SAMPLE 1
The following tasks are designed to aid your discussion. Please feel free to raise other issues that you feel are important.
1. Each writer in turn should read his/her paper aloud to the group as group members follow on their copies. Then each member of the group should write one sentence summarizing what s/he feels is the focus, the main idea. Then compare your sentences. If you pretty much agree, the paper has a focus. If not, discuss with the writer what you see as the problem. If s/he doesn't have a focus, help her/him find one that s/he feels comfortable working with. Once you find it, the recorder should summarize the focus below.
2. Read through the writer's paper again only this time underline all the factual information the writer gives to support his/her focus. The recorder should list this information below. Discuss whether you feel this information is presented with sufficient detail. Remember, good writing must be convincing; the writer's opinions are not enough. They should be supported with facts and examples.
3. Is additional information needed to make the paper clearer and more complete? Help the writer get the facts and help her/him find the questions that still need to be asked. List at least five suggestions and questions.
4. Is there anything in the paper that you feel doesn't belong, that has nothing to do with the focus? List these below.
5. What do you find to be the paper's greatest strengths?
6. What do you find to be the paper's greatest weaknesses?
7. For the next class meeting, the writer should bring in a new draft of this paper.
SAMPLE 2
The following tasks are designed to help you decide on the best way to organize your papers. Complete all of the tasks for one group member's paper at a time. Procedure: Each person in turn reads his/her paper aloud to the group as the other group members follow. Then answer each of the following questions individually. After you answer the questions, discuss answers and reach a consensus for each question. The recorder should record your decisions in the spaces below.
1. What is the main focus of this paper? Summarize it in one sentence.
2. What are the sub-ideas which develop the focus of this paper?
3. What information (facts, examples) does the writer give to support each sub-idea?
4. How does the writer arrange the information? Cite specific example from the paper.
5. Is the arrangement effective? Explain why it is or isn't.
6. How would you suggest the writer arrange the details for maximum effect? If you agree with the writer's arrangement, explain why and cite specific examples. If you are suggesting an alternate way, support your choice by citing specific examples.
7. Are there any sub-ideas or details which you think do not belong in the essay? If yes, list them below
and explain why you think they are off-topic. Based on the group's responses to the above questions, the writer should decide whether her/his paper needs to be reorganized. If it does, rewrite the paper for the next class meeting.
SAMPLE 3
The following tasks are designed to aid your discussion. Please feel free to raise other issues.
1. Each writer in turn should read each of his/her versions to the group as the group follows on their copies. Then each member of the group should write one sentence summarizing what s/he feels is the focus of each version. Decide which version's focus is clearer and sufficiently specific. Summarize your discussion below.
2. What version do you like best? Support your choice by citing specific examples from each version. If you do not find that you prefer one version, then select parts of each version you like best. Support your choices by citing examples.
3. Which paragraph in each version is the strongest? Explain why, citing examples from the paragraph.
4. Which paragraph in each version do you find the weakest? Explain why, citing examples from the paragraphs.
5. Which version or which combination of versions do you think should become the final draft? Support your opinion with specific examples.
6. The writer should bring in a final, typed draft of this paper.
SAMPLE 4
The following tasks are designed to aid your discussion. Please feel free to raise other issues you feel are important.
1. Each writer in turn should read his/her final draft aloud to the group as the group follows on their copies. As you read, listen and look carefully for anything that does not seem right and place a pencil mark in the margin of that line.
2. Examine each paragraph in the essay to see if it is clearly written. Go through one paragraph at a time answering the following questions for each individual paragraph:
a. Which sentence in this paragraph is the strongest? Explain why.
b. Which sentence in this paragraph is the weakest? Explain why.
c. Are all the ideas clearly expressed in whole sentences which are properly punctuated? If not, which ones aren't and what recommendations would you make to the writer about those sentences?
d. Does the writer vary the sentence structure or does s/he basically stick to one sentence pattern? Cite examples. If the writer basically uses one sentence pattern, help the writer join ideas
so that the sentence patterns vary.
e. Does one sentence logically lead to the next? If not, what do you think is the problem? Are transitional words or phrases needed? If so, which ones?
f. Are there any errors in grammar, usage, spelling, typing? Point these out to the writer.
g. Does the writer use a particular word or phrase too often? If so, which ones? Help the writer find other words or phrases which are synonymous.
