Peer Editing Worksheet for Essay #4
By Susan Morse and Erin Ferris

Part I: Before handing your paper to your peer for peer evaluation, please rate your own essay. What do you like about your essay? What do you think you need to work on? What specific feedback would you like to get from your peer about your essay?

Your name: ________________________

Whose paper are you editing? ___________________________

Rating of Essay by Reader: ___________ [1-10, where 10 is high]

Comments:

Rating of Peer Editing by Writer: ___________ [1-10, where 10 is high]

Comments:

To the Reader: An immediate goal of peer editing is to provide constructive criticism in a timely fashion. This worksheet will be returned to your peer on Tuesday, which allows them plenty of time to consider your comments somewhat leisurely in preparing the final paper. It also means that you should follow the "harshness" level indicated by your peer as well as make specific comments without, nevertheless, "writing" your peer's paper for them. General comments like "this is a great paper" or "this sucks" are neither helpful nor encouraging. Instead, saying things like "in paragraph X, you provide strong evidence to support your claim. In paragraph Y, where you talk about M, more evidence would be helpful. You might think about the passage on p. Q where Socrates says P…" If something is unclear, be as specific as possible about why you think so (i.e. a word, an example which is not clearly related, syntax, etc.)

To the Writer: You will need to use these comments from your peers selectively. Decide for yourself which suggestions help and which may simply reflect your reader's difficulty in understanding what you are trying to say. If you think your reader has misinterpreted or misread what you were trying to say, you will need to clarify rather than change your meaning. Once you have reviewed your editor's comments, give a rating of the degree of helpfulness on a scale of 1-10 [10 is high] and a brief comment justifying your rating. Remember to hand in this worksheet with your final paper.

Overview:

1. Read the essay once through quickly before commenting. Write down your initial reaction as to whether the essay fulfills all the requirements of the prompt. What requirements of the prompt were not met?

2. Now answer the following questions providing specific comments based on the requirements from the Grading Rubric from your handbook. When reading the essay, keep the Grading Rubric on hand to use when commenting on the essay.

Conceptual

a. Does the essay clearly present an argument about a specific function of ritual and unwritten law in maintaining social order of The Odyssey?

b. Is the essay focused, or does it try to address too many different topics?

c. Is the writer's interpretation one, which makes sense?

d. Is the argument persuasive?

e. Looking at your grading rubric, how would you rate your peer’s essay according to the section labeled “conceptual?”

Thesis

a. Is the thesis clearly stated? What do you think the thesis statement is?

b. How could the thesis of the essay be improved?

Structuring (Topic Sentences)

a.  Underline the topic sentence of each paragraph.

b.  Does the topic sentence in each body paragraph clearly set out the main idea of the paragraph? How can the writer improve their topic sentences?

c.  Does the topic sentence clearly relate to the overall thesis?

d. Looking at your grading rubric, how would you rate your peer’s essay according to the section labeled “structuring?”

Development and Support (Transitions, Examples)

Both at paragraph and sentence level, good transitions make a connection to and a distinction from what precedes.  In the next questions, pay particular attention to "listing" words such as "also," "too," "in addition," "first," "second," and so on which often tend to leave it up to the reader to determine the relation among the points the writer wants to make.  Note whether the writer tends to rely on "listing" and whether this seems due to a lack of logical relations among the parts.

a. Does the order of presentation of the paragraphs seem logical?  Suggest any ways in which the order of paragraphs might be rearranged to strengthen the presentation of the overall argument.

b.   Note any places in which transitions are lacking and suggest how transitions from one paragraph to the next might be improved.

c. Within each body paragraph, consider what each sentence says and does. Mark with a T transition words and other signal words or "clues" that lead the reader through the development of the writer's argument.  Suggest any "signals" that might aid in developing or refining the argument at the sentence level.

d.  Is the order of presentation within each paragraph logical?  Suggest any rearrangement of sentences within paragraphs, which might strengthen the presentation of the paragraph.

e. How well is the thesis statement supported by textual evidence and/or examples from the lectures?

f. Should more textual evidence and/or examples be provided?

g. Could the writer make use of textual evidence and/or examples from lecture in this section? If so, suggest where and how.

h. How well does the writer make connections between their ideas, the text, and the lectures?

i. Looking at your grading rubric, how would you rate your peer’s essay according to the section labeled “development and support?”

Language and Sentence Level:

a. Circle any repetitive language errors and note in the margins what kind of error(s) is (are) repeated (following the Corrections Symbols List). You are only expected to point out repetitive errors, not correct the essay.

b. Identify in the margins any sentences you find difficult to read or understand – sentences which seem vague, tangled in their syntax, overly wordy, or hard to follow.

c. Describe the writer’s use of language? Does the writer use slang instead of academic vocabulary? Do they repeat the same words or phrases instead of using synonyms?

d.  Looking at your grading rubric, how would you rate your peer’s essay according to the section labeled “Language?”

Other General Points to Address:

a. Note any adjustments that should be made to the essay's format in terms of font, spacing, margins, cover page, etc.

b. Note any quotations, which are incorrectly punctuated (following the Corrections Symbols List).

c. Does the paper clearly meet the minimum 4-page requirement? If not, advise your peer to lengthen the paper. You can provide suggestions as to where and how this might be accomplished (i.e. p. X, 2d para.: "expand your explanation"; p. Y, 1st para., "more textual evidence," etc.).
d. Note any sentences or paragraphs, which could be more concise (particularly passages which strike you as mere "filler"). Make suggestions about how such wordy passages might be revised.

e. Note any quotations, which are not incorporated into the writer’s own sentences and/or which could be incorporated more effectively.

f. Note any areas in the essay that could be expanded upon to illustrate a better understanding of counterargument strategies and/or logical fallacies.

g. Note any paragraphs that would be more effective if they were combined or, alternatively, separated into more than one paragraph.

h. Note any places at which the writer could help the reader follow the argument better by means of transitions and/or clear signals (i.e. "logic words" like "thus," "so," "because," etc.; "qualifying language" or "comparison and contrast language" such as "On one hand, … on the other hand," "Just as, … so too…"; "accommodating language" like, "Although I might agree that X, nevertheless Y," or "I would allow X, but Y"; etc.).

Summing Up

a. List the two greatest strengths of the essay.

b. List two main areas of improvement to focus on.

c. Return to the beginning of this worksheet to rate the essay on a scale of 1-10 [10 is high] and provide a brief comment justifying your rating.