Peer Review Workshop

Peer Review Workshop
Message to Writers
Despite popular theory, writing is not an isolationist activity. Writing is intended for an
audience; therefore, it’s helpful to receive feedback on your drafts before you have to
submit the final revision. The responses you get from your classmates can help you
determine whether you have responded to the assigned topic and whether your essay is
clear and effective. Please abide by the following guidelines:
 Make sure that you have brought a whole draft (at least 2 pages) and not just a
paragraph or an outline.
 Explain your goals, tell your readers what problems you’re struggling with, and ask
for advice or help with specific aspects of the paper or the assignment.
 Don’t be defensive or embarrassed about your work. It’s always difficult to show our
writing to others for critique and response, especially when it’s in rough form, but the
purpose of the workshop is to help you revise the essay to make it a better final
product. Keep the focus of the workshop on the writing, not on the writer.
 Keep in mind that your colleagues’ responses are just that: responses. Consider
their comments and suggestions carefully, because they have been offered
thoughtfully and in the spirit of collaboration, but remember that the final decisions
about revising the essay are yours. If you don’t agree with someone’s suggestions,
that’s OK. If, however, multiple readers tell you they don’t understand your point, do
not ignore that information.
Message to Readers
Your main job is to be a thoughtful, responsive reader in order to offer help and
suggestions to the writer for revision, not to judge or evaluate the paper. Please abide
by the following guidelines:
 Start by telling the writer what he or she has done well: identifying specific strengths
is just as important as pointing out weaknesses. Don’t be afraid to tell the writer what
you liked and how it affected your reading.
 Keep your comments helpful, specific, and respectful. Specificity is particularly
important: telling someone that an essay is “good” or “bad” is not helpful. Let the
writer know exactly what works and what doesn’t by pointing to specific aspects of
the paper, using language such as “The example in the third paragraph makes your
point really clear,” or “I don’t understand how Kendall’s point from the reading relates
to your argument.”
 If there is something you don’t understand, your job is to communicate your
confusion to the writer, not to tell him or her how to fix it; that’s up to the writer. You
may make suggestions if you have an idea that may help the writer to clarify
something, but avoid telling the writer “I think you should…” Rather, try to ask a
question: “I’m not sure what you mean here. Can you give me an example?”
 Above all, remember that you are looking at a work in progress, so keep the focus
on global issues (logic, response to prompt, organization, tone), not on minor
editing or proofreading, unless your understanding of the writer’s meaning is
obscured.
Peer Review (5 points): Read your peer's essay SILENTLY first. Then, WRITE
DIRECTLY ON THEIR DRAFT, responding to the following questions as you assess
your peer’s draft. Note: If there is no introduction paragraph, skip #2 and #3.
1. Assess the essay's title.

1. Is the essay both unique and relevant to the topic? Does it make you jump out
of your seat?
2. Or is it bland or generic? (ie. “Essay #2” or “Our Group’s Advertisement”)?
3. If you find it to be bland, generic, or irrelevant to the essay’s topic, write a more
riveting, fitting title in the margin.
2. Read first few sentences. STOP. Do they immediately grasp your attention, leaving
you panting or more? No? Then, suggest a new type of hook: anecdote, statistic,
illustration, intriguing quote. BE SPECIFIC regarding how the writers can WOW you.
3. Read the next few lines. STOP. Do these sentences introduce the topic? Do they
address the questions of So What and Who Cares? If you answered no to any of
these questions, explain in the margins how the writers can improve their description
of the topic.
1. Do you really want to read further? What about the title and introduction either
holds or loses your attention? Explain your response in the margins.
4. Underline the thesis statement.
1. Is it relevant to the prompt?
2. Is this statement specific and crystal clear?
3. Is this a declarative, argumentative statement?
4. Does it reveal why you should care?
5. If you answered no to any of these questions, offer suggestions for improvement.
5. Skim the topic sentences of each paragraph.
1. Is each topic sentence a declarative mini-thesis that connects clearly back to
the argument proposed in the thesis statement?
2. Does they cover all of the requirements from the assignment prompt?
3. If you answered no to any of these questions, offer suggestions for improvement.
6. Are there clear transitions provided to show connections between body
paragraphs? If not, offer suggestions on how the writer can more smoothly connect
one paragraph to the next.
7. Now reread each body paragraph for unity. Do all the sentences in the paragraph
connect to the idea introduced in the topic sentence?
8. Focus on the evidence and development.
1. Has the writer incorporated borrowed information (whether summarized or
paraphrased) with a clarifying signal phrase and necessary contextualization
(background information)?
2. Is each quote or paraphrase appropriate for the paragraph claim?
3. Has the writer paraphrased too much or too little?
4. Does the writer add sufficient analysis to each quote?
9. Examine the other details.
1. Were there sufficient examples used to develop each topic sentence? What
types of examples--personal experiences? facts? hypothetical scenarios?
2. Cross out any examples that seem irrelevant to the paragraph's topic.
3. What other examples would you suggest your peer add to make the paragraphs
more interesting and the claims more credible?
4. Does the writer explain how the examples prove the topic sentence's claim?
10. Assess the essay’s style.
1. Is the voice unique? Do you think you could recognize it out of a pile of other
essays? If not, offer suggestions for improvement.
2. How can the writer make the style even more sophisticated word
choice, figurative language, etc. Offer suggestions for how the writers can
improve the overall style.
11. Overall, was this a strong essay or did it miss the mark? Explain with detail.
12. Evaluation: At the end of the essay, first tell the writer what you thought was the
paper’s greatest strength. Then explain specific changes this writer should make in
his/her revision of the essay. To answer this question, consider again the essay’s
thesis, organization, development of ideas, and overall clarity.
Self-Reflection and Peer Response Letter (5 points) – Once you receive your paper
back from your peers, review their feedback and reread your essay objectively, taking
note of our paper’s strengths and weaknesses. Then write a letter to your peers
responding to the following questions: What do you think needs improvement? What
comments did you receive from your peers? How were they useful? What changes will
you make based on these comments? This self-reflection and peer response letter will
be stapled to your final draft along with your outline.

Peer Review Workshop

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peer Review Workshop

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peer Review Workshop

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peer Review Workshop

1. Assess the essay's title.

You might also like