Foundations and Assessment of Education/Edition 1/Foundations Table of Contents/Chapter 6/Experts Take Sides/Peer Review One

If someone's user name appears below, this peer review has already been "claimed" or completed. Please select another peer review slot or article. This article has been reviewed by:Jnemo001 (talk) 23:01, 23 June 2009 (UTC) To evaluate this peer review, click on the Discussion tab above. PEER REVIEW TEMPLATE Use this template for your peer reviews. DIRECTIONS: You are required to complete TWO (2) peer reviews. Please take your time and provide effective, helpful feedback. Plan to spend 1.5 to 2 hours per review! Each peer review is worth 50 points and will be "graded" by the article's author. (Click on Discussion to see the rubric the author will use to grade your peer review.) You may only review articles written in the current semester (no articles with BOLD titles) As instructed above, be sure to sign your peer review with four tilde ~~~~. You will not receive credit for reviews that are not signed To complete this assignment, we suggest having two tabs/windows open in your browser (e.g. Internet Explorer): one with this peer review template and one with the article you are reviewing Starting the DAY AFTER the peer reviews are due, you may complete ADDITIONAL peer reviews for EXTRA CREDIT (25 points each). You MAY NOT complete any Extra Credit Reviews until that time. --- Part 1 - Article Components Learning Target(s) Answer the following questions regarding the learning targets: Is/are the stated learning targets actual learning targets i.e. they state what the reader should know or be able to do after reading the article? ___YES ___ Is/are the learning target(s) specific? YES THEY ARE SPECIFIC _______ Is/are they appropriate and reasonable? (Are they too easy or too difficult for ECI 301 students?) _YES THEY ARE APPROPRIATE THEY MAY SEEM EASY BUT NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND IS ACTUALLY A DIFFICULT ACT TO DESCRIBE_____ Is/are they observable? (You wouldn't have to look inside the readers head to know if they met this target.) YES______ Does the article provide adequate information for readers to achieve these targets? YES______ Please make a comment about the learning target(s). If you answered "No" to any of the questions above, please explain how the author can improve them. Comment: I THINK THE LEARNING TARGETS ARE GOOD BECAUSE NCLB IS COMPLICATED SO YOUR LEARNING TARGET OF A DEFINITION FOR THIS ACT IS A COMPLEX TARGET. Grammar and Mechanics Review Please either paste the entire body of the article here or any sections that you feel need to be revised. To do this: go back to the module page for the article select "edit this page" highlight all the text, hit control "c" (or "copy" from the edit menu) navigate back to your peer review page click edit this page and paste the text into this window (use control "v" or paste from the edit menu) You may want to have Wikibooks open in two windows/tabs to make this process easier. Type your comments in ALL CAPITALS or in another color so the author can easily find them. PASTE TEXT HERE After viewing each of these articles and others, it is clear that there are very few, if any articles that argue that we should fully embrace NCLB exactly as it was first articulated and received. The first article presented above leaned more on the side that NCLB should be completely rejected and that our country should adopt a completely alternative plan for action that is perceived as more conducive to certain goals such as access to a greater range of information and more freedom for diverse methods of teaching and learning.THE PREVIOUS SENTENCE COULD BE CUT AND REDUCED TO MAKE TWO SHORT SENTENCES. The second and third articles above did not explicitly reject NCLB in its entirety but argued that there have been some problems that have resulted from NCLB that need to be addressed and corrected as well as possible. One fact that does remainTHE FACT REMAINS that the United States has a closer KEEPS A CLOSE eye toON certain kinds of student achievement than it ever has before. This kind of awareness is something that is either directly or indirectly acknowledged in each article. The majority of articles set out to show problems that exist with NCLB and how to possibly respond to these problems, without necessarily discarding NCLB in its entirety. NCLB has not been in place for more than 10 years. As NCLB is given a longer time to work, such problems can be discussed more and proposed solutions for dealing with these problems can be given time to work. Adjustments can be made. With time, then, it seems that NCLB can bring nothing but improvement for student education. If we do not meet NCLB’S lofty goal of a 100% passing rate in 2014, it is not unreasonable to aim for an improvement in overall student performance and a smaller gap for achievement according to the preset categories. Sources For each source listed in the "References" section of the article, name the type of source (scholarly or popular) and the perspective it provides (research, expert opinion from educator, popular news source, parent organization, personal contact, etc.) . SCHOLARLY - PROVIDES FACTUAL INFORMATION ABOUT TOPIC . SCHOLARLY - EXPERT OPINION FROM EDUCATOR . POPULAR - TEACHER ORGANIZATION . SCHOLARLY - EXPERT OPINION FROM EDUCATOR . SCHOLARLY - EXPERT OPINION FROM EDUCATOR . . List the range of publication years for all sources, e.g. 1998-2006: 2009 WAS THE ONLY DATE ON ONE REFERENCE______ - ________ Answer the following