What's the best thing about this paper? Be specific.
Does the introduction capture your interest and set up the causal question to be investigated? How does it "hook" you?
How does the introduction convince you that the event or trend to be examined really exists and that answering the causal question will prove useful?
What is the claim or thesis? Is it a cause and effect argument?
How does the writer make his or her causal argument (what kind of evidence does he/she use to support the claim)?
Identify other strategies the writer uses to establish the causal relationship (direct explanation, indirect explanation, precedent, or analogy). Are these methods sound? Identify any weaknesses that you notice.
Do you see evidence of weak causal analysis that can be strengthened on revision (for example, oversimplified or overlooked causes or consequences)?
Does the writer mention alternative explanations? Does he/she persuade you to prefer his/her explanations to the alternatives?
Comment on the conclusion. Does it provide closure to the essay? What could be done to improve it?
What part of the paper do you think the writer should focus on for revision? Be specific, and offer suggestions.
