Peer
Review; SLA Argument
Author’s
Name: Laura Hall Peer
Review’s Name: AJ Joslin
What is the main point,
the argument? [List
page # and paragraph—and then write it in your own words]
The
author is for Shelby Lee Adams work.
How does the argument
refute potential detractors? [Please list anything the author may have missed
that they need to address]
The
author states that these are powerful images that the critics are looking at in
the wrong way.
Introduction: Describe in your own
words what the intro does, then if its effective. Why/Why Not? [Please be as specific
as possible]
I
think it is effective. It covers Shelby Lee Adams’s past, his work and the
author’s opinion of him.
Paragraph Concerns: if there are any paragraphs with more than one
main point, address whether they should be split into separate paragraphs, or
if one point seems unnecessary and can be deleted. Are there any paragraphs doing the same thing
and can be combined? This is a good place to discuss overall structure, the
logical series of points being made. If
the paragraph sequence could be altered for greater effectiveness, please note.
The
paragraphs work well they all stay on topic.
Evidence: Is each main point backed with evidence? Has the author thoroughly explained the implications
of the point being made? Offer advice on
how to back up the point (photo treatment, quotes, logic).
The
author explains In Plato’s cave very well, but I think a citation is need in
the first paragraph on page 3. I would like to see a few more sources to get
more opinions.
Transitions: Does each paragraph
flow well from the previous? If there
are any fuzzy transitions, please list them specifically—page #, paragraph
#--and give advice on how to make the transition smoother (or moved to
somewhere else in the paper).
I
like the transitions. They flow from one paragraph to another.
Conclusion: Is the conclusion effective in wrapping up the
argument, leaving the reader/listener well aware of the point(s) being
made? Does the author leave any loose
ends (unfinished arguments begun earlier)?
Can the conclusion be strengthened?
The
conclusion wraps up the paper well the last line ends the paper nicely.
Voice/Audience: Describe how the voice is effective in
addressing this controversy, keeping in mind that there are people who will not
agree with the argument. Do you feel
that the author is effective in projecting him/herself as a rationale authority
who had given thought to all viewpoints?
Voice is hard to maintain throughout an entire paper. Please list passages and word choices that
hinder the success of the rationale voice, and offer advice on how to make it
stronger.
The
author’s voice is strong. I like use of the Blacksburg location compared to
Kentucky.
Revision Suggestions: [recap any suggestions
made above, and then list the two most important ones you feel need to occur to
achieve maximum effectiveness.]
I would suggest
adding a source or two to diversify the opinions in the paper. Also cite the
documentary on page 3.
No comments:
Post a Comment