Julius Caesar Analysis Peer Editing Guidelines

The following is the framework we will use to peer edit your Julius Caesar essays tomorrow in class. It might also be helpful as you are writing your first draft:

Introductory Elements:

  1. Make a strong statement or observation about the underlying subject of the analysis. This can be stated as an aphorism or universal truth.
  2. Provide a brief contextual summary of the conversations provided in the excerpt, including what each speaker intends to convince Caesar to do.
  3. Write a thesis which directly responds to the prompt using the arrangement and order of arguments in addition to an assertion about the superiority of Decius’s argument.

Body Paragraph(s):

Note: This is a basic 5 part structure–however, you should consider using more than one piece of text evidence and accompanying analysis to fully develop your explanation of each argument’s content.

  1. Write a topic sentence which acknowledges the arrangement or pattern of the argument being addressed and its specific strategies.
  2. Provide a brief contextual introduction of your evidence and its strength and/or weakness, depending whose argument you are addressing.
  3. Cite text evidence sparingly, using line numbers–stick to MLA format.
  4. Fully develop how Calphurnia and Decius appeal to Caesar based on the nature of their relationships with him and knowledge of the basic expectations of a husband/wife/emperor/conspirator. Put another way, explain how each argument appeals to Caesar and moves him to agree. This is the speaker–audience connection on the rhetorical triangle.
  5. Crystallize the analysis and write a suitable transition based on the part of the arrangement you are going to analyze next and addressing its relationship to what you just got done analyzing.


  1. Crystallize how both arguments proceed and why Decius ultimately prevails, using the underlying structure and complexity of the arguments.
  2. Extend the underlying subject of the analysis to provoke the audience to think about the implications of the subject of analysis beyond the confines of Shakespeare’s play.

Scoring Structure:

You will be asked to give each paper you edit a whole number score based on the following levels of language control & depth of analysis:

  • 9: Masterful language use & Sophisticated analysis
  • 8: Well-controlled language & Effective analysis
  • 7: Mature language & Convincing analysis
  • 6: Generally clear language & Adequate analysis
  • 5: Limited, inconsistent language & analysis
  • 4: Immature language use & Inadequate analysis
  • 3: Misused language & Oversimplified or Meager analysis

I won’t go lower–you’re all capable of at least a 5, if you fulfill your potential.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s