3. Are there any other suggestions you would like to make about this paragraph? If not, move on to the next paragraph and answer questions a-g.
4. Are there any suggestions you would like to make about the entire paper? Have all your markings in the margin been discussed? If not, do so now.
Pianko, Sharon, and Abraham Radzik. "The Student Editing Method ." Theory into Practice . 19.3 (1980): 221-223.
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Revision Workshop Checklist
Checklist 1: Cause and Effect
1. Does the introduction clearly state the purpose of the essay and help the reader focus on the topic?
-Unclear, confusing intro -Clear, well focused intro
1 2 3 4
2. In this essay, it is helpful to use words that suggest the cause-and-effect connection (so, therefore, because, as a result, led to, brought about, caused). Circle all such words in the essay that suggest cause/ effect relationships.
3. Is there a smooth transition between paragraphs? Place a star between paragraphs that have a smooth, clear transition. Place a question mark between paragraphs that have poor, confusing transitions.
4. Bracket any sentences that are hard to read or comprehend.
5. Indicate any mechanical errors. Place the following symbols above the error: SP=spelling, P = punctuation, and GR = grammar.
6. By the end of the paper, do you think the cause/ effect relationship has been logically developed and clearly explained?
-Relationship is clouded, -Relationship is logical
the logic unclear and clearly explained
1 2 3 4
7. In the margin, note any logical flaws you find throughout the essay. (e.g., the post hoc fallacy)
8. List any additional or secondary causes (or effects) that you think should have been included but weren't.
Checklist 2: Comparison and Contrast
1. Does the introduction clearly indicate subjects to be compared and contrasted?
-Subjects being compared -Subjects being compared
/contrasted are unclear /contrasted are clear
1 2 3 4
2. Bracket the thesis statement.
3. Is the basis of the comparison clear?
-Common elements between the -Common elements between the
subjects are not clearly identified subjects are clearly identified
1 2 3 4
4. The paper should avoid trivial or obvious comparisons. Does the comparison/contrast lead the reader beyond the obvious?
-Comparison deals with -Comparison deals with
trivial or obvious elements substantive elements
1 2 3 4
5. Circle any transitional words or phrases that highlight similarities and differences. Note such words
or phrases as: on the one hand, on the other hand, on the contrary, despite, unlike, both, and similarly.
6. Well written topic sentences act as guideposts, alerting readers to comparisons and contrasts. They reinforce the main idea of the paragraph. Underline the topic sentence in each paragraph, and in the margin rate the effectiveness of each topic sentence as follows:
G: good--lopic sentence clearly states main idea of the paragraph.
F: fair-Topic sentence is clearly identified but it does not accurately reflect the main idea of the paragraph.
P: poor-It is difficult to determine which sentence in the paragraph is the topic sentence.
7. Briefly outline the comparison; identify the subjects and list the points of comparison. (iTo begin, is the paper organized as a "subject by subject" or "point by point" comparison?)
8. Based on the brief outline above, would you say that the treatment of the elements is balanced?
-Points treated for one subject -For each point treated in one subject,
are not given equal consideration the same point is treated equally
in the other subject in the other subject
1 2 3 4
Checklist 3: Argumentation
1. Does the introduction clearly establish the position to be defended in the paper?
-Unclear, confusing position Position is clear and well focused
1 2 3 4
2. Put parentheses around the thesis statement.
3. Underline the topic sentence in each paragraph.
4. To be convincing, an argumentation essay must provide sufficient evidence to support the writer's position. Underline with ajagged line those pieces of convincing evidence.
5. Is there a smooth transition between paragraphs? Place a star between paragraphs that have a smooth, clear transition. Place a question mark between paragraphs that have poor, confusing transitions.
