Yes, within your first "section", you gave both context and purpose to the passage in regards to Hamlet's character. In the end of the commentary, you discussed the purpose of the passage in regards to the book as a whole and what themes this passage really illustrated.
Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary?
You explained within the two minutes of the commentary that you were going to go through the passage chronologically which laid out a clear organization for the commentary. I also agree that this passage was best addressed chronologically.
What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?
Why do you think Shakespeare uses the character Hamlet to show these views of death?
Why do you think its important the Gertrude and Polonius are listening in on this soliloquy?
What did the speaker do well?
You did a great job of specifically naming various literary terms. Also, the way you presented the commentary was engaging. Sometimes commentaries can be monotone and boring, but you did a great job of put emphasis on what was important which I think helped your argument as a whole. You also did the whole commentary in 2 takes? 3? which I thought really helped the fluidity of the commentary.
What would you suggest for improvement?
The only thing that could use improvement is the amount of "um"s and pauses but it really wasn't until my second or third time going through the commentary that I really noticed this.
What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.)?
Nope! You really covered everything that I had in my notes from class on this passage. You also addressed the "drama" factor of the passage and also explicitly referred to various literary terms.
What would you score them based on the rubric?
Part A: 4- You exemplified great knowledge of context. Part B: 8-You gave a detailed interpretation and you had a unique view on the passage (Shakespeare's use of drama in the passage). Part C: 8- Well organized. You remained focused and clear throughout the commentary. Part D: 5- Great use of literary terms and used appropriately. Clear and precise speech, no rambling. Total: 25/30- Awesome job for the first go!
Really well done!! - Kate
Second Peer Review - Joe
Context/Purpose: Both context and purpose were dealt with well throughout the commentary both at the beginning and at the end and were used effectively to tie the commentary together as a whole. Some specific context was also given for certain elements of the passage such as the break from iambic pentameter that helped me as a listener better understand the point you were making.
Organizational Principle: There certainly was a clear organizational principle that was laid out at the beginning of the commentary. This was very good however i would have liked to have heard some rationalization for why you chose to organize the commentary this way. I think this would add something to it and would show the examiner right from the start that you have given the passage a lot of thought.
Questions: How is the sleep imagery portrayed in this passage utilized throughout the text as a whole?
How do we know as you assert that Hamlet has not considered death in such a way as this before?
What did the speaker do well: You set everything up very nicely in the beginning of the commentary which made the rest of the commentary easier to follow. Also, you did an excellent job of identifying lit terms and features of drama and not only reporting them and talking about their general significance but i thought that you also extrapolated meaning from them very well. That is to say that you really strove to interpret rather than report. Furthermore i thought that the connections you made at the end of the commentary did a great job of tying the commentary all together and relating the passage to the rest of the play.
Improvements: I commend your efforts to record this all in one go and i think that as a first/second try it is quite a fluid commentary. However there are points within the commentary where there are large pauses or an abundance of umms. This i think will become better with practice but i just thought i should point it out. Also perhaps more specifc context such as how Shakespeare uses sleep imagery throughout the play would be nice but its not necessary.
Anything forgotten: Not really. You pretty much addressed everything that needed to be addressed even features of drama which i think heaps of people forget (including me)
Score:
A - 4^ B - 9 C - 8 D - 3
Overall: 24/30 WELL DONE
July's People #79
Context/Purpose: The context was dealt with in an effective and precise manner. Good work!
Organizational Principle: You stated at the beginning that you "guessed" you would organize it chronologically. First, never be so unsure because it takes away from your reliability as a critic. Second, why did you choose to organize it chronologically? It seems like you chose this method by default. Analyzing the passage chronologically could be the best way to go about it but just deliberate and clarify.
Questions: How do you link the castration of the cats to the castration of Bam? The cats in urban life and tribal life were castrated for different reasons.
Why do you think Gordimer used dashes to make her message more clear. This seems like something she does not typically do, so if she is trying to make the message easier or more lucid, why does she do this?
What did the speaker do well: I really enjoyed your ideas. I thought they were insightful and well thought out. I specifically and especially liked the way you interpreted "my poor thing". You were also very clear about how you were going to go about the passage.
