134 Peer Review Guidelines_Essay 2 (10 points)/Dr. Gao 2011
Critic’s Name __________; Critic’s Credit __________
1. MLA format (1 point): Who is the author? ________. Note there is no
need to include a cover page for Essay 2. Check author information (four
lines double spaced at the upper left as showcased below),1 and the header
(author’s last name and page number at the upper right, for instance, Gao 1).
In the essay proper, check citations and quotations according to your
laminated MLA card. Check the list of Works Cited2 at the end of the essay
(alphabetically listed/distinction between something in print and something
online).
1.1: author information (0.25)
________
1.2: header (0.25)
________
1.3: In-Text Citation (0.25)
________
1.4: Works Cited (0.25 point)
________
2. Significance in connections between the two primary texts compared or
contrasted (1 point): What or where is the connection? Is the connection
thematically or technically important or is it of minor interest? Is the
connection stylistically established or mechanically organized?
3. Title (0.5 point): What is the title? Is the title interesting? What is the
stylistic feature of the title: metaphor (“Handicapped by History”),
alliteration (“Trapped or Trashed: Eveline’s dilemma”) or humor? Is the
title both informative and argumentative? Throughout the essay, is the title
echoed somewhere in the text?
1
Elizabeth L. Angeli
Professor Patricia Sullivan
English 624
14 December 2008
2
Danhof, Clarence H. Change in Agriculture: The Northern United States, 1820-1870.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1969. Print.
“Historical Census Browser.” University of Virginia Library. 2007. Web. 6 Dec. 2008.
1
134 Peer Review Guidelines_Essay 2 (10 points)/Dr. Gao 2011
4. Thesis statement/Central claim(s) (1 point): What and where is the central
claim? Draw a claim chart to see if everything is organically connected or
mechanically tied up together. Is the claim powerful enough to raise our
eyebrows or create some ripple effect? In in other words, did the essay
impact the reader’s perspective? Is the claim too narrow or too wide? Did
the author bring something new and original to the academic discussions or
simply repeat what others have said on the issue?
5. Evidence based on the primary source (1 point): list evidence by types
(textual evidence/Anecdotal Evidence/Testimonial Evidence/Statistical
Evidence/Analogical Evidence, etc.). How are the pieces of evidence
sequenced: progressively intensive/climactic or otherwise? Are the pieces of
evidence organically connected to each other? Are the pieces of evidence
relevant, representative, and revealing of the main argument?
6. Warrant (0.5 point): Identify some warrant, implied or stated, in the
argument. Overall, is the argument well warranted at a more general level?
7. Counterargument (1 point): Did the author integrate a different point of
view either from the primary source or the secondary source on the issue? Is
the argument developed dialogically?
8. Cohesiveness/ Coherence (1 point): The strength of a paragraph lies in its
unity through variety. Is there anything that doesn’t belong to the paragraph?
What is the main idea of each paragraph? Are there any “holes” left
between or among sentences at the paragraph level? In other words, did the
author jump around or jerk around for no reason? At the essay level, check
to see if the conclusion goes along with the introduction/thesis statement.
Are there any loose threads that don’t belong to this essay? Identify two or
three strategies the author has used in transition: transitional phrases,
anadiplosis, etc. Does the prose flow smoothly?
9. Integration of the secondary sources (1 point): What are the types of the
contextual information: historical, biological, critical or
compositional/technical? At least one source should come from
something in print, be it an essay or a book. How relevant are those
sources to the main argument or central claim? Are they organically
integrated or mechanically attached to the essay? Note the secondary
sources can also function as evidence to support the main claims. Is so,
identify types of evidence (textual evidence/Anecdotal
2
134 Peer Review Guidelines_Essay 2 (10 points)/Dr. Gao 2011
Evidence/Testimonial Evidence/Statistical Evidence/Analogical Evidence,
etc.) that come from the secondary sources.
10. Organization (1 point): What sequence has the author used to organize the
text as a whole: Inductive, deductive, progressive, climactic, chronological,
etc.? What structure has the author employed: the block method, the
alternating structure, juxtaposition, appositional or oppositional, parallel,
convergent or linked? What patterns of inquiry in DiYanni’s words are
present: description, narration, critical analysis, comparison and contrast,
interpretation, argumentation, etc.?
11. Compositional approach/Technical analysis (1 point): For visual analysis,
check: focal point, the figure/ground contrast, lighting, movement,
perspective, unity vs. variety, (symmetrical/asymmetrical) balance and
harmony, proportion and contrast, leading lines, internal frames, picture
within pictures, rule of thirds, depth of the field, etc. For verbal analysis,
check literary conventions: plot summary in simple present tense, character
analysis, setting of the story and the thematic connection, foreshadowing and
flashback, discrepancies between the event time and narrative time,
metaphor, simile, allusion, irony, tone, alliteration, rhyme, stanza, etc. Most
important, how is a technical detail related to some thematic significance?
Additional Comments:
3