Download
1 / 8
80 likes | 247 Vues
1.2. Peer Critiques Reflection. Today…. We are going to do 4 focused peer critiques. Unless otherwise specified, you are to write out your critique on a piece of notebook paper that you will give the writer (i.e. you need four loose pieces of notebook paper and something to write with).
E N D
1.2 Peer Critiques Reflection
Today… • We are going to do 4 focused peer critiques. • Unless otherwise specified, you are to write out your critique on a piece of notebook paper that you will give the writer (i.e. you need four loose pieces of notebook paper and something to write with). • After one critique is finished, you have a short conversation with the writer and exchange papers and critiques. • Then, you exchange your paper with another student and do the next critique
TAKE YOUR TIME • Your peers are giving you careful feedback on your work. • Be courteous and give their work the same careful attention. • There is no rush—don’t “punt.” • WITH EVERYTHING, YOU ANSWER “WHY OR WHY NOT.” IF THERE IS A PROBLEM, YOU GIVE SPECIFIC IDEAS FOR REVISION • BE POLITE! • Writers—remember that these are your peers. It’s okay to disagree with them, but first really consider their suggestions.
1. Intro and Conclusion. Why or why not are these problems? How, specifically, would you fix these problems? • Is the student’s focused topic apparent? • Can you easily identify it? • What is it, in your own words? • Do they introduce their topic in a way that makes sense? (Is it consistent with the focused thesis? Does everything seem related and progress naturally?) • Do they make the topic a problem? (ie topic sounds important?) • Do they have an exit strategy in their conclusion? (like telling what the consequences of this work are to this point or forecasting what needs to be done). • Does the paper end in a way that feels satisfying?
2. Thesis and topic sentences. Why or why not are these problems? How, specifically, would you fix these problems? • What is the thesis? Does the thesis make clear claims about the literature or about the topic? • Review the topic sentences. Do they have topic sentences? Do the topic sentences make clear claims about the literature opposed to the topic? Are the topic sentences consistent? (i.e. no claims are made that contradict or aren’t anticipated by the thesis)
3. Synthesis and Sources. Why or why not are these problems? How, specifically, would you fix them? • Underline all moments of synthesis in the body paragraphs. • Is the writer talking about many sources together in the same paragraph? Or, do they focus on one source in a single paragraph? • Do they quote or paraphrase more? Would you change how (quote, paraphrase) they use sources? • When they quote, do they introduce the source and, at some point, tell the reader what information is important. • Is the information from the sources consistent with the thesis and topic sentences? • Do they make a convincing argument for their claims about the literature?
4. Concision and Specificity. Why or why not are these problems? How, specifically, would you fix them? • Is the writer’s style concise? Can you help them say the same thing using less words? • Is the writer specific enough? Do you find general sentences that don’t tell you much? Do you have enough information to understand the writer? • Is there too much information? Can you find information that is not important for the literature?
Reflection • 1. What did you learn by critiquing your peers? • 2. What’s your revision plan? What are the biggest problems with your draft? How will you fix these problems?
