Visual Argument Assignment: Peer Review
Name of paper author: _____________________________ Name of Peer reviewer: _____________________________ Paper title: ______________________________________________________
1. The title.
Did the title catch your attention? Is it interesting, informative, and indicative of thewriter’s stance?
2. Introduction: strategies.
Does the introduction make you want to keep reading? Why or why not?Did the introduction begin too generally? Too narrow? Could it be improved? If so, how?
Mark the thesis of the paper with
. Does the thesis make a clear and compelling argumentabout the use of rhetorical appeals in the visual text being examined? How so/how not? Where is it inthe introduction? Is this placement an effective choice? After reading the essay, is the thesis wellsupported in the body of the essay with specific visual evidence? How so/how not?
4. Rhetorical Appeals.
What rhetorical appeals did the author use in his or her own writing? How didthe author work these appeals into his or her text? Were these choices appropriate and successful?
5. Development of Ideas.
Are the main points of the paper sufficiently developed? Does the paper bringup any interesting points that you would like to see developed further? Do you find any spots where the paper goes off on a tangent or addresses peripheral/irrelevant material? Does it focus on analyzing thevisual text, or does it spend too much time discussing the issue presented by the text?
6. Organization of Argument.
Is the argument organized effectively? Do the ideas follow each other ina logical, understandable way? Are there any places that are confusing?
Does the author use topic sentences? Are the paragraphs more or less cohesive -- i.e.do they focus on/develop one idea? Are any paragraphs too long or too short for easy reading?
8. Style: argument and writing.
Is there unnecessary repetition of points in the argument? Does s/hevary sentence structure? Are there too many short, choppy sentences, or ones that are overly complexand need to be broken up? How do the sentences flow into one another?
9. Visual Rhetoric.
Did the author include the visual text in his/her paper? Are there any aspects of thetext that could be analyzed further to contribute to the impact of the argument?
Is it a successful conclusion in that it offers closure to the paper while emphasizing themain thesis strongly one last time?