Peer Workshop on Problem Section Directions:

1. Before you begin, the writer should write down the audience for his or her proposal at the top of the proposal section.
2. Answer the following questions on a separate sheet of paper for each paper you read. Make sure that you put your name on the sheet on which you type your answers so that you get credit when the writer puts these responses in his or her packet.
3. After you have read and responded to all questions, discuss your responses with each writer.
4. As you read, imagine that you are the intended audience for this proposal. Would you honestly give your money or support to the proposer? Be honest! This is not the time to be creative. Instead, consider what kinds of answers you would like from your peers and be as responsible as you can.

Response Questions:

1. Does the paper make a strong and clear proposal claim? (E.g., Somebody should . . . .)
2. Does the paper note reasons why the proposal ought to be implemented?Does the writer relate the claim to a need or problem? What is the problem? What are the causes? What evidence does the author provide for the existence of the problem? Is that credible evidence and if so, why? What should the writer add and why?
3. Does the writer note effects of instituting their proposal? Does the writer explore the implications of the claim? Who is directly affected by the problem and why is that serious? What evidence does the writer provide and if the evidence is credible, why is it credible? What should the writer add and why?
4. How are the readers affected? What evidence does the writer provide and if that is credible, why is it credible? What should the writer add and why?
5. Does the writer identify the objectives of a solution to the problem? That is, does the writer say what would be necessary for a solution to solve the problem?
6. What is the writer's solution? Does the solution appear to solve the problem? What makes you say that? 7. What reasons does the writer give to prove that the solution will solve the problem? Does the writer have sources to back up these reasons or to show the solution has worked elsewhere? What are those sources? Does the writer need more sources? Where and how would these help?
8. Does the writer's solution appear to be feasible? That is, is it a practical or doable solution? What makes you say that?
9. Does the writer show that the solution could be implemented by addressing budget, personnel, equipment, and timeline for the solution? What does the writer need to add to make you hand over your money?
10. Does the writer prove that you, the stakeholders, decision-makers, or money people will benefit directly or indirectly? What might the writer add and why?
11. What objections does the writer refute? Are these refutations convincing? If yes, why, if no, what should the writer add? Suggest some refutations.
12. What alternative solutions does the writer consider? How does the writer prove to you that these are not as suitable as his or her solution? Do you believe the writer and if so, why? If you don't believe the writer, what should the writer add?
13. What would enhance this solution either in terms of writing or in terms of format and layout?
14. What other advice do you have for the writer?