What you’ll doIntroduce the draftSummarize its main research areaOffer discussion about the effectiveness of

the organizationAssess and respond to the author’s

presentation and research

How to do itRead the guidelines from Ch. 4b in the St

Martin’s handbookYour crit should be 300-500 wordsSeparate your analysis into paragraphs. Do

not just write one big paragraph of text.You will critique students from across TTU’s

FYC programLook to the essay’s works cited list to

determine what text your peer wrote about. Read that text.

Text for analysis/thesisIdentify the writer's thesis and then evaluate

it for effectiveness.Determine whether the writer has selected a

particular topic to present on Discuss whether the thesis is specific

enough and of appropriate scope for this lit review

Overall Essay StructureComment on the overall structure of the

essay. For example, explain in detail whether or not

the paragraphs are presented in a logical and persuasive way. Does the writer provide a clear introduction, body and conclusion? Does each paragraph begin with a clear topic sentence and transition into the next paragraph?

Provide examples of claims and sources that are particularly effective or areas that need more improvement.

Peer Review TipsDo your best to avoid “yes” and “no”

responses. Try to explain why a section or idea works or

doesn’t work. Simply stating “yes” doesn’t help your reader.

Give as much written commentary as you can. I will let you speak to one another for a few minutes, but written feedback is timeless.

A presentation adapted for the Texas Tech University FYW Program from a presentation to the University of South Florida FYC Program by Erin Trauth, Angela Tartaglia, Richard Ellman, Melissa Jones, and Andrea

Dennin

Why should you complete peer critiques, anyway?

To start, peer review has many benefits, including:

The ability to get feedback on your writing before the instructor sees it

The ability to see your own strengths and weaknesses after reading and responding to another paper

A greater sense of audience – it is not just your instructor reading your work!

The chance to learn new information from your peers about the subject you may also be writing on

The opportunity for feedback, feedback, and more feedback!

Think About It:Imagine you have spent many hours on a project for this class, and you are counting on getting a good grade on

the final draft. While working on a draft, you see that you have some problems in your writing, but you have looked at your own work for so long that you are not quite sure how to fix them. You seek help from your instructor, and you obtain some great feedback, but you also need some additional help . Where can you turn for more feedback?

Your peers! Not to fear! Help is on the way!

This is why we have built peer critiques into our curriculum.

However, while the benefits of peer critique are plentiful, sometimes peer review doesn’t work as well as it could.

Why is this the case?

Something to consider…“In a national survey of 560 teachers of writing and 715 of

their students, Sarah W. Freedman found that many teachers grieved over the use of peer review groups because they had difficulty getting students to respond effectively to one another's writing. Vague comments proliferate.”

The students, too, complained about the writing responses, saying that their peers rarely offered substantial help with their writing. The result is that such vague comments rarely translate into effective revisions, and this is unfortunate because when students receive concrete suggestions for revisions, they do revise with the suggestions in mind.”

Sources:Freedman, S. (1985): The Role of Response in Acquisition of Written Language, Berkeley: California UPZiv, N. (1983): "Peer Groups in the Composition Classroom: A Case Study," Conference on College

Composition and Communication, Detroit, March 17-19.

The essence of the peer review is your comments – without strong, specific comments, peer reviews can often be useless!

What might be considered “useless” or “vague”

feedback?

“I liked it.”

“I liked your paper. It was really good.”

“I didn’t like your thesis.”

“Your thesis is sort of long.“Your paragraphs confuse me.”“The introduction is good but could be better.”

Does this feedback help you fix your writing problems?

Probably not, right?

It is not specific enough, and it doesn’t offer any

real suggestions for improvement.

As a peer critiquer, you can't just say, "I liked it," or "I didn't like it." Instead, you want to give the writer information that will really help to improve what the writer has written.

What is also important to remember is that while you should not be harsh or personal, you should be honest. Saying something works when it really does not will not help anyone.

There are, in general, three types of peer review comments:

- Vague Comments- General, but Useful Comments- Specific, Directive Comments

In order to make effective comments on a peer review, you want to make SPECIFIC, DIRECTIVE comments.

Most Effectiv

e

Least Effectiv

e

Vague Comments:Comments that are full of generalities, providing

little or no specific direction for revision and/or comments that simply praise or disagree with the writing

Example:“Try to revise the whole second page” or “I liked

it” or “I do not really like this part”

Think about it: what do comments like this really tell a person about their paper that will help them REVISE?

General, but Useful CommentsComments that are too general but may provide some

direction for revision

Example: “I don’t like your introduction. Maybe describe the topic of public writing better.”

A general, but useful comment is slightly better than a vague comment because it narrows what works (or does not work) to a specific area of the paper, as well as offering a specific suggestion. We can take this a step further, however, by providing a specific, directive comment.

Note that this comment points

to a specific place in the paper (the

introduction)

Note that this comment offers a

suggestion for improvement

A Specific, Directive CommentComments that not only point out a specific problem area

of the paper, but also offer the writer a reason why the change is needed and a specific direction for revision.

