PEER REVIEW CRITIQUE – TEXT IN CONTEXT

ENGLISH 107 FALL 2014

Reader’s Name: ________________________________________

Writer’s Name: ___________________________________

Paper Title: __________________________________________

Consider all of the following points, and write at least three paragraphs discussing the strengths and weaknesses of your peers’ papers. How well does your peer address the paper assignment, and how well does your peer structure his/her paper?

Bring one typed copy of your critique for each peer to your conference.

Introduction: general background information, primary text title(s), primary text author(s), primary text character(s), secondary text title, secondary text author, approach – the Monomyth, thesis statement.

• Make recommendations for any of these items that are not present in the introduction.
• Discuss the ratio of primary/secondary text in the introduction.
• Discuss the amount of background information provided.
• Provide suggestions for revisions.
• Consider citations.
• Consider the strength and clarity of the analytical thesis statement.

Body Paragraphs: Separation/Departure, Initiation, Return; specific examples in PIE format.

• How convincing are the PIE paragraphs? Do the Illustrations relate to the Points? Are the Explanations supporting the Points and Illustrations?
  • I want you to really look at the Points, Illustrations, and Explanations being made. Consider if the Illustration your peer is giving you actually fits the Point or not, and how that Illustration is explained.
  • Remember: your Points are the phases (Separation, Initiation, Return) or the specific 17 stages (e.g.: call to adventure, belly of the whale, road of trials, master of two worlds, etc.) from the Hero’s Journey (the secondary text). Your Illustrations come from the primary text(s).
• Consider the structure of the all the paragraphs individually. Are the paragraphs written in PIE, PEI, IPE, IEP, EIP, or EPI? Note, only PIE is acceptable!
• Consider the structure of the paper as a whole. Does the flow of the paper make sense? Is the Hero’s Journey discussed in sequential order? Is the story discussed in chronological order, or in narrative order? This is important to consider because many of the stories involve flashbacks. It must be clear to the reader of your paper that the writer understands the chronological sequence of events of the story itself, and that these events are put into the Hero’s Journey framework in chronological, sequential order.

Conclusion: recap of what the paper has proven (the thesis); mention of the primary text title(s), primary text author(s), primary text character(s) again; mention of the approach again; final explanation of heroic status of the character(s)

• Make recommendations for any of these items that are not present in the conclusion.
• Consider the strength and clarity of the final explanation of heroic status

Citations: citations present for all Points and Illustrations; proper citation format