In class today, we will conduct peer reviews of Paper 1. As you review a classmate’s paper, write your responses to the following questions and prompts on the paper itself, on a separate sheet of paper, or in an email to your partner (you and your partner should decide which is best for you). Read over the following prompts before reading your partner’s paper so that you have a clear sense for what you will be addressing. Afterwards, discuss your comments.
1. Before reading your partner’s paper, let each other know if you have any particular questions or concerns about your papers. If your partner has any specific questions or concerns, be sure to address these in your written comments.
2. Recently, we discussed strategies for introducing and organizing the paper. As you read your partner’s paper, make an outline that charts the organization. Does the introduction effectively set up the paper overall? How does your partner divide their paper into different sections and subsections? How does your partner transition between and guide you through these sections and subsections? Do you have any suggestions for how your partner could improve the overall arrangement itself or the way they guide you through it?
3. In terms of content, keep in mind that our goal is not simply to report our research and list the important information related to our controversies but rather to analyze the positions taken in response to them and the broader conversation around them. So, the main question here is, are there opportunities for your partner to incorporate the main terms and concepts we’ve discussed in class? When your partner discusses arguments, do they show how different pieces of the argument (claims, reasons and evidence, etc.) fit together? Do they use stasis theory to help identify types of arguments and to show the relationships between various arguments, where people agree and disagree? Do they use the notion of kairos to show how arguments respond to specific contexts or events, or showing how the conversation has shifted over time? Do they clarify how different stakeholders hold different positions based on their larger orientations? Again, what advice would you offer to your partner for them to more thoroughly, accurately, or effectively incorporate these concepts in their paper?
4. Identify three non-consecutive sentences from your partner’s paper that confused you in some way, and note where they appear in the paper. Try to explain what confused you, and offer suggestions for clarifying the points made in these sentences.
5. What is the most effective part of the paper? What do you like most about it? What is most in need of improvement?