The colonists did not like the Stamp Act!
Peer Review Protocol
Read, Comment, Discuss
- Read each other's work
- Comment on the work in writing by using the comment function.
- 2 compliments
- 2 questions
- 2 suggestions or comments of concern
- Discuss what you are seeing and thinking. Also, address the questions that have been generated!
Peer Reviewers need to remember the rhetorical situation with this particular draft. It is a first draft! The best help and comments you can give will focus on the big picture or what we writing studies peeps like to call global concerns.
- Are the ideas clear and well-developed?
- Does the writer work to help the audience understand the rhetorical situation and the historical context?
This is not the time to fix or comment on little stuff. We will tackle these local concerns later.
Peer Review Focus
- Does the thesis work?
- Does it provide a "blueprint" for the rest of the paper?
- Does it let readers know that the essay is an investigation of a rhetorical situation?
- Does it specifically name the primary source document, when and where it was written, the writer, the audience?
- Ch. 4 is all about the events leading to the Revolutionary War.
- Ch. 4 is all about the tensions between the colonists and the British.
- Ch. 4 is all about the fact that some colonists (like Jonathan Sewall) sided with the British; while others (like John Adams) felt that their rights and liberties were being trampled.
- Does the writer provide enough background information about the situation between the British and the colonists?
- Does the writer include specific details and events that help the reader to understand the historical context?
- Does the writer provide information that has been properly cited from Hollitz and other sources?