Ms. Cote English 11 Peer-Evaluation What is a peer-evaluation? An evaluation in which you will use specific criteria to assess the work of your peers. Teacher Notes: Students will be informed that the above information is the description of a peer- evaluation. The “specific criteria,” mentioned in the description, are the standards that students will use to evaluate the work of other students. The standards, in this case, will be presented in the form of a rubric (See Peer-Evaluation Rubric). Below are the specific criteria, and questions, that you will be using to evaluate your peers’ essays: Peer-Evaluation Rubric CATEGORY 4 - Exceeds Standards 3 - Meets Standards 2 - Approaching Standards 1 - Below Standards Score Introduction The student uses a hook that The student uses a hook that The student uses a hook that fails The student does not use grabs the attention of others grabs the attention of others to grab the attention of others. a hook. The student and piques their interest in the but fails to pique their interest The student introduces the does not introduce the controversial issue. The in the controversial issue. The controversial issue but does not controversial issue or student introduces the issue student introduces the issue state his/her position on the issue. state any kind of and, in a very clear and and states his/her position on The student briefly summarizes position on the issue. understandable way, states the issue. However, his/her less than 3 pieces of supporting The student does not his/her position on the issue. position on the issue is vague evidence. summarize his/her The student briefly or difficult to understand. The supporting evidence. summarizes 3 or more pieces student briefly summarizes of supporting evidence. only 3 pieces of supporting evidence. Body The student uses 3 or more The student uses only 3 pieces The student uses less than 3 The student does not use pieces of supporting evidence of supporting evidence to pieces of supporting evidence to any supporting evidence to justify his/her position on justify his/her position on the justify his/her position on the to justify his/her the controversial issue. Each controversial issue. Each controversial issue. Each piece of position on the piece of evidence is briefly piece of evidence is briefly evidence is briefly introduced, but controversial issue. introduced, and how it justifies introduced, and how it how it justifies the student's the student's position, is justifies the student's position, position is not fully explained. explained in great detail. The is explained. The evidence is The evidence is not arranged in evidence is arranged by order arranged by order of any particular order. of importance (least important importance (least important to to most important). most important), but the arrangement may not be appropriate. Transitions The student uses well-worded The student uses brief phrases The student uses brief phrases to The student does not use phrases to shift seamlessly to shift between his/her shift between his/her explanations any phrases to shift between his/her explanations explanations of the supporting of the supporting evidence for between his/her of the supporting evidence for evidence for his/her position his/her position on the explanations of the his/her position on the on the controversial issue. controversial issue. However, the supporting evidence for controversial issue. phrases do not appear to create his/her position on the any real connections between the controversial issue. pieces of evidence. Conclusion The student restates his/her The student restates his/her The student repeats, word for The student's argument position on the controversial position on the controversial word, the position on the does not have a issue and briefly summarizes issue and briefly summarizes controversial issue that he/she has conclusion; it just ends. the supporting evidence. The the supporting evidence. in the introduction. author closes with a final thought that encourages others to further consider the student's position. Teacher Notes: Students will use the Peer-Evaluation Rubric above to evaluate peers’ essays, which will be read aloud. As a presenter reads his/her essay, students will take note of how the presenter has addressed the evaluation criteria in the essay. After the presenter is done reading the essay, the students will use numbers in the “Score” column of the rubric to indicate whether or not the presenter’s essay exceeded (4), met (3), approached (2) or was below (1) the standards described in the criteria categories of the rubric. Peer-Evaluation Questions: 1. Was the essay clearly organized? Why or why not? Teacher Notes: Students will use the evaluation criteria on the rubric to help them answer this question. The essay was clearly organized if it had an introduction that laid the foundation for the presenter’s argument; several body paragraphs that flowed and contained supporting evidence that built on the presenter’s argument; and a conclusion that neatly wrapped up the presenter’s argument. 2. Was the essay well-developed? Why or why not? Teacher Notes: Students will use the evaluation criteria on the rubric to help them answer this question. The essay was well-developed if the introduction grabbed the students’ attention while firmly establishing the presenter’s argument; the body paragraphs described the supporting evidence, in-depth, and how it justified the presenter’s argument; and the conclusion summarizes the argument and encourages the students to further consider the presenter’s argument. 