For the peer editing exercise with Tracing Maus, you will read at least the landing page for one of your classmates, and then answer a few questions about their analysis. Consult the table below — find your name in the left column to determine which student’s analysis you should read.
Then read that student’s reflection post and the rhetorical analysis on the landing page that the post links to and think about their argument. Leave a comment on that student’s reflection post in which you give them feedback about the following questions:
- What is the most interesting claim that your peer makes?
- What are you left wishing the student had told you more about?
- What is one similarity between your own analysis and your peer’s?
- What is one thing you have learned while reading this analysis? (which might mean: how do you see the text differently? what’s something your peer brings up that you hadn’t really thought about? what is something your peer sees differently from you?)
Note that when you post your comment, it will “await moderation” until your classmate approves it. When your peer leaves feedback for you, it will similarly await moderation. Be watching for those comments and approve them when they come in. Think about the feedback you receive and consider whether you want to respond to it with any revisions. Think about what you learn from reading your peer’s analysis and providing them feedback too — and whether you want to revise anything in your own analysis in response to having done so.
