Writer's Workshop Peer Conference Form For Persuasive Essays ✓ Solved

Writer's Workshop Peer Conference Form for Persuasive Essays

Persuasive Peer Conference Form:

  1. How many ideas are presented for the brainstorming portion? The writer should have at least 20 different ideas. If not, give suggestions.
  2. Which persuasive strategies did the writer use? Identify and cite the methods.
  3. Draw or describe a diagram that helps the reader follow the author's argument.
  4. Does each paragraph have a clear topic sentence that sets up the main idea?
  5. Does each paragraph include at least three supporting detail sentences? If not, add revision suggestions.
  6. Does the author present opposing views in an organized way with supporting details? If not, add revision suggestions.
  7. What is the conclusion? Restate it in your own words.
  8. Does the conclusion summarize instead of conclude? If so, suggest how to add a stronger conclusion.

Narrative Peer Conference Form:

  1. Is there a clear beginning, middle, and end? Explain how you identify each.
  2. What is the central conflict? Identify the type (character, nature, society, etc.).
  3. How does the plot develop? Describe evidence of development and what's missing.
  4. Describe four main elements of the setting found in the piece.
  5. Describe the characters and explain their development via appearance, action, dialogue, and monologue.
  6. What point of view is used? Explain and provide examples.
  7. What narrative devices are used (imagery, metaphor, simile, etc.)?

Descriptive Writing Checklist:

  • Identify specific activities and behaviors:
    1. Describe characters' specific actions.
    2. Name characters and give appearance and personality details.
    3. Identify the setting with details (location, weather, time, date).
  • Use deliberate word choice:
    1. Choose specific nouns.
    2. Use vivid verbs and avoid weak "to be" verbs.
    3. Add concise, colorful modifiers.
    4. Use synonyms appropriately to avoid repetition.
    5. Avoid overused words; choose fresher alternatives.
  • Incorporate sensory images:
    1. Sight
    2. Smell
    3. Touch
    4. Hearing
    5. Taste
  • Use figurative language:
    1. Personification
    2. Onomatopoeia
    3. Comparisons (similes, metaphors)
    4. Idioms and distinctive speech patterns

Paper For Above Instructions

This paper outlines an effective approach for completing the three peer-conference forms above (persuasive, narrative, descriptive) and provides model guidance a peer reviewer can use to give constructive, actionable feedback. The goal is to make peer conferencing systematic, evidence-based, and focused on revision moves that improve clarity, development, and reader engagement (Graham & Perin, 2007).

Persuasive Peer Review: Focus and Steps

Begin by identifying the writer's claim and audience. A helpful first response is an objective restatement: "The author argues that ... aimed at ...," which confirms comprehension and establishes a basis for feedback (Purdue OWL, 2020). For brainstorming, evaluate whether the writer generated many varied ideas (20 recommended). If fewer, suggest clustering smaller ideas, using prompts (who, what, when, where, why, how), or freewriting to reach the number (ReadWriteThink, n.d.).

Assess persuasive techniques: Are appeals to logos (facts, statistics), ethos (credibility), and pathos (emotion) present? Note specific examples and recommend adding evidence where claims are weak (Graff & Birkenstein, 2014). When a paragraph lacks a strong topic sentence, suggest a one-line replacement that establishes scope. For supporting details, require at least three concrete sentences—examples, facts, or short anecdotes—to make claims persuasive (Graham & Perin, 2007).

For opposing views, ensure the writer presents and refutes them respectfully and with evidence; if missing, suggest two likely counterarguments and model a rebuttal (Purdue OWL, 2020). Finally, critique the conclusion: if it merely summarizes, recommend a stronger ending that synthesizes the claim, highlights significance, and issues a call to action or implication (Strunk & White, 2000).

Narrative Peer Review: Structure and Stakes

When reviewing narrative pieces, identify the beginning, middle, and end by function rather than length. The beginning should hook and establish setting and protagonist; the middle develops conflict and complications; the end resolves the conflict or leaves a purposeful open question (Tompkins, 2013). Describe evidence that marks each section—inciting incident, rising action, climax, resolution—and point out missing transitions.

Pinpoint the central conflict (e.g., character vs. self, character vs. society) and evaluate whether stakes increase believably. Examine character development across four channels: appearance, action, dialogue, and interior monologue. Quote lines that reveal character trait through behavior and speech, and suggest richer sensory detail where characters feel thin (Zinsser, 2006). Check point of view: cite passages that reveal an internal narrator (first person) or an omniscient perspective, and recommend consistent POV control to avoid reader confusion (Hillocks, 1986).

Descriptive Writing: Techniques and Checklist Use

Descriptive writing is judged by sensory specificity and word choice. Use the checklist to search for named characters, concrete actions, and a clearly situated setting. Recommend substituting general nouns and verbs with specific, vivid options (avoid overuse of "is/was") and pruning excessive modifiers for concision (Strunk & White, 2000; Zinsser, 2006).

Encourage use of imagery and figurative language to engage multiple senses; for every image, ask the author which sense it targets and whether an alternate sensory detail might heighten impact (NCTE, 2013). Suggest onomatopoeia or personification when appropriate, and highlight examples of successful figurative language to scaffold revision (NWP & Nagin, 2003).

Practical Peer-Feedback Language and Revision Moves

Effective peer feedback balances descriptive praise with targeted suggestions. Use sentence stems: "I noticed..., which shows..., I wonder if..., Could you add...?" Offer at least three revision moves per major problem: (1) fix structural or thesis clarity, (2) add development or evidence, (3) strengthen diction or imagery. Cite sources or model sentences when suggesting replacements (Graff & Birkenstein, 2014).

Example Response Snippets (for reviewers)

Persuasive: "Your claim that the school should adopt later start times is clear, but paragraph 3 needs supporting data. Consider adding CDC sleep statistics and a student quote to satisfy ethos and pathos (Graham & Perin, 2007)."

Narrative: "The opening gives a vivid image of the rainy street (sight, sound), but the protagonist's motive is unclear until halfway through. Add an early line about why the outing matters to increase stakes (Tompkins, 2013)."

Descriptive: "You use strong verbs like 'lurched' and 'shimmered'; replace 'nice' with a more precise adjective and add a smell detail to deepen immersion (Zinsser, 2006)."

Conclusion

Using these forms, reviewers can deliver focused, evidence-based feedback that helps writers revise for clarity, development, and voice. Peer conferencing functions best when reviewers identify specific examples, suggest concrete revisions, and reference writing principles and models to guide improvement (Purdue OWL, 2020; Graham & Perin, 2007).

References

  • Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL). (2020). Purdue OWL: Audience, purpose, and thesis. https://owl.purdue.edu
  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing Next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Alliance for Excellent Education.
  • National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). (2013). Position statements on writing instruction. https://ncte.org
  • ReadWriteThink. (n.d.). Peer review lessons and resources. https://www.readwritethink.org
  • National Writing Project (NWP) & Nagin, C. (2003). Because Writing Matters: Improving student writing in our schools. Jossey-Bass.
  • Strunk, W., Jr., & White, E. B. (2000). The Elements of Style. Longman.
  • Graff, G., & Birkenstein, C. (2014). They Say / I Say: The moves that matter in academic writing. W. W. Norton & Company.
  • Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on Written Composition: New directions for teaching. National Conference on Research in English.
  • Zinsser, W. (2006). On Writing Well: The classic guide to writing nonfiction. HarperCollins.
  • Tompkins, G. E. (2013). Teaching Writing: Balancing process and product. Pearson.

Related Assignments