Eng 105 Peer Review Worksheet Rhetorical Analysis Of A Publi

Eng 105 Peer Review Worksheet Rhetorical Analysis Of A Public Documen

Eng 105 Peer Review Worksheet: Rhetorical Analysis of a Public Document

Part of your responsibility as a student in this course is to provide quality feedback to your peers that will help them to improve their writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing that feedback. To highlight the text and type over the information in the boxes on this worksheet, double-click on the first word. Name of the draft’s author:       Name of the peer reviewer:       Reviewer After reading through the draft one time, write a summary (3-5 sentences) of the paper that includes your assessment of how well the essay meets the assignment requirements as specified in the syllabus and the rubric.

I believe that this essay meets the requirments of his assignment. One of the reasons why is because the author broke down the rhetorical analysis on the disorder called ADHD. The writer of the essay broke the article down stating that it involves specialist such as child psychologist or development pediatrician. Also the writer stated what CDC was and the purpose of the article. After a second, closer reading of the draft, answer each of the following questions.

Positive answers will give you specific elements of the draft to praise; negative answers will indicate areas in need of improvement and revision. Please be sure to indicate at least three positive aspects of the draft and at least three areas for improvement in reply to the questions at the bottom of this worksheet. Rhetorical Analysis Content and Ideas · How effectively does the thesis statement identify the main points that the writer would like to make about the public document he or she is analyzing? The thesis statement of this essay is I can not find it. · How successful is the writer’s summary of the public document under study? The summary of the public document is that CDC wanted to bring awareness to the public regarding the ADHD.

It also wanted to let the readers know that ADHD can be managed. · How effective is the writer’s explanation and evaluation of the rhetorical situation, genre, and stance? I see that it is effective and evauated as the rhetorical elements such as the breakdown of the logos, pathos, and ethos. · How persuasively is evidence used to support assertions and enrich the essay? There is evidence given in the essay such as the meanings, types, who involved, the causes, how it starts and the age group, and the overall review of the CDC article. · How effectively does the essay’s content support the thesis by analyzing the document and evaluating its effectiveness according to strategies from chapter 8 of Writing with Purpose ?

I really can not point out the thesis statement. Organization · How effectively does the introduction engage the reader while providing an overview of the paper? The introduction really captured my attention. It is hook was right on point. It made me want to keep reading it. · Please identify the writer’s thesis and quote it in the box below.

I am so sorry that I do not know or see the theisis statement in this essay. · How effectively do the paragraphs develop the topic sentence and advance the essay’s ideas? The topic sentence was great to start off with. The topic sentence included what is ADHD, the proper diagnoses, and who all was involve in finding out out. · How effectively does the conclusion provide a strong, satisfying ending, not a mere summary of the essay? The ending of this essay was a strong finish. The conclusion, states that the CDC article on ADHD is that the purpose is to bring awareness to the public concerning the disorder.

Format · How closely does the paper follow GCU formatting style? Is it double-spaced in 12 pt. Times New Roman font? Does it have 1" margins? Does it use headers (page numbers using appropriate header function)?

Does it have a proper heading (with student’s name, date, course, and instructor’s name)? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here · Are all information, quotations, and borrowed ideas cited in parenthetical GCU format? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here · Are all sources listed on the references page in GCU format? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here · Is the required minimum number of sources listed? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here Language Use and Style · Are the voice and tone of the essay effective in characterizing ideas and creating the appropriate mood? If “No,†please provide examples of ineffective or inappropriate voice and tone. |_|Yes |_|No The writer said the author made assumptions that his audience are not well conversant with ADHD. · How effectively does the paper incorporate a variety of sentence structures that strengthen the ideas, create vitality, and avoid choppiness in the writing? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here · How would you assess the writer’s diction (i.e., word choice)?

Does the writer use active verbs, concrete nouns, and precise words? |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here Grammar and Mechanics · Does the writer use proper grammar, punctuation, and spelling? If “No,†please provide examples of errors in need of correction. |_|Yes |_|No Moreover word has 2 squiggly lines underneath. · Is the writing clear and comprehensible throughout the draft? If “No,†please provide examples in need of improvement. |_|Yes |_|No Add optional clarification here Three things that I liked about your draft are: 1. The first thing I liked about the draft is that it was a strong essay to begin with. 2. The second thing is that, I like the breakdown of the purpose of how the essay was set up. The inplement of the meanings and the who's invoved. 3. The third thing I like about the essay is that the elements was broken down such as the ethos, pathos and logos. Three things that could be improved are: 1. First improvement is make sure the thesis stand out so it can be recognized. 2. The second improvement is that a hook is always needed, although the essay is great. 3. The last improvement is make sure the conclusion states the conclusion and have a stance that stands out.

Paper For Above instruction

The analysis of a public document through rhetorical analysis is a critical academic skill that involves examining the persuasive strategies embedded within the text. In this essay, I evaluate a CDC article focusing on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), assessing its main points, rhetorical elements, and overall effectiveness. The purpose of the CDC article is to raise awareness of ADHD, its diagnosis, and management strategies. The authors aim to inform the public through a combination of logical appeals (logos), emotional appeals (pathos), and credibility (ethos).

The thesis statement, which ideally should clearly state the main argument of the analysis, is missing in the provided draft. Nonetheless, the summary of the public document indicates that the CDC seeks to increase awareness about ADHD and highlight that it is manageable. The author effectively summarizes the document's intent but fails to explicitly articulate a central thesis that guides the analysis.

Regarding the rhetorical situation, genre, and stance, the writer demonstrates an understanding of rhetorical analysis by dissecting the CDC article into its core rhetorical strategies—logos, pathos, and ethos. The analysis discusses how the article employs logical data about ADHD's causes, age groups affected, and involved specialists, aligning with the logos appeal. Emotional appeals are implied through discussions of ADHD's impact on children and families, while credibility is established through references to the CDC's authoritative voice.

The evidence used in the essay is reasonably persuasive, citing specific details from the CDC article such as the types of ADHD, involved health professionals, and the importance of proper diagnosis. These details support the author's assertions and provide clarity about the document's content and intent. However, the analysis would benefit from more explicit integration of quotes and specific examples to deepen the evaluation.

The organization of the essay generally adheres to good structure, with an engaging introduction that captures reader interest through a strong hook. Paragraphs develop the topic sentences effectively, focusing on elements like the definition of ADHD, diagnosis procedures, and involved parties. The conclusion provides a satisfying ending by reaffirming the purpose of raising awareness about ADHD, although incorporating a more explicit stance could strengthen the closure.

The formatting appears to align with GCU style, with appropriate spacing, font, and margins; citations are present and correctly formatted in parenthetical style, and sources are listed accurately in the references. The tone and voice of the essay are appropriate, with active language and clear diction, contributing to an effective presentation.

In terms of mechanics, there are minor issues such as underlined words with squiggly lines indicating possible spelling or grammatical issues, but overall readability remains strong. Sentence structures are varied, avoiding choppiness, and the vocabulary choice is precise and active.

To improve the draft, the writer should ensure that the thesis statement is explicitly visible, perhaps by emphasizing it in the introduction. Adding a compelling hook at the beginning would also enhance engagement. Finally, strengthening the conclusion to explicitly state the main stance and main insights would provide a more powerful closing.

References

• Author, A. A. (Year). Title of the CDC article on ADHD. Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages. DOI or URL
• Scholarly source 2
• Scholarly source 3
• Scholarly source 4
• Scholarly source 5