ENG-105 Peer Review Worksheet: Rhetorical Analysis of a Public
Document
Part of your responsibility as a student in this course is to provide quality feedback to your peers
that will help them to improve their writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing
that feedback. To highlight the text and type over the information in the boxes on this
worksheet, double-click on the first word.
Name of the draft’s author: Elizabeth Whorton
Name of the peer reviewer: Abigail Thompson
Reviewer
After reading through the draft one time, write a summary (3-5 sentences) of the paper that
includes your assessment of how well the essay meets the assignment requirements as
specified in the syllabus and the rubric.
Elizabeth did a great job summarizing the CDC's web page about ADHD, as well as providing examples
of ethos, logos, and pathos throughout her work. She discussed the appeal to the reader's emotions by
pointing out the pictures used on the page to show an emotional connection between a mother and her
children.
After a second, closer reading of the draft, answer each of the following questions. Positive
answers will give you specific elements of the draft to praise; negative answers will indicate
areas in need of improvement and revision. Please be sure to indicate at least three positive
aspects of the draft and at least three areas for improvement in reply to the questions at the
bottom of this worksheet.
Rhetorical Analysis Content and Ideas
• How effectively does the thesis statement identify the main points that the writer
would like to make about the public document he or she is analyzing?
The thesis statement shows the writer'sd purpose of their work, as well as mentions the research
from the CDC for individuals seeking further information about this disorder. Elizabeth also
discusses about the essay using ethos, logos, and pathos.
• How successful is the writer’s summary of the public document under study?
The writer's summary of the documet was great, she honed in on the use of pathos throughout the
page.
• How effective is the writer’s explanation and evaluation of the rhetorical situation,
genre, and stance?
The writer did a great job at defining the rhetorical analysis, but did not go too in depth on the
genre or stance of the work.
• How persuasively is evidence used to support assertions and enrich the essay?
Elizabeth used in text citations to show or quote the work of her source, Smith, V. (2015) as well
as provided facts from other CDC web pages besides just the one we were tasked to read.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
√ Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper KnowledgeBase. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €21,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
