Your Name __________________________

Author's Name _______________________

1.  Consider the title of the paper.  Without reading further than the title, write down what you think the author will be discussing:

Return to this question when you finish the paper.  Did the title help you determine the thesis of the paper?  Does it accurately reflect what the paper is about?  Could you suggest a better title?

2.  Read the introduction.  Without reading further than the introduction, state the thesis of the paper:

How will the author develop the thesis?

The following questions should be answered after you finish reading the entire paper.

3.  Is the thesis presented in the body of the paper the same as you summarized from the introduction?  If not, how does it change?

List the main arguments the author uses to develop her/his thesis:

4.  Does the author provide sufficient facts/details/evidence to support his/her arguments throughout the paper?  If there are areas where you think more supporting material is needed, list them here:

5.  Consider the style of the paper.  Indicate errors in mechanics (sentence structure, punctuation, voice, person, tense, spelling, proofreading, etc.) on the paper itself.  Are these excessive?

6.  How appropriately and correctly does the author use quotations?  Are most quotations from primary or secondary sources?  If a quotation is from a secondary source, is it necessary to quote the author verbatim or could the material be paraphrased?  Indicate quotations that could be paraphrased on the paper itself.

7.  Look at the bibliography and endnotes. Are the endnotes and bibliography in the proper humanities format?  If not, indicate errors on the paper.

Is the use of documentation appropriate and sufficient?  Put an “EN” by references in the paper which you think need to have a citation.

Do large numbers of citations seem to come from the same source?  If so, list the source here:

8.  Does the paper use at least five primary sources?  List the titles below.

Are the primary sources used by the author crucial to the arguments of the paper?  Why or why not?

9.  Consider the secondary sources used by the author.  Are different interpretations considered?  If so, how does the author deal with discrepancies among the sources?

10.  Re-read the conclusion.  Are the thesis and the main arguments restated in the conclusion?  Are they the same as those presented in the introduction?  If not, what alterations might you suggest?

Did the author prove what she/he claimed to prove?  What recommendations would you make to the author to help rewrite the paper?