Summary-Response Peer-Review Workshop

 

1. Have the student author read the RESPONSE section of his or her paper out loud to you while you follow along with your copy. The student author should put a squiggly line under any sentence that he or she stumbles over or has to reread.

 

2. Based on the response, write down what summary points you expect the student author to include in his or her summary. Remember that the student author should only be including points that he or she is responding to.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Point out the sentence that you believe is the thesis to the student author. If that is not the thesis, or if the thesis is weak, brainstorm how to improve the thesis with the student author and write down a revised thesis statement.

 

 

 

 

4. Now, read the summary. Review the assignment sheet and write down any requirements or organization elements that the student is missing.

 

a. For example, if the student named the author of the article, but forgot to name the title, write down: “missing title of article.”

b. Missing:

i.

ii.

iii.

 

5. Underline any summarized information that the student author seems to have misunderstood, or that you understood differently.

a. Below, explain what is specifically misleading or confusing.

6. Discuss the response section of the paper. Write down the points that the student author uses to support his or her thesis.

 

 

 

 

7. Are the points effectively supporting the thesis? What can be improved? Be specific.

 

 

 

 

 

8. Are quotes and paraphrases used effectively? Bracket any quotes that aren’t integrated well, and write a comment below offering suggestions for improvement.

 

 

 

 

9. Find 3 sentences that would benefit from unity and/or coherence improvement and explain why.

a. For example, is there a jump in idea that would be fixed by employing the known/new sentence construction?

b. Have the student author rewrite the 3 sentences you chose, and collaborate about how to improve them.

 

c. Revised sentences:

i.

 

 

ii.

 

 

iii.

 

 

10. Explain where in the paper you were confused, and where you thought the author did a good job, but be specific about what was confusing and good. Did the author use buzzwords that made the paper flow well, or did he or she have some really interesting sentences that stood out to you?

 

a. Circle the instances in the paper and put a + or – above them so the student author knows what is effective and what is confusing.

 

 

 

11. Lastly, comment on any mechanics tendencies. Did the student have a lot of fragments or comma splices? Point them out, but do not physically correct the “errors.” Remember that mechanics corrections are not as important as content and clarity edits.

 

a. Tendencies to look out for:

 

 

12. Finally, if you have time, point out any format or MLA corrections that the student author needs to make.

a. Format corrections:

 

 

 

Self-Editing Tips

 

· When you are editing, you can read the paper out loud to yourself so you hear any errors in flow.

· Read the paper “bottom up”; this method means that you read the paper sentence by sentence, starting at the end. This technique can help you find errors in transitions.

· Finally, take time away from your paper. When you feel yourself getting frustrated or tired, take an hour away from your paper. A fresh perspective will help you see new revisions that need to be made.