Peer Editing of Paper Two

CRTW 201

Dr. Fike

In order to stay and participate in this peer editing exercise, you must have at least 5 pages of your own paper (excluding works cited page) to share with classmates.

Instructions:  This is an exercise is reading and writing.  Read and write until the top of the hour.  You may then discuss your written comments with your authors.  But please, until then just read and write.  Talking compromises others' ability to write a helpful statement about their authors' papers.  At the end of the class period, give your written comments to your authors.

INTRODUCTION

• Does the focused topic (the class session:  not the discipline or the overall course) appear before the thesis?  Is it in the thesis?  Does the thesis follow the model in the assignment sheet?  Here is the model:  I will argue that [whatever class session or cultural event you choose as your focused topic] was a success [or a failure or a mixture of success and failure] because it met the standard of [whatever standard(s) you want to apply] with respect to the overall discipline. 
• If your view is mixed, you have the option of adding an "although" clause at the beginning of the sentence.
• If the thesis states that the author and the major are a good match, send up a red flag:  that connection belongs in the conclusion but is not what the thesis should state.
• It would help to use a controlling theme (e.g., a concept like diversity) to stitch together the parts of the paper.  What would you suggest to the author in this regard?  This theme might have something to do with the kind of thinking you do in your discipline.  Thinking in your discipline is _____ thinking.

 ANALYSIS OF THE DISCIPLINE

• Does the body open with the overall discipline (not the class session or the major or the overall course)?  Remember that the major is a subset of the discipline.  Analyze the discipline, not the major.
• Does this section begin with Q@I?  (It should.  Always start with Q @ I.)
• Are all 10 elements present?  Are they underlined and boldfaced?  (Do not leave out context and alternatives.)
• Are all of the elements used correctly?  If not, point out errors and make suggestions.  Remember that you have to give something substantive for each element, not just mention them by name.

ANALYSIS OF THE CLASS SESSION

• Does this section analyze the class session?  It should.  Do not
• Does the section begin with Q@I?  (It should.  Always start with Q @ I.)
• Are all 10 elements present?  Are they underlined and boldfaced?  (Do not leave out context and alternatives.)
• Are all of the elements used correctly?  If not, point out errors and make suggestions.

EVALUATION OF THE CLASS SESSION

• Does the section measure the class session against the overall discipline by using the standards of critical thinking?  You must bring together the ideal that you expressed in section one and the focused topic (class session) in section two.  Take an element from section one and an element from section two and then use the former to evaluate the latter in terms of the standards.  Do not just evaluate the class session.  Evaluate it against what you said about the discipline.
• Are at least 5 standards used?  Are they used correctly?  Could the author say more?  Make suggestions.
• Does the section argue that the class session was a success, a failure, or a mixture of success and failure?  Remember that this is the section where the thesis statement must receive support.

CONCLUSION

• Does the paper explain why the major and the author are a good fit for each other?  "Explain" is the key word.  The author must make and support a point, not just express an opinion and bail out of the paper.  Thinking in your discipline is _____ thinking.  The "blank" may play a key role here.

WORKS CITED

• Is the class session listed as one of the paper's sources?