Module 9

Manuscript Work

Assignment

• Assignment 6: Peer Review #3
  • Grade: 10 Points
  • Due
    • End of Module
  • Submission
    • Use your peer review partner's shared Google Docs to provide your peer review feedback and comments at the end of the document. In addition, you can use Google Docs' commenting feature to provide your feedback to a specific area in the texts.
  • Part 3 Peer Feedback Guide
    • Directions: Answer the following questions for your peer review partner, approximately 1-2 paragraphs per item.
      1. Does the results section logically follow the methods (submitted as part 2)? Does it seem like the same study? Explain.
      2. Do the analyses make sense, in terms of the research questions? Are all important pieces of information reported? Is it clear what the researcher did? Can you identify all variables? Can you identify the data sources? If quantitative, are the statistics reported correctly and accurately, and do the degrees of freedom match the sample size? Are effect sizes reported? If qualitative, are the codes, categories, etc. described in detail, along with the processes used to arrive at those codes and categories? Explain.
      3. Is all relevant information in tables/figures? Are tables and figures properly formatted, located at the end of the document, and clear? Does the author include a note in the body of the document indicating where the table should be inserted? Explain.
      4. Are results summarized in a clear, jargon-free way at the end of the results section?
      5. Does the discussion begin with a common language explanation of the results? Is each finding described?
      6. Does the discussion contain description of theoretical and practical importance of the study? Are the results reported faithfully, or does the author make exaggerated claims about the finings? Explain.
      7. Does the author describe limitations of the study, and are there other limitations that you noted that should be mentioned?
      8. Does the author connect the results to the current literature, and suggest future directions for research? Explain what else could be included.
      9. Is this section in APA style? Are all references included?
      10. Taken as a whole, do the results and discussion seem to go together? Does this seem like a quality study? What is missing?
      11. What other suggestions for improvement do you have for your peer?
• Peer Feedback Rubric: Formatting
  • Novice: 0 (0.00%) - 79 (79.00%)
    • At the highest level, the feedback is vague or unhelpful, or responses to some questions are missing, or the feedback was given to the peer much later than the due date. This would be the highest category you could earn if you turned in your draft to your peer after the deadline for feedback had passed or failed to turn in a draft for feedback at all.
  • Competent: 80 (80.00%) - 89 (89.00%)
    • The feedback is mostly clear, though some points might be somewhat vague or unhelpful. The feedback would help the peer make some meaningful adjustments to the proposal, but could be more specific, appropriate, or constructive. This category would be the highest possible for feedback that was submitted one to two days after the feedback deadline; or if you turned in your draft to your peer late but before the deadline for feedback.
  • Proficient: 90 (90.00%) - 100 (100.00%)
    • The feedback is clear, helpful and constructive, and will enable the peers to make meaningful adjustments to the work. Your original draft and your feedback were both delivered to your partner in by the deadlines.
• Continue working on your article (create all tables, figures, thoroughly check formatting of whole manuscript, check the correspondence of your manuscript to the author instructions, rewrite abstract, draft your cover letter)