6. Bracket any parts of the essay that are inappropriate to the audience. For example, are there any unnecessarily long plot summaries.
7. How well structured is the argument?
-Wandering, illogical, unfocused. - Direct, logical, focused.
1 2 3 4
8. Does the paper end with a clearly stated and justified conclusion?
-Conclusion is not justified -Conclusion is logical, justified
or unstated. clearly stated.
1 2 3 4
Grahner, Michael H. "Revision Workshops: An alternative to Peer Editing." English Journal . 76.3 (1987): 43-44
1. Does the introduction clearly state the purpose of the essay and help the reader focus on the topic?
-Unclear, confusing intro -Clear, well focused intro
1 2 3 4
2. In this essay, it is helpful to use words that suggest the cause-and-effect connection (so, therefore, because, as a result, led to, brought about, caused). Circle all such words in the essay that suggest cause/ effect relationships.
3. Is there a smooth transition between paragraphs? Place a star between paragraphs that have a smooth, clear transition. Place a question mark between paragraphs that have poor, confusing transitions.
4. Bracket any sentences that are hard to read or comprehend.
5. Indicate any mechanical errors. Place the following symbols above the error: SP=spelling, P = punctuation, and GR = grammar.
6. By the end of the paper, do you think the cause/ effect relationship has been logically developed and clearly explained?
-Relationship is clouded, -Relationship is logical
the logic unclear and clearly explained
1 2 3 4
7. In the margin, note any logical flaws you find throughout the essay. (e.g., the post hoc fallacy)
8. List any additional or secondary causes (or effects) that you think should have been included but weren't.
Checklist 2: Comparison and Contrast
1. Does the introduction clearly indicate subjects to be compared and contrasted?
-Subjects being compared -Subjects being compared
/contrasted are unclear /contrasted are clear
1 2 3 4
2. Bracket the thesis statement.
3. Is the basis of the comparison clear?
-Common elements between the -Common elements between the
subjects are not clearly identified subjects are clearly identified
1 2 3 4
4. The paper should avoid trivial or obvious comparisons. Does the comparison/contrast lead the reader beyond the obvious?
-Comparison deals with -Comparison deals with
trivial or obvious elements substantive elements
1 2 3 4
5. Circle any transitional words or phrases that highlight similarities and differences. Note such words
or phrases as: on the one hand, on the other hand, on the contrary, despite, unlike, both, and similarly.
6. Well written topic sentences act as guideposts, alerting readers to comparisons and contrasts. They reinforce the main idea of the paragraph. Underline the topic sentence in each paragraph, and in the margin rate the effectiveness of each topic sentence as follows:
G: good--lopic sentence clearly states main idea of the paragraph.
F: fair-Topic sentence is clearly identified but it does not accurately reflect the main idea of the paragraph.
P: poor-It is difficult to determine which sentence in the paragraph is the topic sentence.
7. Briefly outline the comparison; identify the subjects and list the points of comparison. (iTo begin, is the paper organized as a "subject by subject" or "point by point" comparison?)
8. Based on the brief outline above, would you say that the treatment of the elements is balanced?
-Points treated for one subject -For each point treated in one subject,
are not given equal consideration the same point is treated equally
in the other subject in the other subject
1 2 3 4
Checklist 3: Argumentation
1. Does the introduction clearly establish the position to be defended in the paper?
-Unclear, confusing position Position is clear and well focused
1 2 3 4
2. Put parentheses around the thesis statement.
3. Underline the topic sentence in each paragraph.
4. To be convincing, an argumentation essay must provide sufficient evidence to support the writer's position. Underline with ajagged line those pieces of convincing evidence.
5. Is there a smooth transition between paragraphs? Place a star between paragraphs that have a smooth, clear transition. Place a question mark between paragraphs that have poor, confusing transitions.
6. Bracket any parts of the essay that are inappropriate to the audience. For example, are there any unnecessarily long plot summaries.
7. How well structured is the argument?
-Wandering, illogical, unfocused. - Direct, logical, focused.
