Peer Review, 3 : Juliann Zheng

883 WordsDec 8, 20154 Pages
Peer Review 3: Juliann Zheng Cognition: This argument is definitely justificatory and you adhere to the genre. You address your audience well, and the comparison and contrast you provide is very effective. However, I am still not entirely sure what your proposition is. It feels as though each paragraph is a small argument that can stand on its own, but the common thread linking them all is just the structure. It isn’t until the conclusion that I can get an idea of what your point is. I think a clear introductory paragraph would really help to avoid confusion. Score: 3 Invention: As I stated in the cognition section, this is clearly a justificatory argument. However, as I said in the cognition section, I think that the main issue is that your proposition does not seem to be clear. Your reasons and evidence are good and thorough. They are fitting for a justificatory argument. Score: 3 Reasoning: Within each paragraph, your reasoning is very strong. You make a claim and support it with appropriate evidence. You do a good job of making and explaining connections between Venice and United States. You make good points about their similarities and differences. The one thing I think is missing is the common thread holding all of your paragraphs together. They are all clearly about the link between Venice and America, but I don’t see an overarching claim. In your conclusion, what you’re trying to argue becomes more apparent, but it would be nice to be sure of what it is that you are

    More about Peer Review, 3 : Juliann Zheng

      Open Document