Peer Review for Public Statement

1. Public Statement
Peer Review
Introduction
• Does the title pique your interest and provide an accurate focus for the paper?
How could it do so more effectively?
• Are you convinced that a problem exists, it is significant, and it is solvable? How
could the writer improve the presentation of the problem?
Writer’s Position
• Is there a clear description of the writer’s position? Could it be made more clear
or precise?
• Do you need more details about the writer’s position to understand it? How could
the writer make his or her position clearer?
Justification
• How could the writer provide stronger reasons for his or her position? Where
could the reasons be better supported with more details and evidence? How could
the reasons appeals more to the values and beliefs of the audience?
• Can you think of additional justifying arguments (arguments from principle, from
consequences, from precedent or analogy)? How else could the writer improve
support for his or her position?
• Does the writer anticipate and address objections or alternative positions? Does
the writer convince you that his or her position is superior to alternatives? How
could the writer strengthen his or her rebuttal of objections or alternatives?
• What do you think the gut reaction of a typical reader would be to the writer’s
position?
• How might the writer improve the structure and clarity of the argument? (for
example, old before new material, effective topic sentences, transitions)
Correctness
Note any errors in grammar or usage. Common errors to look out for include:
• Incomplete or run on sentences
• Introductory clauses missing a comma
• Typos/Spelling errors
• Wordiness or pretentious language
• Subject/Verb agreement