Peer Review Form

ENGL 343 / NCLC 343 Media Analysis #2
Peer Review Guidelines

Reviewer:
Analyzer:
Analyzer’s Email:
Name of Analyzed Work:

1) Begin by reading the entire analysis, exploring all the possible links.

2) Briefly summarize the analysis’s central argument in your own words. If you have trouble identifying a clear thesis, write one that makes sense in light of the entire analysis.

3) How successfully do the lexia build upon one another? What advice do you have in terms of content and design that would help the analysis build in an accumulative fashion, so that reading all the lexia results in a coherent argument? Keep in mind that for a critical analysis of a new media text, the “puzzle” model will probably be more preferable than the “kaleidoscope” structure.

4) How does the organization and design of the analysis hold together? Which lexia don’t connect well with preceding or subsequent ones? Offer concrete suggestions on how to improve any confusing links.

5) How would you rate the analysis’s use of hypertext to further its argument? What problems do you see for the reader in terms of balancing coherency and chaos?

6) Identify three places in the analysis where you were confused, and explain what was confusing.

7) Are there lexia that seem less coherent or less convincing than others? If so, choose one and explain how it might be clarified and better supported.

8) What’s the best thing about this analysis?

9) Make three or four direct statements recommending specific changes that the writer should make for the final version of the analysis.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

10) How would you rank the originality of this analysis? Does it go beyond our class discussion of the text in interesting and new ways?