2)Whose Paper Are You Editing?

Research Log 5

Peer Editing

Instructions: Email the questions and your responses to your partner and copy me on the email ().

1)Your Name?

2)Whose paper are you editing?

3)What is the paper’s title? Do you like the title? Make, at least, two other suggestions for a title?

CLAIM

4)What is the author’s claim?

5)Is it qualified in any way? If so, how?

ARGUMENT

6) A) List the arguments the author uses to support her claim?

B) Are the arguments clear or do they require more explanation?

C) List any arguments for the claim you think the author is

overlooking.

7) A) Outline briefly the evidence the author uses to support each

argument listed in 6A.

B) Discuss how well you think the evidence supports each argument? Where is more evidence needed?

C) How could the arguments be improved?

COUNTERARGUMENT

8) List the counterarguments the author raises and the strategy

the author uses to deal with each counterargument.

9) How could the section dealing with counterarguments be

improved?

10)Are there any other counterarguments you can think of? If so, list

them.

SOURCES

11)What scholarly journals does the author use?

12)What books does the author use?

13)Classify the other sources the author uses.

14)Critique the sources. Are they current, authoritative, objective?

15)Where, if anywhere, does it seem the author relies too much on

sources? Where are more sources needed for support?

QUOTATION & DOCUMENTATION

16)Examine the direct quotes in the paper. Which, in your opinion,

should be paraphrased or summarized rather than quoted?

17)Discuss the author’s use of signal phrases and parenthetical
documentation.

18)Does it appear the author properly documents paraphrase and

summary as well as quotation?

19)Examine the Works Cited Page. What, if any, errors in format

do you find?

19) Does the author use any extended quotations? If so, are they
properly formatted?

MECHANICS

20) List briefly errors in a) punctuation, b) grammar, c) spelling,

and d) other mechanics (such as page numbering and margins) that

you found.

QUALITY OF WRITING

21) Does the opening paragraph compel your attention? If not, what

would you suggest to improve it.

22) Does the author provide enough background to introduce the topic?

If not, what else is needed?

23) Is there a conclusion to the paper or does it just seem to stop?

24) Does the conclusion merely restate what has already been said? If

so, how do you suggest improving the conclusion?

25) Examine the paper for transitions between paragraphs. List 4 good
transitions. If you cannot find 4 good transitions, suggest some

areas where the author should work on her transitions.

26) On a scale of 1 to 10 (with 10 being the highest), how would you
rank the overall quality of the writing. Keep in mind this is a rough

draft, so I’m not expecting 9s and 10s. What suggestions do you

have for improving the quality of the writing?

PERSUASIVENESS

27) How confident are you of the author’s knowledge of the issue?

28) Are you convinced of the author’s claim after reading the paper?
If not, why not?

OTHER SUGGESTIONS

29) What other suggestions do you have for improving this paper?