<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Monday April 10: Peer Review by </title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2017-04-10 15:12:43 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2017-04-10 18:22:33 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>Announcements</title>
         <author>eleni_oflarity</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165696682</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>Major Assignment 4 due on Monday April 17 @ 3pm via Blackboard<br>**No class next week, conferences Tuesday - Friday</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2017-04-10 15:14:25 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165696682</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Peer Review Procedure</title>
         <author>eleni_oflarity</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165697015</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Email your draft to your group members and me<br><br>2. Read your partner's draft and respond to the following questions in a word document.<br>--- Was there a clear thesis in the introduction? What is the argument your partner is trying to make? How might your partner strengthen their thesis?<br>--- Did your partner provide enough context in the introduction to familiarize you with the topic?<br>--- Did the background paragraph set up the conversation surrounding the topic? Do you now have a solid sense of what is going on around the issue at hand?<br>--- What is the topic sentence in the first body paragraph? Does it support the thesis? Does the explanation and evidence provided defend the claim made in the topic sentence? (Repeat for each of the body paragraphs)<br>--- Does the draft have a logical flow? Does each paragraph follow the previous one in a way that makes sense? <br>--- Generally, what did your partner do well?<br>--- What could be improved upon?<br>--- Do you have a clear sense of where this paper is going?<br><br>3. When you have provided as much constructive feedback as you possibly can, email your response to your partner and me. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2017-04-10 15:15:23 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165697015</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Peer Review Groups</title>
         <author>eleni_oflarity</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165698983</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div>1. Emily Aguierre, Rian Cruzen, Thomas Nelson<br>2. Elliott Armitage, Jonah Krausz, Reilly Morgan<br>3. Stephanie Avila, Melissa Harris, Kurt Santos<br>4. Jeremiah Bell, Payton Lamkin, Blake Moore<br>5. Quinn Freeby<strong>, </strong>Haley Carl, Kyle Howgate<br>7. Kyle Jones, Nat Nunes, Rivers McFadden<br>8. Kelsey Cambas, Morgan Diamond<br><br></div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="" />
         <pubDate>2017-04-10 15:22:25 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/eleni_oflarity/PeerReview/wish/165698983</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
