A PEER REVIEW for C AND H, Write 4 specific categories separately..docx

A PEER REVIEW for C AND H, Write 4 specific categories
separately. Don’t make it a paper. I want each categories.
Maybe 3-5 sentences for each categories. And give a score for
each parts. Full points for each part is 3. need it in 4 hours.
Make words gently and friendly.
Requirement:
Choose at leastFOURcategories and type specific comments: (1)
what the writer did well (their strengths) and (2) your
suggestions for revision. To receive credit for the peer review,
your comments should be specific, substantial, and constructive.
Vague or overly effusive (i.e. too much of "this is really good")
comments will not receive full credit.
CATEGORIES:
1. Argument
Significant, specific, and arguable major claim about the topic;
major claim supported by sub-claims; acknowledgement of
other perspectives, arguments, or conceptions about the claim;
claim is strengthened by discussion of counter-claims; overall
clarity of purpose and cohesion
2. Evidence
Claim supported by a variety of evidence; evidence quoted,
summarized, and/or paraphrased; no “quote bombs”; evidence is
substantial, credible, and reliable
3. Analysis
Claim supported by explanation and analysis of evidence
provided; claim supported by explicit or implicit articulation of
the stakes (the “so what”); analysis is cohesive, developing
smoothly to the conclusion
4. Transitions & Organization
Smooth transitions and logical organization; easy to follow
from one paragraph to the next; good balance of writer’s
analysis and outside evidence; sub-claims (generally) appear as

topic sentences.
5. Language & Scope
Narrow and focused introduction; narrow scope of the paper;
substantial enough to teach something important to the reader,
but not too broad as to cover too much; use of academic
language and academic reasoning; no “I” voice; language
appropriate and accessible for a wide audience
Back to Basics: The Importance of Communication in Healthy
Relationships
My paper talks about relationships in William
Shakespeare’s plays Othello and Much Ado. Specifically, it
focuses on the nature of communication in the two plays. It is
up for debate whether communication is included in a healthy
relationship. I haven’t yet decided whether I want to limit my
scope to romantic and sexual relationships, but I may decide to
do so. I do have some research that is really good for not those
specific types, and I may want to throw that in there. Now here
is my main claim. William Shakespeare, in his comedy Much
Ado about Nothing and his tragedies Romeo and Juliet and
Othello, the Moor of Venice, explores the idea that healthy
relationships are founded on communication and mutual trust,
and relationships that do not incorporate these practices are
doomed to failure, death, and destruction.
Othello, the Moor of Venice is a tragedy written by William
Shakespeare. The play revolves around Iago, an aide to military
general Othello. In the play, Iago undermines the marriage of
Othello and Othello’s wife, Desdemona. “The Moor is of a free
and open nature / That thinks men honest that but seem to be so
/ And will as tenderly be led by the nose / As asses are”

(Othello, I.III). Iago is under the delusion that Othello has been
sleeping with his wife, and acts on this presumption, working
his way further into Othello’s confidence until he can make any
statement and have Othello believe him. Eventually, Othello
becomes so deceived by Iago’s treachery that he murders
Desdemona. Othello believes that she has been committing
adultery with Othello’s lieutenant, Cassio.
Romeo and Juliet is perhaps Shakespeare’s most infamous
tragedy. “From forth the fatal loins of these two foes / A pair of
star cross’d lovers take their life / Whose misadventur’d piteous
o’erthrows / Doth with their death bury their parents’ strife”
(Romeo and Juliet, Prologue). Two warring families, the
Montagues and Capulets, each sire a child. Romeo, the
Montague, and Juliet, the Capulet, meet at a Capulet party that
Romeo has snuck into with his friends. The two become
infatuated with each other and are married by a Benedictine
friar. Juliet’s quarrelsome cousin Tybalt attacks Romeo’s friend
Mercutio and slays him. Romeo kills Tybalt in a fit of rage and
is banished from Verona for his crime. Meanwhile, Juliet has
been arranged to marry County Paris, a local nobleman. Juliet
convinces the friar to put her into a temporary coma and advise
Romeo of the situation so he can return and whisk her away
from the city. Romeo never receives the message, and upon
returning to Verona, believes Juliet to be dead. He kills himself
moments before she awakes, and she commits suicide despite
the friar’s attempts to take her away to a nunnery.
After a short and uneventful civil war, soldiers Benedick and
Claudio, with the captive rebel leader Don John in tow, begin a
stay in Messina. Claudio immediately becomes infatuated with
Hero, their host’s daughter, and asks for her hand in marriage.
Benedick once again runs into Beatrice, Hero’s cousin, with
whom he shares an ongoing battle of wits. Don John hears of
the impending nuptials and takes it upon himself to wreak civil
havoc. He convinces his compatriots to make it appear that Hero
is unfaithful to Claudio, and dresses one of her servants in her
nightgown. Claudio is invited to view the servant and Borachio

