Give Feedback

1

PEER EDITING CHECKLIST: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY This rubric-based checklist is designed to ensure you have provided a thorough evaluation of your peer’s Annotated Bibliography draft. TEACH A MAN TO FISH . . . Keep in mind that we are all our own editors. You are tasked with identifying errors, issues, and areas for improvement—not correcting or copyediting your peer’s paper. Your main objective, however, is to provide the type of feedback that you would like to receive—be kind, be constructive, and make suggestions for improvement if you think something needs work. However, do not spend hours copyediting someone’s paper or fixing his or her formatting. Simply point out the issues and direct him or her to appropriate resources where he or she can learn how to correct the problem. INVENTION o Does this draft respond to the prompt appropriately? Is the topic international in scope?

o In other words, is the student following the directions in the prompt, or perhaps going off-topic or even making up a new one?

o Does this draft meet the minimum requirements listed below (and in the guidelines for Draft 3 and Peer Review 3), thereby demonstrating an effort to engage in the writing process?

o A comprehensive rough draft will include at least three (3) research questions, a minimum of eight (8) sources from Randall Library, and—at least—the "summary" portion of the annotation for each source

o A comprehensive rough draft will demonstrate an effort to format the document in MLA style and format citations according to MLA guidelines

o A comprehensive rough draft will be relatively—if not completely—free of grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling errors

o Research questions should be open-ended, interpretive, free of bias, complex, and debatable— not factual, superficial, opinionated, or leading. Is this the case?

o An example of a viable research question: “How has Ebola—more specifically, the recent Ebola crisis—effected nurses around the world?”

o An example of a research question that needs to be replaced with an actual research question: “What is Ebola?”

ARRANGEMENT o Are the sources listed in correct order according to MLA guidelines for formatting the list of

Works Cited (alphabetical order)? o See the Annotated Bibliography Template

o Are the annotations clearly on the “summarize, assess, reflect” track? o Only the summary portion of annotations is due for the draft; some students may

already have taken a swing at the trifecta (summarizing, assessing, and reflecting in a 100- to 200-word annotation for each source)

o See the Writing Effective Annotations video tutorial STYLE o Is the style and tone of the draft appropriate for an academic audience?

o See the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers (7th ed.) and the Writing Effective Annotations video tutorial

o Do the annotations suggest that the student is aware of and applying the guidelines and tips for writing strong annotations from the Writing Effective Annotations video tutorial?

2

MEMORY o Are there at least eight (8) sources listed in the draft? o Are the sources all from Randall Library?

o You should be able to tell based on the citation for the source—see chapter 5, “Documentation: Formatting the List of Works Cited” Sources,” and chapter 6, “Documentation: Citing Sources in the Text” in the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers (7th ed.)

o If you’re not sure, then go ahead and search Randall Library for the source using the publication information included in the citation

o Are there any outside sources (or, sources not from Randall Library, such as a website) included in the list?

o If so, then be sure to remind your peer about this course’s “Research” policy (direct them toward the Syllabus)

o Do the sources included relevantly respond to the research questions? Do the sources included suggest that the student has spent ample time wading through a variety of sources and carefully selected texts with an eye for how they will be worked into his or her research-based argument (Essay 4)? Or does it seem like the student may have created a list of the first eight sources they found?

DELIVERY o Is the document clearly formatted based on the model provided in the Annotated Bibliography

Template? o Is the student’s last name and the page number listed in the top right corner of every

page of the document? o Is there a four-line header on the first page of the document, and does it include the

correct information? o Is there a title? How can it be improved? o Are there at least three research questions listed after the title? o Is the student using either Times New Roman or Cambria font, size 12 point?

§ It is just like Highlander: there can be only one font (Times New Roman or Cambria—pick one and stick with it) and it should be size 12

o Is the entire document double-spaced, with the “extra spaces between paragraphs of the same style” removed?

o After the research questions, the list of sources (with annotations) should begin; is the list formatted with a “hanging indent” so that the top line of each entry “hangs” over the rest of the lines, which are indented to the right?

§ Contact the UNCW Technology Assistance center for technology support— including help with word processing software! They can walk you through all of the strange formatting commands mentioned above!

o Are source citations formatted correctly according to MLA guidelines? o See chapter 5, “Documentation: Formatting the List of Works Cited,” and chapter 6,

“Documentation: Citing Sources in the Text” in the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers (7th ed.)

o Are there grammar, spelling, or mechanics errors? o See chapter 3, “The Mechanics of Writing,” in the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research

Papers (7th ed.) for grammar and mechanics rules and conventions specific to MLA style