Peer Response Comments: Fully ironic essay

Peer editing steps for this paper: Groups of four

1. Writer #1 reads the paper out loud.

2. Other group member(s) write down general and specific notes as the writer is reading and for a short time after the piece is read. You may ask for parts to be read again, or to look at the essay. You may NOT ask questions about the true (as opposed to ironic) purpose of the essay.

3. Other group members read their comments/questions one at a time, with no response from the writer #1. Give your peer edit comment sheets to the writer.

4. Writer may respond and general discussion may take place.

5. Repeat this procedure for all group members.

6. Choose one or two pieces to read to the class.

Hints:

· Begin with something that you liked.

· Use “I” statements (I liked... I would change... etc.).

· Avoid “you” statements (you should change... etc.).

· Ask questions, point out effective words, and point out areas that are confusing or need clarification.

Respond in writing to the following:

Introduction and thesis:

1. Does the introduction catch your interest and make you want to read on? Specifically how does the writer do this?

2. Does the introduction (not necessarily just the opening paragraph) include a clearly ironic statement of thesis? State what you think is the REAL thesis in your own words. Remember that this should be a critical position on something big or small.

3. Does the introduction set the ironic tone for the piece? Is this ironic stance consistent through the piece?

Moving from general to concrete:

4. What is the most effective (or humorous) example used to back up the thesis? Why do you think this works best?

5. What is the least effective example? Why?

6. Is the tone satirical without being sarcastic or simply mean-spirited?

Holistic evaluation:

7. After reading the essay are you convinced of the writer's real (as opposed to ironic) position? Are you confused about what the writer was really saying? Why or why not?