(Don John’s aide) in an intimate setting, where the servant is
called Hero. The next day, Claudio denounces Hero at their
wedding and leaves her. During this action, Benedick and
Beatrice have each been convinced that the other is in love with
them. As everyone exits from the failed wedding, Beatrice and
Benedick each profess their love for each other, and Beatrice
demands that Benedick kill Claudio as his first act of love for
her. Benedick offers to talk to Claudio and try to get him to see
reason. In the end, Benedick and Beatrice are married, and
Leonato (Hero’s father and the house-holder) offers a fictional
other daughter (actually Hero) as Claudio’s bride if he admits
his wrongdoing. He does, and he and Hero are wed. This is the
plot of William Shakespeare’s comedy Much Ado about
Nothing.
Communication skills are a constantly developing and
improving field. In “The American Family: Where We Are
Today”, history and family studies teacher Stephanie Coontz
notes that “People who raised children in the 1940s and 1950s
typically report that their own adult children and grandchildren
communicate far better with their kids … than they did” (13).
This subjective information shows us that people who raised
children in the 40s and 50s can recognise that their
communication with their kids has been surpassed by their
children’s communication with their offspring. If most people
have the ability to recognise improved methods of
communication, society should see growth in the ability to
communicate.
Research on familial communication (including that between
parents and their children, and spouses) has been published
since the 1980s. In their article “An Examination of Family
Communication within the Core and Balance Model of Family
Leisure Functioning” (2009), Kevin Smith, Patti Freeman, and
Ramon Zabriskie refer to previous research as they argue that
families with improved communication skills have healthier
levels of emotional codependence and healthy techniques for
adapting to both short-term and long-term change (79-81).

These studies of models of family relationships provide an
objective base from which to draw conclusions about
communication’s effect on family life. This proves that the field
is considered valid by scholars and merits study.
In Othello, the Moor of Venice, Othello fails to communicate
with Desdemona and uses physical action to express his
unfounded anger. In the latter parts of Othello, Iago convinces
Othello that Cassio has had sex with Desdemona. “I will make
him tell the tale anew-- / Where, how, how oft, and when / He
hath, and is again to cope your wife:” (IV.1). “Cope” refers to a
sexual act; “making the beast with two backs” is another
euphemism for mating that Iago uses earlier in the play. Later in
the scene, Othello confronts Desdemona, and instead of asking
her whether she has committed adultery with Cassio, strikes her.
In Act IV, Scene 1, Othello trusts the unvetted accusations of
Iago over the statements made by his own wife. This shows how
communication in Othello and Desdemona’s relationship is
flawed because Othello does not trust Desdemona to be truthful.
His striking her shows that she loses worth in his eyes and
becomes something that needs to be punished instead of valued.
Listening is a central part of communication. If the needs of
each party are not understood, the relationship will founder. In
Much Ado about Nothing, William Shakespeare creates a
positive environment for communication. In their blog post,
Tumblr user Penfairy argues that “Beatrice stands up and rails
against men for their cruel conduct towards women. … And
Benedick, her suitor, listens to her (sic)”. User Penfairy argues
that in this scene (Act 4, Scene 1), by Benedick being willing to
listen to Beatrice, he is able to overcome his male-dominated
views of the world and see things in a more compassionate
light. Had Benedick not listened to Beatrice, and tried to solve
the problems of the play by himself, Much Ado about Nothing
could quite easily become a tragedy. Harmony is restored in
Much Ado, because, unlike in Romeo and Juliet, characters are
capable of listening to each other.

