Peer review for Sarah

Language Paper Peer Review
Your Name:
Writer’s Name:


1. How does the writer reflect on the interview process? Are the internal thoughts of the writer towards the informant expressed? Quote at least 3 examples
• There were some quotes about her thought process during the interview. “Should I follow her into the kitchen” whether to ask the question about Leander leaving.
.
2. What differences in terms of race, class, gender, etc. are discussed regarding each informant? List examples from each interview segment.
• I don’t see any

3. How does the writer characterize his or her informant? Do you think there should be more physical description, material description, background, or nonverbal communication to better understand the person and interaction?
• She does a good job describing what she was wearing maybe she could describe more of the seeing than just the buggy and horses

4. Do the informants seem to be full characters you could describe with unique worldviews? Quote any examples that helped you know the informant’s worldview.
• I think that I can get a fairly good picture of their worldview but maybe she could give me a better picture

5. Each interview should be distinct from the other and in narrative form. What is the story being told about each interview? Describe them separately here.
• I can’t tell a difference between the interviews

6. What is the thesis for interview 1? What is the thesis for interview 2? Are these theses truly theses—that is, do they make surprising and specific claims that need support to be accepted by an audience? If not, what’s the problem?
• I don’t know if there is a thesis in this paper on not. I don’t know how to spot it in this kind of paper. sorry

7. Does there seem to be a balance of summary and quotation? Or does one mode seem overused or underused?
• I think that there are a lot of quotations. In the one we read in our book, there was only one quote in the paper and the rest were paraphrases.

8. For each interview, what do you think the writer most wanted to know?
• I think that there is only one interview but I think she most wanted to know about the amish thoughts about Leeander leaving


9. What is the verbal art discussed? Do you think it fits the criteria of verbal art? What’s the deeper level of meaning for the culture?
• She does a good job describing the surrounding area and the people who come to greet her. I think that she could go into more detail

10. What new knowledge do you have after reading these interviews? What would you still like to know about the culture?
• I now know hoe amish people feel about people leaving their roots, and how they feel about religion

11. On your copy cross out any portions of the paper you think are irrelevant to understanding the informant, the culture, or the writer’s perspective. Don’t be shy. The writer doesn’t have to take your advice.
•

12. Comment on the organization. Does it seem to be working?
• I think it is working, it just needs another interview in the paper

13. Comment on the writing style. Is it gripping enough to hold an average reader’s attention?
• I got a little bored reading it. Try to find a way to grab the readers attention better

14. What’s the single most important thing this writer could do to improve this paper before it’s graded?
• Add another interview