Corporate Implementation of Microsoft SharePoint

Peer Review Questions:
Does the memo include an effective opening paragraph, making a connection to the audience?
Is there a Buffer (brief background information on the situation or topic)?
Is there a clear purpose statement – the audience should know from the start why you are writing this memo
Is there a section on the current situation? What is the problem? Don’t assume your audience sees what you see.
Is there a section that outlines what is being proposed, and how the proposal could be executed?
Is there research to support the what is being recommended/proposed?
Is the research presented correctly and in a meaningful way, with an attributive tag (lead in) and a parenthetical reference to close the research reference?
Does the writer make a connection with the audience, predict audience reaction, and address counterarguments? Is it clear that the benefits of this proposal out way the native aspects.
Does the writer recognize constraints (organizational, legal, ethical, financial, etc…)?
Is what the writer’s proposal realistic and supported by evidence.
Is there a conclusion which recaps and includes a call to action? What should happen next?
Is the memo written clearly with a minimum number of grammatical errors?
Are there headings/subheadings within this document?
Is the memo in the correct memo format?
Please review before revising your memo: Self-Editing Strategies

Guidelines for Participating in Peer Review
With each assignment that requires a peer review, you will use the questions provided to guide the peer review. What this means is that as you read your peer’s paper, you need to answer the questions. For example, if the question is “Is the purpose of the memo clear?” When you read your peer’s draft, you should know early on in the document if a writer has conveyed the purpose of the message, why he/she is writing. If he/she has conveyed the purpose, then you will acknowledge that the purpose is clear; you understand what the memo is going to be about. If he/she hasn’t, tell the writer. Provide suggestions. Tell him/her what you understand to be the purpose. In short, tell the writer what you are experiencing as a reader. You will need to do this with every question provided.

Provide the type of feedback you would like to receive. Provide feedback your peer could use to revise. Comments such as: “this is great!” “you don’t need to change anything” “this is confusing” etc… are not helpful. If it is great, identify why it’s great. If it is confusing, explain why. Please do not respond “yes or no” – if the answer is yes, explain why, and if the answer is no, explain what is missing and how your peer may address that specific issue. Don’t assume the writer sees what you see.