top of page
Search

Peer Review: Regents Essays

  • Writer: Rosie Jayde Uyola
    Rosie Jayde Uyola
  • May 19
  • 12 min read

Updated: May 21



Peer Review: Regents Essays


Materials:

  • 3 Regents essays per student

  • Regents Part III Rubric (1 per student)

  • Peer Feedback Sheet (3-column template)

  • Bard-style sentence stem guide

  • Notebook for focused freewrite and final reflection


Essential Questions

  • How do we evaluate the strength of a civic argument?

  • What makes peer feedback meaningful?

  • How can reflection improve our thinking and writing?


FFW (4 min; 8 sentences) How can giving critical and thoughtful feedback to your classmates help you deepen your own analytical and writing skills?


Danielson Alignment (Highly Effective)

  • 1a / 1e: Deep knowledge of pedagogy and learner needs through metacognitive writing

  • 3c: Every student actively engaged in writing and thinking

  • 3d: Real-time informal assessment of where students see strengths/weaknesses


DOK 4 Alignment (Hess Matrix)

  • Students engage in self-evaluation, identify gaps in understanding, and justify their thinking

  • Promotes reflection on extended learning


Bard Pedagogy

  • Core Bard strategy: Focused Freewrite opens thinking without pressure

  • Promotes voice, authenticity, and complexity


Visible Learning

  • Written work is visible in notebooks and may be collected or shared


Minutes 5–10 | Self-Annotation of One Essay

Students silently re-read one of their essays and mark:

  • Their thesis

  • Where they used evidence

  • One sentence they think needs revision


Danielson Alignment (Highly Effective)

  • 1e: Purposeful design that pushes analysis of text and structure

  • 3c: All students working with personal writing for individualised growth

  • 3d: Teacher circulates and assesses who is identifying key elements correctly


DOK 4 Alignment

  • Students analyse structure, evaluate reasoning, and prepare for peer critique

  • Task requires metacognitive reasoning across multiple drafts


Bard Pedagogy

  • Prepares students for dialogic writing by reading their work as a reader

  • Builds agency


Visible Learning

  • Annotations are physically marked on paper and inform peer review


Minutes 10–25 | Partner Peer Review Using Bard Feedback Format

Each student gives and receives feedback on one essay.

Peer Feedback - 3 prompts:

  1. What worked well?

  2. What was unclear?

  3. What can be improved and how?


Sentence stems guide feedback:

  • “Your thesis is strong because…”

  • “This quote supports your point…”

  • “You could improve this by…”

  • “I’m confused about…”

  • “You might clarify…”

Partners then switch and repeat for second essay if time allows.


Danielson Alignment (Highly Effective)

  • 2a: Culture of respect and trust through structured peer dialogue

  • 3b: High-level discussion and reasoning between peers

  • 3c: Full student engagement with partner, no passive learners

  • 3d: Feedback is formative, aligned to rubric, and student-driven


DOK 4 Alignment

  • Evaluate arguments

  • Justify critique using rubric and textual evidence

  • Apply understanding across peers’ and own work

  • Compare civic responses across drafts


Bard Pedagogy

  • Uses Dialectical Notebook logic: response → revision → reflection

  • Students engage in dialogic thinking through critique


Visible Learning

  • Feedback is written on rubric and margins

  • Peer Review Sheet serves as visible artifact of learning



Minutes 25–30 | Partners Switch and Read

Read feedback and ask partner for clarification if needed


Minutes 30–35 | Final Reflection Write

FFW: What is one specific revision you will make to one of your essays based on today’s peer feedback? WHY? Write 1 paragraph (5 - 8 sentences)


Danielson Alignment (Highly Effective)

  • 3d: Students use feedback to plan next steps

  • 1e: Final reflection connects learning to future revision

  • 3c: Full intellectual engagement to close the loop


DOK 4 Alignment

  • Apply feedback, justify revision decision, synthesise peer commentary into future thinking


Bard Pedagogy

  • Ends with writing to think

  • Centers reflection as part of the learning process


Visible Learning

  • Writing is collected or used to launch next revision



    Set I: Turning Point

    Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and Brown v. Board of Education (1954)


Prompt: Describe the historical context surrounding these documents, then explain how the two Supreme Court decisions represent either a turning point or a continuity in U.S. history.


Paragraph 1 – Historical Context

After the Civil War, the U.S. Constitution was amended to abolish slavery and provide citizenship and equal protection under the law. Despite these legal changes, Southern states implemented Jim Crow laws to enforce racial segregation and maintain white supremacy. The federal government often failed to intervene. In 1896, the Supreme Court ruled in Plessy v. Ferguson that segregation was constitutional if facilities were “separate but equal.” This decision gave legal backing to racial segregation for nearly six decades. By the 1950s, civil rights organizations, such as the NAACP, began challenging segregation in court, arguing that it denied equal access to education and opportunity. The legal and moral momentum for change had grown significantly after World War II, when African American veterans returned home to a country that denied them basic rights.


