I will assign you partners by email as the working drafts trickle in. Please make sure your working draft, or its most recent version, is submitted to the shared student files section of the EEE dropbox by Wednesday morning. You probably just submitted it to the submit section. And please make sure that the exchange of peer review comments is completed by Thursday night.
INSTRUCTIONS:
1a. Does the paper address what?
1b. Is the what appropriate to the length of the paper, not too narrow and not too broad?
2a. Does the paper address how?
2b. What is the weakest how moment in the paper?
2c. What is the strongest how moment?
3a. Does the paper address why?
3b. Does it do so in the form of reversible thesis that could logically be disproven? (I.e. "I hate Jane Austen" cannot logically be disproven, whereas "Captain Wentworth acts differently in the revised ending because he's on drugs" could be logically disproven.)
4. Is that thesis clearly indicated in the introduction paragraph... not necessarily in one sentence, because sometimes it takes more than one, but somewhere in there?
5. Does the title use this two-part format, with the first part providing a creative frame and the second part providing a capsule of thesis?
6. Personalized peer review request from partner I.
7. Personalized peer review request from partner II.
8. Personalized peer review request from partner III.
Please consult the Nov. 26 post below if you don't know what I mean by what/how/why.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment