Audience Analysis Peer Review
Instructions
- Open the audience analysis assignment to be familiar with the assignment and criteria while responding to these questions.
- On another tab, have the “peer review sample.docx” (available via Unit 1 Peer Review and Final Draft Submission Folder) document open to help guide your responses.
- Select a draft to review that has not already been reviewed or only has one review.
- Enter your feedback in the “Audience Analysis Peer Review Form” and return the “Audience Analysis Peer Review Form” to your peer.
Your narrative responses must be in complete sentences and must use language found in “peer review sample”
- The analysis addresses all questions for analysis. If not, then list all of the missing responses to questions for your peer.
I have observed that your memo has not sufficiently addressed all the questions for analysis. The questions that are missing responses are:
- Who are the secondary audiences of these websites? Who else might use the information found on these sites?
- What persuasive strategies do the websites employ to appeal to their primary audiences? Do they use claims? Do they make an effort to connect with the audience? (See pages 48-51 of your textbook for more on persuasion)
- The analysis is well organized. It has a clear structure with an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. If there is not a clear structure, provide a comment about how to make the structure clearer.
The memo has an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction has identified the two websites and the topic to be discussed. The body has addressed the comparison and contrast between the two websites. However, the structure of the body is not clear. Instead of using a single paragraph, you could have separated the major points using different paragraphs.
- The memo includes a clear analysis of the two web sites, including comparison and contrast of the sites themselves and their target audiences. It does not just describe. If there is not a clear analysis of a technical and non-technical website, provide feedback to your peer on where the analysis needs to be in the document. Point out any areas where there is description.
While the memo appears to be sound, the analysis fails to compare and contrast the two websites clearly. You have identified both websites as informal and the primary audience for each to be educators. The analysis shows that the two websites are similar, and there are no significant differences. However, the analysis can be strengthened by identifying the technical and non-technical website.
- The analysis is concrete in that it uses examples from the Websites to support major points. The use of examples is selective and to-the-point. The examples are included in order to illustrate the analysis point and not to fill the page with words. There are no long direct quotations (defined as more than 3 lines) from the analyzed Websites.
The analysis of the two websites is fairly concrete. The content is clear, but you have failed to use examples to support major points. This makes the analysis to be unclear. Additionally, there are no direct quotations from the websites. Quotations have only been used to differentiate the titles of the two websites.
- The student explains how the examples relate back to the analysis. If there are any deviations to these criteria, provide your peer with feedback using the peer review worksheet templates to guide your responses.
I have not noticed any example in the memo. Therefore, there is a significant deviation from these criteria.
- The memo is formatted correctly following the specified guidelines for memos from Chapter 11. APA citation style is used when needed. If there are errors, point those out to your peer.
The memo has been properly formatted according to the APA citation style. However, I would have been appropriate if you used the same font and font size throughout the paper. Additionally, in-text citations would be necessary.
- Spelling, grammar, and punctuation are correct. Minimum word requirement is met. If there are errors, point those out to your peer.
There were no noticeable spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors in the memo. However, the memo did not meet the minimum word requirement of 750. I believe you can achieve this by responding to the questions you left out.
- Rate how well the paper aligns with the assignment guidelines (minimal = does not meet assignment guidelines; medium = meets about 75% of the assignment guidelines; very high = meets 95% or above of the assignment guidelines)
Minimal
Low
Medium
High
Very high
The memo did not meet most of the assignment guidelines. You did not sufficiently compare and contrast the two websites. Therefore, I would rate the paper as Low for now.
- Suggestions for meeting the assignment guidelines:
You started very well by identifying the topic and two websites that addressed that topic. Therefore, you should have focused on bringing out the comparison and contrast between the two websites. Additionally, you should identify the technical and non-technical audiences. You should also be able to meet the word count by addressing the questions you missed.
- Write a final comment to your peer about two of the overall strengths and one overall weakness of the first draft.
The memo was properly punctuated, and the grammar was also excellent. The format of a memo was adhered to, with only minor errors. However, the overall weakness of the draft is insufficient comparison and contrast between the two websites.