This handout is designed to serve as a starting
point (but not a finishing point!) for doing peer evaluation and draft
workshops. You should take the time to carefully read and comment on each
other's papers. There is more to this process than just "skimming" and
writing "good" and "bad." Make your comments useful by explaining why
you find something in a paper to be particularly effective or ineffective.
Also, don't underestimate the value of simply asking the person who wrote
the paper some direct questions--that's why we do workshop with live bodies
present, after all. The following are a few things to consider as you look
over your colleagues' papers:
| Does the paper have a clear thesis (i.e., a statement that clearly identifies both the specific subject and the author's "take" on that subject? If so, indicate where in the paper you think the thesis is best stated. Keep in mind that this may not necessarily be one sentence, so mark however much you feel is necessary in understanding the main point of the paper. There may be several other people's answers to this question already on the page if you are not the first reader of the paper. Disregard these answers and indicate what you feel to be the thesis (or lack thereof). There are no wrong answers to these questions if they are answered in an attempt to give constructive criticism. If you feel that there is no real thesis, you should also indicate that as well. |
| Does the paper consistently deal with this thesis throughout its course or does it stray into territory separate from this idea without ever coming back to it? Make comments on the paper where you see the writer effectively arguing for his/her thesis as well as places where you feel that the writing departs from its target. One way to get at this is to summarize what you thought you were going to be getting next from the author after the section of the paper you felt served as its thesis. If this expectation does or doesn't match up with what was actually delivered in the paper, you may get some additional insight into why the paper was effective or ineffective in conveying its stated intentions. |
| Putting yourself into the mindset of the intended audience, do the claims that the writer uses to support his/her thesis seem valid and well-supported to you? Are the examples he or she uses clear to you (keep in mind, you are approaching the paper from the perspective of the intended audience, which may or may not be similar to your own experience and perspective)? Can you think of any legitimate counter-arguments (i.e., "devil's advocate" positions) that you can raise to any of the claims that are made in this paper? Mark on the paper (with your reasons why) places where you find the author's argumentation to be especially solid or especially shaky, keeping in mind that you are not trying to "flame" someone on their writing, but trying to help them improve. |
| Does the style of the paper seem appropriate to the topic to you? In other words, does the language that the writer uses (grammar, word choice, sentence structure, overall paper format) in constructing this paper fit in with the demands of the prospective audience properly? Also, does the thesis fit the prospective audience well (for example, is it appropriate to write a paper on "The Biological Impact of Radon Gas on Laboratory Rats" for a junior-high English class? Think about why it might be and why it might not be). Comment (in writing, on the draft) on these topics in places both where you think the language is very appropriate or very inappropriate. |
| Does the overall logic of the paper convince you that the author understands what he/she is writing about? Examine the way in which the author constructs their argument and mark both places where their thought-process is well-described and places where they have used generalizations, faulty or incomplete logic, or no support at all for the claims that they are making. |
Remember: Draft workshops are for your mutual benefit. You will get more out of these both if you participate actively and encourage your group-mates to do so by asking as well as answering questions. You are equally (if not more) qualified to comment on each others' papers than I am, especially in the formative stages of your papers. Use your group-mates as resources for improving your writing and be a resource yourself for the others in your group. Also, if you don't participate actively and honestly in the evaluation of others' work, you should have no expectation of receiving such evaluation yourself. This is the part of the class where you can do yourself the greatest favor, both in terms of improving your grade and improving your ability to write critically, so takie it seriously.