This is a peer review response essay. Read my partner's essay, and then Answer the following questions at least 300 words:

1) What's most interesting about this topic to you, as a reader? If nothing stands out as particularly interesting, how could the essay's writer engage your interest? Be sure to explain your response.

2) What do you think of the order of the body paragraphs in the essay outline? Are there alternative ordering or organizing strategies that you can suggest? Try to offer at least one potential alternative "re-order" and explain how or why that reordering might benefit the overall effectiveness of the essay.

3) What important aspects of the main argument are unanswered or unaddressed by this outline? Play the role of a skeptical reader (even if you are prone to agree with your peer's argument) and think about which parts of the argument are least likely to convince someone. Why wouldn't those parts of the argument be convincing? What could be changed (added, subtracted, re-arranged, etc) to make the argument more convincing? Offer at least two critical issues you'd like your peer to address in revision related to the argument itself (so, not grammar/syntax/citations/etc) and explain why you think those issues should be addressed.

4) Optional: Is there any other feedback that you'd like to offer the writer based on what you've read?

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF A SUCCESSFUL PEER REVIEW:

• It should be a formal letter addressed to your peer (So, "Dear <Peer's Name>," and written in the second person), not to the instructor (Nick).
• It must address the three required parts of the prompt listed above in no less than 300 words.
• It must be reasonably proofread and error free.

If you're struggling to meet the assignment requirements, reach out to me ASAP. I'm happy to help if you're stuck, and I'll also have read your peer's 2.1, so I'll have some thoughts, too. Once I receive everyone's completed peer reviews, I'll email them to you directly so you can use them in your revision process.