Peer Review Worksheet – Essay 2 – Analyzing Arguments
The introduction of Essay 2 is quite engaging because one can easily follow the argument being proposed by the writer. Arguably, an engaging introduction should grab the reader’s attention from the first sentence, as seen in the essay. The writer also uses short non-repetitive sentences to describe his ideas and reveal the purpose of the paper. The instructions demanded that the writer identify the titles, authors, purpose, and claims of each article to establish their relevance to the argument analysis. From the introduction, it is evident that the writer fulfills all the requirements listed in the instructions. I agree that there is no missing element in the introduction part of the essay as per the instruction. However, the writer did not include the second instruction elements, which required them to establish the exigencies that the authors address, the constraints and resources that exist for the authors, their audience, the time, and the location where each article was published.
The writer makes a good choice of the opposing article. The secondary article is very engaging and offers a concrete counterargument to Schwarz’s article. The argument it proposes is detailed and well organized with a logical pattern leading to the conclusion. I did not see any disconnect between the two articles. In fact, they are very complementary because each author is obsessed and very emotional about the argument they propose. I would rate the claim of the secondary article as above average. First, the author, Phillip, assumes a patriot’s role always in protecting his country and the treasures it holds dear. Among these treasures, the American Flag and National anthem appear to be the closest to him. Therefore, he makes substantial claims on the topic guided by patriotism. From the essay, there is a distinction between the student’s voice and the outside sources though sometimes the two appear to merge.
The purpose of the essay is not clearly articulated in the introduction. The writer focuses more on what the two articles say and forgets to explain his essay’s purpose. Though he attempts to write an engaging thesis, it is not entirely a description of what the essay is about. Nonetheless, it takes more effort to decipher that the essay is an argument analysis. The purpose and claim of each article are clearly articulated. The writer arguably does a good job of briefly describing each article’s purpose and claims and offering an engaging summary of the two. He grabs my attention by posing a rhetorical question at the very beginning of the essay, which prompts me to read on in an attempt to unravel the purported mystery.
The author gives significant examples of ethos, pathos, and logos for each article. Essentially, the essay carefully lays down each rhetoric style in a detailed fashion, and one can easily follow it through. There is a significant element of depth, especially on the pathos rhetoric. The writer clearly portrays the emotional connection between each author and the topic that they are dealing with. There is a substantial description of each strategy, as seen from each article in the essay. For instance, the writer explains the use of logos by analyzing historical data’s detailed use, especially by Schwarz. He elaborates further that Phillip, on the other hand, takes on a long description of facts in the song. However, he did not offer specific examples of the use of logos in Phillip’s article. All in all, one can irresistibly say that the author did a good job describing the rhetoric styles.
There are parts in the main body parts that are somewhat confusing and, to some extent, lose focus. I want the author to provide more information on some instances, such as in the second paragraph. While describing the pathos rhetoric, the writer comments that “Schwarz has turned around the actual meaning of the song as viewed by most Americans.” The point would have benefited more from more illustration of the contrast between Americans’ new and old viewpoints regarding the national anthem. Further, in the third paragraph, I think the logos appeal needs more explanation because the writer did not analyze it in depth.
At the sentence level, I realized that the author made some significant mistakes. Some places were unclear and repetitive. For instance, in the last sentence of the second paragraph, the writer writes, “…slaves fighting for their freedom from slavery.” The phrase is repetitive and disrupts the flow of ideas. The same issue is visible in other areas of the essay. The writer has several grammatical and mechanical issues in the essay. For instance, in the second paragraph, the sentence- “the British ships “who accepted everyone and pledged no one would be given back to their ‘owners’” (Schwarz).”- has punctuation errors. The author should try learning how to properly punctuate his sentences and use fewer non-content words to increase the clarity of his essay.
The conclusion is arguably shallow. The author restates the thesis but does not summarize the main points of the essay. Further, he does not offer a specific conclusive argument of the paper. I have a few questions about the paper. What is the final point of the paper? What is the closing argument that the writer seeks to propose? Which author satisfies the readers more? What was the response to the author with a less fitting response? Which author is better informed on the issue, and why do you believe this? Is there a call to action?
Mla in-text citations should include page numbers, especially when directly quoting the source of information. However, since the articles were from news pages, there were no page numbers, and therefore the writer did a good job both in-text and works cited page. The writer should still try and uniformly format his work cited page. For instance, the heading should be bolded, and the references should be indented in the “hanging paragraph indentation” style.
Based on my assessment, to improve the paper, the writer should work first on the essay’s grammar and mechanics. This will offer a more seamless flow of ideas to the reader. Further, the writer should improve his introduction and describe his paper’s purpose before commencing his work. The author should also improve the conclusion part of the essay and summarize his main ideas. The conclusion should, without repetition, summarize the arguments, offer a standpoint, and a final thought on the essay.