ENG 406B: Electronic Documents and Publications

Content Strategy Report Peer Review

Date: 12/04/2022

Writer (team name/client): The Writer’s Block

Reviewer name: Cheng Chen

Grading Criteria
The report will be assessed using the following criteria:

Knowledge of content strategy: Are key concepts of content strategy used and applied? Are all
parts of a content strategy analysis included (see above: description of organization, stakeholder
analysis, audience analysis, content audit [quantitative, qualitative, social media, gap,
competitor], workflow, governance, recommendations, conclusion, appendices [optional])?

Yes, key concepts of content strategy are used and applied. All parts of a content strategy
analysis are included.

Quality of analysis: Are clear analysis criteria articulated and does analysis systematically
engage with these criteria? Are key strengths and weaknesses of the content captured in the
analysis?

They provided a high-quality analysis in their report.

Clarity of recommendations: Are recommendations clearly stated and prioritized? Are the
recommendations supported with references to data from the content strategy analysis? Are
visuals/screenshots/examples/templates used to illustrate problem areas or recommended
improvements?

Yes, they offered very detailed and clear recommendations in their report. Their
recommendations are supported with evidence from their content audit section. Screenshots are
used several times to illustrate problem areas.

Report format: Is the report formatted as a business report with cover page, executive summary,
table of contents, list of figures, body, and appendices?

The report has cover page, executive summary, table of contents, list of figures, and body. I think
they don’t really need appendices.

Visual design: Does the report’s visual design help to convey the key points? Are visuals
appropriate and clearly labeled? Are information graphics used to clarify key information and
add visual appeal? Are principles of document design including headings, smaller paragraphs,
lists, alignment, and white space used to guide readers through the document?

Yes! They provided excellent and creative visual design to convey the key points. All the visuals
are appropriate and clearly labeled, which are used to clarify key information. However, I would
like to suggest them removing white space. Also, I would suggest using consistent bullet points
throughout the report.

1
ENG 406B: Electronic Documents and Publications
Content Strategy Report Peer Review

Writing quality and polish: Is the writing clear and concise? Are the paragraphs coherently
organized? Is the text proofread? Are visuals properly labeled and referenced in the report? Is the
report written in a consistent first-person plural “we” voice?

Most of the writing is clear and concise; however, there are still some sentences that sound
confusing to me. I pointed them out in their word document. Besides, there are a few
grammatical errors that need to be corrected. I believe all the visuals are properly labeled and
referenced in the report. The report is written in “we” voice consistently.

Summary of report’s strengths:

The overall report is strong and well-written. They provided excellent and creative visual design
in their report, which helps me to understand the key points they tried to convey. In Persona
section, they did a great job on breaking down all pieces of information, especially Persona 1. In
Recommendation section, they offered insightful opinions on how to improve the website.

Summary of report’s weaknesses. Include a prioritized list of revisions.

 Some sentences and expressions sound a little bit confusing.
 There are several grammatical errors in their report.
 The capitalization of the headings needs to be consistent throughout the report.
 The bullet points should be in a consistent manner.
 They need to remove white spaces.