3.  In your comments and feedback to your peer, focus on the following questions to guide your review:

General Questions: 

  • Are there statements and/or sections that are confusing to understand?
    • If so, use the highlight feature in Word to annotate any passages that were confusing or difficult to understand.
  • Are there any sentences or paragraphs that seem out of order, incompletely explained, or otherwise need revision for clarity?
  • Is the overall flow/organization of the paper clear and logical?
    • If not, how could the paper be reorganized to improve flow/organization?
  • Be sure to avoid too much “copy editing” (i.e., grammar and spell check).

Focused Questions by Section: 

  • Does the introduction provide background for the topic of the review using appropriate references?
    • If not, explain what additional information should be added/what should be removed.
  • Can you easily locate the author’s purpose statement at the end of the introduction?
    • If so, does the purpose statement connect the introduction to the literature synthesis?
  • Is the topic of the paper easily comprehensible to a non-expert reader?
    • If not, use the highlight feature in Word to annotate areas of the paper that are difficult to understand.
  • Does the author effectively synthesize the literature according to the assignment guidelines?
  • Does the author provide multiple, clear suggestions for improving the body of literature in the discussion/evaluation section with a focus on improving the methodology of the studies?
  • Does the author provide a conclusion that summarizes the review in a concise manner?

4. Once you have reviewed the paper, answer the following questions at the end of their paper draft: 

  1. What part(s) of the paper are the most effective? Why? Provide examples from the paper to support your evaluation.
  2. What part(s) of the paper are the least effective? Why? Provide examples from the paper to support your evaluation.
  3. How could the paper be stronger/more convincing to the reader? Provide examples from the paper to support your evaluation.

5. Submit your edited peer review to your classmates’ original post. To do this: 


PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING STORY AND FIND THE FOLLOWINGS: 1. RHEOTORICAL SITUATION 2. AUDIENCE, PURPOSE, TONE, GENRE, MEDIUM. 3. FINDING ADVERBS . MODIFY . EMPHASIZE . AMPLIFY . OR DOWN TONE THE VERB SENTENCES: CAN YOU FIND A SENTENCE THAT HAS A GOOD OPENING PHRASE OR WORDS? OR A SENTENCE THAT HAS A LOGICAL TRANSITION WORD CONECTING ONE IDEA, TO ANOTHER. How to present your review to your peer? One page entitle: my review FIRST PARAGRAPH . (PEERS NAME) I think your rhetorical situation was audience, tone, purpose, genre and medium. . I was able to find adverbs empowering your sentences. . I also found good transitional phrases. Second Paragraph . (YOUR PERSONAL MESSAGE TO THE PEER) Example: I love some of your writing effects. HOW TO PRESENTED TO THE INSTRUCTOR? . Cover Page: Running head: PEER REVIEW . (Use template) . Second page: Just attached a copy of the one you gave to your peer. . Following pages: Attached the pages your peer gave you for review.