Improvements: Just as Joe said in you last commentary, I believe your attempts to orate all in one go are commendatory and will help you in the long run, however there were a lot of gaps and errors in language that I think could have been avoided if you were not so pressured to record in one go. I also really wish you had addressed ore lit. terms. All of your ideas were great and I think you saw all the literary terms there were to see. However, sometimes you either assumed they were too obvious or perhaps forgot to reference them. For example, when describing Maureen you id not even mention the word adjectives or modify or connote etc. You did not mention how a "trampoline for fleas" was a metaphor, and you talked about the juxtaposition while referring to the bowling shirt and Maureen's dad, but you again forgot to mention it was also a metaphor.
Anything forgotten: LITERARY TERMS. Your ideas were there, just include a couple more tedious and perhaps obvious literary terms. I think you just assumed the reader was alert enough to pick up on them.
Score:
A - 4 B - 6 C - 8 D - 3
21/30- REALLLY GOOD JOB, just please address more freaking literary terms. You addressed them without stating what they were in a sense.
Context/Purpose: More context and background information about the apartheid, Nadine Gordimer, and how this passage relates to the novel as a whole. In class we talked about how context should be able 3 to 4 minutes in the beginning of your commentary.
Organizational Principle: I agree with the statement above, uncertainty is not convincing! I also got a bit lost, keep your focus consistent.
Questions: How do you see other literary terms being used within this passage?
How does this passage relate to the novel as a whole?
How do you see this passage depicting the apartheid in south Africa?
What did the speaker do well: I think your ideas are very interesting and just need to be supported by literary terms and supported with info about the apartheid.
Improvements: There are some awkward pauses while your speaking and language is inconsistent. I suggest you pause briefly to collect your thoughts and then continue.
You definitely understand the passage as a whole, but there is a lack of literary terms used. Literary devices? Adjectives, pronouns, nouns, modifiers, etc? Elaborate on the syntax, perhaps?
More context and background information about the apartheid, Nadine Gordimer, and how this passage relates to the novel as a whole.
I would personally choose a different approach to organizational pattern to make your ideas clear.
Anything forgotten: Definitely literary terms, more specific connections to the apartheid and the power struggle.
[ invalid file: "The Waters of Separation".mp3 ]
"To Be or Not To Be" Act 3 Scene 1
Peer Review by Kate Van Allen
Did the speaker address context? Purpose?
Yes, within your first "section", you gave both context and purpose to the passage in regards to Hamlet's character. In the end of the commentary, you discussed the purpose of the passage in regards to the book as a whole and what themes this passage really illustrated.
Was there an organizational principle utilized for their commentary?
You explained within the two minutes of the commentary that you were going to go through the passage chronologically which laid out a clear organization for the commentary. I also agree that this passage was best addressed chronologically.
What questions would you ask this person for clarification, IF YOU WERE THE ACCESSOR?
Why do you think Shakespeare uses the character Hamlet to show these views of death?
Why do you think its important the Gertrude and Polonius are listening in on this soliloquy?What did the speaker do well?
You did a great job of specifically naming various literary terms. Also, the way you presented the commentary was engaging. Sometimes commentaries can be monotone and boring, but you did a great job of put emphasis on what was important which I think helped your argument as a whole. You also did the whole commentary in 2 takes? 3? which I thought really helped the fluidity of the commentary.
What would you suggest for improvement?
The only thing that could use improvement is the amount of "um"s and pauses but it really wasn't until my second or third time going through the commentary that I really noticed this.
What did they forget to address (lit terms, themes, etc.)?
Nope! You really covered everything that I had in my notes from class on this passage. You also addressed the "drama" factor of the passage and also explicitly referred to various literary terms.
What would you score them based on the rubric?
Part A: 4- You exemplified great knowledge of context.Part B: 8-You gave a detailed interpretation and you had a unique view on the passage (Shakespeare's use of drama in the passage).
Part C: 8- Well organized. You remained focused and clear throughout the commentary.
Part D: 5- Great use of literary terms and used appropriately. Clear and precise speech, no rambling.
Total: 25/30- Awesome job for the first go!
Really well done!! - Kate
Second Peer Review - Joe
Context/Purpose: Both context and purpose were dealt with well throughout the commentary both at the beginning and at the end and were used effectively to tie the commentary together as a whole. Some specific context was also given for certain elements of the passage such as the break from iambic pentameter that helped me as a listener better understand the point you were making.
Organizational Principle: There certainly was a clear organizational principle that was laid out at the beginning of the commentary. This was very good however i would have liked to have heard some rationalization for why you chose to organize the commentary this way. I think this would add something to it and would show the examiner right from the start that you have given the passage a lot of thought.
