Essay 2_Peer Critique Work Sheet_Leanne

Reviewer name: Chris Kim

Workshop Author: Leanne Shashlo

Essay Title: Article Response

Peer Critique – Essay 2: Persuasive Essay with Annotated Bibliography

I. Thesis

(1) What is the subject of the essay (the issue)?

-Lack of the University’s effort to inform students about scholarship programs

(2) What is the argument of the main opinion article the author is responding to? (complaint)

-The University of Michigan’s high tuition cost excludes students from low socioeconomic background. Students with low socioeconomic status who do not have financial affordability to pay tuition cost for the university do not even attempt to apply for admission, because they know they could not attend school due to lack of financial strength. And the University does not provide students with available scholarship sources thoroughly, which hinders students from financial support.

(3) Restate and characterize the author’s argument (thesis/pitch):

-The author largely disagrees with the article’s argument; the author thinks the University is providing scholarship information to the students. Also the author argues that there should be scholarship program aimed not only for low-income students, but also other aids considering wide economic diversity of students.

II. Clarity, Development, and Structure

(1) Does each paragraph advance the argument with a clear transition and topic sentence? Does the topic sentence consistently present the central idea of the paragraph?

-Yes, the author did a good job advancing the argument with smooth and clear transition and topic sentence. The author also did a decent job consistently presenting the central idea of the paragraph.

(2) How well does each paragraph use evidence to support its claims?

-The author used very specific and effective evidences to support her claim, especially first body paragraph where she mention specific program to refute the claim the article made.

(3) How well does the author introduce/contextualize quotations and paraphrases?

-The author effectively uses the quotation to support her view. The quotations are all properly used and follow the flow of the paper well.

(4) Does the essay consider at least one reasonable counterargument?

-No, I could not find a counterargument in the paper.

(5) How effectively does the essay conclude? Rather than summarizing, does it synthesize/consider counter-arguments/trace out implications or address a So What? question?

-Although the author generally summarizes the paper’s argument, the author leaves the readers with the necessity of more thorough analysis on the subject.

(6) Any final thoughts?

-In general, this paper is well organized and well supported. Although introduction seems little bit shaky, as the paper enters to the body paragraph, the paper turn into strong and thorough essay. Also, counterargument could be utilized to further strengthen the paper. But otherwise, the author did a decent job writing the paper.