Works Cited
Coontz, Stephanie. “The American Family: Where We Are
Today.” U.S. Diplomatic Mission to Germany, U.S. Embassy,
Jan. 2001, usa.usembassy.de/etexts/soc/ijse0101.pdf. Accessed
9 Feb. 2017.
Coontz, Stephanie. “The Real Story of the American Family.”
The American Prospect, vol. 26, no. 2, Spring 2015,
prospect.org/article/real-story-american-family. Accessed 8
Feb. 2017.
Coontz, Stephanie. “Women’s Equality Not Quite There Yet.”
stephaniecoontz.com, The Evergreen State College, 7 Mar.
2011, www.stephaniecoontz.com/articles/article63.htm.
Accessed 8 Feb. 2017.
Corbett, Lisa Ashley. Male Dominance and Female
Exploitation: A Study of Female Victimization in William
Shakespeare’s Othello, Much Ado about Nothing, and Hamlet.
2009. Clark Atlanta University, PhD dissertation.
DigitalCommons, digitalcommons.auctr.edu/dissertations/93/.
Accessed 12 Feb. 2017. In her thesis “Male Dominance and
Female Exploitation: A Study of Female Victimization in
William Shakespeare’s Othello, Much Ado about Nothing, and
Hamlet”, Lisa Ashley Corbett examines how women are made
inferior in the face of male competition. In examining Much
Ado, Corbett argues that Claudio, a soldier, “dehumanizes”
Hero, his bride-to-be, by slandering her on their wedding day.
Corbett then examines how Iago is able to trick Othello into
believing that Desdemona has cheated on Othello, legitimizing
this action by arguing that Othello is more trusting of his male
advisor than his own wife. In Hamlet, the title character ignores
his companion Ophelia’s descent into madness and is part of the
reason she drowns. Corbett argues that all three of these
characters; Desdemona, Hero, and Ophelia become victims of
male ego and bullishness.

This thesis has a nearly perfect score on the CRAAP test, only
wavering because there is no contact information for the author
(even though such information could be acquired through
university resources. The requirements for a thesis paper to be
submitted are not as rigorous as an academic article, but I
expect, given the evident quality of the work, that Corbett had a
long and involved research and revision process. The paper lists
some forty different sources in its bibliography, evidence that it
was extensively researched.
Crawley, Jocelyn Dukes. On Gender and Identity in Three
Shakespearean Texts. 2010. Georgia State University, PhD
thesis. Semantic Scholar, www.semanticscholar.org/paper/On-
Gender-and-Identity-in-Three-Shakespearean-Crawley-
Crawley/9d6eca44e04cabf06b8e234bfbda1c337218eccb.
Accessed 12 Feb. 2017. Jocelyn Crawley’s “On Gender and
Identity in Three Shakespearean Texts” examines how
Shakespeare wrote male and female characters with different
aspects in mind, based on the ideas of masculinity and
femininity in Elizabethan England. Crawley examines Kate and
Petruchio’s relationship in The Taming of the Shrew as
Petruchio forces Kate to accede to his statements, no matter
how false they are. Kate’s eventual submission is the “taming”
referenced in the title. In Othello, Desdemona agrees to take a
backseat to Othello and Brabantio (her husband and father,
respectively) as they decide the outcome of her life. With this,
Desdemona loses her agency in the play and ends up smothered
by her husband after he believes she was unfaithful. Crawley
goes on to argue that Romeo’s obsession with Juliet in Romeo
and Juliet causes him to lose focus on the rivalry between his
family and hers that plagues Verona. Crawley ends their paper
with the claim that Shakespeare’s plays are fraught with
patriarchal subtext.
This paper has a solid list of other scholarly sources that lend it
credence. Because it examines Shakespeare’s work, it being
current is of less import than it would be for more modern

