Peer review

Presentation
1. Is the hypertext essay well-designed? If yes, give a detailed explanation why. If no, describe in detail, how the author can improve the design of his/her hypertext essay.

The hypertext essay was pretty well designed the only that caught my eye was the background drew your attention to it but besides that it was well put together. The colors and layout was put together nice but just had a few words that were the same color of the background.

2. Is the hypertext essay easy to navigate? If yes, give a detailed explanation why. If no, describe in detail how the author can improve his hypertext essay navigation.

The essay was really easy to follow all the links were easily located and could be found in the summary or on the bottom of the page.

3. Are the hyperlinks working? If no, which link(s) need to be fixed?

All the links were working and took you where you needed to go.

Informational Needs of Audience
1. Has the author clearly identified him/herself? If yes, where in the hypertext can the reader find this information? If no, suggest a good location for his/her name. Does the author have a title for his/her hypertext essay? If yes, where in title located? If no, suggest a title.

Yes, you can find the authors name on the first page of the summary so you notice it right under the title.

2. In the summary, has the article and the author of the article been identified by name? Is the author’s name linked to the Works Cited page?

Yup both are easily located on the first page in the summary.

3. From the summary, does the reader have a clear idea of the article’s content? Briefly describe what you think is the gist of the article. As a reader, do you feel more or less information should be included in the summary part?

I would have to say Charlotte had a good Idea cover the article and was a good amount of words so the reader didn’t get bored reading it.

4. Describe what you perceive to be the author’s thesis. Is it clear to the reader? If not, how can it be made clearer?
The author’s thesis is that people are becoming more distant and worried about financial gain.

1. Are the supporting response sections of the hypertext relevant and meaningful as individual sections, yet related to the summary? If yes, describe in detail why. If no, make suggestions how these sections can be improved.
All the responses are covered right from the thesis statement so you know she did a good job.

2. Visit the sources that the author has linked to in the essay. Has the author successfully supported the thesis throughout the hypertext with informative and reliable outside sources? If yes, describe why these outside sources are informative and reliable. If no, why are these outside sources not informative and reliable (or has the author failed to do this at all)? Do you think more or less supporting information is needed?

Charlotte had the reliable sources like CBS so you know it was a reliable source. Since CBS has all the four points we covered in class that make cites reliable especially its authority.

3. Has the author successfully employed rhetorical devices in the response? If yes, how? If no, make suggestions how the author can do so.

Charlotte had rhetorical devices in her responses with a lot of good points being brought up and with good sources to back it up.

4. Does the author demonstrate a strong control of the conventions of academic discourse, i.e. format, syntax, paragraph structure, punctuation, mechanics, diction, documentation? If not, point out one or two representative examples of areas the writer should work on (do not proofread the essay).

After just reading through it once I didn’t notice any academic discourse you might find a few if you scan through it a couple of times but for the most part it was perfect.