1. Roll
2. Draft Check (200 pts for 2, 100 pts for 1, 0 points for 0
3. In-Class Peer Critique 1 (25 minutes)
4. In-Class Peer Critique 2 (25 minutes)
Trauth 1302 – In-Class Peer Critique Assignment
Objective:
To demonstrate your ability to critique argumentative essays and articulate your critique to the text’s author
Part One Description:
After you have read the draft provided, please respond to each of the following prompts as specifically as possible, using detailed examples and select passages from the draft you have read to illustrate your points and validate claims about that draft (on your own sheet of paper). Each of your responses should be about 50 - 100 words in length, for a total of 300 words for each critique.
1. Identify the writer’s thesis (underline it) and then evaluate it for effectiveness. Discuss whether the thesis is specific enough and of appropriate scope for this argument. Explain why or why not and provide suggestions for the writer to help improve the thesis, if the thesis is ineffective.
2. How has the writer structured the argument? Explain in detail whether or not the support for the argument is presented in a logical and persuasive way and whether or not the counterarguments are realistic. Discuss any stronger counterarguments that the writer will need to rebut, if any.
3. Examine the use of the source material. Discuss whether the sources are relevant and reliable, as well as whether they are used appropriately and effectively integrated. Explain to the writer how selecting or integrating sources in a different way might improve the argument, providing examples of revised versions of introducing, integrating, and commenting on source materials.
4. Examine the types of arguments employed in the draft. Does the author use ethos, pathos, and/or logos? Explain what types of arguments you see being used in the paper now and what types of arguments could possibly be added to strengthen the paper’s argument.
Part Two Description: Now, assess each major area as Needs Improvement, Satisfactory, or Excellent and make sure to answer all questions thoroughly in complete sentences. Provide examples and give suggestions when an area needs improvement.
5. Has the student focused his or her argument on a narrow topic?
6. Is the essay argumentative rather than informative?
7. Has the student considered the contexts of the articles which he or she quotes?
8. Has the student discussed any assumptions which he or she makes about the topic as well as the assumptions which the articles make?
9. Has the student presented sources effectively to support his or her points?
10. Does the quality of the sources meet the guidelines specified by the instructor? Has the student cited these sources correctly?
11. Is the Works Cited list formatted correctly?
12. Has the student cited all of the sources listed in the Works Cited?
13. Does the student consider the counterargument fairly and carefully?
14. Do the articles which the student cites in the counterargument support the counterargument and not the argument
15. Has the student clearly stated an arguable thesis statement?
16. Do the lines of argument provide adequate support for this thesis statement, and is it clear how they support it?
17. Does the student summarize the main points that he or she has made?
18. Does the conclusion restate the thesis statement in some form (not necessarily in the same words)?
19. How effective is the conclusion rhetorically?
20. Is the essay clearly organized and easy to follow?
21. Can you tell which paragraphs are lines of argument?
22. Is it clear how every paragraph helps to develop the thesis statement?
23. How effective is the student’s writing at the sentence level?
24. Which areas should the student focus revisions specifically?
25. Name two things done particularly well in this draft.
26. Name three areas the student should focus on in revisions (be specific)!
5. Review Peer Critique Assignment (Part One of In-Class Peer Critique – Same Assignment. Find your papers to peer critique by clicking on “Submit Now” in RW. Complete two peer critiques by Monday at 11:59 p.m.
6. Review Peer Critique Scoring Guide
The format for the critique is not set. Students may write an integrated essay, or they may do the critique in Q&A format. They may also refer to the writer in third person, or they may address the writer directly. However, do make sure that they are consistent. Some will begin in third person and shift to second.
Scoring Guide:
C1—Issue Identification and Focus
Does the student address all of the questions in the assignment? While some students may occasionally go beyond the prompts and provide additional information, some will ignore the questions altogether.
C3—Sources and Evidence
Has the student provided specific examples from the critiqued paper? 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 offer pertinent suggestions to the writer? 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