Paragraph 2 – Answering the Prompt

The two Supreme Court decisions represent a major turning point in U.S. legal and social history. In Document 1, the majority opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) claims that segregation does not imply the inferiority of African Americans and that any such feeling exists only “because the colored race chooses to put that construction upon it.” This reasoning gave legal approval to segregation across the country. In contrast, Document 2, the unanimous opinion in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), argues that “separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” Chief Justice Earl Warren refers to the psychological effects of segregation on children, stating it generates a “feeling of inferiority” that undermines their ability to learn. The Brown decision reversed Plessy and declared segregation in public education unconstitutional. This ruling launched a new phase of the civil rights movement and forced the federal government to confront issues of racial inequality in a way it had not done since Reconstruction.


Paragraph 3 – Conclusion

The shift from Plessy to Brown reflects a legal and ideological transformation in the meaning of equal protection under the Constitution. The Supreme Court moved from supporting segregation to recognizing its harms and rejecting it as incompatible with democratic values. While the ruling in Brown did not end segregation immediately, it became a legal foundation for future civil rights activism and legislation. This change marked a clear turning point in how the U.S. government interpreted and enforced civil rights protections.



Set II: Reliability

Truman vs. MacArthur and Civilian Control during the Korean War


Prompt: Describe the historical context surrounding these documents, then explain why Document 2 is or is not a reliable source of information about U.S. foreign policy.


Paragraph 1 – Historical Context

After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union emerged as global superpowers with opposing ideologies. As tensions between capitalism and communism intensified, the U.S. adopted a policy of containment to prevent the spread of communism. In 1950, North Korean forces invaded South Korea, leading the United Nations, under U.S. leadership, to intervene militarily. President Harry Truman insisted that the U.S. objective was to push back the invasion, but not to expand the war into China or provoke the Soviet Union. General Douglas MacArthur, the commander of U.N. forces in Korea, disagreed and publicly advocated for expanding the war by bombing Chinese targets. This public disagreement challenged the principle of civilian control over the military and led Truman to relieve MacArthur of his command in 1951.


Paragraph 2 – Answering the Prompt

Document 2, General MacArthur’s farewell address to Congress, is not a fully reliable source of information about U.S. foreign policy during the Korean War. MacArthur uses emotional and persuasive language to present his position, stating that in war “there is no substitute for victory.” His speech reflects his personal belief that limited war would lead to appeasement and future conflict. However, this document must be viewed with caution because it was delivered after his dismissal and represents only one side of a political dispute. MacArthur’s remarks omit Truman’s reasoning, which included the fear that escalating the war might bring the Soviet Union directly into the conflict or provoke nuclear retaliation. While MacArthur’s military experience adds context to his viewpoint, the speech does not present the full scope of U.S. foreign policy considerations. Because of this, it should be understood as a biased primary source influenced by personal frustration and opposition to Truman’s civilian leadership.


Paragraph 3 – Conclusion

Although General MacArthur was a key figure in the Korean War, his speech is not a fully reliable account of U.S. foreign policy because it reflects only his personal perspective and omits key diplomatic and strategic factors. Historians must consider the source’s purpose, timing, and intent. In this case, MacArthur’s farewell address was a public justification of his own views and a challenge to the decisions of the president. While it is valuable for understanding the debate over military policy, it cannot be accepted at face value without examining other sources and the broader Cold War context.



Civic Literacy Essay

The Treaty of Versailles Debate


Paragraph 1 – Historical Context

At the close of World War I, the United States faced a decision about how it would engage with the world moving forward. President Woodrow Wilson believed the country should take a leading role in building global peace. He helped negotiate the Treaty of Versailles, which included the League of Nations. The League was designed to resolve international conflicts through diplomacy and collective security. In contrast, many in the U.S. Senate expressed concerns about the treaty, especially about Article X, which could require American military involvement without Congressional approval. The civic disagreement reflected a wider debate between international cooperation and national independence, and between executive leadership and legislative oversight.


Paragraph 2 – Efforts to Address the Issue

President Wilson made repeated efforts to convince the public and Congress to support the treaty. He gave speeches across the country arguing that without the League of Nations, peace would not last. In Document 1, Wilson warns that rejecting the treaty would mean stepping away from the global leadership role the country had earned through sacrifice in the war. Meanwhile, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge and others proposed a version of the treaty that would include specific conditions. Document 2 shows Lodge arguing that the treaty, without changes, could give the League the power to pull the United States into foreign wars. These two efforts reflected opposing views on how to maintain peace and protect democratic values.