questions about the sources used in the article: Did the author CITE at least 5 sources? __YES________ and use at least 2 scholarly sources? _YES_____ Are the citations in APA format? _NO_____ Here are two examples of citations in APA format, one for a paraphrase and one for a quotation: Constructing a title is both a science and an art, but on one fact all of the experts agree: the title must contain a colon (Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, & Starr, 2007). Unfortunately impoverished children are often attending “low-performing schools staffed by ill-equipped teachers” (Murnane, 2007, p. 34). Are all the sources listed in APA format in a Reference list labeled "References"? __NO____ Here is an example of a reference written in APA format: Bailey, J., & Barnum, P. (2001). The colon and its rise to prominence in the American circus. Journal of American Punctuation, 34(5), 2-3. Taken together do the 5 sources represent a good balance of potential references for this topic? ___YES___ Does the author consider potential bias in the sources? __YES____ Are most of the sources current (less than 5 years old)? __UNKNOWN____ Please make a comment about the sources. If you answered "No" to any of the questions above, please explain how the author can improve. Comment:ALL THE DATES FOR THE REFERENCES ARE NOT LISTED AND I DON'T THINK THEY ARE IN APA FORMAT. Multiple Choice Questions What does each question assess: knowledge or reasoning (application of knowledge)? Question 1 _______KNOWLEDGE________________ Question 2 ____REASONING___________________ Question 3 _____KNOWLEDGE__________________ Question 4 ______REASONING_________________ Answer the following questions about the multiple-choice questions. Are there 4 multiple-choice questions? __YES____ Do they each have four answer choices (A-D)? __YES____ Is there a single correct (not opinion-based) answer for each question? __YES___ Do the questions assess the learning target? _YES_____ Are the questions appropriate and reasonable (not too easy and not too difficult)? __YES____ Are the foils (the response options that are NOT the answer) reasonable i.e. they are not very obviously incorrect answers? ___YES___ Are the response options listed in alphabetical order? ___NO___ Are correct answers provided and listed BELOW all the questions? _YES_____ Please make a comment about the multiple-choice questions. If you answered "No" to any of the questions above, please explain how the author can improve the question/s. Comment: THE ANSWERS ARE NOT LISTED IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER Part 2 - Ratings LIST and EXPLAIN your rating for each of the four criteria. Importance: I rated this article __4_ for importance because...I THINK THE INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT AND RELEVANT TO FUTURE TEACHERS. Interest: I rated this article __3_ on interest because... IT RAISED A FEW GOOD NEW POINTS Credibility: I rated this article _3__ for credibility because...SOME OF THE REFERENCES COULD HAVE BEEN BIAS Writing skill: I rated this article 4 on writing because... IT WAS WELL WRITTEN WITH AN OBVIOUS INTEREST FROM THE WRITER. HIGHLIGHT SPECIFIC POINTS IN THE RUBRIC that apply to the article. To do this: Highlight sections with the cursor and use the BOLD icon above OR type ''' (3 apostrophes) before and after the text you want to make bold Wiki Article Rubric criteria 5 4 3 2 1 How important was the information presented on this topic to you as a teacher education student? Covers key ideas crucial for future teachers to know Based on researched information. Highly relevant to current educational practice (*this description may be less applicable for some topics such as history of education) Provides an excellent overview of the topic including relevant research, educational practice, laws and litigation. Includes in-depth discussion of at least a few selected key issues. 'Includes ideas relevant to future teachers'Bold text Mostly based on researched information. Applicable to today’s schools Provides a good general overview with relevant information and discussion of a few key ideas A couple useful points; some irrelevant information About half of the information is the author’s opinion. Some out-dated information; may not reflect current practice Good information is included but the paper yields a partial /incomplete understanding of the topic or key issues One useful point A few facts but mostly the author’s opinion. Most of the information is irrelevant in today’s schools. Focused on unimportant subtopics OR overly general with few specifics. Important information is missing. Information is not relevant to future teachers. Information is entirely the author’s opinion. The information is obsolete. Only irrelevant details or common knowledge. Lacks any substantive information. criteria 5 4 3 2 1 How interesting was the article to read? Sidebar includes new information that was motivating to read/view Visuals (headings, colors, fonts, pictures, etc.) enhance the article by making it easier or more inviting to read Multiple perspectives are considered and discussed Mostly new information/ideas Insightful interpretation & analysis are evident throughout the article; a clearly stated conclusion synthesizes all of the material presented. Points are clearly made and elaborated on with compelling examples. Sidebar includes new information that enhances understanding of the topic Visuals add to the article At least two perspectives were presented About half of the information/ideas are new