Ms. Cote
English 11CP
Peer-Evaluation
What is a peer-evaluation?
An evaluation in which you will use specific criteria to assess the work of your peers.
Teacher Notes:
Students will be informed that the above information is the description of a peerevaluation. The “specific criteria,” mentioned in the description, are the standards that students
will use to evaluate the work of other students. The standards, in this case, will be presented in
the form of a rubric (See Peer-Evaluation Rubric).
Below are the specific criteria, and questions, that you will be using to evaluate your peers’
essays:
Peer-Evaluation Rubric
CATEGORY
Introduction
4 - Exceeds Standards
The student uses a hook that
grabs the attention of others
and piques their interest in the
controversial issue. The
student introduces the issue
and, in a very clear and
understandable way, states
his/her position on the issue.
The student briefly summarizes
3 or more pieces of supporting
evidence.
Body
The student uses 3, or more,
pieces of supporting evidence
to justify his/her position on
the controversial issue. Each
piece of evidence is briefly
introduced, and how it justifies
the student's position, is
explained in great detail. The
evidence is arranged by order
of importance (least important
to most important).
Transitions
The student uses well-worded
phrases to shift seamlessly
between his/her explanations
of the supporting evidence for
his/her position on the
controversial issue.
3 - Meets Standards
The student uses a hook that
grabs the attention of others
but fails to pique their interest
in the controversial issue. The
student introduces the issue
and states his/her position on
the issue. However, his/her
position on the issue is vague
or difficult to understand. The
student briefly summarizes
only 3 pieces of supporting
evidence.
The student uses only 3 pieces
of supporting evidence to
justify his/her position on the
controversial issue. Each
piece of evidence is briefly
introduced, and how it
justifies the student's position,
is explained. The evidence is
arranged by order of
importance (least important to
most important), but the
arrangement may not be
appropriate.
The student uses brief phrases
to shift between his/her
explanations of the supporting
evidence for his/her position
on the controversial issue.
2 - Approaching Standards
The student uses a hook that fails
to grab the attention of others.
The student introduces the
controversial issue but does not
state his/her position on the issue.
The student briefly summarizes
less than 3 pieces of supporting
evidence.
1 - Below Standards
The student does not use
a hook. The student
does not introduce the
controversial issue or
state any kind of
position on the issue.
The student does not
summarize his/her
supporting evidence.
The student uses less than 3
pieces of supporting evidence to
justify his/her position on the
controversial issue. Each piece of
evidence is briefly introduced, but
how it justifies the student's
position is not fully explained.
The evidence is not arranged in
any particular order.
The student does not use
any supporting evidence
to justify his/her
position on the
controversial issue.
The student uses brief phrases to
shift between his/her explanations
of the supporting evidence for
his/her position on the
controversial issue. However, the
phrases do not appear to create
any real connections between the
pieces of evidence.
The student does not use
any phrases to shift
between his/her
explanations of the
supporting evidence for
his/her position on the
controversial issue.
Score
Conclusion
The student restates his/her
position on the controversial
issue and briefly summarizes
the supporting evidence. The
author closes with a final
thought that encourages others
to further consider the student's
position.
The student restates his/her
position on the controversial
issue and briefly summarizes
the supporting evidence.
The student repeats, word for
word, the position on the
controversial issue that he/she has
in the introduction.
The student's argument
does not have a
conclusion; it just ends.
Teacher Notes:
Students will use the Peer-Evaluation Rubric above to evaluate peers’ essays, which will
be read aloud. As a presenter reads his/her essay, students will take note of how the presenter
has addressed the evaluation criteria in the essay. After the presenter is done reading the essay,
the students will use numbers in the “Score” column of the rubric to indicate whether or not the
presenter’s essay exceeded (4), met (3), approached (2) or was below (1) the standards
described in the criteria categories of the rubric.
Peer-Evaluation Questions:
1. Was the essay clearly organized? Why or why not?
Teacher Notes:
Students will use the evaluation criteria on the rubric to help them answer this question.
The essay was clearly organized if it had an introduction that laid the foundation for the
presenter’s argument; several body paragraphs that flowed and contained supporting
evidence that built on the presenter’s argument; and a conclusion that neatly wrapped up the
presenter’s argument.
2. Was the essay well-developed? Why or why not?
Teacher Notes:
Students will use the evaluation criteria on the rubric to help them answer this question.
The essay was well-developed if the introduction grabbed the students’ attention while firmly
establishing the presenter’s argument; the body paragraphs described the supporting
evidence, in-depth, and how it justified the presenter’s argument; and the conclusion
summarizes the argument and encourages the students to further consider the presenter’s
argument.
