Before class you should...
-Read Part 1, Section 4b, "Reviewing Your Peers" (pp. 75-86) in the St. Martin's Handbook.
-Read the two sample drafts I emailed to you. PRINT them out and BRING them with you to class. This is your quiz grade for this week.
Today in class we will...
9:30 am substitute: Mr. Trice
11 am substitute: Mr. Maraj
- Discuss peer critiques.
Peer Critique 1.1a and 1.1b
This assignment is all electronic through Raider Writer. After you log-in, click on "Turn In/Manage Writing" on the left. Then by Peer Critique 1.1a, click "Submit Now." The draft you are supposed to critique will then pop up. Follow this same process for Peer Critique 1.1b.
Objective: To demonstrate your ability to write a critique based on a primary source (a peer's essay).
Purpose: Having others read your writing is a good way to find out if your document is reaching its intended audience. In this assignment, you will read the drafts of two of your peers and write a critique of each.
Description: To complete this assignment, use the guidelines from Chapter 4b of The St. Martin's Handbook and compose a critique of your peers’ drafts. 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 will be 400 - 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. For example, a thesis that states that an author uses ethos, pathos, and logos in their text is NOT specific enough for a rhetorical 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 particularly effective or areas that need more improvement.
What the graders are looking for...
C1: Focus
Does the student thoroughly explore the quality and specificity of the draft being examined in the critique?
C3: 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.
C5: Own Perspective
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.
C6: 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)?
C7: 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?
No comments:
Post a Comment