Read through the draft of another group's analysis and recommend changes based on the following criteria.

1. Topic—Without looking back at the paper, explain the topic in your own words. What is the most important information the group has gained from the interview and analysis?

2. Organization—Now, looking back at the paper, write a brief outline of the overall argument. How might the group make this organization clearer to the reader? Does the paper include:

   • an analysis of the interview itself?
   • an assessment of the function of writing in the interviewee's job
   • an analysis of a writing sample from that job (if available)?
   • an overall assessment of the demands of the job?
   Indicate any of these that are missing or incomplete. Also explain how your classmate's might expand on particular topics.

3. Evidence—Arguments about the interview and the writing sample require evidence to support them. Evidence will be in the form of references to articles about the job or in specific references to things the person interviewed said in the interview. Indicate any points in this paper that need more support. Also, indicate any evidence in the paper that requires more interpretation before it will be clear to you.

4. Conclusion—The concluding paragraph should look forward to wider applications of this information while providing a brief wrap-up of everything the paper has addressed. Explain how this group's conclusion could be more effective.

5. Questions—Write three questions you have in response to this paper.

Sign your name on each draft that you peer-review.

It should take a minimum of 20 minutes to peer-review each draft.