SAMPLE PEER EVALUATION SHEET

This sheet provides guidelines for students who are asked to comment on other students' essays. Reader-based responses may be more useful for early drafts; criterion-based responses may be more helpful for nearly finished drafts.

READER-BASED RESPONSES

Moment by Moment Report

Which words struck you or stuck out or resonated?

After reading the introduction, where do you expect the piece to go?

What kind of person does the writer seem to be in the beginning?

After reading the introduction, are you with the writer or against her?

What beliefs or feelings do you bring to the piece that could influence the way you read?

Did anything surprise you in this piece?

What didn't you understand?

What kind of person does the writer seem like at the end of the piece?

What pleased you about the piece? What displeased you?

Did you want to defend yourself at any point in the piece? Why?

How did your feelings change as you read the piece?

Summary Responses

Summarize the writer's argument.

Tell what you wish the piece said.

CRITERION-BASED RESPONSES

Quality of Content

Is the basic idea or insight a good one?

Is it supported by logical reasoning or valid argument?

Is it supported by evidence and examples?

Is there a clear point of view?

Is the piece fitted to its audience?

Organization

Is the whole essay unified?

Are the parts arranged in a coherent and logical sequence?

Is there a beginning, a middle, and an end?

Language

Are the sentences clear and readable?

Are the words used correctly?

Is it succinct enough for its audience and purpose?

Is the diction, mood, or formality appropriate?

Mechanics and Usage

Are there mistakes in grammar, usage, spelling, or typing?

Adapted from Peter Elbow's Writing with Power (1981).


Peer Review Guide:

Writer: Reader: .

Writing Criteria
Preliminary Questions
Were the directions followed?
Summarize the paper:
Elements of the Paper
Voice- Clear Purpose; distinctive voice; purpose; awareness of the audience / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Content- topic worth discussing; evidence supports thesis; accurate / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Argument- clear argument with strong supporting points / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Organization- Logical flow all through the paper; intro, body, and conclusion / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Language- Academic Language; avoids slang; clear and understandable / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Paragraph structure- well-developed paragraphs with good transitions / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Grammar- punctuation, capitalization, and correct use of language. / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
References and Citation-
Uses sources and cites them appropriately / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
MLA format- follows correct MLA format / 1 2 3 4 5 / Comments:
Other Comments:

Center for Transformative Learning

Peer Consultation

Stephenson Hall CPO 2136 x3404