This project belongs to:
The project is reviewed by:
Peer Review Worksheet
Project III: Public Rhetoric Project
Written Communication 200
The Blurry-Eyed Kay Siebler, Professor
Fall 2005
1) Read through the project once without making any marks. Then read through it again with a pencil or pen in your hand, making notes and comments in the margins. Who is the audience for this piece of rhetoric? Position yourself as an audience member and ask some questions about the information presented. What is missing? What do you need to know more about?
2) What are the specific strengths and weaknesses of this project? Name at least three of each. NOTE: If you write, “this is a really good project; I like it a lot” or “there are some grammar errors” or any other such pointless feedback, you will immediately go straight to peer review hell for three days. There is no beer or chocolate in peer review hell.
AGAIN: Position yourself as the intended audience member here. How could this project BETTER appeal to you?
3) Thinking of the goals of the project as outlined below, how would you evaluate this project (using the check, plus, or minus system, depending on whether you think the writer met the expectation, didn’t quite meet the expectation, or made you scream “Eureka!” because they did such a fabulous job).
□ The project appeals to the intended audience (the rhetoric and graphics are appropriate for the intended audience of bvu students).
□ The project is well-edited.
□ The project clearly establishes the ethos of the author through a variety of strategies including effective, clean writing.
□ The argument/claim of the project is well-presented and supported.
□ The genre of the project is appropriate for the intended audience (and is something other than an academic essay).
□ The project follows the style manual for things like dates, times, punctuation, capitalization, abbreviations.
□ The project reflects a good balance of ethos, pathos, and logos.
□ The pathos used appeals to the specific audience.
□ The logos used appeals to the specific audience and is appropriately “framed.”
□ The author establishes his/her ethos by clearly identifying credible sources (sources that have authority with this specific audience).
□ The title and introduction do a good job of drawing in the intended audience.
□ It is clear what the author wants the audience to do with this information.
□ Sources are identified within the text itself (whatever form the text takes) and a bibliography (doesn’t need to be annotated) accompanies the project.
□ The writer’s notes include a rationale about the project and why the genre appeals to the intended audience and why the audience will be interested and care about this information.
□ It is clear from the project what the writer wants the audience to DO with the information presented (example: the audience needs to change their behavior, change a policy, or do something specific).