Directions: Offer CONSTRUCTIVE (not destructive) feedback

Introduction: The first paragraph that opens the paper.

Does your peer engage/intrigue you with an introductory hook?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

If your peer could do anything to develop or improve his or her hook, what do you suggest?

Thesis:

The final sentence       of the introduction.

Does your peer develop a blueprint thesis statement that identifies a general main idea and three subtopics?   

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

If the thesis is confusing, too long, too short, or grammatically flawed, what do you suggest?

Body Paragraph 1:

The first supporting paragraph.

Does your peer’s 1^st body paragraph begin with an identifiable topic sentence that acknowledges the first of the three subtopics?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Does your peer develop this paragraph with appropriate descriptive and narrative content to flesh-out and support the topic? If the paragraph seems too short, too long, or disorganized, what do you suggest?

Body Paragraph 2:

The second supporting paragraph.

Does your peer’s 2^nd body paragraph begin with or follow a transitional word or phrase that links the first topic area to the second?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Does your peer develop this paragraph with appropriate descriptive and narrative content to flesh-out and support the topic? If the paragraph seems too short, too long, or disorganized, what do you suggest?

Body Paragraph 3:

The third supporting paragraph.

Does your peer’s 3^rd body paragraph begin with or follow a transitional word or phrase that links the second topic area to the third?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Does your peer develop this paragraph with appropriate descriptive and narrative content to flesh-out and support the topic? If the paragraph seems too short, too long, or disorganized, what do you suggest?

Conclusion:

The final paragraph that brings the paper to a close.

Does your peer appropriately revisit the major points of his or her paper in the conclusion?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Once you finished reading this conclusion, did you feel the paper was indeed complete? Did your peer leave a dominant impression with you as the reader? If something was lacking, missing, or insufficient, try to identify what that was here.

MLA Formatting and Academic Tone:

The standard academic paper design.

Does your peer properly format his or her document with 12-point Times New Roman font, personal identification info., a header, and double-spaced paragraphs?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Does the tone and approach of the essay seem appropriate for an academic audience?  While this is a personal essay, the writer should not be using colloquial/conversational language (See pages 150-158 in RFW for more help). Write down any words that seem too conversational or colloquial.

Mechanics:

Grammar, punctuation, and spelling clarity.

Does your peer’s work show evidence of proofreading?

? Yes     ? No (explain) --->

Using your Rules for Writers text, take the time to identify concepts and page numbers your peer should revisit during his or her revision process.