Peer-editing Worksheet!

A review on a paper about the New freedom tower in New York.

1. This paper starts off in the second paragraph with the main thesis being that the One World Trade Center or Freedom Tower is a significantly innovative piece of architecture.  This thesis statement is debatable in two points one is that there are other pieces that could be far more innovative than this in architecture and that the freedom tower is not a architecture masterpiece but a target.
2. The author includes many reasons why the Tower is innovative. The first is that the tower has a vast number of office space, which is implied will offer more businesses in New York to flourish. The second point I saw is the foundation of the building in which new techniques with a lot of materials have been poured into the Tower. The third point is that the Tower offers two symbolic meanings to the people in the U.S. The first is aimed at how the Tower has contributed to a hopeful meaning for the people who had family affected by the previous Twins Towers destruction. The second symbol is to the people in America and how this Tower represents resilience and strength. Also that the way in which the glass is positioned allows a awe-inspiring effect on the Tower. A few things that the author could have done to improve on his paper are what companies helped build the Tower.
3. There are a few outside sources that the author used in this paper as support for his paper. For his counter-argument the author does not mention where two of his sources came from and who the people in the counter are such as other editors, writers, architects, or engineers.
4. The arguments are that the Tower is too land and vanilla and missed an important point when it could have been constructed. The essay does refutes these arguments by pointing out the symbols for the people it is suppose to express as well as the glass effect.
5. The writers refutations towards the counter arguments are solid but leaves one question that may not have anything to do with the paper, like what opportunity was missed when the Tower was built. An argument that popped into my head that the author can include is expanding on how the terrorists won idea when the Tower was built. Also are there not dozens of other architectural buildings that were or are being built the are better than the freedom tower?
6. The paper includes detail information of the revenue that can be generated due to office space and need.
7. The essay includes one logical fallacy and that is how it is how it includes that the office space is for rent but that those how own the space own the tower. A quick clarification of who actually owns the space is all that is needed.
8. Yes
9. The introduction can be improved by stating what points the author will make for his argument.
10. The conclusion offers insight on technology that was used in the Towers construction that the paper does not talk about, so if the author expanded on what tech was used and how then it would fit the conclusion.Or else he should just take that part out.

Link

Jonathan Martinez