Directions to Students:

 As Composing Inquiry states in the interview chapter: “don’t expect those words to stand by themselves and convey to your readers precisely what you think they mean without doing the work to explain your interpretation or analysis” (105). That’s where the real reflective, critical thinking work of this writing assignment begins and it’s also where secondary sources might help develop your ideas.

 In offering feedback to your classmate on the interview assignment draft, consider the following:

 1) Identify places in the text you gravitate towards because they are compelling, thought-provoking, moving, descriptive, detailed, specific, working in the spirit of the interview essay, etc. Mark those sections with a big star and say a bit about why you find them noteworthy.

 2) Identify places in the text that confuse you because they are awkward, vague, limited in scope, too general, not specific, descriptive, or explicit enough, not working in the spirit of Benmayor, interview chapter, Bryan McLucas’ essay, etc. Mark those sections with question marks in the margin. If you can, add a few comments about why you think you are confused or dissatisfied with these parts.

 3) Does the draft need to develop any of the following? If so, mark the spots where you think more needs to happen:

            a) more paraphrases, quotes or summaries of interviewee

                        b) compelling intro

                        c) claims about the group this person represents

                        d) the “so what” factor – how does the analysis respond to/complicate/impact the writer’s initial research questions?

4) Pose a minimum of one or two questions of specific passages that will help the writer expand and develop in the revision process (You can write these questions in the margin; if you can’t fit them in, be sure to use some kind of mark to tie your question to a specific part of the paper).

5) What needs to be cut from the essay? Where isn’t the writer addressing the assignment? Mark these sections with brackets.

6) Provide suggestions for organizational revisions. Revisions that reflect the making of claims about the group that this person represents, the flow of the paper, about the “data” that is representative of broader issues that more research or scholars in the field might help with.