Writing & Research Methodology

English 8125 CRN 17939

Peer Reviews Suggestions

Note: this is only a suggestion. Feel free to do your review in other ways. For example try using a journal review guidelines.

Choosing the correct sections for the draft you are reviewing, fill out Huff's reviewing checklist (appendix C, also scanned here, but it has an extra first page). Then provide a qualitative review of the work. You can:

• Offer an overall analysis
• Summarize the Huff quantitative review and provide any additional comments as needed. Explain your ratings as needed.
• Provide suggestions on areas that should be improved and discuss ways they can be improved
• Discuss what was done well and where the strengths are
• Is the title appropriate, concise, and sexy?
• How well does the introduction work?
• More specific things to consider for the lit review:
  • How well does it share results of similar studies or texts?
  • How well does it establish the importance of the article and show there is a gap that the article will fill?
  • Does it seem to be a thorough literature review? Most of you will likely not be experts in your peer's area, so you may not be able analyze how thorough it is. However look for areas that seem underexplored or possible gaps/wholes. Do suggest texts if you can.
  • How well does it connect the article to the larger conversation in the discipline/area about the topic? If it is multidisciplinary, does it focus on the particular area/discipline of the topic, while seeming to also converse with the other areas?
  • How is the literature handled? Do the summaries seem appropriate and both thorough and concise enough?
  • Is there a summary of the major themes in the literature at the end of the review? Should there be?
  • Does the literature review flow? Does it read like and article and not like an annotated bibliography? Could it flow better?
  • Is the map of the literature review evident? Can you tell if the map was hierarchical, flow-chart like, or composed of circles? How can you tell? Is this a good map type of this type of literature review and article?
• More specific things to consider for Methods:
• Does it provide a clear methodology?
• Are the methods and tools used explained well?
• Is there adequate information on the participants, including basic demographic information (as needed), numbers of sample and total population, & selection process
• Is there enough researcher information, such as biases?

Remember your goal here it to help the writer improve her or his work.