Pass 1 CONTENT peer revision — claim, evidence, synthesis, structure

Turn-and-Talk (Lemov): with elbow partner, share ONE thing you're proud of in your draft and ONE thing you're nervous about. 60 seconds each.

• Validate that revision is the writing
• Reframe nervous = where the work is needed
• Set Pass-1-only focus for today — no mechanics yet

Today we begin formal 3-PASS PEER REVISION, retained from G6 with research-paper-specific criteria (MG-28). PASS 1 = CONTENT. We are NOT looking at commas, sentence types, or spelling today. We are looking at: does the research question focus? Does the thesis answer the question? Does each body paragraph make a sub-claim? Are sources synthesized or list-style? Is each cited correctly? Does the conclusion offer a so-what? 14 Pass-1 criteria total. ONE PASS AT A TIME. Doing all 3 passes at once is worse than doing each well. Today: Pass 1 only. The discipline of focusing makes the feedback useful. Use the purple highlighter — purple = Pass 1 = Content (G6 color code retained).

• Specific, kind, useful. Three S-K-U criteria for peer feedback.

  model [Coach mark each criterion yes/no/partial in purple in the margin.] If partial, write a 1-sentence suggestion: 'The thesis answers the question but doesn't preview the body — try adding: I will show this through ___, ___, and ___.'

  prompt Read partner's introduction. Apply 3 Pass-1 criteria: (1) Does the intro have a hook? (2) Does it state a research question? (3) Does the thesis answer the question + preview a roadmap?
• List-style is the most common G7 first-draft pattern. Pass 1 catches it.

  model List-style indicator: each sentence starts 'X says...' or 'According to X...' with no analytical claim leading. Synthesis indicator: paragraph opens with WRITER'S claim; sources support. Suggestion frame: 'Try opening with YOUR claim, then weave: "Building on this..." / "In contrast..."'

  prompt Read body paragraph. Apply Pass-1 synthesis check: is this list-style or synthesis? If list-style, suggest a connector move.
• So-what is what makes a research conclusion ARGUMENTATIVE rather than merely informative.

  model Summary indicator: 'In conclusion, I have shown X, Y, Z.' (just restates body). So-what indicator: 'This matters because ___' / 'These findings change ___' / 'The implication for ___ is...'

  prompt Read conclusion. Does it offer a so-what or merely summarize?

• Pair-share: name 1 Pass-1 criterion you are most confident applying.
• Cold Call: what makes Pass 1 different from Pass 2?
• Thumbs: ready to begin Pass 1 (up) / need re-explanation (down)

M-7-F-WR-16-A Chart

MG-28 Pass 1 panel: 14 criteria for research-paper content (research question, thesis, sub-claims, synthesis, sources, counterpoint, conclusion, roadmap, structure). Purple color-coded per G6 system. Print-ready 11x17.

MG-28 Chart Physical / non-image

3-pass peer-revision rubric adapted for research papers: 3-band stacked card extending G6 MG-16. PASS 1 — CONTENT (purple, 14 criteria adapted for research): research question focused / thesis answers the question / body paragraphs each make a sub-claim / minimum 3 sources cited overall / sources are credible per CRAAP / synthesis across sources visible in each body paragraph (not list-style) / counterpoint or limitation acknowledged / conclusion offers a so-what / introduction has hook + question + thesis + roadmap / paragraph order follows roadmap / each paragraph has a topic sentence and closing sentence / evidence supports claims / quotes are embedded with quote-sandwich pattern / paraphrases follow 3-rules. PASS 2 — SENTENCE-LEVEL (blue, 10 criteria adapted for research): four sentence types varied (at least one of each type used) / no misplaced or dangling modifiers / coordinate adjectives marked correctly / wordiness audit applied (no obvious wordiness patterns) / active voice default / signal phrases varied (not just 'X says') / interpretive sentences after quotes / parenthetical citations placed correctly / sentence rhythm varied / no sentence over 35 words without justification. PASS 3 — MECHANICS (green, 12 criteria adapted for research): MLA formatting correct (1-inch margins, double-spaced, header) / Works Cited alphabetical with hanging indent / each in-text citation matches a Works Cited entry / titles italicized or quoted correctly / spelling clean / capitalization clean / punctuation clean / pronoun case correct / pronoun consistency / semicolon/colon used correctly if used / commas for coordinate adjectives / quotation marks placed correctly. Bottom rule: 'ONE PASS AT A TIME.' Print-ready 11x17.

• PASS 1 conference: exchange drafts with assigned partner. Apply all 14 Pass-1 criteria with purple highlights and margin notes. 25 minutes.

  scaffold MG-28 Pass 1 sheet; purple highlighter; criterion-by-criterion checkoff
• Show Call (Lemov): teacher displays one student's draft with one strong Pass-1 fix visible. Class names what the reviser did. Reframes as model for next round.

  scaffold Document camera

• Identify 1 strength and 1 specific revision target from your partner's Pass-1 feedback. Apply this revision before next class.

• Restate: Pass 1 = Content only. One pass at a time.
• Preview: Pass 2 sentence-level revision

• Apply Pass-1 revisions to your draft. Bring revised draft tomorrow.