Welcome to ENG 101

Home | Course Policies | Daily Schedule | Assignments | Links



Peer Review for Assignment #1

Author:______________ Reader:________________

This assignment asks students to visit a public space and analyze the way in which the physical space influences and is influenced by the social practices and activities which occur there. Therefore, the author should explore the connections between the physical space and the people in that space.

As a peer reviewer, it is your responsibility to communicate your comments, questions, and suggestions to the author in a productive way. Your response will be the primary feedback the author will use to improve his/her paper. Thus, you should pay attention to moments when the author is effectively communicating ideas and is engaging you as a reader, and you should also notice when the author/reader communication breaks down. Try not to focus on GMP (grammar, mechanics, and punctuation) errors.

Directions:

1. Read the entire draft through once, perhaps circling or checking problematic sentences or paragraphs.
2. Read the goals for Assignment #1.
3. Read the peer review questions.
4. Read the paper again and answer the questions (on a separate sheet of paper) as conscientiously as possible.

Peer Review Questions:

1. Can you visualize this public space? Are the details of the space descriptive enough to allow a reader who has not been to the space to visualize the space? If not, what could be added?

 

2. What was the goal of the writer in this paper? From what perspective is the author writing? Does the paper reveal a bias? If so, explain. How do you think the author intended the reader to respond to this paper?

 

3. Does the author successfully illustrate how the physical space is shaped by the people who use it? Are the author's conclusions supported by evidence (descriptive or interpretive)?

 

4. What cultural need does this space fulfill? Does the author explain this relationship between people and the public space? Is the author's explanation supported by evidence?


5. Does the author attempt to explain how different people view the space? Does the author adequately probe different viewpoints?

 

6. Do the people the author describes seem realistic? Can you visualize them? Why or why not?

 

7. As a reader, what did you enjoy about this paper? Were there parts that you wish the author would explore in more detail? Which parts and why?

 

8. Circle a favorite passage or sentence from this paper and mark it with a "+". What makes this passage or sentence work for you? Is it a certain technique, tone, method of description, or some combination that makes it successful?

 

9. Describe at what points the writing becomes less interesting or confusing (you may wish to circle or mark these sections as well). What could be changes or elaboration could be made to make the writing clearer? Is there anything missing or unanswered for you as a reader?

 

10. What is the overall organizational structure of this paper? Does it adequately serve the author's purpose? Can you suggest a possible alternative or is the structure of the paper well suited for conveying the author's intent?

 

11. Can you identify some of the heuristics used in this paper? Suggest a few heuristics that would help improve the paper? Are there any heuristics that the author used that seem to be harming the paper?