Objectives:

Students will effectively analyze an argument

Students will improve revision skills
Students will correctly identify absolute phrases
By critically examining peer writing, students will gain a better understanding of the
writing process and the elements of a well written paper

Materials:

Students Frankenstein analyses rough drafts

Writing utensils (pens, pencils, markers)

Procedure:
1) Minilesson on the difference between revision and editing
a. The writing process is a lot like building a house. Once you have your rough
draft, you work on revising. Revising is about constructing the foundation of your
house. You look at the structure of your house. You look at the contents, such as
how many rooms it has or should have. And does each room have a purpose? Are
the rooms organized in a logical layout? But editing is all about the small details
of your house. Its about sprucing up your paint, fixing the trim, and freshening
the carpet. So, revision is about looking at the big things. Is your paper focused?
Does it have structure? Are your paragraphs logically organized? Does each
paragraph have its own idea? Editing, on the other hand, is about looking for the
little things. Are your commas in the correct places? Are all of your sentences
punctuated? Do you make correct word choices?
2) Distribute 4 copies of the Peer Workshop handout to each student
3) Task students to use the handout to first assess their own writing
4) Break students into groups of 3 or 4 to read and discuss each others writing ***NOTE:
For students who are doing the creative analysis, direct their group members to use the
workshop handout to assess only their argument part of the assignment. Direct students to
use their knowledge of writing to comment on the fictional portion of the assignment.
5) Remind students that all rough draft and workshop materials will be turned in with the
final draft

WORKSHOP FOCUS QUESTIONS

Name:__________________
Draft:__________________
Assignment:_____________

Directions: Use the questions below to guide discussion of your peers writing. Afterwards, use
the bottom portion of this handout to compare your peers feedback to the feedback you gave
yourself. In addition, reflect on your plans for revision.

What is the topic of the paper? How does the author introduce the topic? Are there any other
effective ways the topic could be introduced?

Is there a clear thesis statement? Is the authors thesis statement well placed? Is there sufficient
build up to the thesis statement? If so, how does the author build up to their thesis? How could it
be done differently?

Does the paper maintain focus? How is it organized? Could it be organized better? Why?

Does the paper include relevant, strong textual evidence to support the authors argument? Could
the paper use more supporting details? Explain why or why not.

Does the paper flow well? Does it effectively use transitions and contain varied sentence
structure? (Does the author use any absolute phrases? Are there places where the author could?)

Does the paper have a strong introduction and conclusion? How do these two paragraphs work
together and with the body of the paper?

Additional comments, suggestions, or advice:

FEEDBACK COMPARISON AND PLANS FOR REVISION