WA 4 – Peer Review for WA 4

Reviewee [writer]: their name Reviewer [you]: your name

As you read your peer’s paper,

 Highlight the thesis statement in the introduction.

Please keep in mind:

No responses to a question on this peer review sheet should be short, vague, or rushed. This is a critical thinking
assignment for you, and I need to be able to see that you are thinking critically about your peer’s essay and applying
what you have learned thus far from our discussions of the following: content covered in ENC 1101, the writing process,
traditional essay structure, chapters from your text, Anne Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts,” William Safire’s “The Perfect
Paragraph,” Donald Murray’s three articles on writing and revision, and the ENC 1101/ENC 1102 Essay Rubric. To receive
full credit for the assignment, I will need you to answer every question on the sheet thoughtfully and specifically,
highlight what was instructed above highlighted green and blue, and submit the peer review sheet to the correct Canvas
Discussion Board by the assigned deadline.

Introduction – Hook, Context, and Thesis

Hook – Does the introduction begin with an engaging opening that grabs the reader’s attention? If you had to rate the
hook, from 1 at very boring to 10 at very engaging, how would you rate the hook? If present, how does the hook
succeed? How does the hook fail? How could the hook be improved? Please explain and be specific.

[write your response to this question here – keep your answer highlighted]

Context is everything – The introduction of the paper should provide background and context on the topic your peer is
writing about. In order to do this successfully, the paper writer must provide sufficient and objective context for the
reader as explained when we discussed traditional essay structure at the start of the term. It should answer context with
who, what, where, when, why, and how. Context includes clearly explaining the history of the issue, debate and
controversy on the issue, as well as proving any background information needed for a reader to understand the author’s
argument. Is objective context provided? Explain and provide suggestions for development and improvement of the
context.

[write your response to this question here]

Argument – What is the peer’s argument (thesis)? Please copy and paste it below. Do not forget that this thesis should
also be highlighted on your peer’s paper.

[write your response to this question here]

Body Paragraphs – Explaining Your Reasons and Evidence

Topic sentences – does each paragraph begin with a clear topic sentence that refers back to a specific point from the
thesis? Has the writer confused evidence with a topic sentence, meaning that a quotation or paraphrase or some other
form of evidence was offered as the first sentence of the paragraph rather than an argumentative first sentence? Go
through each first sentence of every body paragraph and verify your answers here. Please explain your answer.
[write your response to this question here]

Focus – Review each body paragraph for unity and on-topic-ness – does the evidence match the main point of that
paragraph (which should be clearly stated in the topic sentence)? Are there any paragraphs that get off track with
irrelevant information? Make a note of the paragraph number and provide a brief explanation below.

[write your response to this question here]

Evidence – does the writer provide sufficient evidence to support the thesis? Can you find a variety of evidence? Count
each incidence of evidence, including examples, quotations, paraphrases, logical reasoning, and common knowledge,
you can find in each body paragraph. For each paragraph below, indicate the number of uses of evidence. So, for
example, if you find two quotations, a paraphrase, and an example in body paragraph 1, you would write the number 4
next to B1. Indicate where further evidence is needed to support the argument.

B1 =

B2 =

B3 =

B4 = (continue this formula if there are more than four body paragraphs)

[write your response to these questions here]

Integrating Evidence (Quotations & Paraphrases) – Do clear signal phrases prepare readers for researched sources (ex:
According to John Smith . . .)? Are all quotations integrated with a framing/sandwiching technique of IQEA (Introduce,
Quote, Explain, and Analyze)? Find every quotation and examine its framing. If a step is missing from the framing of a
quotation, indicate its location by page number, paragraph number, and line number, for example “page 3, paragraph 1,
line 6.” Are all paraphrases introduced with signal phrases? Are all paraphrases analyzed to show they support the topic
sentence? If a step is missing from the framing of a paraphrase, indicate its location by page number, paragraph number,
and line number, for example “page 3, paragraph 1, line 6.” Explain your answers.

[write your response to this question here]

Integrating Evidence (Example, Common Knowledge, and Logical Reasoning) – Do clear signal phrases introduce
example, common knowledge, and logical reasoning? Are all of these kinds of evidence analyzed to show how they
support the topic sentence of the body paragraph they are in? If a step is missing from the framing of an
example/common knowledge/logical reasoning, indicate its location by page number, paragraph number, and line
number, for example “page 3, paragraph 1, line 6.” Explain your answers.

[write your response to this question here]

Evidence Equilibrium – What is the balance between expert (quotations and paraphrases) evidence and writer
(examples, common knowledge, logical reasoning) evidence? Does the essay or certain paragraphs rely more on one
kind of evidence and not have an equal balance of both kinds? Indicate clearly where evidence is skewed more one way
than another, for example “page 3, paragraph 2 uses only quotations and does not integrate other kinds of evidence.”
Explain your answers.
[write your response to this question here]

Synthesized Evidence – When you look carefully at each body paragraph, can you see that evidence from multiple
sources is used and tied together? Can you see, in other words, that authors’ arguments are being interwoven together
in each/one body paragraph? Can you see how the authors agree or disagree with each other? Explain your answers.

[write your response to this question here]

Counterargument and Rebuttal – Does the essay include a counterargument as outlined? Where is/are the
counterargument(s)? How fairly and objectively is the counterargument presented? How convincingly and thoroughly is
the counterargument answered and overcome in the rebuttal? Are there any counterarguments you can think of that
are not explored and overcome? Explain your answers.

[write your response to this question here]

Organization/Transitions – Has the writer used clear organizational cues (transitions, signal phrases, repetition of key
ideas, etc.) to logically develop their paper? Does one idea lead logically to the next? Or is the writer bouncing from idea
to idea without connecting the dots and emphasizing the thesis? Are there transitions between paragraphs as well as
between sentences in a paragraph? Are the correct transitions used to support the organization of ideas? Does the order
of paragraphs match the order of points argued in the thesis? Explain and provide suggestions for improvement of the
organization.

[write your response to this question here]

In-text citation – Are paraphrases and quotations correctly cited in MLA format through in-text citation? If any evidence
seems not to have been correctly cited, be clear about where the issue is and how you would fix it.

[write your response to this question here]

Work Cited page – Is there a Work Cited page? Are the entries on the Work Cited page in correct MLA format for a
journal article, web article, TedTalk. etc.? (See the Start Here! Module on Canvas.)

[write your response to this question here]

Conclusion – Thesis, Closure, and Expansion

Conclusion – Is there a conclusion? Does it restate the thesis? Does it summarize all of the main points made in each
body paragraph? Does the conclusion include more than summary, meaning some kind of further thought is offered on
the topic as outlined in our discussion of traditional essay structure covered at the start of the term? Does the
conclusion address “so what?” and “who cares?”? Provide any advice on improving the conclusion you think would be
helpful.

[write your response to this question here]

Final Reflections – A Holistic View

[write your response to this question here]

Which steps of the traditional essay structure (as covered at the start of the term) does the writer do well, and which
areas does the writer still struggle with? How can you tell?

[write your response to this question here]