Peer response to the 3 poems attach. on file
Guidelines for the Peer Response Papers
1) 2 full pages minimum, double-spaced in Times New Roman, 12-point font. 2 pages minimum, please. Submit them to the Peer Response Dropboxes under the appropriate Unit.
2) Peer Response papers should reflect close reading of the peer’s story/poem/play, a deeper, more detailed reading then, perhaps, other classmates’. This should be demonstrated in the paper in the following three ways:
1) The paper addresses at least ONE ELEMENT OF FICTION or POETRY (depending on the assignment) in-depth. Begin the paper with this analysis, and write about a paragraph analyzing how that element functions in the story/poem—what works about it and what doesn’t.
2) The paper addresses 3 THINGS YOU LIKED about the story/poem. These should be larger issues as much as possible; that is, cover the “big stuff”—instead of saying here that you liked a certain word used on page 5, or in line sixteen, if a poem. Instead of saying you like a specific word or a character’s name, discuss why you enjoyed the descriptions of the setting, or the overall way the theme was working in several scenes, the overall message of the poem, etc.
3) The paper addresses 3 SUGGESTIONS FOR REVISION. Again, these should be on the large-scale issues. In general, avoid suggestions about fixing grammar or spelling—that’s the writer’s responsibility to clean the text up for the final draft. Think about what the writer really needs to know from his/her reader, what the writer might not be able to see about the piece for him/herself.
4) How to get an “A” on the Peer Response Paper: Be specific! Give precise examples, quotes, details, page numbers (for stories), line numbers (for poems). Make insightful points that show you’ve carefully read and considered the piece and offer useful suggestions that 1) show you understand something about the craft of writing fiction/poetry/plays (apply the techniques of fiction writing to plays, since both involve story) and 2) will help the author achieve what he/she is trying to do in the rough draft.
5) These papers need not be formally written. They can be conversational in tone, but they should argue their analysis convincingly and back it up with lots of specific examples.