Peer Review Instructions

Please read this sheet carefully in order to orient yourself and to know how
you are to help your peers.
READ QUESTIONS FIRST.
Process:
1. Read questions first (see below)
2. Read your peers paper. Pause at the end of each paragraph to give
yourself time to write comments.
Reading aloud is the best way to judge the clarity and coherence of a
paper because it enables us to connect the written word with the
spoken one. If an argument has broken off; if a sentence is unclear,
wordy, inaccurate, overly-romantic or pretentious; if there is a lack of
evidence; or if there is a logical gapall of these will be immediately
obvious (to the writer as well as the reviewer).
3. When you have finished reading the paper answer the "Peer Review
Questions" on a separate document or sheet of paper.
Concentrate on your own response to the paper rather than rendering
judgment.
Use the first person e.g., "I hear ..." "I didn't
understand...""I'm confused about ..." "I'd like to hear more about..."
"I couldn't follow ..." Avoid using the second person e.g., "you should"
"you need to" "you ought to." Responses are a clear guide because
they enable the writer to rethink the issues on his/her own. Your
responses (1st person) are easier to listen to and accept, and in thus
in the end more effective, than your judgments (2nd person).
4. When you are finished, collect your paper and peer review sheet. Use the
sheet and comments on your paper to revise your it. TURN IN ALL PAPER
COPIES AND THIS SHEET WITH YOUR REVISION.

Peer Review Questions

Writer:
Reviewer:
Assignment: Does the draft carry out the assignment? What could be done
to better fulfill the assignment?
Title and Introduction: Is the first paragraph an adequate statement of
the paper's topic and approach? Did you know from the first paragraph
where the paper was headed? Does the title state what the draft is about? Is
it interesting? How does it catch the readers attention? Has the writer
(being either yourself or your classmate) clearly expressed the question
(major claim, thesis) that he/she has selected to analyze? What is that
question? Is there any seemingly extraneous information included in the
introduction? Having read the entire essay, suggest an alternate way to
begin the essay. Having read the entire essay, does the introduction fit the
paper? Has the writer (being either yourself or your classmate) clearly
expressed the question (major claim, thesis) that he/she has selected to
analyze? What is that question? Is there any seemingly extraneous
information included in the introduction? Having read the entire essay,
suggest an alternate way to begin the essay. Having read the entire essay,
does the introduction fit the paper? Does the first paragraph serve as a
good introduction to both the paper's topic and the writer's approach or
general conclusion? Can you identify a thesis statement? Suggest, if
possible, a way to improve the introduction or thesis statement.
Body: What are the main points that are being made in each paragraph?
Briefly outline the point of each paragraph and sketch the evidence given in
support for each. How is the evidence linked to the main point of the
paragraph? And to the main point of the essay? Is there any seemingly
extraneous information throughout the body of the paper, such as plot
summary, excessive quotation, or unsupported claims? What are the main
points that are being made in each paragraph? Briefly outline the point of
each paragraph and sketch the evidence given in support for each. How is
the evidence linked to the main point of the paragraph? And to the main
point of the essay? Is there any seemingly extraneous information
throughout the body of the paper, such as plot summary, excessive
quotation, or unsupported claims?

Evidence & Continuity: Did the writer support the argument in a

convincing manner? Were quotations from the text well chosen? Is the line
of argument clear from paragraph to paragraph? Did each paragraph add to
the argument?
Supporting points: List the main points made in the draft, in order of
presentation. Then number them in order of interest to you, noting
particularly parts that were not interesting or that seemed unnecessary. Do
any need to be explained more fully or less fully? Should any be eliminated?
Are any confusing to you? How well are the main points supported by
evidence, examples, or details?
Structure: Can you identify the organization or line of argumentation?
(Could you outline the process whereby the writer reaches the conclusion?
Can you identify the main argument?)
Paragraphs: Which paragraphs are clearest and most interesting to read,
and why? Which ones are well developed? Which paragraphs need further
development? What kinds of information seem to be missing?
Sentences: Read the draft and choose three to five sentences you consider
the most interesting or the best written because they are stylistically
effective, entertaining, or memorable for some other reason. Then choose
the three to five sentences you see as weakest, whether confusing,
awkward, or simply uninspired. Are sentences varied in length, in structure,
and in their openings?
Words: Are verbs active and vivid? Mark words that are particularly
effective--those that draw vivid pictures or provoke strong responses. Then
mark words that are weak, vague, or unclear. Do any words need to be
defined? Are any words potentially offensive, to the intended audience or
anyone else?
Style: Did you find any sentences or ideas that were unclear (either
because of sentence structure or because they expressed concepts that
were difficult to follow)? Suggest, if possible, a way to clarify these
sentences or ideas.
Conclusion: Does the conclusion draw together the strands of the
argument? Is it a sufficient statement of the paper's main points? Does the
draft conclude in a memorable way, or does it seem to end abruptly or trail
off into vagueness? Has the writer restated (not simply repeated) the major
claim of the paper in light of its discussion throughout the paper? In other
words, what should the reader have learned by the end of the argument?
What is your understanding of the initial question after reading the paper?
Has this understanding been adequately expressed? And does it open up the