Questions: How is the sleep imagery portrayed in this passage utilized throughout the text as a whole?
How do we know as you assert that Hamlet has not considered death in such a way as this before?
What did the speaker do well: You set everything up very nicely in the beginning of the commentary which made the rest of the commentary easier to follow. Also, you did an excellent job of identifying lit terms and features of drama and not only reporting them and talking about their general significance but i thought that you also extrapolated meaning from them very well. That is to say that you really strove to interpret rather than report. Furthermore i thought that the connections you made at the end of the commentary did a great job of tying the commentary all together and relating the passage to the rest of the play.
Improvements: I commend your efforts to record this all in one go and i think that as a first/second try it is quite a fluid commentary. However there are points within the commentary where there are large pauses or an abundance of umms. This i think will become better with practice but i just thought i should point it out. Also perhaps more specifc context such as how Shakespeare uses sleep imagery throughout the play would be nice but its not necessary.
Anything forgotten: Not really. You pretty much addressed everything that needed to be addressed even features of drama which i think heaps of people forget (including me)
Score:
A - 4^
B - 9
C - 8
D - 3
Overall: 24/30 WELL DONE
July's People #79
Context/Purpose: The context was dealt with in an effective and precise manner. Good work!
Organizational Principle: You stated at the beginning that you "guessed" you would organize it chronologically. First, never be so unsure because it takes away from your reliability as a critic. Second, why did you choose to organize it chronologically? It seems like you chose this method by default. Analyzing the passage chronologically could be the best way to go about it but just deliberate and clarify.
Questions: How do you link the castration of the cats to the castration of Bam? The cats in urban life and tribal life were castrated for different reasons.
Why do you think Gordimer used dashes to make her message more clear. This seems like something she does not typically do, so if she is trying to make the message easier or more lucid, why does she do this?
What did the speaker do well: I really enjoyed your ideas. I thought they were insightful and well thought out. I specifically and especially liked the way you interpreted "my poor thing". You were also very clear about how you were going to go about the passage.
Improvements: Just as Joe said in you last commentary, I believe your attempts to orate all in one go are commendatory and will help you in the long run, however there were a lot of gaps and errors in language that I think could have been avoided if you were not so pressured to record in one go. I also really wish you had addressed ore lit. terms. All of your ideas were great and I think you saw all the literary terms there were to see. However, sometimes you either assumed they were too obvious or perhaps forgot to reference them. For example, when describing Maureen you id not even mention the word adjectives or modify or connote etc. You did not mention how a "trampoline for fleas" was a metaphor, and you talked about the juxtaposition while referring to the bowling shirt and Maureen's dad, but you again forgot to mention it was also a metaphor.
Anything forgotten: LITERARY TERMS. Your ideas were there, just include a couple more tedious and perhaps obvious literary terms. I think you just assumed the reader was alert enough to pick up on them.
Score:
A - 4
B - 6
C - 8
D - 3
21/30- REALLLY GOOD JOB, just please address more freaking literary terms. You addressed them without stating what they were in a sense.
Context/Purpose: More context and background information about the apartheid, Nadine Gordimer, and how this passage relates to the novel as a whole. In class we talked about how context should be able 3 to 4 minutes in the beginning of your commentary.
Organizational Principle: I agree with the statement above, uncertainty is not convincing! I also got a bit lost, keep your focus consistent.
Questions: How do you see other literary terms being used within this passage?
How does this passage relate to the novel as a whole?
How do you see this passage depicting the apartheid in south Africa?
What did the speaker do well: I think your ideas are very interesting and just need to be supported by literary terms and supported with info about the apartheid.
Improvements: There are some awkward pauses while your speaking and language is inconsistent. I suggest you pause briefly to collect your thoughts and then continue.
You definitely understand the passage as a whole, but there is a lack of literary terms used. Literary devices? Adjectives, pronouns, nouns, modifiers, etc? Elaborate on the syntax, perhaps?
More context and background information about the apartheid, Nadine Gordimer, and how this passage relates to the novel as a whole.
I would personally choose a different approach to organizational pattern to make your ideas clear.
Anything forgotten: Definitely literary terms, more specific connections to the apartheid and the power struggle.
Score:
A - 3
B - 6
C - 7
D - 2
-Mary A.