Advocacy

Project Peer Review

Rhetoric and Argument
ABOVE
X

Review of the Scientific

Literature

MEETS

BELOW

The foundation of the advocacy

project is a well-written and
relevant review of scientific studies
about the animals impacted by the
issue being covered. This review of
the literature is presented with a
historical framework and is logically
connected to the presentation of
the problem and the solutions
offered.
Comments:The literature review is grounded in a chronological historical framework, which is
then called back to from when discussing the problem As proven through studies like those
conducted by Bahlig-Pieren & Turner, dogs are capable of feeling emotions and pain, but their
forms of communication, like their use of body language, is often misunderstood by humans.

X
The composition clearly presents
and analyzes a significant
political/social/cultural problem
and establishes the problems
urgency, scope, and severity. The
problem is clearly framed and
focused; it is not presented as the
writers opinion, but is a sourced
argument, backed up with credible
sources.
Comments: The scale and severity of the problem is presented immediately, and backed up with
a credible source. Presently in the United States, there are a total of 19,448 cases of animal
Problem Statement and
History

abuse, 11,894 of which list dogs as the victims according to Pet-Abuse.com, an online database
that documents incidents of animal cruelty.

X
The composition presents and
analyzes solution(s) to the central
problem (Macro and micro solution
offered). Rigorous and well-
documented arguments that
address a possible solution or
solutions are presented clearly.
Comments: The social media aspect of the solutions could use expanding. Taking advantage of
Analysis of Solutions

this convenient method of information dissemination, we can bring a greater awareness to the
problems of canine abuse. is somewhat vague at the moment.

Argument Development
and Counterargument:

Rigorous arguments of a possible

solution or solutions are developed
through the use of expert support,
persuasive evidence, and well
chosen rhetorical appeals. The

composition anticipates and

responds effectively and
appropriately to oppositional
claims. For the level of this course
and for this particular assignment,
the arguments are sophisticated,
creative, persuasive, insightful, and
deeply embedded in scholarly
discourse.
Comments: The legislative approach is well documented, however the public education section
is a bit light on concrete arguments. The initiation of a licensing system with pre-licensing
classes serves to screen for potentially problematic owners, which may reduce cases of canine
abuse significantly is a bold claim that might not be supported enough.

X
Uses at least one multi-modal
element, and this element
strengthens and deepens
explanations, summaries, or
arguments. Visual evidence is
dense and diverse in information,
yet communicates information
clearly and effectively.
Comments: Excellent use of self-made infographics. The dog expressions image in particular was
very effective and helping the reader understand complex forms of dog communication.
X
Organization/Arrangement The project is well-organized and
easy to follow, with transitions,
of Evidence:
topic sentences and/or headers to
help guide the reader; the
presentation of evidence is
arranged coherently and
demonstrates a well-documented
analytical synthesis.
Comments: The section headings are helpful for identifying each section of the essay, however
transitions could be stronger. The literature review could use some transition sentences to
emphasize the shifting historical perspective, however that could be challenging as that area
might need to be trimmed due to length constraints.
Scholarly Ethos
Throughout the composition, the
writer illustrates the scholarly ethos X
of a well-informed, objective, and
credible advocate.
Comments: Constructing complex arguments that tie-in differing articles and sources makes the
writer seem well-versed in the topic: These findings are made more intriguing when we
Multi-Modal Element(s)

consider the strength of the human-canine relationship dogs are able to form with their caretakers
that was demonstrated by the kennel experiment conducted by Tuber et al

Evidence and Information Literacy

Sources: Credibility &
Relevance

The selected sources are credible

for a scholarly audience and offer
clear, relevant support to all of the

compositions argumentative
moves.
Comments: All of the sources are diverse, but extremely relevant to the topic at hand:
lawmakers, researchers, and public activists all support a specific argument from various angles.
Source Use and Integration The composition uses sources
X
appropriately in distinct and
different
capacities: primary/secondary,
exhibit/argument/background. The
author integrates the sources
seamlessly into the composition
and properly introduces them.
Comments: As mentioned previously, the diverse are all used in areas when they could be most
effective. At times the introductions can be wordy (see comments in essay), but are good at
reinforcing the credibility of the sources.
Documentation &
The AP is formatted correctly using X
Formatting
MLA formatting (this includes
margins, page number location, and
page 1 header). Sources are
documented appropriately using
MLA; this includes appropriate
captions for multi-modal elements
and correct format for Works Cited.
Comments: No issues to be found. Even the multi-modal elements have proper citations.

Style Mechanics and Conventions

Clarity, Sentence Structure
and Readability

The writing is clear, eloquent,

X
characterized by precise word
choice, purposeful sentences with
varied structure, and a high degree
of readability for the level of its
course and this particular
assignment. Few errors of
grammar/language/usage are
found, and if there are small errors,
they do not detract from
readability.
Comments: I only spotted one grammar error and a handful of awkwardly worded sentences.
Most of those instances were related to source introductions, so its possible my style might
conflict with the writers.
Organization and
The organization is deliberately
X
Development
paced, and demonstrates a very
high degree of skill and control
when moving from idea to idea,
paragraph to paragraph, and
sentence to sentence. Connections
are made throughout the essay to
create cohesion

Comments: At times, the transitions are very effective. For example, first the writer lays the
foundation of the historical perception of dogs, and then uses the following transition to move
into more recent scientific studies: More recent studies from the late 20th to early 21st century
provide even further insight into canine intelligence and learning and its effect on our
consideration of dogs as conscious intelligent creatures. More transitions like that will bolster the
flow of the paper.

Required Elements

Page length, number of sources,

X
and included content as described
in prompt meet the minimum
requirements
Comments: Page length seems to be right at the upper limit, with more than enough sources.

Style, Mechanics, &

Conventions
THE TOP THREE PRIORITIES I RECOMMEND FOR YOUR REVISION
STRATEGY:
1. Bolster the social media plan. Maybe strategize what sort of campaign
would be effective: raising awareness for the victims, fundraising for the
Safe Haven programs, etc.
2. Revisit the introductions of your sources. I gave one concrete example in
a comment of how I might revise one. In general, placing their title before
their name without any punctuation can be awkward to read, especially if
youre introducing two sources in the same sentence. When introducing
two sources, consider just making that a standalone sentence saying who
they are and what they research. Then go into the specific facts from them
that you want to cite.
3. Contemplate some counterarguments to the proposed solutions. If the
public needs educating, how specifically would that be implemented?
Could social media help there as well?
My suspicion is that you ran into a similar issue as me: length. I ran up against
that 12-page limit fairly quickly, while my solutions (and counter-arguments)
seemed a little thin compared to the lit review and whats the problem sections.
Do your best to try to trim those two areas down to bolster the solutions section.
Good luck!