Rubric For Peer Review

Rubric for Peer Review: Initial impression 1-Poor Consists of incomplete sentences. 2-Fair Written as complete sentences but talks more about the author’s reaction than the work itself. 3-Meets Expectations Written as complete sentences, but vague. 4-Exceeds Expectations Written as complete sentences, provides an overall assessment of the document (“good”, “needs work”, etc) 5-Exceptional Gives an overall assessment of the document, including an evaluation of the potential for improvement upon editing. (Includes items for “3”.) What author did well Only lists one thing, does not elaborate or explain. Lists 1-2 things the author did well; gives an example for one of them. Lists 3 things the author did well. Gives examples for at least 2 of them. Lists 3-4 things the author did well. Gives examples for all of them; examples are specific. (Includes items for “3”.) Which aspects need improving Only lists one thing, does not elaborate or explain. Lists 1-2 things the author needs to fix; gives an example for one of them. Lists 3 things the author did poorly. Gives examples for at least 2 of them. Lists 3-4 things the author did poorly. Gives examples for all of them; examples are specific. (Includes items for “3”.) Justification for rubric score Consists of incomplete sentences. Written as complete sentences but vague Written as complete sentences; provides 1-2 examples from rubric to justify score. Suggestions for improvement Lists only 1 item the author can improve upon OR does not provide any suggestions for improvement. Lists 2 items the author can improve OR does not provide suggestions for improving each item listed. Suggestions, when present, are non-specific (“edit this”). Lists 3 items the author can improve. Provides one suggestion for improvement per item. Suggestions are somewhat vague. Provides 1-2 examples from rubric to justify score. Reviewer explains why these items justify their score. (Includes items for “3”.) Lists 4 items the author can improve. Provides one or more suggestions for improvement per item. Suggestions are specific. (Includes items for “3”.) (Includes items for “4”.) Lists 5+ things the author did well and includes a specific example for each one. Also includes an explanation of why each item is an example of good writing. (Includes items for “4”.) Lists 5+ things the author did poorly and includes a specific example for each one. Also includes an explanation of why each item is an example of poor writing. (Includes items for “4”.) Provides 3-4 examples from rubric to justify score. Reviewer explains why these items justify their score. (Includes items for “4”.) Lists 5 or more items the author can improve. Provides one or more suggestions for improvement per item. Suggestions are specific and creative. (Includes items for “4”.) *A grade of ZERO will be assigned to any section that is missing or incoherent. A grade of ZERO will be assigned to any review that is plagiarized.