Unit 4 (Researched Argument) Peer Review Questions
1. Read the paper’s title. Does it introduce the subject matter and/or summarize the paper’s thesis statement? If not, indicate that a title is needed. After you have read the paper, suggest some titles.
2. Read the paper’s introduction. In your own words, list answers for the following: What issue is introduced? What reasons are given for the issue’s relevance or importance? What opposing arguments are presented? What is the thesis statement? (If any of these are missing, indicate this to the writer).
3. Reread the thesis statement. In a list, identify the who, what, when, where, and why addressed in the thesis. If any of these are missing, indicate this to the writer.
4. Does the writer provide sufficient background information for a reader to understand this topic? If not, indicate any points of confusion you had, any terms whose definitions you didn’t know, or any other parts of the argument that were unclear.
5. Read the body of the paper. As you read, note in the margins what each paragraph does (e.g. “background information provided,” “thesis supported with outside sources,” etc.).
6. List the outside sources used in this paper. Beside the name or title of each source, identify the reason for expertise the writer provides. If the writer provides no reason for expertise, write: “introductory tag needed.”
a. How credible are these sources?
b. How appropriate are these sources for this argument?
7. Make corrections, if necessary, to MLA formatting on any outside quotes, paraphrases, or summaries (all should have attributive tags and parenthetical page numbers before the period; quotes should have quotation marks).
8. Consider the overall strength of the paper’s argument. That is, review the thesis statement and supporting arguments offered throughout. How logical is the argument? What challenges to this argument has the writer not mentioned? Write a note addressing these to help the writer strengthen his/her thesis and support.
9. Circle any first- or second-person pronouns present in the paper (there should be none).
10. Read the conclusion paragraph. It should avoid phrases like “in conclusion,” “to summarize,” and the like.
a. Does the conclusion open/widen the issue? (That is, does it provide new material rather than simply restating what’s already present in the paper?)
b. Suggest one or two ways the writer could open his/her paper up with the conclusion (i.e. suggest different aspects of the argument the writer might address here).
11. Review the paper for conventions of grammar, spelling, punctuation, capitalization and usage. Circle any errors you see and, when possible, make corrections.
12. When you have finished, exchange papers with your peer and discuss these answers. If time permits, you may exchange papers with a second peer.
