RBA Draft comments
RBA AUTHOR NAME:
ESSAY
ELEMENTS AND
TECHNIQUES
PEER REVIEWER NAME:
THE IDEAL FOR AN EXEMPLARY RBA
ESSAY
COMMENTS (AND SOME FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS)
Please leave at least some comments in each box below
TOPIC
Sophisticated or nuanced approach to a
well-chosen topic that shows awareness
of scope, different perspectives and/or
points of tension, and which is
appropriate for the assignment
objectives and class theme.
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
TITLE
Catchy, well-written title that gives the
reader a sense of topic and argument
Clear, precise, and well-defined;
sophisticated in both its articulation and
the ideas behind it, connecting to a
larger issue, relevance or So What
Underlying argument developed in the
essay matches thesis statement; essay
delivers on the “promise” of the thesis;
avoids tangents and digressions;
author’s argument is clear and
sophisticated; it is showcased and drives
the essay (rather than evidence driving
the essay
Shows attention to audience and
hooking the reader; clearly establishes
topic and argument
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive
feedback here]
[PEER REVIEWER: Underline or highlight the thesis statement on the draft
& also leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback here]
THESIS
STATEMENT
ARGUMENT
INTRODUCTION
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
CONTEXT,
BACKGROUND
& DEFINITION
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE –
INTEGRATION &
ANALYSIS
EVIDENCE –
ETHICAL USE
VISUAL
EVIDENCE
STRUCTURE –
COHERENCE &
FLUIDITY
Provides effective background, context,
or theoretical framework to support the
central argument (in a background
section or integrated throughout, as
appropriate); fully utilizes any theoretical
framework that is introduced as
appropriate; defines important terms at
the appropriate places
Strong, effective use of specific forms of
evidence to support the argument. Uses
both primary and secondary evidence;
uses background sources, exhibit
sources, argument sources, and method
sources. Synthesizes multiple
arguments from different types of
sources appropriate to topic – strong
sense of the conversation about the
topic & evidence of rigorous research.
No perceivable gaps in research.
Effective use of summary, paraphrase,
and direct quotations to support claims;
polished use of signal phrases and
attributions; consistently and effectively
comments on, adds to, qualifies, and
critiques source material
Ethical use of source material; provides
context and appropriate
citation/documentation
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
If using visuals, uses as evidence to
support argument rather than as
decoration; includes image source
citations after works cited/bibliography
Well-constructed, purposeful coherent
structure that avoids tangents and
digressions; arrangement of paragraphs
leads the reader through argument
effectively; good sense of forward
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive
feedback here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: Underline or highlight on the draft one transition that
works really well (mark it as “excellent transition”) and another that could
use some revision (mark it as “transition could use revision”) – also please
leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback here]
STRUCTURE –
COHESIVE/
COHERENT
PARAGRAPHS
CONCLUSION
STYLE AND
VOICE
DESIGN,
DELIVERY &
CORRECTNESS
momentum; fluid transitions between
paragraphs and ideas; demonstrates
conceptual relationship between
paragraphs/ideas; develops, reinforces
or builds on central claim; if uses
subheads, uses them in conjunction with
transitions rather than instead of and
creates rhetorical, interesting subheads
Each paragraph has a coherent,
cohesive purpose that contributes to
developing the argument (rather than
simply showcasing a source); strong use
of topic sentences to provide transition,
identify topic of paragraph, and connect
to argument
Ties the paper together; resists relying
exclusively on summary; works in
conjunction with intro to bookend the
argument; includes reference to larger
significance, conversation or the So What
of the argument
Clear, consistent, and engaging style
appropriate to topic and audience;
avoids bias; shows attention to crafting
language and structure through
concrete, vivid language, effective word
choice and usage, varied sentence
structure, and effective/strategic use of
rhetorical appeals and strategies of
development
Shows clear attention to ethos in the
design of the essay as well as in
proofreading (grammar, punctuation,
spelling, MLA format for source citation
and works cited); demonstrates mastery
of appropriate conventions of academic
discourse and format; follows the
specific instructions in the assignment,
[PEER REVIEWER: Underline or highlight on the draft one topic sentence
that works really well (mark it as “excellent topic sentence”) and another
that could use some revision (mark it as “topic sentence could use
revision”) – please also leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
[PEER REVIEWER: Underline or highlight on the draft one sentence or set
of sentences that you think demonstrate excellent attention to style or
voice (mark as “great style/voice”) – please also leave at least 1 sentence
of constructive feedback here]
[PEER REVIEWER: please leave at least 1 sentence of constructive feedback
here]
grammar, punctuation, source citation,
and language usage
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: WHAT WORKED WELL & SUGGESTIONS FOR REVISION. In this section, provide general suggestions and
additional comments that build from the following questions: Do there seem to be any holes in the author’s research? What points
need further development? Does the author showcase his/her research effectively so we get the sense that the paper is not just an
opinionpiece, but is informed by rigorous research? Conversely, does the author spotlight his/her argument sufficiently so that the
paper isn’t just a patchwork of different sources?
[Leave additional comments here]