1301

1. 1301 Peer Critiques

2. Peer Critiques Description: In this assignment, you will read the drafts of TWOof your peers and write a critique OF EACH. For each critique, you will introduce the draft, summarize its main points, assess and respond to the author's presentation, and offer conclusions about the effectiveness of the analysis. Remember to speak as specifically as possible about the draft, quoting from it when necessary. Your critique FOR EACHwill be about 500 words in length. The elements of the draft you should address include: • Text for Analysis/Thesis: Identify the writer's thesis and then evaluate it for effectiveness. Determine whether the writer has selected a particular text to analyze and whether or not the thesis indicates that the writer will complete a rhetorical analysis of the text. Discuss whether the thesis is specific enough and of appropriate scope for this analysis. Explain why or why not, and provide suggestions for the writer to help improve the thesis, if necessary. • Quality and Specificity of Analysis: Evaluate the writer’s analysis. Does the writer select specific quotations from the text to discuss? What are these quotations, and what does the writer have to say about them? Does the writer seem to effectively analyze, or does the draft read more as a summary or paraphrasing of parts of the text being analyzed, or does the writer end up arguing about the content, rather than the structure and presentation of the text? • Overall Essay Structure: Comment on the overall structure of the essay. For example, explain in detail whether or not the paragraphs are presented in a logical and persuasive way. Does the writer provide a clear introduction, body and conclusion? Does each paragraph begin with a clear topic sentence and transition into the next paragraph? Provide examples that are effective or areas that need more improvement.

3. Grading Criteria Focus: Does the student thoroughly explore the quality and specificity of the draft being examined in the critique? Has the writer addressed all of the questions in the prompt? Sources and Evidence: Does the student support his or her critique with evidence from the text? In other words, does the student directly refer to specific parts of the text (paragraphs and/or sentences).  This criterion is particularly important because students tend to use vague and generic language that could apply to any draft. OwnPerspective: Does the student show authority in relaying his or her perspective about the effectiveness of the text? Students tend to shy away from making a direct critique of a document, or they default to praising the document in some generic way. Conclusion: Does the student provide an accurate evaluative statement about the draft's overall effectiveness?  Does the student discuss the significance of the problems he or she identifies in the draft (i.e., how important each of these problems are)? Communication: Does the student communicate his or her critique effectively?  Is the student's tone professional?  Has the student organized his or her critique effectively?  Is the critique relatively free of grammatical errors?

4. Peer Critiques are BA 6 • So, look over your grader comments from BA 6, see what you need to be doing. The KEYS are: • ELABORATE/FINISH YOUR THOUGHT • PROVIDE DIRECT EXAMPLES (Quotes from draft) • Offer suggestions for what you’d do differently

5. ELABORATE/FINISH YOUR THOUGHT • “The introduction was unclear.” vs. “The introduction was unclear BECAUSE it lacked a clear purpose, and there was a number of grammatical errors. • Tell me why. I’m not reading the draft you are critiquing, so be clear. Don’t leave critiques/comments unrealized.

6. PROVIDE DIRECT EXAMPLES • Provide thesis/quotes/elements that you are referring to. “The writer’s audience was too vague.” vs. “The writer’s audience, which he identified as ‘people that like texting,’ was too vague and needs to be more specific.” • Applies to the “good” stuff too.

7. OFFER SUGGESTIONS/MODEL WHAT YOU’D DO • When you find something that isn’t working, offer a a different approach. Perhaps, model it. “The author’s purpose was weak, and should be replaced with something more indicative with Jaschik’s agenda. They should consider the move to understand students’ motives fro plagiarism, with the ultimate goal of preventing it? • If it is a direct sentence that needs work, rewrite it (model) what you would do differently

8. No 1st or 2nd Person • Focus your comments on the MATERIAL not YOURSELF or the STUDENT. “I felt that the thesis was unclear because…” Vs. “The thesis was unclear because…” “Your intro” vs. “The intro”

9. We’ll Be Looking For… 1.Three paragraphs, one for each of the three prompts. Label them if it help - Text for Analysis/Thesis, Quality and Specificity of Analysis, ect •  Must include an overall evaluative statement of the draft. Also, does the analysis meet the 1.1 assignment description? OR Use the rhetorical checklist on the blog. • Discuss the significance of the problems you saw. 2.  All commentary should be professional, no blatantly mean or offensive commentary (don’t be a jerk). 3. No assigning a grade (A, 90%, etc). 4.  For every negative criticism, they need to give a constructive on how to improve that issue. (E.G. You thesis is a bit weak but would be stronger if it included an audience.) 5. No saying “Prof. Dornich said…” since this will be all of 1301, not just our class.

10. Text for Analysis/Thesis: • Do you see the essay title and author’s name stated? • Is there any additional author/article bio info that would help? • Do you see audience and purpose? Are they accurate? • Do you see the thesis? Yes or no, identify what it is (specifically, in quotes). Is it clear? Does it have two or three rhetorical choices that match the choices discussed in the rest of the draft? Is there an evaluative statement?

11. Quality and Specificity of Analysis: • Is there a topic sentence? Does it match what the paragraph is actually about? • Do the quotes adequately represent the rhetorical choice? Are there too many quotes, or possibly not enough? Are they cited correctly? • Is the majority of the paragraph dedicated to analysis? Or is there too much summary? • Remember! There’s a difference between analysis and summary/ focus on the topic. Read closely.

12. Overall Essay Structure: • Are the body paragraphs presented in a clear logical way? • Is the purpose and audience that was address in the intro carried all the way through? Are they ever readdressed – Echoed? Remember echoing audience and purpose? • Does the paragraph transition to the next paragraph? • Does the conclusion have all of the necessary elements? • Provide an overall evaluative statement?

13. What if it doesn’t suck? • You will invariably find things that are working. Doesn’t mean you’re off the hook. • Tell me why it’s effective – Same criteria applies: Direct Evidence, Fully- formed thoughts • For example: The writer’s thesis, which was “______” was effective because ________.

14. Example In the beginning of the rhetorical analysis, the writer states the audience of Malcolm X's essay as “African Americans seeking a formal education” and “young people in the educational system that do not understand the full potential of an education.” The identified audience is extremely vague especially “young people in the educational system.” To narrow down the audience, consider that Malcolm X was most likely trying to target minority groups, mainly African Americans, as his intended audience. The writer identifies the purpose of Malcolm X's essay as “to display how his schooling molded him as a man and shaped his views.” Like the identified audience, the identified purpose of Malcolm X's work is also not very specific. The chosen rhetorical devices were good except “credibility,” which is not a rhetorical device. The author should think about what it was specifically that allowed Malcolm X to establish credibility, and use that as a choice. For the thesis statement, the rhetorical choices, audience, and purpose are all crammed into one sentence, making it unclear what the writer is trying to get across. To make the meaning more clear, the original thesis statement could be divided into two sentences, the first sentence stating Malcolm X's specific audience and purpose while the second sentence, the thesis statement, states the rhetorical devices that the writer chose and restates the identified audience.