1 2 3 4
8. Does the paper end with a clearly stated and justified conclusion?
-Conclusion is not justified -Conclusion is logical, justified
or unstated. clearly stated.
1 2 3 4
Grahner, Michael H. "Revision Workshops: An alternative to Peer Editing." English Journal . 76.3 (1987): 43-44
Peer Editing Question Set
Editing Guide: Peer-Evaluation
Name______________
Date___________
Filled out for (author's) _______________'s paper.
Instructions for Author:
Begin by reading your title and explaining what stage your draft is in at this point. Tell what issue or problem you are working with. Are you still getting your thoughts together or are you further along in the process? Say what you like best about your work so far, and what you would like your readers to focus on at this point, for example, to reformulate, revise, or edit. Read your paper out loud in stages, starting with the introductory paragraph. Ask your listeners to answer these worksheet questions. Everyone can refer back to copies of your paper.
Instructions for Listener (Peer Evaluator):
Fill out this form, following along on your copy as the author reads the paper. Then give this form to the author.
1. Listen to the first paragraph. STOP. Find the author's thesis statement. Could it be worded more clearly? Is this introduction effective? If so, explain what makes it good. If not, suggest a possible improvement.
2. Now skip to the last paragraph. Listen to it and consider the conclusion. Does it drive home the main point (thesis)? YES or NO. (Circle one). What improvement can you recommend?
3. Now read along through the rest of the paper. Go back and underline the topic sentence in each paragraph. Identify by number any paragraphs without topic sentences.
4. Are there paragraphs that need more development or support? Which ones? What do you recommend?
5. Does the order of points seem logical? Look at transitions. Are all the details connected to the main idea? Are paragraphs explicitly connected to each other so that the flow of the argument is clear? Point out places that need improvement.
6. Does the author ever seem to be trying to impress you rather than communicate ideas? Where?
7. Mark any place on the rough draft where the sentences tend to be too short and jerky, or where they tend to be too long and complicated.
8. What do you see as the paper's strengths?
9. What does the author need to work on? What improvements do you recommend?
Strenski, Ellen. "Lightening the burden of assigned writing: Editing Guides for Self and Peer Evaluation ." History Teacher. 16.1 (1982): 15-16. Print.
Name______________
Date___________
Filled out for (author's) _______________'s paper.
Instructions for Author:
Begin by reading your title and explaining what stage your draft is in at this point. Tell what issue or problem you are working with. Are you still getting your thoughts together or are you further along in the process? Say what you like best about your work so far, and what you would like your readers to focus on at this point, for example, to reformulate, revise, or edit. Read your paper out loud in stages, starting with the introductory paragraph. Ask your listeners to answer these worksheet questions. Everyone can refer back to copies of your paper.
Instructions for Listener (Peer Evaluator):
Fill out this form, following along on your copy as the author reads the paper. Then give this form to the author.
1. Listen to the first paragraph. STOP. Find the author's thesis statement. Could it be worded more clearly? Is this introduction effective? If so, explain what makes it good. If not, suggest a possible improvement.
2. Now skip to the last paragraph. Listen to it and consider the conclusion. Does it drive home the main point (thesis)? YES or NO. (Circle one). What improvement can you recommend?
3. Now read along through the rest of the paper. Go back and underline the topic sentence in each paragraph. Identify by number any paragraphs without topic sentences.
4. Are there paragraphs that need more development or support? Which ones? What do you recommend?
5. Does the order of points seem logical? Look at transitions. Are all the details connected to the main idea? Are paragraphs explicitly connected to each other so that the flow of the argument is clear? Point out places that need improvement.
6. Does the author ever seem to be trying to impress you rather than communicate ideas? Where?
7. Mark any place on the rough draft where the sentences tend to be too short and jerky, or where they tend to be too long and complicated.
8. What do you see as the paper's strengths?
9. What does the author need to work on? What improvements do you recommend?
Strenski, Ellen. "Lightening the burden of assigned writing: Editing Guides for Self and Peer Evaluation ." History Teacher. 16.1 (1982): 15-16. Print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)