Paragraph 3 – Additional Efforts and Consequences

After the treaty failed to pass the Senate, the United States signed separate peace treaties with Germany and other nations. The country never joined the League of Nations. Document 3 explains that this decision reduced the League’s influence and contributed to its failure to stop aggression during the 1930s. Without U.S. involvement, the League lacked the strength to act against growing threats like Nazi Germany. Many Americans remained committed to isolationism during this time. Public opinion supported avoiding new military alliances, and this sentiment shaped foreign policy for years.


Paragraph 4 – Civic Impact on the United States

The disagreement over the Treaty of Versailles had lasting civic effects. It raised questions about how the Constitution divides power between the president and Congress. Document 4 shows that public opinion also played a role, as citizens expressed concerns about becoming too involved in European conflicts. The treaty debate influenced how future presidents approached international agreements. Leaders became more cautious about promising support for global organizations without securing Senate approval. The controversy also affected how Americans viewed their role in the world and how democracy functions during moments of crisis.


Paragraph 5 – Conclusion

The Senate’s rejection of the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations changed the course of U.S. foreign policy. The disagreement between Wilson and his opponents represented a larger civic conversation about responsibility, power, and independence. Each side made arguments rooted in different visions of what would keep the nation secure and just. The documents show that this disagreement affected not only diplomacy but also public trust, constitutional interpretation, and the future of civic debate in the United States.



Regents Essay Student Checklists (Sets I–III)



Set I Checklist: Turning Point or Similarity/Difference


□ I explained the historical context of both documents using accurate facts.

□ I clearly stated whether the second document shows a turning point or continuity.

□ I used evidence from both documents to support my argument.

□ I explained how each document supports my analysis.

□ I used outside information where relevant.

□ I wrote a full introduction, body paragraph, and conclusion.

□ I stayed focused on the prompt throughout my response.


Set II Checklist: Reliability and Document Analysis


□ I explained the historical context of both documents using accurate facts.

□ I evaluated whether Document 2 is reliable, and explained why.

□ I identified the author's point of view and possible bias in Document 2.

□ I considered the purpose, audience, and situation of the source.

□ I used specific quotes or ideas from both documents to support my response.

□ I wrote a full introduction, analysis paragraph, and conclusion.

□ I clearly explained how I reached my judgment about the document’s reliability.


Set III Checklist: Civic Literacy Essay


□ I explained the historical context of the civic issue using accurate facts.

□ I described at least two different efforts made to address the issue.

□ I explained how civic disagreement impacted the United States or American society.

□ I used evidence from at least four different documents, each only once.

□ I analyzed the documents rather than just describing them.

□ I included one paragraph for historical context, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

□ I used my own words and thinking, not just summary.

□ I stayed focused on the civic issue in every paragraph.





Peer Review Feedback Sheet – Regents Essays


Use this sheet to give and receive feedback on one of your Regents essays.

This helps you reflect, revise, and grow as a writer. Your partner should fill out this sheet while reading your essay.


Write These Notes in the Margins of Your Partner’s Essay

- Star (★) one strong sentence that supports the main idea

- Underline a sentence that could be clearer

- Write a question where you want more explanation

- Circle one quote. Ask: Does this support the argument?

- Add 1 positive comment and 1 revision suggestion


Peer Review Table

Use this table to summarise your feedback in three parts.

What Worked

What Was Unclear

What Could Be Improved





















Final Notes to the Writer

  1. What is one thing this writer does well?

  2. What is one suggestion to make the essay stronger?

  3. What question would you ask the writer to help them think more deeply?



    Regents Essay Support Handout

    Set I: Turning Point, Cause and Effect, or Compare and Contrast

    ✔ Start with 1 paragraph of background (What happened before the events in the documents?)


    You may be asked to do one of the following:

    • Compare and contrast (What is the same or different between the documents?)

    • Explain cause and effect (What caused the events or decisions, and what happened next?)

    • Identify a turning point (Did something major change between the two documents?)

    ✔ Write 1 paragraph to answer the question, using quotes and analysis

    ✔ End with a conclusion paragraph that explains why your answer matters


    In your writing:

    □ Use one quote from Document 1

    □ Use one quote from Document 2

    □ Add one fact from your own knowledge

    □ Focus on what the documents show and how they relate


    Set II: Document Reliability

    ✔ Start with 1 paragraph of background (What is the time period or event?)

    ✔ Write 1 paragraph that explains: Can we trust Document 2?