Example: “I do not think the introduction fully describes the topic of public writing in a way all readers will understand, which is necessary if you are going to fully analyze the topic in the next few paragraphs . Maybe you could use a quote that really defines public writing from a source, or you could expand on your first two sentences (which I have underlined in your paper).”

Note that this comment points out a specific spot for improvement (the

introduction) and states what exactly is wrong with it

Note that this comment offers two suggestions for improvement, and that

the peer reviewer underlined the sentences that the writer could work on

Note that this comment tells the writer why the change is needed

Pop Quiz!In the following pairs, determine which of the

two choices is the most effective comment:A. “This is disorganized!” B. "This section discusses both animal-rearing

conditions and experimental methods, but the two are mixed together, making it difficult to focus on your points. Could you separate each into its own paragraph?”

A. “The background and references given in paragraph 2 don't seem directly relevant to your thesis. I think we need references that give facts on the dangers of public writing specifically rather than references that explain the extensive history of blogging and its positive effects.”

B. “How are these references relevant?”

A. “Your thesis is unclear.”B. “I am having trouble understanding your

thesis. The thesis needs to be clear so that the reader is sure of the position you are going to take in the rest of the paper. Could you state specifically the stance this paper will take on gun control?”

Now, let’s look at a few comments taken from real peer reviews and analyze their effectiveness.

Remember, the best peer review comments

include a specific statement of where an improvement needs to be made, why it should be changed and one-two suggestions for

the writer in fixing the weakness!

For the peer review comment below, analyze whether or not the comment is effective in helping the writer. What

type of comment is it (vague, general but useful, or specific –directive)? If it is effective, what makes it so? If it is not, what is the comment missing? What could the

peer reviewer add to make the comment more effective?

Activity adopted from Gloria A. Neubert and Sally J. McNelis, Peer Response: Teaching Specific Revision Suggestions, The English

Journal, 1990.

“I like your topic sentence, but it does not mix well with the rest of the paragraph.”

For the peer review comment below, analyze whether or not the comment is effective in helping the writer. What

type of comment is it (vague, general but useful, or specific –directive)? If it is effective, what makes it so? If it is not, what is the comment missing? What could the

peer reviewer add to make the comment more effective?

“Your thesis statement needs to be more specific in regard to the advertisements you will be talking about in the paper, because it is important that the reader knows what to expect in the following paragraphs.”

For the peer review comment below, analyze whether or not the comment is effective in helping the writer. What

type of comment is it (vague, general but useful, or specific –directive)? If it is effective, what makes it so? If it is not, what is the comment missing? What could the

peer reviewer add to make the comment more effective?

“Maybe you should fix your conclusion.”

For the peer review comment below, analyze whether or not the comment is effective in helping the writer. What

type of comment is it (vague, general but useful, or specific –directive)? If it is effective, what makes it so? If it is not, what is the comment missing? What could the

peer reviewer add to make the comment more effective?

“I feel like your conclusion is not descriptive enough yet, and this paper should leave the reader with something to remember about San Diego if it is truly a travel ethnography. Maybe you could end with a quote from the musician you talked about in your last paragraph, or maybe use more of the second-person narrative you used in your introduction. I think something like that would be more descriptive and more memorable.”

In order to be an effective peer reviewer, remember to:Read the writer’s essay carefully – just skimming the paper is

not enough to really help the writer. Be positive. Point out strengths as well as weaknesses, and be

sensitive in how you phrase your criticism (“Could you clarify this section?” rather than “Your organization is a mess.”)

Be honest. Don’t say something works when it doesn’t. You’re not helping the writer if you avoid mentioning a problem.

Be specific. Rather than simply saying a paragraph is “confusing,” for example, try to point to a specific phrase that confuses you and, if possible, explain why that phrase is problematic.

Focus on one or two major areas for revision – it is not your job to completely edit the paper, but instead to focus on major flaws and offer suggestions

Sample Introductory ParagraphAccording to the Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, there are 1.5

million children adopted in the United States each year. In recentyears there has been a shift in the choice between open or closedadoption. Researchers are beginning to challenge the idea that closedadoption is the only effective practice. This questioning affects 1.5million children and their families. Even though many researchersclaim closed adoption is the most traditional and logical choice foradoption cases, more and more researchers are encouraging to consider open adoption for all cases. While some researchers still are againstopen adoption, researchers are discussing how open adoption isbecoming more common and most people prefer it.

Sample SynthesisDemick and Warner explains that more

data about the affects of open adoption versus closed adoption on theadoption triad needs to be collected, because there has been verylittle research done on open adoption (Demick and Warner 287). Brown et. al also agrees with Demick and Warner.

Brown et. al goes intofurther detail and explains in their article that because there isscarce data on open adoption there is no central standard to place onopen adoption (Brown et. al 180). Despite not having set standards onopen adoption practices, Brodzinsky and Schechdter state that openadoption is continually growing and moving to more openness. In theiropinion, the growth of open adoption cannot wait for longitudinalstudies (Brodzinky and Schechdter 330).

One more note…If one of the following describes you, you

need to see me immediately after class:You’ve never logged into RaiderwriterYou’ve never turned in any assignmentsYou haven’t turned in an assignment since BA3