topics (apartheid, for one). I am happy to use this paper as a
source in my work because it is of higher-level academics than
my own, even though it is written by an undergraduate student.
The claims in this paper are very well-supported and accessible
to readers familiar with the plays. There is no discernible bias
in the paper that reduces its legitimacy.
Othello. Directed by Jonathan Miller, performance by Anthony
Hopkins, Bob Hoskins, and Penelope Wilton, BBC, 1981.
Othello is a film adaptation of William Shakespeare’s Othello,
The Moor of Venice, produced by the British Broadcasting
Corporation (BBC) in 1981.
See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082861/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov
_st_sm for full cast and crew listing.
Penfairy. Weblog post. Perfidious Snatch: Fatalistic Piece of
Bread, Dec. 2016,
penfairy.tumblr.com/tagged/shakespeare/page/4. Accessed 1
Feb. 2017. In an untitled December 2016 blog post, Tumblr
contributor Penfairy demonstrates how women in Shakespeare’s
plays, when they are appreciated, keep society healthy; and
when they are ignored, have society crumble around them. The
author examines the tragedies Romeo and Juliet, Othello,
Hamlet, and King Lear, and juxtaposes them with the comedies
As You Like It, Much Ado about Nothing, The Merry Wives of
Windsor, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, and the romances The
Tempest, The Winter’s Tale, and Cymbeline. Each category of
the plays has a different flavor. The tragedies have oppressed
female characters that are ignored at the cost of lives; the
comedies, active female protagonists; and the romances,
daughters and wives through whose compassion the men are
redeemed. The destruction of this society brought about with
the tragedies compares to spiking divorce and abuse rates in the
late 20th century, as the model of the nuclear family started to
fall apart.
This information is not current, but it does not need to be, as
Shakespeare’s plays have been around for four hundred years.
There are no links to be used. The information answers some of

my questions for Othello, mostly about the final stages of
Othello and Desdemona’s relationship. The author is a self-
professed ‘historian’, no credentials are given. The author can
be contacted (I did in order to ask their permission to use the
essay as a source) and is fairly quick to reply. URL reveals
nothing additional to what is above. The evidence is all in the
plays themselves, and so is easily accessible. While not
reviewed, it is free of emotion and propagandist purpose. The
general purpose is to inform, with a slight rebuke (the essay was
prompted by a comment urging Penfairy to “Take a break from
your women’s studies major and get some fresh air”.
Rallings, E. M. “Problems of Communication in Family
Living.” The Family Coordinator, vol. 18, no. 3, 1969, pp. 289–
291., www.jstor.org/stable/581997.
Shakespeare, William. William Shakespeare: Complete Plays.
Compiled by Arthur Henry Bullen, New York, Fall River Press,
2012, pp. 818-57. William Shakespeare’s Othello, the Moor of
Venice (1604) tells the story of a young couple who are broken
by false jealousy. {more summary} This is an original work,
therefore all the information in it is true within the world of the
story. I looked through several Shakespeare tomes before
choosing this one; I prefer it to my others because it is the most
readable while maintaining the true text.
Smith, Kevin M., et al. “An Examination of Family
Communication within the Core and Balance Model of Family
Leisure Functioning.” Family Relations, vol. 58, no. 1, 2009,
pp. 79–90., www.jstor.org/stable/20456838.
Police Suppression of Democracy in Action
The human rights of freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom
of expression are largely used by the public to express concern
and bring attention to actions taken by those who impose a
threat to their rights. Police involvement in these situations is
intended to primarily defend protesters as well as ensure that
violence does not erupt. Introduction of police militarization in

