View the step-by-step solution to:

Course Project Part 2: Peer Review Reading and Reviewing Drafts For this portion of your course project you will engage in a peer review using this...

Course Project Part 2: Peer Review

Reading and Reviewing Drafts

For this portion of your course project you will engage in a peer review using this discussion forum. Refer to the Course Project page, located in the Course Materials and Resources section, for complete requirements. Post your draft of your course presentation no later than Thursday to ensure your peers have an adequate amount of time to review your paper. Once you have posted your draft of your presentation, conduct a peer review of one your classmate’s presentations.

Important Note: Depending on the number of individuals in your class, your instructor may assign an additional paper for you to review. Please check for announcements.

Due Dates

  • Your draft of your presentation must be posted by midnight Thursday.
  • Your reviews of your classmates' presentation drafts should be posted by midnight Saturday.

NOTE: Please make sure to post your draft on time Thursday to ensure that your classmates have an adequate amount of time to complete their review of your presentation.

Please answer the following questions for each draft you review. You are welcome to add additional commentary for your peers. You can copy and paste the form into a word document to fill it in and then copy and paste it into the discussion forum.

Note: you are not required to revise the paragraphs for your peers - your job is to provide the feedback your peers need to revise their own work.

OPEN-ENDED FORM

Author____________ Reviewer_____________

The goals of peer review are:

  1. to help improve your classmate's presentation by pointing out strengths and weaknesses that may not be apparent to the author, and
  2. to help improve editing skills.

INSTRUCTIONS

Read the paper(s) assigned to you twice, once to get an overview of the presentation, and a second time to provide constructive criticism for the author to use when revising his/her presentation. Answer the questions below.

ORGANIZATION (10%)

  1. Were the basic sections (Introduction, Conclusion, Literature Cited, etc.) adequate? If not, what is missing?
  2. Did the writer use subheadings well to clarify the sections of the text? Explain.
  3. Was the material ordered in a way that was logical, clear, easy to follow? Explain.

CITATIONS (20%)

  1. Did the writer cite sources adequately and appropriately? Note any incorrect formatting.
  2. Were all the citations in the text listed in the References section? Note any discrepancies.

GRAMMAR AND STYLE (20%)

  1. Were there any grammatical or spelling problems?
  2. Was the writer’s writing style clear? Were the paragraphs and sentences cohesive? Did paragraphs have an opening topic sentence, several supporting sentences, a concluding sentence, and a transition sentence to the next paragraph (where appropriate)?

CONTENT (50%)

  1. Did the writer adequately summarize and discuss the topic? Explain.
  2. Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials available from the standard sources (e.g., ECPI library)? If no, what's missing?
  3. Did the writer make some contribution of thought to the presentation, or merely summarize data or publications? Explain.

There are two primary areas that you should be focusing on when you engage in this kind of peer response: the macro issues and the micro issues.

The macro issues deal with the large issues (content, fulfillment of purpose, organization, etc.). Usually, when a reader makes recommendations about macro issues, it means you will probably need to add content to your paragraph, delete content from your paragraph, move major chunks of your paragraph around, etc.

The micro issues deal with the smaller scale issues (spelling, grammar, word choice, punctuation, etc.). Usually, these micro issues are identified in the proofreading/editing stages of the writing process, and it is easier to identify them when you have several sets of eyes going over your draft. If you notice any micro issues as you go through your peers' drafts, please do note them. You might even want to offer suggestions for how to improve them.

NOTE: You will be evaluated on the content and depth of your responses, so remember the following when completing them:

  • Be considerate
  • Be thorough
  • Write clearly and use complete sentences
  • Make constructive comments
  • Avoid rude remarks
  • Make helpful suggestions
  • Praise the positive

Your purpose for each response is to assist the writer in any way possible with improving her or his paper. Now is the time for sound advice and cyber-support.

Giving and Receiving Constructive Criticism

I know some of you will feel awkward about posting your draft to the discussion board for others to read, but there are many reasons why making your draft public like this can benefit you. Here are a few of those reasons:

  • For one thing, it's always helpful to have someone else read over your work because readers will find mistakes writers cannot see. Writers tend to read over their writing so much that, after a while, they can no longer see the mistakes they are making. A reader can help with this problem.
  • Also, writers write so that readers can understand what they are writing about. What better way to see if a reader understands what you have written than to have a reader actually read your writing?

Additionally, I know some of you will feel awkward about making comments about drafts you have read.

You might feel that you are not qualified to give feedback, but I'm asking you to put aside your doubts and give it your best shot. More than anything else, your classmates need real readers who can let the writers know if they are "making sense" or fulfilling the assignment. You can serve as a genuine reader for your classmates, and that's a valuable service to them. Don't worry about "not being sure" of an answer to a required question. You are the READER-and your interpretation of what you read matters. Just answer the questions from a reader's perspective, and don't worry about being "right" or "wrong." As long as you read the draft carefully and answer the required questions thoughtfully, you are doing your job.

Your reviews should be thoughtful and detailed. Saying things like “this is a great job” or “well done” throughout the entire paper, does not help the writer improve. No one is able to create a perfect presentation the first time. Even those with extensive writing experience need to revise their first drafts. What does this mean? Please provide constructive criticism. Some things you should be looking for:

  • Missing internal citations
  • First person writing
  • Grammar errors
  • Two or three sentence paragraphs
  • Misuse of quotation marks
  • Direct quotes without proper citation
Sign up to view the entire interaction

Top Answer

Here is the answer... View the full answer

Review.doc

Author____________ Reviewer_____________
The goals of peer review are:
1. to help improve your classmate's presentation by pointing out strengths and weaknesses that may not be apparent to the...

Sign up to view the full answer

Why Join Course Hero?

Course Hero has all the homework and study help you need to succeed! We’ve got course-specific notes, study guides, and practice tests along with expert tutors.

-

Educational Resources
  • -

    Study Documents

    Find the best study resources around, tagged to your specific courses. Share your own to gain free Course Hero access.

    Browse Documents
  • -

    Question & Answers

    Get one-on-one homework help from our expert tutors—available online 24/7. Ask your own questions or browse existing Q&A threads. Satisfaction guaranteed!

    Ask a Question
Ask a homework question - tutors are online