/Peer_Content_Analysis_RD

Writer:_____________________________________ Peer Reviewer:_____________________________________

Peer Content Analysis for Sophomore Research Paper Rough Draft

I. Introduction (only if available)

A. On a scale of 1-­‐10, how interesting is the introduction?

B. Does anything in the introduction need to be cited? If so, indicate what.

C. Is there a good transition to the thesis statement?

II. Thesis statement A. Read the thesis statement. List the main points here as indicated:  Research topic:

 How it affects humanity, literature, and / or the arts:

B. Check off for approval or X for disapproval the following here and explain why you X’d the criteria when you do.

1.

Active verb(s): 2.

Strong verb(s): 3.

Appropriate tense(s): 4.

Specific: 5.

Arguable: 6.

Appropriate scope (not too broad or too narrow for 3-­‐4 pages):

7.

Significant: 8.

Clear: 9.

Maps out the paper (both focus-­‐wise and sequentially):

III. Body A. Write a one-­‐sentence or –phrase summary for each paragraph. Put a check next to each paragraph that goes back to the thesis statement in some way, and an X for each that does not. Put a star next to the paragraphs that need work, either for their focus or lack thereof, or for any other reason.

1

B. Underline each topic sentence. Does each topic sentence tie back to the thesis? Put a "Th" next to each that goes back to the thesis in some way and a "no Th" for each that does not.

C. Does the existing paragraphing make sense? Mark places where new paragraphs should begin and circle ending sentences that really belong in the next paragraph.

D. Highlight each parenthetical reference in the paper. Check the format.

Correct any problems in the draft.

E. Check to see that all information that is not the author’s idea but is put in the writer’s own words has parenthetical referencing. If you believe a sentence needs documentation but doesn’t have it, put a * in the right hand margin next to the sentence(s).

F. Check to see if you think the writer has plagiarized any information. Type it into Google Search and see if it comes up! If you think anything needs to be reworded or reworded further, or if it needs quotation marks, put a squiggly line under the phrase or sentence.

G. Make comments regarding the development of the paper (whether or not the paper needs more information [MORE] in a particular paragraph, or whether there are any unnecessary paragraphs [UNNEC.], “rambling,” [RAMB.] or anything that does not pertain [?]).

H. Is each quotation or paraphrase introduced and explained? Mark an I next to the introduction of the quote and an E next to its explanations. Write “needs I” or “needs E” if the author lacks either or both.

I. Is each quotation a dropped quote (DQ), partially integrated quote (PIQ), or fully integrated quote (FIQ)? Label each with those abbreviations.

J. Is there an interesting story included? If so, summarize it here:

K. Are there good transitions between items? Put an arrow over places where they are needed.

IV.

Conclusion (only if available) A. Is a summarizing statement included that is NOT a mirror image, wastebasket ending, unnecessary summary, etc.? Y/N B. Does the author tie up loose ends? Y/N C. Does the author state the importance / future implications of the paper?

Y/N D. Write next to the conclusion one of the following words: application, prediction, conclusion drawn from paper, other (be specific), or none.

2