the U.S. has substituted idealistic police involvement with
heavy police interference and the use of excessive force toward
protesters. This imposes its own threat to the same rights that
protestors are aiming to defend. Militarized policing of
demonstrations in the U.S. has effectively introduced violence
into non-violent protests by adding a level of disruption and
aggression that was not present before riot gear and military
grade weapons were involved. In mistreating and criminalizing
protesters, police effectively suppress the voice of the public in
their attempts to defend their rights.
The way the public perceives a demonstration or movement is
important in ensuring that the correct message is spread to bring
attention to the issue in the way it was intended. When that
message is skewed by media’s misrepresentation, it is harder for
progress to be made. In her article “Protest is Democracy at
Work,” Amy Lerman explores the way opposing media
represents protests. She confirms that “Protests are not about
violence” and that the narrowed focus on issues that support
their opposing cause only “[threaten] to undermine the
legitimate message of tens of thousands of peaceful protesters.”
Lerman continues to focus on the shift of attention that is made
by media toward instances where few individuals use the cover
of protest to commit crimes and injure police officers. She
elaborates on that when concluding that “[protesters]
unequivocally condemn these acts of violence against members
of our community. However, blaming all protesters or their
supporters for the actions of one unstable individual
fundamentally misrepresents the nature and importance of
protests.” For some, especially those who have found that the
voting process in their state is like jumping through hoops,
protesting may feel like the only way they can express their
opinion on important matters. Unfortunately, media’s
representation of these demonstrations undermines the message
that protesters are aiming to share, all the while encouraging
officers to step in and use unnecessary excessive force to
disrupt otherwise peaceful protests. The focus seems to be on

the idea that police havebeen forced to use militarized
measuresin response to out of control protesters which gives the
intention that protesters are simply a group of people looking to
go against the system to cause trouble. While this is unsettling,
looking at history books can give clues that help explain what
this strong resistance against protesters is all about.
Protesters are constantly portrayed as the enemy regardless of
their well intentioned actions due to the trouble that seems to
erupt around popular protests. The idea that the protesters are
the enemy has been a common misconception throughout
history. In their report “Suppressing Protest: Human Rights
Violations in the U.S. Response to Occupy Wall Street” by
Sarah Knuckey, Katherine Glenn, and Emi MacLean, the
importance of how protesters are handled by police is outlined.
In a decision regarding whether a civil lawsuit against the New
York Police Department's aggressive action toward protesters
was allowed to move forward, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff
began with suggesting that protesters are not the enemy, but
rather the hero's that lead this nation toward progressive
change. He makes it clear that this nation owes a lot to its
“troublemakers,” a statement presumably in direct response to
the way protesters were earlier portrayed in court. He further
declared that
from Thomas Paine to Martin Luther King, Jr., [these
“troublemakers”] have forced us to focus on problems we would
prefer to downplay or ignore. Yet it is often only with hindsight
that we can distinguish those troublemakers who brought us to
our senses from those who were simply…troublemakers.
Prudence, and respect for the constitutional rights to free speech
and free association, therefore dictate that the legal system cut
all non-violent protesters a fair amount of slack. (20)
Rakoff brings attention to historic figures that effectively
brought change that was, at the time, seen as rebellious and out
of control. He reminds everyone that even Martin Luther King,
Jr. was once portrayed as a “troublemaker” just as protesters are

being portrayed today. This solidifies the idea that protesters
are not enemies but are rather, and quite possibly, the
misrepresented heros of a society that struggles for progressive
change. While it has been said that understanding history is the
best way to prevent repeating past mistakes, it only begs the
question: Why has police aggression toward protesters recently
gotten so much worse?
Since the SWAT team was introduced in the 1960’s,
militarization of police in the U.S. has been a rising concern.
While the military is well funded and receives upgrades to
weapons, the older equipment has been passed down to police
officers. Keep in mind that these are weapons created for
military use for situations against enemy forces where the goal
is typically associated with lethal action. In his article, “How
Militarizing Police Can Increase Violence,” Jesse Signal breaks
down reasons why militarized police inevitably leads to
otherwise avoidable destruction and chaos. Signal references a
quote by Maria Haberfeld, a Professor of Police Science,
revealing that “military equipment is used against an enemy, so
if you give the same equipment to local police, by default you
create an environment in which the public is perceived as an
enemy.” There is a saying closely resembling Haberfeld’s
message that fits well here: “If all you have is a hammer,
everything looks like a nail.” It is not a hard concept to wrap
the mind around when considering the tools that officers are
being handed when they are assigned to police protests. Water
cannons, body armor, gas masks, riot shields, tear gas, assault
rifles, pepper spray, and police dogs are just some of the means
that have been used to break up protests. While police may feel
the need to control situations, it is necessary for them to
prioritize tasks and understand when interference will only
exacerbate a problem. It is important to note that both the
officer and protester are probable to react in a way that may
only escalate toward more violent measures while police are
carrying equipment that science suggests increase aggressive
behavior.

