Peer reviews

Please use following the peer review instructions listed below for each essay and use a separate word document for each one.
Be as specific as possible with your comments and questions. Be sure to ask the writer questions about his or her draft, especially if you think there are gaps or missing details that need more explanation.
Also, when commenting, try to prioritize for your writer what they ought to focus on, so, for instance, in your summative comment, you can tell them what you think is most important to fix first (or, you can indicate as you respond to questions which you think ought to be their priority).
Use the following prompts to guide your peer review.
Comment on the problem the writer has chosen to address. How well does the writer frame that problem? How does the problem offer an opportunity to respond?
Identify the writer’s rhetorical audience and whether the author is taking a “top down” or “bottom up” approach to the problem. Is it likely that the chosen audience and approach will help the author solve the problem? If not, suggest an alternative.
Indicate how well the writer shows how the problem will affect the reader. What does the writer think the audience ought to do? How does the writer establish ethos?
Comment on the writer’s thesis statement, which should clearly state the proposed solution, perhaps repeating the problem as well. If you cannot locate a thesis statement, what thesis statement might work for this document?
Analyze the research the writer has conducted in order to provide support for the proposed solution, in terms of its feasibility, cost and acceptability. What additional evidence might the writer provide to better support the solution’s feasibility? How well does the writer establish logos?
Tell the writer if you think they need to add more explanation of the sources. Does the evidence feel as if it is dropped in with little or no explanation as to how it relates to this proposal? What kinds of reasoning and/or evidence were left out by the writer that you think would help to make the argument stronger?
Look carefully at those places in which the writer is referring to the ideas of a primary or secondary source. How well does the writer explain any use of fieldwork or library/Internet research? If the writer uses a quotation or paraphrase, is the source appropriately introduced in the text?
Comment on whether the writer adds their own explanation of the quotation or paraphrase. If a writer only writes something like, “This proves my point,” or “I don’t agree with X,” or “I do agree with X,” then that writer hasn’t provided adequate context for readers to understand how the source material supports the writer’s argument.
Comment on the proposed solution. What steps are necessary for realizing this solution? What does the solution ask of the audience? Is the requested action explicit or merely implied?
Determine how well the writer connects with the audience in terms of aligning the proposed resolution with their needs or expectations (establishing pathos).
Comment on the conclusion. What did you learn from the conclusion that you did not already know after reading the introduction and the body? What information does the writer want the audience to know? Does the writer attempt to change readers’ attitudes, actions, or opinions?
Tell the writer which part of the proposal you most enjoyed. Why?