Suggestions and Guidelines
for Peer-Group Editing
of Position Paper #2

1. Distribute your papers among the group members.

2. Spend 10-15 minutes on each paper. (If we start at about 9:45, you'll have about 65 minutes. If there are 2 papers in your group, you can spend about 30 minutes on each; if there are 3, spend about 20 minutes on each; if there are 4, spend about 15 minutes on each.)
   1. It's better if there are at least 3 papers per group, so, if there aren't, please let me know.

3. For each paper, ask as many of the following questions as you have time for:
   1. Did the author state whether and why they did or did not agree with the definition in premise 1?
      For premise 1 and each of the rest of the premises, also ask these questions:
      1. If the author agreed, then it is preferable (but not necessary) that they give reasons for agreeing. If they did give such reasons, do you agree with those reasons? Why?

      2. If the author disagreed, it is necessary that they give reasons for disagreeing, so do you agree with those reasons? Why?

   2. Did the author state whether and why they did (not) agree with the claim about the nature of programming languages in premise 2?
      (Plus questions (i) and (ii), above.)

   3. Did the author state whether and why they did (not) agree with the claim about the "Turing-equivalence" of programming languages in premise 3?
      (Plus questions (i) and (ii), above.)

   4. Did the author state whether and why they did (not) agree about the claim and/or the examples in premise 4?
      (Plus questions (i) and (ii), above.)

   5. Did the author state whether and why they believed that conclusion 5 did (not) follow from premises 1-4? Do you agree?
      1. If the author believed that this conclusion did not logically follow from the premises, did they state whether they believed it anyway, on independent grounds (i.e., for different reasons)?

      2. And, if so, do you agree with those reasons?

   6. Did the author state whether and why they believed that conclusion 6 did (not) follow from statement 5? Do you agree?
      (Plus questions (e)(i) & (ii), above.)

4. Keep a written record of the questions and replies. This will be useful to the author, for revision.

5. At home, over the next week, please revise your paper to take into consideration the comments made by your fellow students (i.e., your "peers"): Perhaps defend your claims better, or clarify statements that were misunderstood, etc. For help, see Dima or me.