major claim to the question of its implications? (Has this major claim
ultimately been placed into a broader perspective or context?) Suggest an
alternate ending to the argument. Has the writer restated (not simply
repeated) the major claim of the paper in light of its discussion throughout
the paper? In other words, what should the reader have learned by the end
of the argument? What is your understanding of the initial question after
reading the paper? Has this understanding been adequately expressed? And
does it open up the major claim to the question of its implications? (Has this
major claim ultimately been placed into a broader perspective or context?)
Suggest an alternate ending to the argument. Does the writer satisfactorily
establish her or his conclusion? Are there sufficient grounds for that
conclusion that go beyond personal opinion and that appeal to your
reasoning?
Final thoughts: What are the main strengths and weaknesses in the draft?
What was the single most important thing said? What is/are the paper's
greatest strength(s)? Explain. What do you think is the strongest objection
or counter-argument to the paper's conclusion? Suggest, if possible, a way
improve the main argument. Are there claims or positions which require
substantiation?
Editing: Did you find distracting grammar, punctuation, spelling, or word
usage problems? Just underline them (and explain briefly if it's not obvious,
using
abbreviations
such
as
gr.
p.
sp.
and
wc).
General/Misc: Suggest an alternate title. Does it express 'in a nutshell' the
essay's theme? Has it followed the proper "title: subtitle" format? [Note:
This assumes the paper already has a title-thus, every paper must have a
title!] What confuses you about the draft? (For example, a certain word
choice, the topic and/or its presentation, the explanation of something in
particular.) Does the flow of the essay break down at any point? In other
words: Does the essay become hard to read or lose its coherence? Where?
And how might you fix it? Does the essay remain within the chosen text(s)?
If there are any generalizations, speculations, clichs, idiomatic
expressions, or colloquialisms underline them so that you can point them
out to your peer(s). What has the writer done well in his/her essay? Provide
positive comments about the strength(s) of the essay. Suggest an alternate
title. Does it express 'in a nutshell' the essay's theme? Has it followed the
proper "title: subtitle" format? [Note: This assumes the paper already has a
title-thus, every paper must have a title!] What confuses you about the
draft? (For example, a certain word choice, the topic and/or its presentation,
the explanation of something in particular.) Does the flow of the essay break
down at any point? In other words: Does the essay become hard to read or
lose its coherence? Where? And how might you fix it? Does the essay
remain within the chosen text(s)? If there are any generalizations,
speculations, clichs, idiomatic expressions, or colloquialisms underline

them so that you can point them out to your peer(s). What has the writer
done well in his/her essay? Provide positive comments about the strength(s)
of the essay.
Source
Writing Across the Curriculum University of Wisconsin- Madison
http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~WAC/page.jsp?
id=139&c_type=category&c_id=22
Writing Across the Curriculum Northern Illinois University
http://www.engl.niu.edu/wac/
Writing Across the Curriculum University of Wisconsin- Madison
http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~WAC/page.jsp?
id=169&c_type=category&c_id=21
Writing Across the Curriculum University of Wisconsin- Madison
http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~WAC/page.jsp?
id=169&c_type=category&c_id=22
Writing Across the Curriculum University of Wisconsin- Madison
http://mendota.english.wisc.edu/~WAC/page.jsp?
id=33&c_type=category&c_id=22