Interpretation and analysis is provided for 3-4 points in the article; a reasonable conclusion based on this information is stated Some good points are made and explained. Sidebar includes new information related to the topic. Visuals are included but have minimal effect One interesting or new perspective is presented A couple (2-3) new ideas or pieces of information Interpretation/ analysis is included for a few (1-2) individual sections, but there is not a conclusion that synthesizes the information presented. Points are made but may not always be adequately supported or explained. Sidebar repeats what is already in the article Visuals are somewhat distracting or not included Only the “typical” view or one biased perspective is presented. One new idea or bit of information Information presented with minimal analysis or interpretation; no conclusion or the conclusion is not based on the information presented At least one clear point is made and supported. No side bar included. Visuals are offensive and completely detract from the content No perspective is acknowledged. Nothing new. No analysis or interpretation included No clear points are made or points appear pasted from other sources without any explanation. criteria 5 4 3 2 1 How credible do you think the information is? Required sources are properly cited and included in a reference list in APA format. Information from diverse sources representing multiple perspectives is included. Several reputable and current sources are cited. The author acknowledges potential bias in sources where appropriate. Author clearly identifies his own ideas, biases and opinions Required sources are included; a couple of formatting errors Information from a variety of sources is included. Most sources are reasonably reputable; bias is acknowledged in others. It is clear when the author is presenting his own opinion; he doesn’t try to pass if off as fact. Required sources are included; APA format is not used or has many errors. A variety of sources is listed but the information primarily reflects a single viewpoint. Sources are reasonable. The author occasionally (1-2 times) states his own opinion as fact. Only 4 sources are cited/listed in the references or only 1 scholarly source was used Sources lack diversity OR information from divergent sources is only superficially mentioned. Some sources are untrustworthy or biased and not acknowledged as such. Author routinely (3-4 times) states her opinion as fact, ignores own biases. Missing two or more sources OR sources used but not cited or listed. All sources and information reflect a single viewpoint. Most sources are untrustworthy or biased and not acknowledged as such. The entire article is biased and opinion-based without acknowledgment of this perspective. criteria 5 4 3 2 1 How well do you think this article was written? Multiple-choice questions (2 application & 2 knowledge) align with the learning targets, assess key points, and are written according to guidelines (see R4) Specific, appropriate and observable learning targets are stated; the content is clearly organized to help the reader achieve these goals Captures and maintains attention throughout All or almost all of the cited information is introduced, elaborated on and explained Writing is organized, easy to read, and contains few to no mechanical errors. Multiple-choice questions (2 application & 2 knowledge) align with the learning targets, and assess key points. Specific and reasonable learning targets are stated; the content aligns with these goals Captures attention initially and periodically throughout Most of the cited information is discussed or explained. The article flowed pretty well and there were just a few mechanical errors. Multiple-choice questions (2 application & 2 knowledge) assess key points Reasonable learning targets are stated; the content relates to these goals Parts of the article capture attention About half of the cited information is discussed A few areas were hard to follow, confusing or oddly organized. There were a few distracting errors. 4 multiple-choice questions are included. Learning targets generally related to the content are stated At least one part of the article is interesting Information is “pasted” together with minimal explanation. Organization was difficult to follow, sentences were awkward and/or there were several distracting errors. Questions are missing or not multiple-choice. Learning target is missing or unrelated to content or is/are not actual learning targets Nothing in the article grabs the reader’s attention Article is entirely “pasted” together from other sources. Poor organization, sentence structure and/or grammatical errors made it very difficult to understand the content. Part 3 - "2+2" List TWO compliments and TWO suggestions about the article content Hints: Focus on the work, not the person Describe "There is...", "I see.." rather than judge "You didn't..." Compliments . YOU REPRESENT THE INFORMATION IN THE NCLB ACT VERY WELL. . YOU KEPT AN UNBIASED OPINION AS YOU WROTE THE FACTS. Suggestions . MORE VISUALS WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER BUT I KNOW WIKI IS HARD TO CREATE IN. . MORE DIFFERING OPINIONS ON THE ACT MAYBE PARENTS VIEWS. You can make compliments and suggestions that relate to specific areas of the paper or to the paper in general. I suggest a mixture of both. Focus on what's most important. Of course, you can also include more than two suggestions and more than two compliments. The goal is to help the author improve his/her article.