WRITING NATURE: 
DISCOURSES OF ECOLOGY

 
 Peer Review Questions
for Assignment #1
Contextual Analysis:
The Leap-of-Faith Essay

Writing Nature	Name of Author ____________________
Winter 2003	Date Paper Received ________________

The peer review is an opportunity for you to help your classmates develop their thinking and writing as well as to hone your own revision and editing skills, not merely to catch obvious shortcomings. Be honest. Be constructive. If you think something in the draft you are reviewing is not working well, say so, but be sure to support your criticisms with clear reasons, specific examples, and, if possible, suggestions for improvement. Please comment specifically on the following areas, but do not feel you need to limit yourself to them. Feel free to write further or continued comments on the author's draft.

1) Is the thesis of this essay explicitly or implicitly stated? Where is it stated most clearly? If it is not stated explicitly, is it clear enough? Write what you take to be the author's thesis. (Keep in mind the difference between theme, the essay's subject, and thesis, the conclusion the author draws about that subject.)

 

 

2) Has the author taken a deductive or inductive approach in the draft overall? Is the author's choice effective? Why/not?

 

 

3) If the author's approach is inductive, does s/he forecast the direction of the essay clearly enough early on? After the first paragraph, do you have a clear sense of what essential idea the essay will explore?

 

 

4) Does the opening paragraph draw you in? Does the essay's opening tone feel natural? forced? Does the tone change throughout the essay? What tone do you think would be most effective?

 

 

5) Do you feel the author has explored his or her subject carefully enough? Has description and/or narration created a vivid and compelling picture in your mind? Has analysis been developed and substantiated thoroughly enough? Any missing links, black holes, parts of the picture out of focus?

 

 

6) Whether descriptive, narrative, or analytical, does each paragraph have a distinct central point? Is the author's central point in each paragraph well supported, illustrated, explained? Are there paragraphs that seem to explore more than one central idea?

 

 

7) When the author brings textual and visual references into play, are these references clear, relevant, effective? Does the author draw appropriate conclusions based on these references? Does the author use quotations and parenthetical citations accurately? Does s/he label and cite visual media correcly?

 

 

8) Overall, do the various aspects the author has emphasized of the essay's most central idea make sense to you? Has the author made clear and effective transitions linking ideas in sequential paragraphs? Does the essay touch on anything you would like to see developed further? Is there too much at any point -- needless or tangential material that should be omitted?

 

 

9) Does the essay draw conclusion, and does this conclusion feel earned? Do introduction and conclusion relate effectively without repeating?

 

 

10) Are there any grammatical or mechanical errors (including problems with punctuation) that appear more than a couple times each that the author will need to focus particular attention on in revising? Are there any consistent problems with diction or usage that you can point out to the author? Is the author's Works Cited (bibliography) in correct MLA form?

 

 

11) Beyond mechanical and grammatical errors, comment on the author's writing style. Does he/she vary sentence structure? Are there too many short, choppy sentences or ones that are overly complex and need to be broken up? Does the author choose precise words? Is there any wordiness?

 

 

12) What would you say are the draft's major strengths and why?

 

 

13) What do you think the author needs most to focus on in order to improve this essay?

 

 

PEER REVIEWER: Attach this sheet to the author's draft before you return it; sign and date it on the lines below.

AUTHOR: When you turn in your revision, include both the peer review copy of your rough draft (if the reviewer has commented on it) and this form.

Name of Peer Reviewer ____________________ Date _______________