Peer Review
Due: August 9th, 9:00am
It’s your responsibility to pair up with someone else from this class, and swap papers with them. Remember that I’m out of town until the 4th, and while I’ll have occasional access to email, I won’t be able to respond very quickly to pleas for help.
I realize this is a bit different from how assignments have worked in the past. I’ve made this a general assignment because I was a bit worried about some groups having too few responders, or getting stuck with an uneven number. So begin by posting a rough description of your essay so far, as well as whether or not you’re currently in Portland. As you look through your peers’ comments, respond to them if you think you’d like to pair up. Then contact each other through Blackboard, and later your personal email or however you choose. If you can meet up in person, that would be ideal, but it’s not required
You must provide you partner with a full rough draft. By full, I mean it fits the length requirement, has a thesis and a conclusion, and includes your sources. It can have its rough areas (or why else call it a rough draft?), but it should be more-or-less of a quality you could turn in to a professor. The whole point of doing the peer review is to take your best effort so far, and make it better.
By Monday, August 9th, you will provide me with the following:
-the rough draft you reviewed
-your review
This peer review is counting as most of your grade for Week 6 and Week 7 (a total of 15 points), so be thorough. I will be not only looking for a detailed and helpful response, but I will be marking off whether or not you provided your partner with a full rough draft. If you do not provide a full rough draft, that will count against you, not your partner.
—
Peer Review Questionnaire
1. Read the entire rough draft all the way through, and then jot down the main points of this argument. What stood out to you after the first reading?
2. Analyze the tenor of the controversially-edged thesis of this research paper. How does it ADD to the body of popular culture scholarship already out there or in what ways does it reflect an approach that already exists?
3. Explore the implementation of sources in this draft. In what ways do these sources underpin the validity of the argument? In what ways may they distract or distance the final intent of the argument?
4. Analyze the expertise of critics who are included in this argument. How well are they implemented? Does the voice of the author remain persuasive while interacting with these critics’ stances?
5. To have a strong and well-balanced argument, there should also be a strong counter-argument inserted at some point in the text. Where do you see this happening?
6. In looking over the structure of the argument, would you recommend a re-shifting anywhere? If so, in what particular manner?
7. What impressed you about this paper? (What would you recommend that this author keep in the re-writing of this argument?)
8. Using your own expertise in popular culture, provide an example, counter-example, information, data, or critical slant that would, in your opinion, strengthen this perspective?
Welcome
This is the working Mentor Blog for Popular Culture, with Grace Dillon, Summer 2010. This site is still in development, and a few of the sections may trickle in throughout the week. If you have any questions, comment on this post, or drop me an email!
This is Lucy reporting, the mentor for this class. This blog is one of the best ways to contact me, aside from my email (lmsoftlight@gmail.com). I’ll be checking in pretty frequently. This is a good place to ask general questions about class content, technical difficulties, the University Studies program, PSU, or similar things. This is not a place to chat with each other; that’s what your group blogs are for.
Everyone should be in a group (A, B, or C, for now). Each group has its own blog, and that is where I’ll post assignments and prompts, and where I expect to see discussion. You should plan to check in every few days, and participate if you see a discussion happening. To find our which group you’re in, see the Groups subpage, here. If you do not see your name, email me right away, and we’ll get it sorted out.
I recommend subscribing to get email updates from both this and your group’s blog, so that you don’t miss any important updates.
There are three primary things which I will post on your group blogs:
Weekly Question for Discussion
These are based on the lectures and reading you’ve been doing, and will be updated every Friday. You will have a week to complete them, and they will be due on Fridays at 9:00am. There will not be room to discuss the questions here, and later you’ll be able to discuss your peers perspectives in more detail, with the student responses.
Student Responses
Every week, I will post one or two of the responses to the previous weeks Question for Discussion, and everyone will have the opportunity to respond to them. Every student will have at least one of their responses posted this term.
Mentor Lectures
Every week, I will post mini-lectures on different topics. This will usually focus on some aspect of writing (thesis statements, outlining, and so on). Feel free to make requests.
