Peer Review

value

30 Points

30 Points

20 Points

20 Points

Thesis

with generalizations and evidence

Organization

Writing Style

Conventions

(grammar, punctuation)

STRONG

· Thesis: clear, cogent, forceful, interesting

· Generalizations: lucid, clearly stated, precise

· Evidence: precise, accurate details, supports thesis, appropriate amount, linked directly to thesis and generalizations, interesting, clear

· Organizational statement: clear, logical

· Overall- structure: builds a compelling argument, flows smoothly, elegant

· Intro with “hook”: creative, interesting, relevant, draws the reader in

· Paragraphs: flow from generalizations to supporting detail, foreshadowing/transitions from one paragraph to the next, variety of length

· Conclusion: relevant to thesis, assesses meaning of argument presented

· Voice: Active (not passive), confident

· Word Choice: vivid images, strong verbs, precise-not wordy, avoids needless adjectives

· Sentence Fluency: easy to read, strong cadence flow

· Quotations: pithy, enrich narrative, speak directly to the point.

· Grammar: few or no comma splices, sentence fragments, run-ons, verb tense disagreements, subject/verb errors

· Punctuation: proper use of periods, commas, semi colon, colon, apostrophes

· Conventions: proper spelling, capitalization, word usage (to or too, etc.)

· Citations: formatted correctly

· Mechanics: margins, font spacing, indentations, and layout acceptable and conventional with format

· Overall: Very minor errors, clean copy.

ADEQUATE

· Thesis: general, predictable

· Generalizations: wordy, not precise or clear

· Evidence: connection to thesis and generalizations not clear, not precise, skimpy support

· Organizational statement: unclear, inconsistent with paper

· Overall- structure: average, reader must work to follow the flow, larger argument obscure

· Intro with “hook”, bland

· Paragraphs: connection between generalization and details not clear

· Conclusion: little connection to thesis, little assessment of meaning

· Voice: some passive, safe

· Word Choice: general, too broad, bland, wordy

· Sentence Fluency: minimal variation, predictable

· Quotations: few or too many, not relevant

· Grammar:

· Punctuation

· Conventions:

· Citations:

· Mechanics:

The above categories’ errors do not obscure meaning or flow of paper, basic things done well, evidence of editing and proof reading.

WEAK

· Thesis: fuzzy, non-existent

· Generalizations: fuzzy, non-existent, inaccurate

· Evidence: little or none, no real connection to thesis

· Organizational statement: missing, muddled

· Overall- structure: muddled, scattered, incoherent to the larger paper

· Intro with “hook”: none

· Paragraphs: little or no relation between generalization and details

· Conclusion: none, or ending is abrupt, unfinished

· Voice: dull, passive

· Word Choice: wordy, words used incorrectly, repeated words

· Sentence Fluency: hard to read out loud, choppy/awkward, incomplete

· Quotations: few or none, no relevance, dull

· Grammar:

· Punctuation

· Conventions:

· Citations:

· Mechanics:

The above categories’ mistakes impair flow and clarity of paper, sketchy or little editing, basic things done poorly.

SCORE

_______ /30

_______ /30

_______ /20

_______ /20