3. Was the overall argument, presented in the essay, valid and effective? Why or why not? Teacher Notes: Students can use their responses to 1. and 2. to help them answer this question. The essay presented a valid argument if it thoroughly justified its thesis statement (position) through the development of its supporting evidence. The essay presented an effective argument if its supporting evidence was organized in a way that dramatically, and convincingly, led up to the conclusion of the argument. 4. How might you improve upon the argument presented in this essay? Teacher Notes: Students will describe what they would change about the essay’s organization and development in order to make the argument, presented in the essay, more valid and effective. What are the rules for conducting a peer-evaluation? Responses to evaluation questions should be: Longer than a sentence Teacher Notes: Students’ should use specific criteria from the Peer-Evaluation Rubric to explain their answers to the Peer-Evaluation Questions. Each answer should be at least three or four sentences long. Worded in a positive way Teacher Notes: Students should answer the questions with phrases such as “This part of the essay would have worked better if…” or “The essay should have included…” as opposed to phrases such as “This essay sucked” or “This essay was really bad.” In this way, students generate comments that sound genuinely constructive. Not be affected by personal biases Teacher Notes: Students should not base their evaluations of their peers’ essays on whether or not they like their peers or on whether or not they share their peers’ positions on a particular topic. The purpose of a peer-evaluation is to objectively assess another student’s work; not to cut that student down for who they are or what they believe. Direct questioning will be utilized to determine whether or not students comprehend the peer-evaluation process. Below is a list of questions to be asked at the conclusion of the lecture: How can you ensure that your essay is clearly organized? How can you ensure that your essay is well-developed? What could you do to increase your argument’s validity? What could you do to increase your argument’s effectiveness? Assignment: Part 1 (In-class)- You will conduct an evaluation session, over a student sample essay, with the other members of your group (who were assigned the same school-oriented, controversial issue as you). During the small-group, evaluation session, record at least three other students’ comments, about the student-sample essay, that you particularly agreed with or disagreed with on your “Drafts” page. You should also explain why you agreed or didn’t agree with the comments that you chose to record. In addition, use the criteria provided in the Peer-Evaluation Rubric to make comments about the student-sample essay during the evaluation session, so that other students have the opportunity to consider your opinion on the validity and effectiveness of the essay. Part 2 (Due In-class)- After you have conducted the small-group, evaluation session, over the student sample essay, make a new page on your wiki entitled “Peer-Evaluation Practice” and list the page on the navigation bar of your wiki. Then go to the home page of the class wiki. Upload a Microsoft Word file entitled “Peer Evaluation” from the home page. The “Peer-Evaluation” file will contain the same Peer-Evaluation Rubric and Peer-Evaluation Questions that appear on this hand-out. Open the “Peer-Evaluation” file in Microsoft Word and fill-out the Peer- Evaluation Rubric and Peer-Evaluation Questions for the student sample essay. When you have finished filling out your peer-evaluation for the student sample essay, click “File” at the top of the screen and select “Save As.” Rename the file “Peer-Evaluation Practice.” Once the “Peer- Evaluation Practice” file has been saved, upload it onto your “Peer-Evaluation Practice” page and insert the file into the space provided. I will provide you with feedback, regarding your peer-evaluation practice, so that you can hone your peer-evaluation skills for use in the upcoming student presentations. The feedback will be based on the following criteria, which will also be used to evaluate the peer-evaluations for the student presentations: Peer-Evaluation Check-list: ______ Each criteria category on the rubric has been scored. ______ Responses to questions reflect the rubric standards. ______ Responses to questions are thoroughly explained. ______ Responses to questions are constructive. ______ Responses to questions are non-biased. ______ Correct spelling and grammar. Part 3 (Due Jan 23)- On your “Drafts” page, use your newly acquired knowledge of the peer- evaluation process to help you revise the second draft of your essay into a final draft. When you make a revision to the second draft of your essay, based on your peer-evaluation knowledge, post a comment about what you revised and why in the section labeled “Optional: a note about this edit for the page history log.” The comments that you make, on your revisions, will appear on the history section of your “Drafts” page. Teacher Notes: Students will be instructed to complete the above assignment. In Part 3, students should try to include terms, from the criteria on the Peer-Evaluation Rubric, in the comments regarding the further revisions that make to the second drafts of their essays. These revisions should be completely separate from the revisions that students make based on feedback from their peers and me.