ENGL&102 – English Composition II (online)

Peer Review: Analysis of Frankenstein

These notes introduce the shape and spirit of the peer review discussion. The purpose of this peer review is not only to help improve your classmate’s draft but also to practice skills yourself—skills you can use later on your own work. Your aim is to help the writer see where specifically they need to address certain aspects of this assignment AND to show me that you understand and can apply the concepts we’ve been learning in class. This peer review assignment is worth a total of 25 points.

Your Peer Review Responsibilities

  • Post the rough draft of your Analysis Essay to the Week 3 Discussion (5 points).
  • Write in-text comments on each draft in your group that address ALL NINE (9) of the Analysis of Frankenstein Peer Review Questions included below (15 points).
  • Write a 5-6 sentence summary comment at the end of each draft that thanks the writer for sharing their work and provides an overall impression of what interested you about the draft and what confused you. What would you want to read more about? (5 points).

Analysis of Frankenstein Peer Review Questions

  1. Is the thesis statementexactly two sentences: one that presents a topic and another that presents a claim about that same topic?Is the TS focused, arguable, and complex?
  1. Are all quotations stepped into and out of effectively? Do any paragraphs begin or end with quotations? Is paraphrased used to establish context for quotations?Are all quotations explicated effectively?
  1. Has the writer employed enough evidence (in the form of quotations & paraphrase) to support his or her assertions?Are there any ideas that need further explication?
  1. Does each paragraph effectively reference TS language? Where could this be done more effectively?
  1. Has the writer effectively referenced Marilyn Butler’s “Introduction” and “Appendix B”?
  1. Has the writer addressed all four assignment questions? To answer this question, make sure to review the assignment sheet posted in the Week 1 Module.
  1. Is the writer providing enough context for the imagined hypothetical reader? To answer this question, make sure to review the assignment sheet. Where could more context or explanation be provided? What context or explanation is needed?
  1. Has the writer distinguished accurately, consistently, and effectively between Marilyn Butler and Mary Shelley?
  1. As this is a rough draft, the organization may not be all the way there yet. Do you see opportunities for bridges (transitions) between separate points in the analysis?