Exterior photo of Smathers Library (formerly Library East) at the University of Florida, photo from the University of Florida Digital Collections

Fall 2005: ENC 1102: Argument & Persuasion: Invoking the Professional Voice

Peer Review Questions

  1. Has this author included a title on his/her draft? If so, do you find it intriguing and/or appropriate? What title would you suggest for this essay?

  2. How does the paper’s opening sentence or passage contribute to the rest of the introduction? Did it pique your interest and make you want to keep on reading? If not, how could it be improved?

  3. Does the writer’s full introduction explain clearly what he/she is trying to accomplish with this research? What strategies does the writer use to reveal his/her claim and focus your expectations? How could the introduction more effectively forecast the argument? What would add clarity and appeal?

  4. Can you locate a thesis? If so, circle it and note “Thesis” on the draft? What would make this statement more full, focused, clear, or risky? In other words, if you were to re-write the thesis statement, what changes would you make?

  5. Try to locate where the author moves from the introduction into the body of the paper. Does s/he make this transition smoothly? Can you suggest an improvement for transitioning into the body?

  6. After considering the movement into the body of the paper, what more can you say about the introduction? Did it “set up” the topic relevantly? Could it be developed more or is it too lengthy already? Does the writer need to “slash and burn” some statements?

  7. Based on the portion of the paper provided, are there any aspects of this subject/research that seem confusing, or upon which you hope the author will elaborate? What are they?

  8. Can you find any passively worded sentences? (Hint: Look for the “to be” verbs.) Underline the passive sentences you find and note “Passive” in the margin. Choose one passive sentence and suggest a way to word it more actively.

  9. After reading through the first two pages, sum up what you consider to be the paper’s major’s strengths and weaknesses and address this with the author.

Peer Review Questions (2)

  1. Preview your classmate’s draft. Take about 5 minutes to read over the parts and familiarize yourself with the language, structure, tone, etc. What is your first impression of this paper?

  2. Identify the thesis statement (the sentence which explains the main point of the argument). (Identify the sentence, circle it, and label it “Thesis.” Do you think it can be improved? If so, how? Were you unable to find a clear thesis statement? Can you come up with one?

  3. Read the introduction.
    · Is there an itinerary statement? If you find one, circle it and label it.
    · Ask yourself, based on this introduction, if you want to read this paper? If yes, then note one thing that caught your attention. If no, then note one thing that could make the introduction more appealing.

  4. Does the essay support its argument? In other words, does the writer provide evidence for the claim he/she makes? Find the places where the argument is strongest and note them. Find the weakest points and note them. (That is, where do you find yourself unconvinced?)

  5. Examine the argument. Are there are any logical fallacies such as name calling, ad hoc, or any other fallacies that could weaken and/or destroy the argument. You may refer to the Penguin list of fallacies to refresh your memories.

  6. Evaluate the argument. Is the subject substantial enough to write about? Has the author convinced you of its significance?

  7. Closely study two “body” paragraphs.
    · Can you find a topic sentence in each paragraph? If so, circle and label it. · Comment on the clarity of the paragraphs. Do you understand what the writer is saying within each paragraph? Is there any confusion?
    (NOTE: YOU SHOULD MAKE AT LEAST ONE COMMENT PER PARAGRAPH)

  8. Identify structural and grammatical problems.
    · Look at sentence structure and decide whether any are awkwardly written.
    · Are the sentences too long or are they easy to understand?
    · Do the sentences flow? What about word choice? Are there redundant words? Include any remarks that would help the writer.
    · Look at passive versus active voice, punctuation, sentence fragments, and other grammatical flaws.

  9. Read the conclusion and comment on its sense of closure.
    · Does it seem like an endpoint or are there questions still to answer?
    · Does the paper seem to end too abruptly?
    · Does the conclusion merely repeat the points given earlier, or does it do something new with them?
    Evaluate the quality and effectiveness of the conclusion.

  10. Finally, make two comments regarding the paper as a whole.
    · First, offer any suggestions for improvement.
    · Second, identify any areas that work well for you as a reader.


Back to top