3. Was the overall argument, presented in the essay, valid and effective? Why or why not?
Teacher Notes:
Students can use their responses to 1. and 2. to help them answer this question. The
essay presented a valid argument if it thoroughly justified its thesis statement (position)
through the development of its supporting evidence. The essay presented an effective
argument if its supporting evidence was organized in a way that dramatically, and
convincingly, led up to the conclusion of the argument.
4. How might you improve upon the argument presented in this essay?
Teacher Notes:
Students will describe what they would change about the essay’s organization and
development in order to make the argument, presented in the essay, more valid and effective.
What are the rules for conducting a peer-evaluation?
Responses to evaluation questions should be:
 Longer than a sentence
Teacher Notes:
Students’ should use specific criteria from the Peer-Evaluation Rubric to explain
their answers to the Peer-Evaluation Questions. Each answer should be at least three or
four sentences long.

Worded in a positive way
Teacher Notes:
Students should answer the questions with phrases such as “This part of the essay
would have worked better if…” or “The essay should have included…” as opposed to
phrases such as “This essay sucked” or “This essay was really bad.” In this way,
students generate comments that sound genuinely constructive.

Not be affected by personal biases
Teacher Notes:
Students should not base their evaluations of their peers’ essays on whether or
not they like their peers or on whether or not they share their peers’ positions on a
particular topic. The purpose of a peer-evaluation is to objectively assess another
student’s work; not to cut that student down for who they are or what they believe.
Direct questioning will be utilized to determine whether or not students
comprehend the peer-evaluation process. Below is a list of questions to be asked at the
conclusion of the lecture:
How can you ensure that your essay is clearly organized?
How can you ensure that your essay is well-developed?
What could you do to increase your argument’s validity?
What could you do to increase your argument’s effectiveness?
Assignment:
Part 1 (In-class)- You will conduct an evaluation session, over a student sample essay, with the
other members of your group (who were assigned the same school-oriented, controversial issue
as you). Before your group begins evaluating the student sample essay, make a new page on
your wiki entitled “Peer-Evaluation Practice” and list the page on the navigation bar of your
wiki. During the small-group, evaluation session, record at least three other students’ comments,
about the student-sample essay, that you particularly agreed with or disagreed with on your
“Peer-Evaluation Practice” page. You should also explain why you agreed or didn’t agree with
the comments that you chose to record. In addition, use the criteria provided in the Peer-
Evaluation Rubric to make comments about the student-sample essay during the evaluation
session, so that other students have the opportunity to consider your opinion on the validity and
effectiveness of the essay.
Part 2 (Due In-class)- After you have conducted the small-group, evaluation session, over the
student sample essay, go to the home page of the class wiki. Upload a Microsoft Word file
entitled “Peer Evaluation” from the home page. The “Peer-Evaluation” file will contain the
same Peer-Evaluation Rubric and Peer-Evaluation Questions that appear on this hand-out. Open
the “Peer-Evaluation” file in Microsoft Word and fill-out the Peer-Evaluation Rubric and PeerEvaluation Questions for the student sample essay. When you have finished filling out your
peer-evaluation for the student sample essay, click “File” at the top of the screen and select
“Save As.” Rename the file “Peer-Evaluation Practice.” Once the “Peer-Evaluation Practice”
file has been saved, upload the file onto your “Peer-Evaluation Practice” page, and insert it
beneath the comments that you recorded from the small-group, evaluation session. I will provide
you with feedback, regarding your peer-evaluation practice, so that you can hone your peerevaluation skills for use in the upcoming student presentations. The feedback will be based on
the following criteria, which will also be used to evaluate the peer-evaluations for the student
presentations:
Peer-Evaluation Check-list:
______ Each criteria category on the rubric has been scored.
______ Responses to questions reflect the rubric standards.
______ Responses to questions are thoroughly explained.
______ Responses to questions are constructive.
______ Responses to questions are non-biased.
______ Correct spelling and grammar.
Part 3 (Due Jan 23)- On your “Drafts” page, use your newly acquired knowledge of the peerevaluation process to help you revise the second draft of your essay into a final draft. When you
make a revision to the second draft of your essay, based on your peer-evaluation knowledge, post
a comment about what you revised and why in the section labeled “Optional: a note about this
edit for the page history log.” The comments that you make, on your revisions, will appear on
the history section of your “Drafts” page.
Teacher Notes:
Students will be instructed to complete the above assignment. In Part 3, students should
try to include terms, from the criteria on the Peer-Evaluation Rubric, in the comments regarding
the further revisions that make to the second drafts of their essays. These revisions should be
completely separate from the revisions that students make based on feedback from their peers
and me.