Peer review: literacy sponsorship

You must review 3 papers that are not your own. If you see 3 reviews on the original post, you must choose another to respond to.  
Your review will contain an “Overall Feedback” section where you will address:

What in the draft is effective and why? That is, what part or aspect of it resonates with you or helps you to understand the writer’s ideas? (Also, what about the draft do you simply like and why?) 
What in the draft is not as effective as it could be and why? That is, what part or aspect of it is confusing or unconvincing? What, possibly, could be done to help improve the effectiveness of this part of the draft? 

Your review will also contain an “Assignment-Specific” section where you will address:

What do you believe is the primary claim or theme that the writer develops in their literacy narrative, according to your own understanding? What thoughts do you have about that theme? (Answer this primarily in your own words. Quoting from your peer’s essay should be minimal, if done at all.) 
Which part(s) of the paper could/should the writer expand and why? (This could be, for example, because a section, memory, or idea is interesting, and you would like to know more; it could be because the section seems incomplete and deserves more attention; it could be because the writer could provide more insight or analysis for this section; it could be because of some other reason entirely.) What extra details, insight, etc., would you like to see added? 

You must review 3 papers that are not your own. If you see 3 reviews on the original post, you must choose another to respond to.