    ✔ End with a short conclusion (Say why the source is or is not reliable)


    In your writing:□ Say who wrote Document 2 and what their point of view is

    □ Say who the document was written for and why

    □ Use one quote from each document

    □ Explain if the author had a reason to leave out or shape information


    Set III: Civic Literacy Essay

    ✔ Start with 1 paragraph of background (What is the issue and when did it happen?)

    ✔ Write 3 body paragraphs:

    - One paragraph that describes one effort to solve the issue

    - One paragraph with a different effort or solution

    - One paragraph that explains how the issue affected the country or people

    ✔ End with a conclusion paragraph (What can we learn from this disagreement?)


    In your writing:

    □ Use four different documents (one per paragraph)

    □ Use one quote per document□ Use your own ideas and clear explanations

    □ Stay focused on how people disagreed and what impact it had



    Apoyo para Ensayos de Regents


    Parte I: Punto de Cambio, Causa y Efecto, o Comparación y Contraste


    ✔ Comienza con 1 párrafo de información de fondo (¿Qué pasó antes de los eventos en los documentos?)


    Puede que se te pida hacer una de las siguientes tareas: 

    • Comparar y contrastar (¿Qué es igual o diferente entre los documentos?) 

    • Explicar causa y efecto (¿Qué causó los eventos o decisiones, y qué ocurrió después?) 

    • Identificar un punto de cambio (¿Ocurrió algún cambio importante entre los dos documentos?)

    ✔ Escribe 1 párrafo que responda la pregunta, usando citas y análisis 

    ✔ Termina con un párrafo de conclusión que explique por qué tu respuesta es importante


    En tu escritura: 

    □ Usa una cita del Documento 1 

    □ Usa una cita del Documento 2 

    □ Agrega un dato de tu propio conocimiento 

    □ Concéntrate en lo que muestran los documentos y cómo se relacionan


    Parte II: Confiabilidad del Documento

    ✔ Comienza con 1 párrafo de información de fondo (¿Cuál es el período de tiempo o el evento?) 

    ✔ Escribe 1 párrafo que explique: ¿Podemos confiar en el Documento 2?

    ✔ Termina con una breve conclusión (Explica por qué la fuente es o no es confiable)


    En tu escritura: 

    □ Di quién escribió el Documento 2 y cuál es su punto de vista 

    □ Di para quién fue escrito el documento y por qué 

    □ Usa una cita de cada documento 

    □ Explica si el autor tenía una razón para omitir o moldear información


    Parte III: Ensayo de Alfabetización Cívica

    ✔ Comienza con 1 párrafo de información de fondo (¿Cuál es el problema y cuándo ocurrió?) 


    ✔ Escribe 3 párrafos del cuerpo:

    • Un párrafo que describa un esfuerzo para resolver el problema

    • Un párrafo con otro esfuerzo o solución diferente

    • Un párrafo que explique cómo el problema afectó al país o a la sociedad

    ✔ Termina con un párrafo de conclusión (¿Qué podemos aprender de este desacuerdo?)


    En tu escritura: 

    □ Usa cuatro documentos diferentes (uno por párrafo) 

    □ Usa una cita por documento □ Usa tus propias ideas y explicaciones claras 

    □ Mantente enfocado en cómo la gente estuvo en desacuerdo y cuál fue el impacto



    Hoja de Retroalimentación – Ensayos Regents


    Usa esta hoja para dar y recibir retroalimentación sobre uno de los ensayos del examen Regents. Esto te ayudará a reflexionar, revisar y mejorar como escritor(a). Tu compañero(a) debe llenar esta hoja mientras lee tu ensayo.


    Escribe Estas Notas en los Márgenes del Ensayo de tu Compañero(a)

    - Marca con una estrella (★) una oración fuerte que apoye la idea principal

    - Subraya una oración que podría ser más clara

    - Escribe una pregunta donde quieras más explicación

    - Encierra en un círculo una cita. Pregunta: ¿Apoya el argumento?

    - Agrega 1 comentario positivo y 1 sugerencia para mejorar



    Tabla de Retroalimentación del Compañero(a)

    Usa esta tabla para resumir tus comentarios en tres partes.

Lo Que Funciona Bien

Lo Que No Está Claro

Lo Que Se Puede Mejorar























Notas Finales para el Escritor(a)

  1. ¿Qué es una cosa que este escritor(a) hace bien?

  2. ¿Cuál es una sugerencia para hacer el ensayo más fuerte?

  3. ¿Qué pregunta le harías al escritor(a) para ayudarle a pensar más profundamente?




 
 

“Our histories never unfold in isolation. We cannot truly tell what we consider to be our own histories without knowing the other stories. And often we discover that those other stories are actually our own stories.”

Angela Y. Davis

Thank you for contacting Rosie Jayde Uyola

© 2035 by Rosie Jayde Uyola

bottom of page