Peer Review

CAMPBELL’S EN140

PEER REVIEW OF ROUGH DRAFT OF ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

PEER REVIEW GUIDELINES

THIS PEER REVIEW IS WORTH 30 POINTS TOTAL, 10 POINTS FOR UPLOADING YOUR ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ROUGH DRAFT AND 20 FOR WRITING A PEER REVIEW OF ANOTHER STUDENT’S A.B. ROUGH DRAFT

How to do the peer review:

This is your opportunity to help a fellow student review and revise as necessary his or her annotated bibliography before it is submitted for final grading. As you look at the A.B. keep the following questions and guidelines in mind:

1. Is the number correct? (Are there at least 30 citation-annotation pairs?)

2. Are the items grouped by type of source (journals, magazines, etc.?

3. Is each citation-annotation pair numbered, 1-30?

4. Is each and every citation in correct MLA format? There is no room for laxness on this point; absolute correctness is necessary.

5. Is the format of the citations and annotations correct? (I suggest you take a look again at the examples I made available.)

6. Is each annotation approximately 5 lines (not sentences) in length? (This isn’t a case where 5 is good but 25 is better. Keep it brief.) Does it give a good, if brief, overview of the main idea(s) of the source? Finally does the annotation give an indication of the source’s usefulness (or lack thereof)? It’s a good idea to put this type of information as the last line of the annotation because it’s helpful to the writer when it’s time to put together the research paper. Think of this last sentence as a “note to self.”

It is your task as a peer reviewer to check all of the points above, and any other areas of concern you discover, and give the writer of the A.B. helpful feedback by pointing out the problem areas; it’s also “nice” to point out some positives. Respond point by point, 1 – 6, in your peer review to be substantive in your comments to gain a substantive score for the project. Use MS Word’s track changes functionality to mark specific items that need attention.