student reviews

ENG 2001 Evaluation Criteria for Short Argument Paper

Use these criteria as you critique your own paper and the papers of your peers. When critiquing the papers of your peers, if you determine that some aspect of the paper could receive less than a 4, be sure to comment on the reasons for this and o�er suggestions. In the same way, make sure you o�er positive suggestions for change relative to what you �nd through the Editing Checklist. Improvement comes when we know why something does not meet a standard and how we can change it.

1. Paper provides a clear position statement in an introduction that arouses reader's interest

2. Paper provides a clear focus throughout

3. Reasons for position clearly stated and backed by relevant evidence in the form of examples, quotes, etc.

4. Paper is written from an appropriate perspective

5. Ideas in paper are ordered logically with appropriate connections within and between paragraphs

6. Paper has an ending that adequately concludes the piece

7. The paper is fr ee or virtually free of grammatical, 4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

mechanical, and spelling errors (Use of the editing checklist should clarify this.)

In addition to using the Peer Critique Evaluation Checklist, you will also be asked to use the Peer Editing Checklist. You need to take the time to become familiar with both of these checklists each week. Although the Peer Editing Checklist will remain the same throughout the course, the Critiquing Checklist will change with the di�erent assignments. These checklists are of value to you when you go over your peers' papers and when you are r eadying your own papers for having them critiqued and/or for submission.

Page 1 of 1 Composition III

© 2010 South University