Module 8 Assignment: Peer Revision

Purpose

This is a chance to practice giving and receiving feedback, as well as an opportunity to revise your draft in response to peer feedback.

Objectives

  • Provide constructive peer review evaluation.
  • Use peer feedback to identify potential revisions in your paper draft.

Process

Follow these steps in groups of two or more:

  1. Group members will address the questions in the Peer Feedback Guide. (You can make a copy of this Google doc to take notes in)
  2. Group members will share their feedback with the author, using the SPARK feedback principles. The author takes notes on the comments. The author can ask any follow-up questions about the feedback.
  3. Repeat the review process with the next author.
Peer Feedback Guide
Question Things to consider in your feedback
Does the introduction prepare the reader for the ideas that are discussed in the paper?
  • Was the introduction too broad? Too narrow?
  • What were the main ideas presented in the paper (that the author could address in the introduction)?
Does the author include a thesis statement (that explains what the paper will be about)?
  • Underline the claim or thesis. Paraphrase the statement.
  • Is there too much detail? If so, what seems unnecessary?
  • Is there too little information? If so, what else do you need to know?
Is the paper well-organized?
  • Did the ideas flow in a way that made sense? What could be different?
  • Did the order of the paragraphs make sense? What could be different?
Are the moves in the argument backed by appropriate evidence?
  • What are the major moves in this argument?
  • What kind of evidence does the author provide for each move?
  • Is the evidence explained and unpacked in ways that make their significance clear?
Overall, was the writing clear and coherent?
  • Was it easy to follow what the author was trying to convey? Put a star beside a section you felt was clear and easy to understand.
  • Circle 1-2 sections where you had difficulty understanding what the author was trying to convey. Tell what is unclear and what might make it clearer.
  • Are the paragraphs coherent? Circle or underline any sentences that do not fit into their paragraphs.
What are the take-aways from this paper?
  • Does the conclusion prompt you to think about that? Does the conclusion stray from the rest of the paper?