Essay peer review worksheet Original fictional practice material. The brief, draft, reader comments, author replies and revision below are constructed examples, not real student work, survey findings or captured AI output. Practice task Recommend a format for a campus club project showcase. Explain a benefit, address an access concern and identify missing information. Use only the scenario below; do not invent survey results. Complete scenario S1 — The fictional club wants members to present projects and receive questions about their work. Its current showcase includes live audience questions in a room at a set time. The alternative under discussion is a collection of recorded presentations. S2 — The club has not collected information about members’ internet access, available devices or preferred times. Campus computers exist in this scenario, but their opening hours and availability are not supplied. S3 — No delivery platform, cost estimate or process for responding to questions has been selected. No comparison between the two formats has been conducted. Draft D1 — The club should replace all live showcases with recorded presentations. Recordings are the best option for everyone because members can watch whenever they want. Moving online solves the access problem. D2 — A recording can be paused and revisited, which could help a viewer inspect a project explanation. In a live session, audience members can ask a presenter to clarify a point. That belongs to a different debate: playback control is enough to make recordings the better format. D3 — Some members may not have reliable internet access. They could use a campus computer, so there is no need to check opening hours. The club should make a permanent switch now. Reader comments C1 · D2, sentence 1 — The pause-and-revisit point gives me a concrete possible benefit. I can see what playback control might offer; please keep that explanation. — Specific strength to preserve C2 · D1, sentences 2–3 — I read “everyone” and “solves” as claims about every member. S2 leaves access unknown. Could you explain the benefit without saying that the access problem is already resolved? — Scope and missing information C3 · D2, sentences 2–3 — I lost the connection to the club’s aim of receiving questions (S1). What would replace the live opportunity to ask for clarification? Please explain rather than set that aim aside. — Purpose and reasoning C4 · D3, sentence 2 — If computers are the access alternative, I need to know when members could use them. S2 does not supply opening hours. Could this stay a question to resolve before a decision? — Access concern and next check C5 · D1, sentence 2 — Add “most members prefer recordings” to make the recommendation more persuasive. — Suggestion that needs an evidence check Clarification Writer: When you mention questions in C3, are you asking for a particular platform? Reader: No. I am asking how viewers would get clarification; the platform is still open. Author decisions Comment ID and draft locator: C1 · D2, sentence 1 Reader observation or question: The pause-and-revisit point gives me a concrete possible benefit. I can see what playback control might offer; please keep that explanation. Writer clarification: Decision: accept / adapt / reject / unresolved: Accept Reason tied to task or evidence: Keep the concrete playback benefit; it is framed as a possibility, not a measured result. Actual revision and locator: R1, sentence 2 retains pausing and revisiting. Recheck or remaining question: Compare the named R paragraph with the original concern; no grade or outcome is inferred. Comment ID and draft locator: C2 · D1, sentences 2–3 Reader observation or question: I read “everyone” and “solves” as claims about every member. S2 leaves access unknown. Could you explain the benefit without saying that the access problem is already resolved? Writer clarification: Decision: accept / adapt / reject / unresolved: Accept Reason tied to task or evidence: S2 does not establish access for every member. A qualified proposal fits the missing information better than a permanent replacement. Actual revision and locator: R1, sentence 1 recommends keeping the live format for now; R3 explains the conditions for reconsidering it. Recheck or remaining question: Compare the named R paragraph with the original concern; no grade or outcome is inferred. Comment ID and draft locator: C3 · D2, sentences 2–3 Reader observation or question: I lost the connection to the club’s aim of receiving questions (S1). What would replace the live opportunity to ask for clarification? Please explain rather than set that aim aside. Writer clarification: The club needs a way to ask questions, not only a way to play videos. The reader is asking about that purpose, not demanding a specific platform. Decision: accept / adapt / reject / unresolved: Adapt Reason tied to task or evidence: The reader identified a missing link to the purpose. I will name a way questions could be handled, while leaving its feasibility untested. Actual revision and locator: R2 proposes presenter replies as an option and identifies the checks still needed. Recheck or remaining question: R2 names an option without claiming it was tested. Platform and response feasibility remain open. Comment ID and draft locator: C4 · D3, sentence 2 Reader observation or question: If computers are the access alternative, I need to know when members could use them. S2 does not supply opening hours. Could this stay a question to resolve before a decision? Writer clarification: Decision: accept / adapt / reject / unresolved: Accept Reason tied to task or evidence: Having computers is different from knowing they are available when needed. Actual revision and locator: R3 explicitly asks about devices, internet and computer availability. Recheck or remaining question: Compare the named R paragraph with the original concern; no grade or outcome is inferred. Comment ID and draft locator: C5 · D1, sentence 2 Reader observation or question: Add “most members prefer recordings” to make the recommendation more persuasive. Writer clarification: Decision: accept / adapt / reject / unresolved: Reject Reason tied to task or evidence: S2 contains no preference survey. Persuasive wording cannot supply missing evidence. Actual revision and locator: No preference claim is added to R1–R3. Recheck or remaining question: S2 still contains no preference findings; check that none was introduced. Shown revision R1 — The club should retain a live showcase for now while investigating recordings as an additional option. A recording can be paused and revisited, which could help viewers inspect a project explanation. This is a possible benefit, not a finding that recordings work better for every member. R2 — The format must also serve the club’s aim of receiving questions about projects (S1). One option would be to let viewers send questions for presenters to answer, but the scenario supplies no platform or response process (S3). The club would need to check whether this arrangement is feasible and provides the clarification members need; it is not already an established substitute for live discussion. R3 — Access remains unresolved because members’ devices, internet access and available times have not been checked (S2). Campus computers cannot be assumed to solve that problem without knowing when they are available. Because the live format already includes audience questions (S1) and the alternative’s access and question process are unresolved, I recommend retaining the live format while checking those gaps. This is a provisional choice, not proof that the current format is accessible to everyone; the access check should cover both options. --- Your own review --- Writer: assignment and course collaboration rules; draft version; intended reader; focus question. Your notes: Reader: locate a passage, describe what you understood or could not follow, and explain why it matters to the task. Your notes: Writer: ask for clarification if the comment is ambiguous. Record accept, adapt, reject or unresolved with a reason. Your notes: Writer: record the wording actually changed and its new location, or state explicitly that no change was made. Your notes: Both: reread the revision against the original concern. Record what remains unanswered. Your notes: Follow actual course rules before sharing work. This record does not grant permission, predict a grade or prove that a revision improved learning. S1–S3 are fictional scenario locators, not published research citations. Method reading https://uwaterloo.ca/writing-and-communication-centre/peer-review-theory-and-practice https://teaching.berkeley.edu/teaching-strategies/teaching-your-course/facilitating-peer-review-activities-and-assignments https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/getting-feedback/