STEP 2: Consider these questions:
Provide Focused, Specific and Usable Feedback! Stay Objective.
a) Consider providing a score for this section of the rubric. You must justify the score.
b) Does the writer state their topic of inquiry? Is their topic narrow?
c) Does it specifically identify a gap and how will they address this?
d) Does the writer explicitly connect its topic to relevant scholary work?
STEP 3: Use this checklist to assist with your feedback:
___ Provide a mission statement that specifies the purpose of your research - to explore something, to explain something, or to create something.
___ State the topic of your inquiry – describe the broad phenomenon you have observed that guided your initial focus for your research project.
___ Trace out the evolution of your narrowed topic using academic literature
___ Define key terms, concepts and theories relevant to your topic
___ Describe and evaluate major influences and advancements in the evolution of academic literature in your topic; who were the original initiators of ideas presented in the paper?
___ Explain the multiple perspectives that authors have taken in academic literature on this topic.
___ Justify the inclusion of sources selected in terms of breadth and need.
___ Compare and contrast main arguments, disagreements, or differences of perspective on the topic.
___ Identify any assumptions you are making in your research and associated methods.
___ State the narrow focus of your inquiry; point out academic sources that were helpful in narrowing the focus of your inquiry.
___ Summarize the methods and findings from your foundational academic literature including a review of the claims made in their analysis of findings, evaluation of the lines of reasoning, and evidence that can be compared to your research.
___ Review the foundational sources that your foundational source authors relied upon in their papers.
___ Describe academic literature that challenges the conclusions of your foundational sources.
___ Identify gaps in the existing body of knowledge, one or two of which you will fill.
___ Expand your discussion of the “gap” in the academic literature that your research addresses.
___ Justify the need for your research method with a rationale that aligns with your foundational sources. How will addressing the proposed gap benefit our understanding of the topic, discipline, scholarly field or real world applications?
Step 4: In your Peer Feedback Review: Remember to do the following:
Methodology:
a) Does the writer explain their method logically?
b) Does the writer provide all the information needed to replicate their method?
c) Do they explain how they arrived at their method?
Analysis, Conclusions and Future Directions:
a) Does the writer refer back to their project and research goal?
b) Does the writer HAVE a new understanding? Highlight in Orange.
c) Do they PROVE that they have this new understanding logically?
d) Do they take time to explain the logic of the results?
e) Do they connect their research BACK to their literature review?
f) Do they connect to their future research?
Writing Mechanics:
a) Does the writer communicate their ideas clearly?
b) Does the writer use the correct language of their discipline?
c) Does the writer use visuals? Do the visuals enhance, distract or confuse the reader?
d) Does the writer have errors in grammar, mechanics or word choice?
Citations:
Find a PEER that uses the same style as you?