Instructions for Peer Review

Print out a copy of these instructions before beginning. Please closely follow the instructions below when reviewing a paper. Note that your participation grade for this week will be determined by the thoroughness with which you review your assigned papers.

Remember to save your work as you are editing.

You will need to bring two printed copies of the edited paper to class on Thursday. Failure to do so will result in a penalty to your paper and a zero for participation this week.

The Thesis Statement

1. Open the document. Delete the text on the first page (i.e. the thesis and topic sentences provided by the author). On the first line type your name, on the second type the name of the student whose paper you are reviewing. Follow this with "Assumed thesis:" and "Actual thesis:"
2. Give the paper a quick read-through. Do not concentrate on finding problems, merely attempt to get the thrust of the paper. Write what you think the thesis of the paper is in one sentence on the cover page (after "Assumed thesis").
3. Copy the thesis sentence (last sentence of the first paragraph) to the cover page (after "Actual thesis").
4. Does the thesis contained within the paper match with that you got from your initial reading of the paper? If not, let the author know and figure out what the discrepancy is. Type your suggestions on the cover page.
5. Does the thesis state the obvious (not desirable) or is it arguable (desirable)? Could the reader reasonably disagree with it (desirable)? Comment on this as needed.

At this stage, the first page of the paper should look like:

YOUR NAME

THEIR NAME

Assumed thesis: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. [From Step 2]

Actual thesis: Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. [From Step 3]

Comments from Step 4

Comments from Step 5

The Close Reading

From here on in, you will be adding comments directly into the paper. If possible, use the commenting features of your software (Track Changes / Comment), otherwise make all additions and comments in ALL CAPS.

Introduction

• Carefully read the introduction. Does it avoid generalizations such as "Since the dawn of time, humans have suffered"? Does it contain sufficient information for the reader to understand the paper? Does it define any necessary terms or concepts? Is it too long? Comment and make suggestions as necessary.

For each body paragraph

• Read the paragraph and note what you think the author is arguing. Compare the topic sentence of the paragraph (TS, the first sentence) with what you thought the author was arguing. Are they the same? Offer suggestions as to what the author needs to do to fix any discrepancies.  Remember, the TS needs to be an argumentative point not a statement of fact (e.g. Achilles was a hero).
• Does every sentence in the paragraph work towards proving the topic sentence? If not, indicate what you feel to be superfluous.
• Is the argument in the paragraph strong and clear? If not, why not?
• Are there any blanket generalizations? Unsupported assertions? Is there textual evidence presented? Is this evidence convincing? Is evidence being correctly cited? Note if not.
• Mark any statements that may need further support.
• Are there any of the following common problems (if so, note them):
  • incorrect grammar;
  • incorrect spelling;
  • excessive summary;
  • rambling prose;
  • use of "made-up" or incorrect words;
  • use of slang or colloquialisms;
  • use of rhetorical questions;
  • use of gender-specific language.
• For the last argumentative paragraph (usually the penultimate paragraph of the paper unless the author is dealing there with objections), examine whether the paragraph contains the culmination of the argument. The TS must reflect the paper's thesis (maybe not in wording but definitely in content). Does it? This is VITAL.

Conclusion

• Carefully read the conclusion. Does the conclusion briefly summarize what has happened in the paper? Does the conclusion examine the implications of everything in the paper? Does it provide a concluding thought? Comment and make suggestions as necessary.

Errors

• Read over the list of problems with the last paper provided by your reviewer. Did the author commit any of these errors? If so, it is imperative that you let them know and suggest how they can be avoided.
• Read over the list of potential problems with this paper provided by your reviewer. Offer guidance as to how the author can fix the problems they perceive with this paper, if indeed they exist.

04/13/2009