INSTRUCTIONS: Read your classmate's rough draft and write a response by answering at least three of the questions below. Most questions deserve a response of at least three or four sentences, possibly a bit more. Be as detailed and specific as possible, quoting from and referring to specific images, sentences, and ideas from the draft. Your goal here is to help your classmate find ways to improve upon this paper: ways to mend its weaknesses and build upon its strengths. DO NOT USE THE WORDS “LIKE” OR “DISLIKE”, “GOOD” OR “BAD”. This is not about your opinion but about what is actually present on the page. Be sure to sign your response and give it to your classmate (along with the rough draft) before the end of today's class.

1. What is this paper about? Can you identify or replicate the thesis in one sentence?    

1. What did you learn about in this paper? What makes you laugh or surprises you or provides you with useful information? What grabs you or moves you or makes you stop and think? What is insightful about the paper?

     2. What might the author add or expand on to answer questions that the paper has raised? What ideas are not supported well? What ideas are not clear? For example, is all the relevant history explained? Are all the connections between ideas evident?  What do you need to see more about?

     3. What sections seem less purposeful (directly related to the thesis) than others? Keep in mind that you don't need to tell a writer that a paragraph is "pointless." Saying honestly "I don't get it" and explaining why gives a clear and useful, but not harsh, message to the author.

     4. Does each body paragraph have a central (main) idea? Which paragraphs seem to lack a main idea or wander away from their topics?

     5. What confused you? What parts did you have to read twice? Don't be satisfied with saying, "Oh, I figured it out." If you stumbled somewhere in this paper, other readers probably will, too, and the author needs to know that.

     6. What has the author assumed about readers’ knowledge or opinions that it may not be safe to assume? How could the writer remedy this problem?

     7. Does the introduction make the reader interested in the paper's topic? Does the conclusion do anything other than offer the reader a rerun of the paper's main points? In other words, does it show the reader the larger significance of the topic (the "big picture"), or perhaps rally the reader to action? Does it leave the reader with something to think about?