Peer Editing Worksheet: Essay #2 (Textual Analysis)
Elizabth
Losh
This peer editing sheet should take 30-40 minutes
to complete. DO #1 and #2 IN PERSON DURING
CLASS OR BEFORE THE NEXT CLASS MEETING! Don't leave any questions
blank. Your section leader may ask you to download two peer editing sheets
from the web, if you are reading two different people's essays.
Remember that it is important to get feedback to the other person
promptly and well before the final draft is due so that the writer can use your
comments in the revision process.
Your section leader may allow
you to use e-mail or you may contact your partner in the dorms or by telephone
to discuss your criticism so the revision process can progress quickly.
Overly general or uncritical comments in peer editing will lower your class
participation writing grade.
This peer editing sheet includes page
references to the Writer's Handbook, but
you may also want to point out helpful passages from Writing from A to Z. Remember that both
books have alphabetical indexes!
NAME OF WRITER
____________________________________
NAME OF READER
____________________________________
GENERAL RATING OF COMPLETENESS AND
POLISH OF THIS DRAFT BY THE READER (1-10, where ten is highest)
____________
GENERAL RATING OF THOROUGHNESS AND HELPFULNESS OF PEER
EDITING COMMENTS BY THE WRITER (1-10, where ten is highest) __________
1.
Before you read the paper, ask the writer what he or she discovered about this
particular sense. Using your own
words, paraphrase the implied
argument that the writer found. Write your answer here, while your
impressions are fresh in your mind.
2. In class, ask to
see the writer's text of King Lear,
pre-writing grid(s), and notes. Describe
what you saw. How thoroughly did the writer gather and analyze all
the possible evidence in the text(s)? Did they really look at
all the evidence? Write your answer here, while your impressions are fresh
in your mind.
3. Now that you have read the paper, how
was the writer's thesis different from what he or she said in response to
question #1? Did the argument sound better in person or on
paper? Why?
4. Rank the evidence that the writer
used in importance. Remember, this might not be the order in which
the evidence appeared in the paper. Make sure to list at least five key
terms, phrases, or
scenes.
5. List
quotations that were longer than they needed to be and then underline the
essential parts.
6. Mark any places in the essay
with "*" where the writer has not provided enough explanation of a particular
quotation. Suggest improvements in the margin
nearby.
7. List all the specific techniques from the
Analysis Checklist (46-47) that the writer uses and write the page number of the
essay where the technique appears.
8. It can be
difficult to connect analysis of a
narrative to analysis of an implied
argument contained in a narrative. Re-read the section on analyzing
narrative in the Writer's Handbook
(48-52). Which section of this chapter would be most relevant to the
improving the writer's essay and why? Give the writer page numbers for
reference.
9. What did you like best about the
writer's essay? In which rubric category (26-27) would you give the essay
highest marks?
10. In your opinion, where is the essay
most in need of revision? In which rubric category (26-27) would you give
the essay lowest marks? Why?
11. What page in
Writing from A to Z would you recommend
to the writer to improve his or her grammar and
mechanics.