At a glance / A proposed forty-minute meeting
| Minutes | Work |
|---|---|
| 0–5 | Silent notes |
| 5–20 | Readers describe their encounter |
| 20–30 | Writer asks questions |
| 30–35 | Agree revision priorities |
| 35–40 | Confirm the next circulation |
Agree on the job
A critique group is not automatically a social reading group, a copy desk, or a workshop in which the author must defend every choice. Decide which one it is before circulating pages. George Mason University distinguishes write-together, feedback, and accountability groups; the distinction matters because each asks a different kind of preparation. A feedback group needs a shared promise: the aim is to describe a reader’s encounter and offer usable priorities, not to remake every draft in the speaker’s preferred style.
Set a small circulation rule
Choose a maximum page or word count, a deadline, and a comment format. Include a cover note with genre, stage, intended reader, and two questions. Readers should finish the entire submitted piece before marking it. If time is scarce, fewer pages read carefully are more honest than a large packet skimmed for comma errors. Rotate the order of writers and the facilitator so status does not become invisible authority.
Run the meeting in phases
Try forty minutes: five minutes of silent note-taking; fifteen minutes of readers discussing the draft while the writer listens; ten minutes for the writer’s questions; five minutes for revision priorities; five minutes for logistics. In the listening phase, require sentences that begin “I understood,” “I expected,” “I lost track,” or “I wanted to know.” These report an encounter. “You should make her nicer” is a solution; it becomes useful only after the group identifies what produced the response.
Prioritize without flattening
End with no more than two higher-order concerns and one strength worth preserving. UW–Madison’s peer-review guidance likewise places purpose, whole-draft reading, specific passages, and larger issues before local corrections. A reader may note a repeated typo, but sentence cleanup should not consume the only hour available to a draft whose structure is unclear. The writer records priorities; the group does not negotiate a binding revision plan.
Protect consent and continuity
Do not forward pages, quote them outside the room, or assume a draft is public because it was shared with peers. Ask before recording a meeting. Keep an attendance and circulation ledger, especially when work is unpublished or drawn from lived experience. This protocol will not eliminate mismatch, hurt feelings, or bad advice. It makes those limits discussable. If the group cannot keep its agreed terms, pause circulation and repair the conditions before asking another writer to take the risk. A facilitator may also offer an opt-out from critique that week, rather than make disclosure the price of belonging. Care applies to excerpts circulated after meetings.
Sources & limits
Groups differ in access needs, genre knowledge, and power relations. A fixed speaking sequence may need adjustment for participants and context.
- Setting Up Your Own Writing Group
George Mason University Writing Center · Source undated · Consulted 19 Sept 2026The guide distinguishes types of writing groups and recommends collaboratively deciding meeting structure, facilitation, attendance, draft sharing, and target length.
- Peer Reviews
University of Wisconsin–Madison Writing Center · Source undated · Consulted 19 Sept 2026The guide recommends whole-draft reading, purpose-first critique, specific passages, and attention to larger issues before sentence-level matters.
Send a correction with the passage and supporting source.