A study conducted by Leonard Berkowitz and Anthony
LePage in 1967 suggested that the mere presence of a weapon
tends to increase aggressive behavior. This study has been
reconducted by many brilliant scientists over the years with
varying results, however in 1998 the study was conducted again
and the question was put to rest by researchers Craig Anderson,
Arlin Benjamin, Jr., and Bruce Bartholow. They concluded that
the so called “weapons effect” was indeed as real as Berkowitz
and LePage suggested back in ‘67. As noted in a discussion of
the results in the research report, “Does the Gun Pull the
Trigger? Automatic Priming Effects of Weapon Pictures and
Weapon Names,” the scientists behind this experiment conclude
that their extensive research suggests that yes, the gun does in
fact pull the trigger. They claim that “[their] research
demonstrates one way that exposure to weapons might increase
aggressive behavior—by increasing the accessibility of
aggressive thoughts” (313). The experiment was conducted by
priming the brain with prime stimuli comparing weapon and non
weapon images and words. The goal was to prime the brain and
then time how long it took for subjects to read aloud words that
were aggressive versus nonaggressive. The hypothesis was that
priming the brain with images and words of weapons triggers
the brain into thinking aggressive thoughts which, in theory,
would be quicker to access since they are at the ready
(Anderson et al. 312). As previously stated, after several trials,
the results concluded that this, in fact, was the case. To
elaborate on the importance of this, imagine a circumstance in
which officers are carrying assault rifles around while policing
protest. The officer may not want to use the weapon per se,
however as this study suggests, having the weapon on hand
triggers aggressive thoughts. In this case, the officer is more
likely to resort to aggressive behavior before anything else is
considered as those thoughts are fresh in mind. A protester with
nonviolent intentions may also notice the weapon which triggers
aggressive thoughts in their mind. Excessive force used by
officers in attempts to control a group of those attending a

demonstration is likely to make protesters angry, but the
presence of these weapons is now proven likely to resort to
aggressive retaliation. Understanding the science behind
militarized weaponry and its aggressive thought provoking
nature, moves us to think about whether there is any part of this
massive militarized policing of protest that is legal.
Works Cited
Anderson, Craig A., et al. Does the Gun Pull the Trigger?
Automatic Priming
Effects of Weapon Pictures and Weapon Names. Columbia, U of
Missouri, July
1998. PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE. Scanlab,
scanlab.missouri.edu/docs/pub/pre2010/
caa-ajb-bdb-psychsci1998.pdf. Accessed 23 Feb. 2017
Knuckey, Sarah, et al. Suppressing Protest: Human Rights
Violations in the U.S.
Response to Occupy Wall Street. Protest and Assembly Rights
Project, June
2013. Academic Search Complete, hrp.law.harvard.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2013/
06/suppressing-protest-2.pdf. Accessed 22 Feb. 2017.
Lerman, Amy E. "Protest Is Democracy at Work." Goldman
School of Public Policy,
U of California Berkeley, 23 Dec. 2014,
gspp.berkeley.edu/news/news-center/
protest-is-democracy-at-work. Accessed 23 Feb. 2017.
Singal, Jesse. "How Militarizing Police Can Increase Violence."
New York
Magazine, 14 Aug. 2014, nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/08/
how-militarizing-police-can-increase-violence.html.
Accessed 22 Feb. 2017.

A PEER REVIEW for C AND H, Write 4 specific categories separately..docx

A PEER REVIEW for C AND H, Write 4 specific categories separately..docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from ransayo

More from ransayo (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A PEER REVIEW for C AND H, Write 4 specific categories separately..docx