. Write a note about the paper that offers constructive feedback.

Answer the following questions about your partner's essay. Please answer in complete sentences and give a substantial response, not the shortest response you can think of. Start with a positive comment about the paper and then write out paragraphs that deal with the main issues listed below:

Argument:

What is the subject of the paper? The subject needs to be more than the name of the text being discussed: it needs to be an issue related to the text.
What point is the writer trying to prove about this subject? In other words, what is the thesis statement of the paper? You can quote it and then restate it in your own words. Comment on how the thesis could be refined or confirm that you think it's strong enough for a college writing environment.
Which points in the body of the paper work well to support the main thesis? Why?
Which points in the body of the paper don't work well to support the main thesis? Why?

Organization (AKA "Flow"):

Does the paper's introduction grab the reader's attention right away, or does it start with a generic fact that anyone responding to the assignment could put at the start of the paper? If it's a good opening, why does it capture your attention? If it's not attention grabbing, what could the writer put instead to start the paper?
Does the introduction set up a plan of development that outlines 3 to 6 major points that will be developed in the body of the paper? If not, let the writer know.
Does the introduction end with an overall return to the main thesis instead of ending with a plan of development (like many of your ENG 101 instructors required)? The goal is to not end the introduction with a list of smaller points as the springboard into the paper, but rather leave the reader with a reminder of the overall point before going to the body of the paper.
Does each body paragraph end with a clear point that does not introduce a new concept at the end to force a transition? Transitions should come at the start of a paragraph, not the end as some of your previous teachers said.
Point out the most effective transitions between paragraphs and say why they work.
Point out areas where transitions need work and suggest alternatives.
If there are paragraphs that go on tangents or lack focus, please point that out and suggest ways to fix it, like breaking up paragraphs, moving points around in the document, and the like.
Are there places within paragraphs where transitional words could make the flow within a paragraph smoother?
Does the conclusion connect all the major points in the body to support the thesis? Does it attempt to make a broader point rather than simply repeating the thesis statement and the plan of development?

Evidence:

Are their claims made in the paper that lack evidence from either the text being analyzed or from research? If so, point them out and suggest ways to provide evidence.
Are the points where the provided evidence doesn't seem to support the claim being made with that evidence? Explain why you feel that way and suggest an alternative way to support the claim. This problem often occurs because the writer's interpretation of the evidence doesn't quite work.
Do quotations follow MLA rules for parenthetical citations? In other words, does every quote have a signal phrase, quotation, citation, and discussion?

Mechanics and Assignment Expectations

Does the paper meet all of the assignment expectations? Review the paper topic and point out any requirement that the writer may have omitted.
Does the writer make the same kind of grammar mistake repeatedly? If so, what is it? Give an example.
Does the paper follow MLA paper format? What changes, if any, need to be made?
Does the writer need to use proper MS Word commands to achieve the desired layout effect?

Final Thoughts:

Close with a legitimate positive comment about the paper.
List three broad areas to work on for the final draft.