Evaluating the Draft: Using Peer Review

Your instructor may arrange a peer review session in class or online, where you can exchange drafts with your classmates and give one another a thoughtful critical reading. A good critical reading does three things:

  1. It lets the writer know how well the reader understands the point of the essay.

  2. It praises what works best.

  3. It indicates where the draft could be improved and makes suggestions on how to improve it.

One strategy for evaluating a draft is to use the basic features of the genre you are composing as a guide.

A PEER REVIEW GUIDE

Click the Peer Review Guide to download.

210

An Informative Explanation Is the report or analysis informative, interesting, and perceptive?

Summarize: Tell the writer what makes the topic important and opposing points of view interesting.

Praise: Give an example of something in the draft that you think will especially interest the intended readers.

Critique: Tell the writer about any confusion or uncertainty you have about the topic’s importance. Indicate if the focus of the report or analysis could be clearer, more interesting, or more appropriate for the intended readers.
A Clear, Logical Organization Does the report or analysis explain the topic and opposing positions clearly, and is it easy to follow?

Summarize: Look at the way the essay is organized by making a scratch outline.

Praise: Give an example of where the essay succeeds in being readable—for instance, in its overall organization, forecast of topics, or use of transitions.

Critique: Identify places where readability could be improved—for example, by adding a forecast, clarifying a topic sentence, or using headings.
Smooth Integration of Sources Are sources incorporated into the report or analysis effectively?

Summarize: Note each source mentioned in the text, and check to make sure it appears in the list of works cited, if there is one. Highlight signal phrases and other in-text citations.

Praise: Give an example of the effective use of sources — for instance, a particularly well-integrated quotation, paraphrase, or summary that supports and illustrates the point. Note any especially descriptive verbs used to introduce information from sources.

Critique: Point out where adding experts’ credentials would make a source more credible. Indicate quotations, paraphrases, or summaries that could be more smoothly integrated or more fully interpreted or explained. Identify verbs in signal phrases that could more clearly signal the writer’s moves.
Appropriate Explanatory Strategies Are writing strategies (such as classification, definition, and comparison) used effectively to report on the topic and analyze the underlying values? Is research adequate?

Summarize: Note which explanatory strategies the writer uses, such as classification, definition, comparison, or cause-effect.

Praise: Point to an explanatory strategy that is especially effective, and highlight research that is particularly helpful.

Critique: Point to any places where a definition is needed, where more (or better) examples might help, or where another explanatory strategy could be improved or added. Note where a visual (such as a flowchart or graph) would make the explanation clearer.

Making Comments Electronically Most word processing software offers features that allow you to insert comments directly into the text of someone else’s document. Many readers prefer to make their comments this way because it tends to be faster than writing on hard copy and space is virtually unlimited; it also eliminates the process of deciphering handwritten comments. Where such features are not available, simply typing comments directly into a document in a contrasting color can provide the same advantages.