Unit 3 Peer Review Questions

Unit 3 (Synthesis of Perspectives) Peer Review Questions

Before you exchange papers with your peer, write your focus question at the top of your paper. Then, read your paper quietly aloud to yourself. Make any changes you see necessary, then exchange papers. Peer reviewers: you may put your answers on a blank sheet of paper or on the back of a page of your peer’s draft.

1. At the top of your peer’s paper, clearly write your first and last name so I can give you credit for your comments.

2. Read the focus question and the first paragraph.

a. Do the first sentences establish the issue to be discussed? If not, indicate to the writer that he/she has not yet provided sufficient background information.

b. Underline the thesis statement. Does it answer the focus question (that is, does it make a claim about the current state of knowledge of the issue addressed)? What specific elements of the issue does it address? How does it address complexity in the issue? Offer some suggestions for how your peer might improve the thesis and/or what he/she needs to add.

3. Read through the paper.

a. How is the paper organized (e.g. by sources, by ideas, by main points & sub points, etc.)? Write a roman numeral outline that corresponds with the paper so the writer can see whether the current organization makes sense.

b. What “sides” of the issues does the writer identify? Do the opinions present a balanced/fair view of the issue? What perspectives, if any, are missing?

c. Who are the “expert” sources the writer includes? List the sources the writer includes. After each name, include profession/reason for expertise, publication and what “side” the source takes. If any of this information is not indicated in the paper, make a note (e.g. “profession missing”).

d. If there are any quotes/paraphrases/summaries that are not introduced by an attributive tag, write: “anchor text needed.” If any quotes/paraphrases/summaries are missing a page/paragraph citation, write: “citation needed.”

4. Look for the writer’s original claims. Underline each original claim you see. In the margins, indicate whether the claim is arguable and whether it refers to the issue (which it should not) or the sources’ arguments about the issue (which it should).

a. The claims should make arguments about the expert opinion gathered from outside sources rather than the issue. By each original claim, indicate whether the claim refers to the issue or the sources.

b. Each original claim should be supported with evidence in the form of quotes/summaries/paraphrases. Indicate any places where claims lack sufficient evidence.

c. Evaluate the evidence provided. Does it support the claim the author makes? Is more evidence needed? Does the claim need to be “tweaked” to make sense or match the evidence?

5. Consider the language and tone of the paper. Is it appropriate for a general academic audience (i.e. does it avoid first- and second-person pronouns, contractions, slang, etc.)? Mark any places you think might be problematic. To suggest alternate word choice, underline the word or phrase and write “WC.” Indicate troublesome, awkward, or confusing phrasing in the margins.

6. Review the paper for grammar, spelling, punctuation, usage, and MLA formatting. Mark any errors/problems you see.

7. Consider the rubric posted on the blog. Based on this rubric, assign a grade to this draft of the paper. Explain why you assigned this grade to the paper. If necessary, offer suggestions for how the writer might improve this grade in the final draft.

Sample Thesis Statement for Unit 3

In a synthesis of perspectives paper, the thesis statement should:

1. Make an arguable claim about the state of knowledge (that is, the current state of expert opinion) of the issue of study.
2. Address specific facets of the experts' arguments.
3. Acknowledge the complexity of the issue and/or variations in expert opinion.

Example thesis statement:

Although most shark enthusiasts claim that humans face almost no risk from shark death while swimming, most beachgoers and Jaws fans continue to perceive sharks as deadly creatures hungry for human blood.

Homework Due Thursday, March 31, 2011

For Thursday, please complete the following:

Bring to class a hard (paper) copy of your Unit 3 paper. If you do not bring a printed draft, you will receive an unexcused absence for Thursday’s class and will lose the homework points for that day. The final draft of the paper is due Tuesday, April 5th at the beginning of class.

Homework Due Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Please note:

We will not meet as a class on Thursday, March 24. Instead, I will meet individually with students in my office on Wednesday, March 23 and Tuesday, March 29 to discuss progress in the class and on the Unit 3 synthesis paper. If you were not present in class Tuesday, March 22, please email me (blemieux@siu.edu) or visit my office to sign up for a conference time. If you miss your appointment or fail to sign up for an appointment, it will count as an unexcused absence.

Homework due next Tuesday:
1. Read Chapter 9 on Arguments of Definition in EaA.
2. Continue working on your Unit 3 paper and synthesis questions. Both will be collected in class on Tuesday, April 5th.
3. Write one paragraph in which you offer an argument of definition for a term relevant to your Unit 3 paper.

Classwork, 3.10.11

Questions to Guide Synthesis Drafting

These questions are designed to help you analyze, compare, and contrast your sources to understand the ways in which they respond to various aspects of your issue and interact with each other. The answers to these questions should provide the basis of a draft of your synthesis of perspectives essay.

