Home
Syllabus
Assignments
Calendar
Grades
Resources
 

Student Email Contact Teacher Discussions Class Roster

Peer Review Guidelines for Assignment 3

Sections in Assignment 3:
Prewriting  |  Discussion  |  Writing the Essay  |  Revising  |  Peer Review  |  Rubric Student Example 1  | Student Example 2 Back to Assignment 3

Read: How to Ask For and Receive Feedback on Your Writing

You will work in the discussion area in groups of three, each person reading and providing feedback on the other two peoples' papers. Locate the group with your name in the group's title.  Enter that discussion group, and click on Reply to Topic.  Copy and paste the text of your draft into the discussion group.  Each group member should read the other two essays posted in the group.   First, read the essay completely without sPeer Reviewtopping.  Then, use the Peer Review Form below as a guide to provide feedback for your classmates.  Click on Reply to Topic and post your peer review in the same discussion group.  You receive 5 points for writing the peer reviews for your classmates.

The peer review form is based on the rubric I will use to grade the essay. Time is limited (for your response and for the author's revision), so concentrate on the most important ways the draft could be improved.  Be specific in your responses, explaining  what you don't understand, and in your suggestions for revision. And, as much as you can, explain why you're making particular suggestions. Try describing what you see or hear in the paper--what you see as the main point, what you see as the organizational pattern.  Identify what's missing, what needs to be explained more fully. Also identify what can be cut. Be honest, but polite and constructive, in your response. The Peer Review Form is brief and to the point, so feel free to elaborate on areas that might help your classmates create a better essay.

  3 2 1 0
INTRODUCTION
Background/History
Thesis Statement

CONCLUSION

Well-developed introduction engages the reader and creates interest. Contains detailed background information. Thesis is clear and focused.
Conclusion effectively wraps up and goes beyond restating the thesis. 
Introduction creates interest. Thesis clearly states the position.
Conclusion effectively summarizes topics.  
Introduction adequately explains the background, but may lack detail.  Thesis states the position.
Conclusion is recognizable and ties up almost all loose ends.
Background details are a random collection of information, unclear, or not related to the topic. Thesis is vague or unclear.
Conclusion does not summarize main points.
Is the last sentence a summarizing topic sentence?  Does it include the lesson learned and refer to the narrated incident?
Does the introductory paragraph define an ethical idea or term adequately? 
SUGGESTIONS:

 

MAIN POINTS
Body Paragraphs
 
Well developed main points explain the thesis. Supporting examples are concrete and detailed.  
The narrative is developed with a consistent and effective point-of-view, showing the story in detail.
Three or more main points are related to the thesis, but one may lack details.  The narrative shows events from the author's point of view using some details. Three or more main points are present. The narrative shows the events, but may lack details. Less than three main points, and/or poor development of ideas.    The narrative is undeveloped, and tells rather than shows, the story.
Is there a discussion of who or what influenced the writer's ethical development?
Does the narrative fully explain the incident from the writer's point of view?
Does the narrative show, not tell, the story as it unfolds?
SUGGESTIONS:

 

ORGANIZATION
Structure
Transitions
Logical progression of ideas with a clear structure that enhances the thesis.  Transitions are skillfully used to move from one idea to the next. Logical progression of ideas.  Transitions are present equally throughout essay. Organization is clear. Transitions are present.  No discernable organization.  Transitions are not present. 
Does the narrative use a consistent chronological progression?
Can you identify transitions between ideas within the paragraphs?
SUGGESTIONS:

 

STYLE 
Sentence flow, variety
Diction
 
Writing is smooth, skillful, coherent.  Sentences are strong and expressive with varied structure. Diction is consistent and words well chosen.   Writing is clear and sentences  have varied structure.  Diction is consistent.   Writing is clear, but sentences may lack variety.  Diction is appropriate.  Writing is confusing, hard to follow.  Contains fragments and/or run-on sentences. Inappropriate diction. 
Is there variety in sentence structures?  Does the writing flow smoothly and clearly?
Is the word choice appropriate?  Highlight any slang or colloquialisms.
SUGGESTIONS:

 

MECHANICS
Spelling, punctuation, capitalization
Punctuation, spelling, capitalization are correct.  No errors. Punctuation, spelling, capitalization are generally correct, with few errors. (1-2) A few errors in punctuation, spelling, capitalization. (3-4) Distracting errors in punctuation, spelling, capitalization.

Are there spelling, punctuation and capitalization errors that distract?
SUGGESTIONS: