Students: This form is to grade your peer review. Hand this in (stapled on top of the peer review form), along with the paper you have reviewed.

Computer Science 3604
Form to Grade Peer Reviews -- To be used by Instructor and GTA

Grading Sheet - Assignment #5c (Peer Review for Writing Assignment #5b)

Your Name (the peer reviewer):                                                                   Date handed in                                           

Name of the author of the paper you reviewed:_________________________________________________

Title of paper reviewed:_________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________

Grades and comments here are with respect to how well you, the peer reviewer, handled these parts of your review. This means that we are grading your review here, not the paper. So, for example, under "Organization", the grading here is how well you reviewed/graded the paper for organization. The final category (Style of Peer Review) applies to the style of the review itself.

                  How well did peer reviewer address Content of proposal (15 points)                                                                                  

• good choice of issue as subject
• reflects knowledge of subject
• persuasiveness (e.g., arguments to motivate importance)
• specific action proposed
• length is in assigned range (deduction if word count not specified)
• not repetitive

                 How well did peer reviewer address Organization of proposal (15 points)                                                                          

• order in which ideas are presented
• state problem, make clear what is sought as a solution
• acknowledgments and references

                  How well did peer reviewer address Structure of proposal (15 points)                                                                                

• good logical flow
• cohesive sentences (single thought)

                 How well did peer reviewer address Style and Tone of proposal (10 points)                                                                       

• professional and formal, rather than chatty and casual
• clarity:  are the points made clearly and precisely to the reader

                  How well did peer reviewer address Mechanics of proposal (20 points)                                                                             

• spelling and typos
• sentence structure
• grammar and punctuation
• proofread by (the names must be signed by the proofreaders in order to get credit for this item)

                  Overall comments from reviewer to author (25 points)      

• overall quality of your (the reviewer) comments to the author
• how well your comments match those of the GTA
• professional tone of your comments
• how helpful your comments are in helping the author revise the paper                                                                    

                  Style of Peer Review (no positive points but but failure in this category can lead to possible significant deductions)      

• constructive and helpful
• specific, not just vague and/or critical -- show specifics of what author should do
• supportive, not "slamming"
• helps author with revision

                  Deductions (lateness, not following instructions)

                  Total Points for Peer Review (100 points)