Foundations and Assessment of Education/Edition 1/Foundations Table of Contents/Chapter 7/In the News/Peer Review Two

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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:Rpaige (talk) 23:07, 14 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
[edit]

Learning Target(s)[edit]

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
  • Is/are they appropriate and reasonable? (Are they too easy or too difficult for ECI 301 students?) I think they're right in the middle.
  • 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:

Though objectives #1-3 are okay, I think objective #4 should be re-evaluated. How does a name broaden awareness about this topic? I think it would work better as a multiple choice question to test one's comprehension rather than making it a learning target. One should walk from this article and remember primary examples versus names.


Grammar and Mechanics Review[edit]

  • 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

1. Students will be able to name the state that has adopted the 'Pay for Performance' program and note at which school level it is being tested

2. Students will be able to explain the three criteria used to determine teacher's success and amount of additional pay in the 'Pay for Performance' programs

3. Students will be able to list three examples of failure in the Detroit Public School System

4. Students will be able to identify U.S. Secretary of Education and his position on mayoral control of the Detroit Public School System

None of the objective targets have periods.

"In most schools around the country, teachers’ salaries" I'm not sure what the "a" is following the word "teachers" but it is all throughout the article.

"After the completion of the first year, using the methods decided upon by the school, teachers will be awarded additional money for the success of their students." What about: "Following completion of the first year"

"I also believe that through this program, highly qualified teachers may find interest in these, and other schools, after realizing that not only will experience and educational background play a factor in their salary, but their efforts and success in the classroom could also land them extra pay." This is a run on sentence, how about: "In addition, I believe this program will attract highly qualified teachers. Not only will their experience and educational background reflect their salaries, but their efforts and success in the classroom as well."

"The choice could be that for the people of the city of Detroit to decide if the bill makes its way to the ballot for a November vote" I wish I had some suggestions I just don't know what is meant by this...especially the placement of the word "that."

3. If Mrs. Smith is in favor of the mayoral control in Detroit Public Schools because she believes is will increase the quality of education for her son John, which mayor would she be trusting to take contol of this important position and make changes? Did you mean "it" ?

4. If Mr. Nixon's child was a student in the Detroit Public School System, which of the following describes what his child likely to be experiencing in school? Is it supposed to be "what his child is likely to be experiencing?"


Sources[edit]

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.)

  1. . This was a popular source and came from a Government website.
  2. . This was a popular source and came from The Department of Education website.
  3. . This was a popular source and came from a popular news source perspective.
  4. . This was a popular source and came from a popular news source perspective.
  5. . This was a popular source and came from a popular news source perspective.
  6. .
  7. .

List the range of publication years for all sources, e.g. 1998-2006: 2009 - 2009

Answer the following questions about the sources used in the article:

  1. Did the author CITE at least 5 sources? Yes and use at least 2 scholarly sources? No
  2. Are the citations in APA format? Yes
    1. Here are two examples of citations in APA format, one for a paraphrase and one for a quotation:
      1. 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).
      2. Unfortunately impoverished children are often attending “low-performing schools staffed by ill-equipped teachers” (Murnane, 2007, p. 34).
  3. Are all the sources listed in APA format in a Reference list labeled "References"? No, there are no periods after the dates in parenthesis and the name of the website isn't listed, just the website address. Rather than labeling the reference section "References" its labeled "Resources."
    1. Here is an example of a reference written in APA format:
      1. Bailey, J., & Barnum, P. (2001). The colon and its rise to prominence in the American circus. Journal of American Punctuation, 34(5), 2-3.
  4. Taken together do the 5 sources represent a good balance of potential references for this topic? No
  5. Does the author consider potential bias in the sources? Yes
  6. Are most of the sources current (less than 5 years old)? Yes

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: There were no scholarly sources. The author should reinforce her article by adding scholarly references as well as referring to the APA website for the proper way to reference a website.


Multiple Choice Questions[edit]

  1. What does each question assess: knowledge or reasoning (application of knowledge)?
    1. Question 1 Knowledge
    2. Question 2 Reasoning
    3. Question 3 Reasoning
    4. Question 4 Reasoning

Answer the following questions about the multiple-choice questions.

  1. Are there 4 multiple-choice questions? Yes
  2. Do they each have four answer choices (A-D)? Yes
  3. Is there a single correct (not opinion-based) answer for each question? Yes
  4. Do the questions assess the learning target? Yes
  5. Are the questions appropriate and reasonable (not too easy and not too difficult)? Yes
  6. Are the foils (the response options that are NOT the answer) reasonable i.e. they are not very obviously incorrect answers? Yes
  7. Are the response options listed in alphabetical order? Yes
  8. 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: Other than some grammatical errors, I feel the author did well on the questions.

Part 2 - Ratings
[edit]

LIST and EXPLAIN your rating for each of the four criteria.

  • Importance:
    I rated this article 4 for importance because...the information was relevent to the teachers of today and tomorrow and was applicable to schools today. She also provided a good general overview of the information though it lacked organization, the point still came across.
  • Interest:
    I rated this article 3 on interest because...The sidebar did include new information related to the topic, new perspectives were presented but there was not a conclusion that synthesized the information presented.
  • Credibility:
    I rated this article 2 for credibility because...Though she had 5 sources, none of them were scholarly which 2 were required. The sources she did have lacked diversity because a majority of them were popular news sources where no authors were even listed.
  • Writing skill:
    I rated this article 2 on writing because...The 4 multiple-choice questions were included, at least one part of the article was interesting but the information was put together with minimal explanation. The organization was difficult to follow, some sentences were awkward and there were several grammatical and general errors.

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[edit]

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
  • 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"
[edit]

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

    . I think the author did well on informing the audience of the topic and the varying sides.
  1. .She also did well at organizing and executing her multiple choice questions by provoking thought and reasoning skills on the readers behalf.
  2. .

Suggestions

    . It seemed to me that the article lacked flow and organization. There was no real feeling of a beginning, middle, and end. Perhaps, one topic could be the focus versus two, that way the author has the room to really delve into the topic and provide a beginning(Introduction), middle (body), and end (conclusion).
  1. . I also observed that the author's sentiments were expressed in the first paragraph on the first topic but not the second. If the article is condensed to one topic area her opinion will have more of an impact, particularly at the end of the article.
  2. .

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.