Workshop Instructions (also linked here: (Peer Reviewing the Rough Draft of the Final Research Project):
In Week Three, you will be writing your first draft of your final paper assignment, the Research Project. Peer review is an essential part of the writing process and all successful writers engage in this activity at some point in that process. Engaging in peer review is an integral part of any scholarly or professional attempt at producing effective writing. The classroom learning environment provides the perfect opportunity to take advantage of the benefits to be gained by submitting your written work, in the form a completed rough draft, to peer review. Read more here about the Benefits of Peer Review.
The purpose of this workshop is (at least) threefold:
- Practicing peer-reviewing skills, such as reading carefully to discern the writer’s purpose and main point or thesis, locating crucial expository or argumentative claims and relevant data that support the main point and overall purpose of the paper, and formulating and communicating constructive feedback.
- Getting feedback from your peers who are working on the same assignment will help you think about your work more critically; it will help you to see problems or errors that you missed and thus help you to improve your paper as you review and address the peer feedback you receive.
- After you’ve reviewed other authors’ attempts at writing a research paper, it will enable you to better identify strengths and weaknesses in your own writing.
As you move toward the final version of your Research Project, in addition to ensuring that your paper follows the basic instructions for the assignment, you should also be using the Grading Rubric from the Research Project instructions to check your work against the explicit criteria spelled out there.
Post your Rough Draft in the Week Three: Workshop: Peer-Reviewing the Rough Draft of the Research Project by end of Thursday in Week Three.
Post your peer reviews of at least two other students’ rough drafts by end of Sunday. Word count for each peer review should be within the range of 350-500 words.
Remember that you will be doing a peer review of TWO peer-authors’ rough drafts. Please post each peer review as a reply to the peer-author’s main post containing their rough draft.
When all the rough drafts are posted (they should all be there by Friday morning of Week Three), scroll through the workshop to find the two rough drafts that you want to peer review, and reply to each of those postings right away that you will be doing a peer review of that paper. Consider this sort of “having dibs on” that draft. If two peer reviewers have already signed up for a paper, make a different choice. The goal is for everyone in the class to have at least two peer reviews on their rough draft.
Once you have reviewed the peer-author’s draft, return to the peer-author’s main post, and reply to that post with your completed peer review. Make sure to include the peer-author’s name in your peer review of their draft. Please copy and paste rather than attaching your peer reviews, as this will make it easier for others to view your comments and critiques.
Your peer reviews should address the following five areas of evaluation, along with any general comments you want to add. Don’t feel as though you have to respond to every single question included here; these are suggested elements of the draft for you to review and critique.
In general, your purpose is to benefit the peer-author by offering your impressions of and reflections on their efforts on this writing project, using the Grading Rubric as a foundational guide for what is expected in this assignment. And, as noted above, by conducting this peer review you will get a better understanding of the criteria you yourself should be addressing in your own paper and the levels at which you are doing so.
Don’t feel like you are grading the peer-author’s work; think of this almost as a group exercise in which everyone is working together to enhance their writing and researching skills.
Don’t waste time with vague or clichéd comments such as “Good job,” or “I liked your paper, but it needs a bit more work.” These are not helpful, and even less so would be negative comments with no constructive content. The attitude here should be one of teamwork and mutual support!
Word count for the peer review should be within the range of 350-500 words.
Peer Review Evaluation Questions
Research question:
- Was it easy to identify the research question in the first paragraph?
- State what you take to be the peer-author’s research question.
- Does this question address a significant issue?
- Is it a worthwhile question to research and write about?
Focus:
- Does every part of the draft relate clearly enough to the peer-author’s research question?
- Or are there some parts that seem to veer off into side areas?
- If there are instances of veering off the main topic or claims that seem irrelevant, tangential, or pointless, indicate where that happens in the draft.
Sourcing:
- Does the peer-author do a satisfactory job of identifying and explaining their sources in terms of their sources’ credentials and areas of expertise, as well as the methods, ideas and arguments that explore and support those ideas?
- Are more or different sources needed?
Quoting:
- Does the author use direct quotes? If not, would adding them help the paper?
- Are there parts of the draft that seem “quote heavy”?
- Can the charge be made that the peer-author is letting quoted passages do the heavy lifting rather than serving to illustrate or bolster the peer-author’s exposition or exploration of the research question?
- Does the peer-author effectively translate specialist information from sources into non-specialist language?
Clarity:
- Are there any parts of the draft that are confusing or hard to follow?
- Point to the specific words/phrases/sentences (or organizational choices?) that seem to be causing this confusion.
- Are the peer-author’s claims vague, fuzzy, or over-general? Does the peer-author effectively distill complex information down to its core, relevant ideas?
General Comments:
- Consult the Grading Rubric for the Research Project and include any final comments here that you think might help the peer-author to strengthen and improve the final draft of the paper.
- Two especially important criteria in this paper are (a) having a clear, specific, and sustained focus throughout the paper and (b) synthesizing source information with the writer’s own contribution to knowledge in relation to the research question addressed in the paper.
- Don’t feel as if you need to address every single criterion listed in the Grading Rubric; use it only as a general reference for the purposes of the peer review
0 comments