Notes from Classmate
Since this review had an in depth worksheet, I will be showing the prompts and responses.
Instructions for reader: Once the author sends you this sheet and a draft, have a quick, orienting chat with your author about the items above. Then read the draft completely from beginning to end and comment on it according to the author’s wishes and curiosities as expressed above. Type in your comments below and send the completed form back to the author and copy me, your interested professor, via D2L.
- No comment from reader needed!
- No comment from reader needed!
- Comment on any of the topics that the author designated in the parallel item above.
Comments I asked for:
I need to do my conclusion. I was really getting into the elements of Jackson’s writing where I left off so a conclusion needs to be written up soon. I also wanted to expand on some of my other ideas but I was unsure of which ones (any suggestions would be amazing!) and probably clarify some ideas I wrote out. I’m also a little on the fence about the title but it’s the least of my worries right now. I also need to make sure my citations are correct cause I feel like they aren’t.
Feel free to give me any advice on parts I should add or clarify on. I know it isn’t 100% complete and I know there isn’t an actual conclusion. Feel free to go ham, it won’t hurt my feelings.
Other than your conclusion, I think your concerns are fairly unnecessary. Your ideas seemed very well explained to me and I understood them. I think that your citations look mostly right too, however I am not an expert on MLA or any format for that matter. I don’t know if URL’s are necessary. I would consult [professor] or the MLA handbook for that information though. I don’t want to tell you the wrong thing. As I mention in the email, I think your title could benefit from having the term “the Arctic” in it because it is a part of your paper that makes your topic unique.
- Now, it’s time to comment on the whole draft! First, please note features of the essay that you enjoyed or found intriguing.
To begin with, I love the topic of your essay. It is so interesting, and I love your focus on the Arctic. It is a great setting to discuss the effects of climate change. I really enjoyed reading the social elements of it, particularly the petro-masculinity section. I was previously unfamiliar with that term and I think there’s a lot to it.
- Now, comment on the overall coherence and clarity of the draft. Please supply more detail than a yes or no answer about the following features:
- Is there a clear organization that you can follow easily as you read? Does it seem to have a clear structure and purpose? If not, suggest how the organization might be strengthened (e.g. by adding transitions, by expanding on a point, by adding a definition, by adding an example, by adding a quotation, by editing out unnecessary information?). Be as specific as possible in your comment.
Yes, the essay flows very well. Another thing I mentioned in the email is the possibility of consolidating some of your paragraphs that are in the same topic. Several sections are split up because of a small change under the same topic, but I think it could help readers recognize that a brand new topic isn’t being introduced quite yet, just a new idea under the same topic.
- Is there a clear sense of topic and purpose by the close of the introduction?
Yes! It is clear that the essay focus on Dr. M Jackson and specifically the Arctic region.
- Is there a thesis statement that begins or concludes the essay that you recognize as such? Does it fit the rest of the essay?
Yes, the thesis is clear at the beginning of the essay. It does fit the rest of the essay.
- Check the adequacy of the support for the interpretive claims made in the essay and note any moments that you feel need additional discussion, explanation, or examples. State specifically where points that need more work can be found in the draft.
I think that the essay has a lot of strong support for the thesis. As I’ll mention in the next section, I think that a little more of Jackson’s thoughts could be included in the designated pages 7-9 though there are some really good excerpts from secondary sources there too.
- Check the answer to #4 above in the author’s section of this form. Have you addressed all concerns? If not, please comment directly on the items that the author has asked for feedback on.
- Now, re-read the specific pages mentioned in the author’s #5 and #6 above. If you wish, you may make marginal notations on the draft for this section.
- Answer any direct questions or concerns the author raises about this section here.
I think that your “rant” (as you say) is very appropriate in this section and it offers a really simple and accurate description of how climate change works in one of the most vulnerable climates. I think that it is a strong point in the essay, but as mentioned before could maybe include a little more support from Jackson directly.
- In addition, review the following local items in this section.
- Is the paragraphing clear? Is there a clear topic or focus for each paragraph in the section? Transitions? References to the thesis?
- Are the sentences clear and complete? Mark or question any sentences that you cannot follow or that confuse you.
- Review the word choice in this section. Are the words on target both in terms of denotation and connotation? Are there any word or phrases that seem odd or that confuse you? If so, note them for the author to check.
- What about punctuation, spelling, grammar, and all sorts of small stuff? Please note mistakes or confusing moments.
- Finally, review the way that the author includes information from both primary and secondary sources.
- Are there clear lead-ins to all quotations and paraphrases?
- Are the introductions to quotations punctuated correctly (with commas after sentence tags like Dellarobbia explained her view of her mother-in-law, “ . . .”(33). OR with semi-colons after full-sentence introductions such as Dellarobbia at last understood the connection between the monarchs and climate change: “ . . .” (420).
No mistakes that I noticed.
- If a bibliography exists, are ALL the sources mentioned in this section included? Are they in correct MLA style? If not, what details are missing, out of place, or incorrect?
- Do you have any suggestions for the writer beyond the points you’ve made above? For example, you might comment on additional information that you’d like to see in the essay. Write out your suggestions below.
I think you’ve accomplished a lot here. I’m excited to read a finished product!
- Once you’ve completed these comments, e-mail this form back to the author using D2L. Be sure to copy me on the e-mail so that I can give you credit for the peer review. Also, return the draft to the author with one general comment that you make orally and in person.
Notes from Professor
You have a complete draft here that works well to establish your thesis and the overall direction of the essay. Though the full arc of the argument is clear enough, a number of places in the draft need attention. In particular, you need more quotes from the memoir to support your claims. Also, the paragraphing of your points is sometimes confusing to readers. For example, when you discuss the importance of the Arctic, you seem to lose sight of Jackson’s book altogether. Instead, you need to weave the information from your secondary sources into your interpretation of Jackson’s rhetorical strategies. Please review my comments to note the spots that I think need shoring up.
Once you have the content settled, please edit your essay very carefully for precision in diction and pronoun use. The yellow highlights also show words, phrases, and punctuation that needs attention before you hand in the final version.
You are well on your way to a fine essay, but you need to turn to the technical issues of meeting readers’ expectations in structure and expression to have a finished piece that is as accessible as your ideas are interesting. Please don’t hesitate to ask me any questions that occur to you.