Rhetorical Analysis Peer Letter Guidelines

Peer Response Letters

The first step of our Peer Workshop is writing a letter to the author.  This will involve reading the paper twice, marking on their text, and then writing your peer a letter.

First, read the paper through once without commenting or marking the page.  It is important to read through once so you get an overall feel and impression.  Then reread the draft and begin making comments on the text as you read.  Jot down questions and/or ideas that you want to raise.  As you respond make sure that you do so in an honest and respectful manner, and try to thoroughly answer the writer’s specific questions.

On their actual text mark the following:

1. Mark on their text which paragraphs are the most clear and developed and which ones need more development.  Let the author know what might be helpful information to include in a weaker paragraph.
2. Choose three sentences you consider to be the most interesting or best written – stylistically effective, entertaining, otherwise memorable.  Then choose three sentences you see as weak – confusing, awkward, uninspiring.
3. Circle words that are particularly effective.  Underline words that are weak, vague or unclear.  Indicate if any words need to be defined or replaced, or that could be potentially offensive.

Once you have read the text twice, and marked the text, begin your letter.  In your letter to your peer make sure you address the following questions:

1. The Assignment: Does this draft carry out the assignment?  How might the writer better fulfill the assignment?  Does it mention the specific article, talk about the rhetorical appeals and discuss intended audience and exigence, etc?
2. Recall the most memorable points.  (“This is what struck me as I read…”)
3. Title and Introduction: Does the title tell the reader what the draft is about?  Does it catch your interest?  What does the opening accomplish in terms of hooking the reader’s interest, establishing the common ground, and establishing the writer’s ethos?  Do you have any suggestions for making the introduction stronger?
4. The Purpose/thesis: Paraphrase the thesis/purpose of the paper as a promise: “In this paper, I will…” Does the draft fulfill this promise?  Why, or why not? 
5. The Supporting Points:  List the main points that the writer makes, in order.  List them in order of interest to you.  Which could be explained or supported more fully?  What evidence, examples, or details might do the trick?  What other supporting points could be brought in?
6. The Tone: What dominant impression does this draft create – serious, humorous, satiric, persuasive, argumentative, objective?  Is the tone appropriate to the topic and audience?  Is it consistent?  Mark specific places where the writer’s voice comes through most clearly. 
7. The Conclusion: Does the draft conclude in a memorable way?  Does it end abruptly? Trail off?  Restate the introduction?  If you like the conclusion, provide two reasons why.  If you do not think the conclusion is strong enough, explain why.
8.  Any Questions the Writer Brought to You?
9.  Final Thoughts: What are the main strengths of this draft?  Weaknesses? What surprised you and why?  What do you want to know more about?  What is the writer’s single most important comment or point?

Treat this letter seriously.  Peer responses and workshops are quite important to the writing process and will benefit your writing, as well as your peers’ writing.   This should be over a page long.

Bring 2 copies of the letter to class, as well as the marked up text.  One will be given to me, and the other (including the marked text) will be returned to your peer and discussed in workshop.