Final answer:
Peer review of a draft involves identifying strengths, such as a strong thesis, and weaknesses, like underdeveloped arguments. Suggest specific improvements like reexamining the thesis, revisiting sources, and reorganizing for clarity. Key focuses for revision should include clarifying the thesis, bolstering evidence, and enhancing organization.
Step-by-step explanation:
Providing feedback on your peer's draft is a critical part of the revision process. In this case, a clear summary of your peer's strengths and weaknesses will guide them in refining their work. First, identify what is working well in the draft. This may include a strong thesis statement, coherent organization, compelling evidence, or effective engagement with the audience.
Weaknesses might involve areas that require deeper development or clarification. Examples include underdeveloped arguments, lack of evidence, unclear thesis, or writing that does not effectively connect with the intended audience. It's essential to explain why these elements are working or not, to provide your peer with a clear direction for revision.
To ensure constructive criticism, you can suggest specific revision strategies. Consider recommending a reassessment of the thesis to more accurately reflect the draft's content, revisiting sources for a more robust argument, reorganizing paragraphs for better flow, or adding transition sentences for coherence.
When reviewing, be sure to comment on how effectively the draft may serve its purpose of persuasion and whether it seems tailored to its intended audience. Additionally, you might consider directing your peer's attention to the development of counterclaims and the need for possibly stronger evidence to support their position.
In closing, the three focuses for revision could be clarifying the thesis, strengthening evidence, and improving organization for better reader engagement.