Objectives: 2 February

Peer Review!

• We will break into small groups of 2.
• First, each writer should state what he/she feels is working best in the paper and what he/she needs help with.
• Next, your peer partner reads your paper (simultaneous reading). You may make corrections in a minute, but this first time, just read it all the way through. 
• Respond to these questions as you talk with your peer reviewer 

(Developed by Eileen Crowe, UNCA Writing Center)  

1.    What are the strongest aspects of this paper? What really works? 

2.    What are its weakest aspects? 

3.    Where were you confused? 

4.    Find, underline, and evaluate the thesis statement. Does it clearly indicate the paper’s focus and purpose?  Does it accurately summarize the content of the essay? 

5.    Is the focus clear? Do all the paragraphs stay on target with the thesis? If some ideas seem random or irrelevant, suggest omitting them. If the writer has not developed a point or an idea as fully as possible, suggest possibilities for more full development. 

6.    Should the writer add (or omit) details to make the meaning more clear?

7.  Suggest changes in word choice or paragraph order that would make the paper more effective.

8.    If the writer has used abstract or general terms, suggest ways to make them more concrete. 

9.    Is the title appealing? Suggest an alternate that would make someone want to read this essay.  

• Now, to the best of your ability, check for and point out mechanical errors, wordiness, and inaccurate citations.