Peer Review & Self Review
ASSIGNED QUESTIONS
- Describe two strengths of the Annotated Bibliography.
- Suggest two places where the Annotated Bibliography could be improved. Justify your rationale for each suggestion.
- Explain how well the sources represent multiple perspectives on the topic. Justify your rationale for the evaluation. Provide a suggestion for including better sources or more points of view.
- Explain how well the writer summarizes the overall research conversation. Explain how the writer plans to enter that conversation. Provide a suggestion for improving the final paragraph or two, which should provide an overview of the topic and research conversation.
- Evaluate whether each annotation clearly summarizes the source, so that someone who has not read it will understand the main ideas. Justify your rationale. Identify whether summaries are neutral, fair, and accurate. If so, justify your rationale. If not, describe where you were confused or needed more information, or where the writer’s bias is apparent.
- Identify whether the writer follows each article summary with an evaluation or assessment of the source. Evaluate whether the writer indicates how this source will be used in the argument essay. Justify your rationale. Provide a suggestion for improving the response/evaluation portion of the annotations, referring to specific sources as necessary.
- Identify whether each annotation is preceded by an MLA-style works cited entry. Identify whether all relevant information is included. If not, indicate which entries need revision. If so, justify your rationale.
- Answer the questions and respond to any concerns the writer identified in the Annotated Bibliography “Dear Reader” Letter. For your self-review, elaborate on how you wish to improve the paper.
