Skip to main content
Humanities LibreTexts

1.16: Peer Review Checklist

  • Page ID
    5365
  • \( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

    Clip art of a checklist. No writing is visible, just lines where item text would appear.
    Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\)

    Each essay is made up of multiple parts. In order to have a strong essay each part must be logical and effective. In many cases essays will be written with a strong thesis, but the rest of the paper will be lacking; making the paper ineffective. An essay is only as strong as its weakest point.

    One of the most important steps for creating a strong essay is to have others review it. By completing a peer review you will be able to create a better thesis statement and supporting arguments.

    Using a checklist to complete your review will allow you to rate each of the parts in the paper according to their strength. There are many different peer review checklists, but the one below should be helpful for your assignment.

    1. Is the thesis clear?
    2. Does the author use his or her own ideas in the thesis and argument?
    3. Is the significance of the problem in the paper explained? Is the significance compelling?
    4. Are the ideas developed logically and thoroughly?
    5. Does the author use ethos effectively?
    6. Does the author use pathos effectively?
    7. Are different viewpoints acknowledged?
    8. Are objections effectively handled?
    9. Does the author give adequate explanations about sources used?
    10. Are the sources well-integrated into the paper, or do they seem to be added in just for the sake of adding sources?
    11. Is the word choice specific, concrete and interesting?
    12. Are the sentences clear?
    13. Is the overall organization of the argument effective?
    14. Are the transitions between paragraphs smooth?
    15. Are there any grammatical errors?

    Sources

    Based on the rubric found at: Grading Rubric Template (Word)


    This page titled 1.16: Peer Review Checklist is shared under a CC BY 4.0 license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Lumen Learning via source content that was edited to the style and standards of the LibreTexts platform; a detailed edit history is available upon request.