English 115

Peer Review

1. Provide feedback on the writer’s introduction of and interaction with sources (semiotic analysis, psychoanalytic criticism, Miss representation, and analyzing visual and multimedia arguments): does the writer reference the author and title of the cited text, introduce the cited material (quotes) with signal phrases, and most importantly, do something with the source—that is, interpret, explain, use to analyze the media artifact, think deeply about it? Offer suggestions for doing any of the above more successfully.

2. Does the author combine two or more approaches to analyze the artifact? Does the essay include description and analysis components? Are they organically connected? Does the essay also integrate ethnographic description? Give suggestions on strengthening the structure of the essay.

3. Comment on the quality of the writer’s argument—that is, is the writer developing an explicit and recognizable position in relation to the media artifact chosen for analysis? Is the argument logically following from the analysis of the artifact? Or, in other words, is the claim well supported by the analysis of contextual and textual features of the artifact? Make suggestions for strengthening the argument/claim of the essay.

1

4. Is the writer’s voice prominent? Is the writer doing more than repeating discussions from class? Do you have a sense that the writer is developing, complicating, or extending his/her thinking in the process of writing? Give suggestions for how the writer could be more present in the essay.

5. Provide feedback on structure, cohesion or logic of these first few pages: is the writer making careful transitions from idea to idea? Can you follow the writer’s line of discussion? Make suggestions for how the writer might develop ideas in a more cohesive or coherent way.

2