Peer Response Sheet: Assignment #1



Directions: Read the SUMMARY SECTION of your partner’s paper. Don’t stop to make comments until you have read the entire section through once. Then, address the following questions with an eye to giving your partner CONSTRUCTIVE help.

1. Write a paragraph to the writer in which you anticipate the concerns of my teaching persona. Let the writer know what you think needs to be added or changed to make me happy (e.g., “Don’t you think Jenny seemed really obsessed about that whole “frontier” thing? Should you mention that?”). Consider what main ideas might be missing from the writer’s summary. Be personal, be informal, be kind but be skeptical.

2. Now write a paragraph to the writer in which you anticipate the concerns of my grading persona. Pretend you don’t know the writer, that you have heard of the Shames article from a colleague but have never read it yourself. Address the following issues:
   • what don’t you understand, what is NOT IN THE WORDS ON THE PAGE
   • look for a main idea and consider whether it is sufficiently accurate and complete
   • consider whether the writer transitions smoothly between paragraphs and ideas
   • make sure the writer does not intrude on Shames’ ideas with any interpretation at this point in the assignment

Now read the RESPONSE SECTION of your partner’s paper.

1. Same idea as before. Write the writer a paragraph in which you imagine how my teaching persona will react to the page. (“Do you really think Jenny will buy that you think Shames is so darn brilliant? Don’t you think that comes across as a little insincere?”) What could the writer do to better convince you of her/his position? What works and doesn’t work?

2. And one more paragraph keeping my grading persona in mind. Make sure your partner has answered the assigned question (“write a response… to Shames’ claim that the American ‘ethic of decency’ has been destroyed by the American hunger for more”). Let them know which of their examples make sense, which don’t, where they need to back up their claims a little better. Has the writer attempted to “listen” to and understand Shames’ argument? Does the writer move from generalizations s/he makes about Shames’ claim to specific supporting details or examples 1) from Shames’ text? and 2) from her/his own experience and observations? If not, what generalizations need backing up?

For BOTH SECTIONS of your partner’s paper:
Circle any words or phrases that you know or suspect are misspelled, misused, etc., or phrases that don’t make sense. You are not responsible for correcting her/his grammar or punctuation, but help them out by pointing out anything that needs fixing.