For each source you use, consider these content analysis questions:

1. What is the writer’s thesis/main argument? (In other words, what does the writer claim about the issue you’re researching?)

2. How do the claims your authors make relate to the issue you’re examining? How do the claims relate to each other?

3. What aspects of your issue do your sources examine? Do they offer any reasons for focusing on those aspects? If not, can you deduce their reasons (based on their background, expertise, personal experiences, etc.)?

4. On what points do your sources agree with each other? On what points to they disagree? Why do these similarities and differences exist? (Consider the background of the writers, etc.)

5. Based on the above analysis questions, what claim can you make about how your sources address the issue you’re examining? (This type of statement could serve as a thesis.)

For each source you use, consider these questions of rhetorical analysis:

1. Where did each of these sources originally appear?

2. What stylistic elements is each author using (formal/informal language, figurative language, images, etc.)? How effective are these elements for the source’s original publication context?

3. What appeals does the argument use (to ethos, pathos, logos)?

4. Who is making the argument? How effectively does he/she establish ethos?

5. What issues are raised and ignored? How does the choice to address or ignore certain elements of an issue affect the argument?

6. What types of evidence are presented (qualitative/quantitative)? How effective is this evidence for the subject matter?

7. What is the purpose of this argument? How does it achieve or fail to achieve that purpose?

8. Based on these analysis questions (and others from p. 98 in Everything’s an Argument), what claim can you make about the form of the arguments made by people discussing this context? (This type of statement could serve as a thesis.)

Homework Due Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Over spring break, please complete the following:

1. Continue working on your synthesis of perspectives paper. The final copy will be due Tuesday, April 5th; we will have a peer review day in class on Thursday, March 31st.
2. Closely read "The Campus Crusade for Guys" in EaA, p.909 - 916. Bring your text to class.

Unit 2 (Research Proposal & Annotated Bibliography) Grading Rubric

An A paper…

· Is written with a tone and in a vocabulary appropriate to an academic audience;

· Explicitly identifies a specific issue as the focus of research;

· Offers thorough, informative background information about this issue that shows evidence of research and evaluation;

· Identifies specific difficulties the writer has encountered so far in the research process;

· Includes strong annotations that do all of the following:

o Include Works Cited entries in proper MLA format;

o Include a brief summary of the source’s subject matter;

o Identify the author’s thesis statement and the author’s identity/credibility;

o Assess the source’s likely usefulness to the writer’s research and include specific reasons for that assessment; and

o Mention or discuss some rhetorical devices used by the author;

· Meets the page requirement and follows MLA formatting guidelines for font, size, spacing, margins, etc.; and

· Is virtually free of errors in spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization, usage, etc.

A B paper…

· Is generally written in a tone and with a vocabulary appropriate to an academic audience, with perhaps a few lapses;

· Clearly identifies a specific issue as the focus of research;

· Offers informative background information about this issue that shows evidence of research;

· Identifies specific difficulties the writer has encountered so far in the research process;

· Includes strong annotations that do all of the following:

o Include Works Cited entries in proper MLA format;

o Include a brief summary of the source’s subject matter;

o Identify the author’s thesis statement and the author’s identity/credibility; and

o Assess the source’s likely usefulness to the writer’s research and include reasons for that assessment;

· Meets the page requirement and follows MLA formatting guidelines for font, size, spacing, margins, etc.; and

· Is generally free of surface errors.

A C paper…

· Has frequent lapses in the general academic tone and/or vocabulary;

· Identifies a specific issue as the focus of research;

· Offers background information about this issue that shows evidence of research;

· Identifies difficulties the writer has encountered so far in the research process;

· Includes annotations that do all of the following:

o Include Works Cited entries in proper MLA format;

o Include a brief summary of the source’s subject matter (though this summary may be the main focus of the annotation at the expense of other information);

o Identify the author’s thesis statement and the author’s identity/credibility; and

o Assess the source’s likely usefulness to the writer’s research;

· Meets the page requirement and follows MLA guidelines, etc.

· Has some surface errors, which may at times be distracting.

A D paper…

· Fails to achieve a tone or vocabulary appropriate to an academic audience;

· Identifies a subject matter but not a specific issue for research;

· Offers unclear, insufficient, or confusing background information;

· Fails to identify difficulties so far encountered or does so too vaguely;

· Has annotations that fail to meet one or more of the criteria for “C” annotations;

· Does not reach the page length and/or does not follow MLA formatting guidelines; and

· Has numerous surface-level errors, which may often distract from meaning.

An F paper…

· Does not meet minimum requirements; or

· Plagiarizes.