125 English Winter 2002 Name of student writers:_________________________________________ Name of student reviewer:_______________________________________ Assignment: Because a good thesis statement and good textual analysis are crucial elements of a good paper, this workshop will be focused on strengthening these skills. This workshop will be similar to the last in that you will be asked to review the thesis statement and analysis of your peer group papers. Again you will be looking for a thesis statement that is debatable, persuasive, and dynamic, and again you will want to make sure the student writer has provided solid analysis of evidence that works to support the thesis statement. Make sure every paragraph responds to the argument. As you read through each student paper in your workshop group, please do the following for each paper: 1. On the paper itself, underline the thesis statement and number all the places where the student writer has cited textual evidence.
2. On the reverse side of this sheet, critique the thesis statement: Is the thesis statement clear
and compelling? Is it debatable? Does the writer simply state the obvious, or offer an original point of view? Give one suggestion on how the thesis statement could be improved. 3. Consider the ways each paragraph relates to the thesis statement. Does each paragraph work to prove the thesis? How could the writer connect unrelated paragraphs to the main argument? Place two stars next to paragraphs that dont clearly address the thesis statement. In at least two places, suggest ways the writer could make the connections between the analysis and the thesis statement more clear. 4. Evaluate the evidence cited in the paper. What kinds of evidence does the writer provide? Does the evidence back up the assertions made by the writer? Are there any places where the writer makes a claim that is not clearly related to the evidence presented or the argument being made? Place an asterisk (*) next to each place where the writer could improve the analysis. 5. While reading the paper, underline all sentences that are unclear, and place a star next to the sentence. Offer a re-phrasing of at least two unclear sentences. Please review the student papers and bring both the peer critiques and the papers back to class on Wednesday. The final draft of the paper will be due on Monday, March 4. Good luck!
English 125 Winter 2002 Name of student writers:_________________________________________ Name of student reviewer:_______________________________________ Assignment: This workshop will be similar to the last in that you will be asked to review the thesis statement and analysis of your peer group Again papers. you will be looking for a thesis statement that is debatable, persuasive, and dynamic, and again you will want to make sure the student writer has provided solid analysis of evidence that supports the thesis statement. In addition, I want you to think about the organization of the essay as a whole. The argument should progress logically, using clear transitions that guide the reader from one idea to the next. Make sure ideas are connected to the thesis statement, as well as to one another. For this workshop, please give your responses to the following: 6. On the paper itself, underline the thesis statement, number all the places where the student writer has cited evidence, and underline the topic sentence in each paragraph. (If the writer does not provide a sentence encapsulating the main idea of the paragraph, note this on the writers paper.) 7. On a separate sheet of paper, critique the thesis statement: Is the thesis statement clear and compelling? Is it debatable? How could it be improved? 8. Look at the transitions between each paragraph. Are there any places where the movement from one idea to the next seems random or confusing? How might the student writer guide the reader from one idea to the next more effectively? Suggest two places where the student writer could make transitions from one idea to the next more clear. 9. Consider the analysis. Does the evidence adequately support the argument? Are there gaps in logic, where the analysis does not respond to the argument? Are there any places where the writer might provide more thorough analysis? Suggest two pl...