How to Answer the Global Revision Questions
The following collection of revision prompts (and their subsequent explanations) are designed to give you a helpful framework for critiquing your classmates’ papers. You should first read your classmate’s paper carefully and then make the most helpful critical commentary you can. The questions below should serve as a helpful guide, not a straitjacket.
You will notice that these global revision prompts do not address surface issues which are corrected by editing. Instead, they deal with the more substantive, structural issues of an essay. (We will use a different set of prompts for local revision which will focus more upon the surface features of a more polished draft.)
If the paper you are critiquing exhibits a problem not addressed by one of these questions, that does not mean you should not address the problem.
What do you like about the paper? What works well?
Come now, there must be something good you can say about the paper. Is it an interesting topic? Has the writer given a particularly good example? Are there any memorable visual images? Do the sentences show variety in their length and construction? Does the paper include specific details about the topic? Is the material clearly organized?
How well do you think the writer keeps his or her readers in mind?
Does the paper consider the attitudes of the reader? Does it take into account the reader’s previous experiences and knowledge? Does it contain information that will interest the reader? Are the vocabulary, tone, and style appropriate for the chosen audience? Is the paper too long for a busy reader, or too short for someone who needs an in-depth account?
How could he or she communicate better with the reader?
Does the paper consider the attitudes of the reader? Does it take into account the reader’s previous experiences and knowledge? Does it contain information that will interest the reader? Are the vocabulary, tone, and style appropriate for the chosen audience? Is the paper too long for a busy reader, or too short for someone who needs an in-depth account?
Does the writer seem to have a clear purpose?
Is it clear what the writer is trying to accomplish? Is there a genuine need for the paper? Does it primarily inform, persuade, explain, or entertain? Is the purpose appropriate for the audience? For instance, there isn’t much point in addressing a persuasive paper to a reader who already agrees with the writer’s position, or to one who is absolutely opposed.
What suggestions can you make about improving the purpose?
Is it clear what the writer is trying to accomplish? Is there a genuine need for the paper? Does it primarily inform, persuade, explain, or entertain? Is the purpose appropriate for the audience? For instance, there isn’t much point in addressing a persuasive paper to a reader who already agrees with the writer’s position, or to one who is absolutely opposed.
How well does the paper focus on its topic?
What suggestions can you make? Has the writer narrowed the topic enough to provide specific details without overwhelming the reader? For example, a short paper called “Communism vs. Capitalism” could hardly be expected to provide more than a few generalities about the two economic systems. If the topic does need to be narrowed, what sub-topics in the paper are especially interesting? Could one of them be expanded into a complete paper?
What questions do you have about the paper? What more do you need to know?
Does the paper bring up any important points without fully explaining them? What details are needed to support the claims made by the writer? Does the paper include facts which seem irrelevant to the topic?
What examples might help?
Does the paper include ideas that could be explained more clearly by specific examples? Would anecdotes, metaphors, or comparisons help the reader to understand certain points? If the paper concerns human activities, is the reader able to see examples of individual people performing those actions?
What specific suggestions do you have for improving the paper?
What particular problems do you believe the writer needs to concentrate on in the next draft? What improvements will help to make the next draft significantly better than this one?
General comments:
What is your overall impression of the paper? In general, do you find the topic to be an interesting, manageable one? What do you see as the clearest direction for the next draft to take?