PHI-105 T-6 Persuasive Essay Peer Review Worksheet.7-10-17 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download PHI-105 T-6 Persuasive Essay Peer Review Worksheet.7-10-17 PDF

Description

Top of Form

Persuasive Essay: Peer Review Worksheet Part of your responsibility as a student in this course is to provide quality feedback to your peers to help them improve their writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing that feedback. Submit this review as an attachment to both your instructor within the assignment bin and into your reply to your peer’s post containing the assigned draft. Name of the Draft’s Author: Gilberto Name of the Peer Reviewer: Andrew Green Summary After reading through the draft one time, write a summary (3–5 sentences) of the paper. This should include the stance and the three sub-topics used to support the position within the essay. Do not place your own critique of the essay within this space. The use of renewable energy to reduce cost can benefit everyone. The environment will have reduced emissions as a result of renewable energy. Explained the differences of inexhaustible or non-renewable energy. Learned the importance of storing energy to prevent wasted resources in the future.

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Evaluate the Essay After a second, closer reading of the draft, evaluate the essay using the Persuasive Essay: Final Draft rubric below. Determine the level of achievement appropriate for each assignment criteria. (Level of achievement ranges from Unsatisfactory to Excellent and are found at the top of the rubric. Assignment criteria are found in the left column of the rubric.). Please use the highlighting tool to score your peer within each criteria. Then use the right hand side of the rubric to include a rationale with evidence and examples for the score.

Topi c7Rubr i c:Per suasi v eEssay:Fi nalDr af t Criteria

% Scaling

1

2

3

4

5

Unsatisfactory

Less Than Satisfactory

Satisfactory

Good

Excellent

0%

65%

75%

85%

100%

Formulates a clear and precise point of view of the topic. Clearly explains the position taken. Sound and detailed reference

Formulates a clear and precise point of view of the topic. Comprehensively explains the position taken. Specific issues

Why was this score determined for your peer’s essay? What evidence/examples do you have for this score?

Content – 70% Objective Perspective and Position

Addresses a single source or view of the argument and fails to clarify presented position relative to one’s own.

Appropriately identifies one’s own position on the topic. Vague explanation of the position is given. Little reference to specific issues

Appropriately identifies one’s position on the topic. Explains the position taken in a coherent way. Sound reference to specific issues

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Rationale for score: Topic and position was clear

related to the topic is made. Position completely appeals to emotion instead of reason.

related to the topic is made. Position mostly appeals to emotion instead of reason.

to specific issues related to the topic is made. Position appeals mostly to reason.

related to the topic are fully presented in great detail. Position appeals to reason.

Word Count

Word count is less than half the minimum or more than double the maximum.

Body of essay is more than 100 words over or under the word count.

Body of essay is more than 50 but less than 100 words over or under the word count.

Body of essay is over or under the word count by 50 words or less.

Within the appropriate word count.

Rationale for score: Met word count

Argues to persuade

No real persuasive argument is made. No outside sources are used.

Presents a vague argument relative to the topic and presents no evidence to support the argument. Fewer than three outside sources are used. No Peer Reviewed sources used.

Presents an argument relative to the topic and presents minimal evidence to support the argument. Not all evidence is relevant to the argument. At least three outside sources are used with at least one peer-reviewed journal article.

Presents an argument relative to the topic and presents key evidence to support the argument through a synthesis of paraphrased and quoted material. Three sources are used. At least two peer reviewed journal articles are used.

Presents an argument relative to the topic and presents key evidence to support the argument through a synthesis of paraphrased research. Identifies not only the main issues, but also the embedded, implicit, or unspoken aspects of the topic. At

Rationale for score: Not enough resources to support argument

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

least three peer reviewed journal articles are used. Direct quotes are minimal. Adheres to principles of critical thinking

Fails to adhere to almost all principles of critical thinking.

Adheres to few principles of critical thinking.

Adheres to some principles of critical thinking on a surface level.

Manage emotions and avoid fallacies.

Adheres to many principles of critical thinking. Use of the principles is clear to see.

Adheres to most of the principles of critical thinking. Attempts to incorporate each one in a logical and fluid way

Rationale for score: Used critical thinking to support topic and deliver message.

Thesis and/or main claim are

Rationale for score: Thesis was clear

Logical reasoning is used within arguments Upholds persuasive tone rather than manipulative Acknowledge other perspectives and evaluate assumptions about the topic.

Organization and Effectiveness – 25% Thesis Development

Paper lacks any discernible overall

Thesis and/or main claim are

Thesis and/or main claim are

Thesis and/or main claim are

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

and Purpose

purpose or organizing claim. Thesis is not stated in the conclusion.

insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis is not stated in the conclusion.

apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis is not stated in the conclusion.

clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis is stated within the concluding paragraph

comprehensive; contained within the thesis is the essence of the paper. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear. Thesis is clearly restated in the conclusion.

Paragraph Development and Transitions

Paragraphs and transitions consistently lack unity and coherence. No apparent connections between paragraphs are established. Transitions are inappropriate to purpose and scope. Organization is disjointed.

Some paragraphs and transitions may lack logical progression of ideas, unity, coherence, and/or cohesiveness. Some degree of organization is evident.

Paragraphs are generally competent, but ideas may show some inconsistency in organization and/or in their relationships to each other.

A logical progression of ideas between paragraphs is apparent. Paragraphs exhibit a unity, coherence, and cohesiveness. Topic sentences and concluding remarks are appropriate to purpose.

There is a sophisticated construction of paragraphs and transitions. Includes topic sentences that are persuasive and align with thesis statement. Includes details and rationale that support the main points of each supporting paragraph. Ideas progress and relate to each other. Paragraph and transition

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Rationale for score: Needed more defined arguments for the sub-topics

construction guide the reader. Paragraph structure is seamless with transition between paragraphs Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Essay is primarily written in first and second person

GCU template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

GCU template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken; lack of control with formatting is apparent.

Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audienceappropriate language are used. Essay is written with third person voice with some instances of first or second person.

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Essay is mostly written with third person voice.

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English. Essay is written with third person voice.

Rationale for score: Some grammar errors

GCU template is fully used; There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

All format elements are correct.

Rationale for score: Followed the format

Format – 5% Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

GCU template is used, and formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasin g and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style)

No reference page is included. No citations are used.

Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used.

Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present.

Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct.

In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.

Overall Feedback Feedback to your peer should be objective and useful. Three strengths of the paper are: 1) Had informative information on topic

2) Topic was clear and precise © 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Rationale for score: Didn’t use 3 sources to support essay.

3) Length was appropriate

Three things that could be improved are: 1) Use of multiple references to support sub-topics.

2) Have more selling points in your persuasive argument

3) Break your sub-topics into more defined arguments.

© 2016. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved....