Authors…(paste this at the beginning of the draft)

What are three questions you would like to ask your peer reviewer to help you develop or organize this paper? Be specific and orient your readers to specific textual locations. You questions should not be yes/no questions, but should ask how you could improve certain aspects of your paper, such as the main areas of content, organization, and style. Also consider more specific areas like thesis statements, description, and analysis. These questions should not include questions on grammar.

a.I’m concerned about whether or not my thesis statement is clear or not. Can you tell what it is?

b.How’s my organization?

c.Do I sound objective?

Reviewers…(paste this section at the end of the draft)

Reviewer’s name:

You must respond to areas 1-3 below.

1) Thesis statement: What point of synthesis is the author trying to make? Paraphrase what the author is saying. If you can’t tell this from the thesis statement, comment on this and explain WHY.

I can’t really tell what the thesis is.

2) Respond specifically to the three areas the author of the paper asked for help Do NOT respond with “yes” or “no.” Explain your responses.

a. no, I can’t tell

b. organization is perfect

c. no, you show your opinion a lot

3) Comment on the content of the essay. Does the author sufficiently analyze, not only summarize, the two sources? Mark any places where you cannot tell which source the author is summarizing/paraphrasing.

Content is great. I wouldn’t change anything.

You must choose 2 of the following areas to comment on. Choose areas where you think the author needs the most help, or where you feel you have the most to say.

4) How well does the author explore the topic? Are the examples and areas he or she explores in the paper all relevant to the main topic? Which topics are not especially relevant, and how can the author (a) link the topics to better fit, or (b) add or remove topics to better explore the main topic?

5) How might the author express his or her ideas more clearly or provide more/better support for his or her claims for the audience? Does he or she need more examples from the text? More analysis? If so, tell where and why what is there is too little. Give suggestions for the type of information to include.

Your ideas make sense to me. I don’t have any other suggestions for you.

6) Organization: Where are there breaks in organization? How does the author move from one topic to another? How can the author revise to better signal claims and support? Does each paragraph sufficiently include both sources?

7) Paragraphs: Is there a reason for each separate paragraph? As a reader, write a note in the margin signaling what you perceive to be the purpose of each paragraph. Is each paragraph unified (on only one aspect of the topic), coherent (sentences smoothly and logically connected to each other), and developed (enough information to build the point the writer is making in the paragraph)?

I could tell a reason for each paragraph. They were all really focused. I wish my paper were this good!