Peer Review for Summary and Analysis

Peer Review for Summary and Analysis Rough Draft

First read your partner’s article or essay they are analyzing. Then respond to your partner’s draft by answering the following questions. Remember that you will be graded on the thoroughness of your response, so answer each question with specific, constructive feedback. Avoid yes/no answers or single sentence responses when possible. These will be turned in with final draft of your paper.

Summary Section

  1. Does the summary’s first sentence include the author name, title of piece, and once-sentence overview of what the piece is about?
  2. Does the writer use his or her own words to express the original author’s ideas?
  3. Where do you see evidence that the writer uses historical present tense?
  4. Does the summary represent the original article accurately and fairly? If not, not where you see problems.
  5. How well does the writer use attributive tags ( writes, uses, states, claims, contends, suggests, believes…)? Where do you see evidence of it?
  6. Is the summary direct and concise, using words economically? If not, point out issues you see.
  7. Where could the writer’s summaries of the text be expanded, condensed or clarified?
  8. Where does the writer use attributive tags to distinguish his/her ideas from the author’s ideas?

 Analysis Section

  1. Does the writer examine the author’s audience and purpose? According the writer, what is the purpose of this piece, and who is the intended audience? What do you understand about how well this text suits the audience or purpose?
  2. Does the writer examine the influence of genre on the shape of the text? How has the writer addressed how genre has affected the author’s style, structure, and use of evidence?
  3. How well has the writer discussed the author’s appeal to logos, ethos and pathos? Where does the writer use in-text examples of specifics?
  4. If the writer chose to discuss angle of vision, how well has s/he addressed this concept? Does s/he address specifics, such as interpretive filter, or deliberate choice to emphasize or omit certain things? Are there in-text examples supporting the writer’s findings?
  5. How well has the writer created a reasonable, logically-structured analysis and how representative is the evidence? (logos)
  6. How well does the writer persuade you that s/he is knowledgeable or trustworthy? (ethos)
  7. How well does the writer appeal to your emotions, sympathies or values? (pathos)
  8. Where do you see evidence of attributive tags? Does the writer introduce quotes smoothly and seamlessly, with an attributive tag for each quote? Are there any dropped quotes
  9. Does the writer use both quotations and paraphrasing? Does the writer cite each instance of use?

Conclusion and Work Cited Page

  1. Does the writer have a simple conclusion that restates, in a new way, the thesis?
  2. Does the writer use proper MLA format for the Work Cited page?