Peer Review Assignment and Guide


Strive to make at least 3-4 comments on every page of each text—at least one of these comments should be a question.

Make sure you cover all of your bases. As you read and comment on your peers’ texts, please address each category at least once per paper:

  1. Ideas
  2. Evidence
  3. Organization

When you point out a choice that you think works well, please articulate why you think that choice works well.

Don’t forget your closing 150 word comment. This closing comment provides you an opportunity to summarize lasting impressions or to articulate what you think the writer should prioritize when revising the text. Consider suggesting revision strategies or describe what you believe to be the paper’s purpose. How do you think the paper can better achieve this purpose? Please make sure to address the author directly, as you write the note.

If you spot a pattern of surface error (i.e. comma splices, noun verb agreement, “floating pointers”) mention it in your 150 word note.

REMEMBER: Please make sure that you download and save at least one peer review to your computer for your ePortfolio.


Peer Review: Talking Points

At a loss for words? No problem! Reference the list below for a more focused discussion.


Remember the Discussion’s Over all Goals


  • Sharpen Focus—What is the paper’s focus and how can you tighten or clarify it?
  • Strengthen the Argument—What evidence could the text add to bolster support for its individual claims and overall argument?
  • Improve Organization—Does the paper follow a logical flow? If not, how can the text achieve this?
  • Develop Understanding—Could the text use nuance or a deeper grasp on the material/subject matter?


Places to Look


  • Introductory Paragraph
  • Position Statement/Thesis
  • Body Paragraph Claim Sentences
    • Are the paragraph’s first sentences mostly summary? If so, how can the author revise their paragraphs so that their ideas drive the paper forward?
    • Are the first sentences the author’s ideas? (Yay!)
      • If this is the case, consider:
        • Do the claims follow a logical order?
        • Do the claims directly relate with the thesis?
      • Quote Sandwiches
        • Discuss the strength of each quote. If a quote does not seem like the strongest choice, which quote would better work?
        • Does the analysis directly connect the evidence with the claim the quote supports?
      • Organization and Transitions
        • Does the paper follow a logical flow? Can you, as the reader, easily describe the argument’s trajectory over the course of the paper?
      • Conclusion
        • Is the conclusion satisfying? Does it strike a balance between revisiting the paper’s main ideas while simultaneously introducing the possibility for further reflection?


Other Questions


  • Does the paper set expectations and meet them?