- Upload your Industry Article assignment as a Word document by DAY TWO (2) to give your student reviewer ample time to complete their review. Include the following in the initial discussion post which will help to establish context for the reviewer and others in the course.
the title of the article,
the name and NAICS code for the selected industry, and
the name and hyperlink for at least one industry journal editorial guidelines and submissions criteria.
Write a paragraph for the initial post to include the title of the article and summarization of it to help establish context for the reviewer and other readers in the course.
The instructor will assign each student to a specific student paper for conducting a peer review. Do not conduct a peer review until the instructor has assigned you an article. - Download the Article Peer-Review Template(Word document).
- Download the Industry Article assigned for your peer review.
- Complete the peer review using the template as the guide, following the prompts below:
Insert your full name in the header or the footer of the blank template
Complete the template in its entirety, assessing the other student’s article based on the critical thinking intellectual standards criteria, as adopted from The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, and the other comment sections in the template.
Include appropriate, evidence-based, honest and respectful feedback using single-line spacing in the areas provided in the template.
Once the review is completed, review and edit, then save each Word document template as a PDF file.
Use this below article to review
a. Did COVID-19 Derail the Patient Experience?
b. NAICS code: 62 Healthcare and Social Assistance
Article Peer-Review: Using the Essential Intellectual Standards Criteria for the peer-review of articles. Paul and Elder’s (2020) Universal Intellectual Standards, as found in The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, are used as criteria for conducting peer-reviews of the two articles assigned in this course. When routinely, consistently, and deliberately put to practice in your daily thinking, research, and writing, the standards will cultivate the development of intellectual virtues over time. Instructions: Complete this review form in its entirety. Clarity Feedback Elaborates where needed Yes | No Accuracy Feedback Presents supporting/contrasting views Yes | No Precision Feedback Provides specificity where needed Yes | No Relevance Feedback Correlates content to the topic(s) Yes | No Depth Feedback Addresses the complexities of the topic Yes | No Breadth Feedback Identifies the big picture Yes | No Logic Feedback Makes sound, rational connections Yes | No Significance Feedback Discusses impact/importance of topic Yes | No Fairness Feedback Discloses information fully and fairly Yes | No Sufficiency Feedback Cites ample evidence-based support Yes | No Two Areas of Strength in the Article Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Provide supporting links, resources, or other means, as applicable and appropriate. Identify two words in the article that could be replaced for improved readability. Select a word you are familiar with or use a thesaurus to identify synonyms. Identify the word and the location (e.g., Paragraph 2, Sentence 3). Select two sentences that may be enhanced with revision. Copy and paste the original sentences in this template and provide the altered sentence structure. You are encouraged to explain why you made the change (e.g., The most important words were moved to the start of the sentence as detailed by Handley(2014) in the fifth chapter of Everybody Writes). |
Article Peer-Review: Using the Essential Intellectual Standards Criteria for the peer-review of articles. Paul and Elder’s (2020) Universal Intellectual Standards, as found in The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, are used as criteria for conducting peer-reviews of the two articles assigned in this course. When routinely, consistently, and deliberately put to practice in your daily thinking, research, and writing, the standards will cultivate the development of intellectual virtues over time. Instructions: Complete this review form in its entirety. Clarity Feedback Elaborates where needed Yes | No Accuracy Feedback Presents supporting/contrasting views Yes | No Precision Feedback Provides specificity where needed Yes | No Relevance Feedback Correlates content to the topic(s) Yes | No Depth Feedback Addresses the complexities of the topic Yes | No Breadth Feedback Identifies the big picture Yes | No Logic Feedback Makes sound, rational connections Yes | No Significance Feedback Discusses impact/importance of topic Yes | No Fairness Feedback Discloses information fully and fairly Yes | No Sufficiency Feedback Cites ample evidence-based support Yes | No Two Areas of Strength in the Article Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Provide supporting links, resources, or other means, as applicable and appropriate. Identify two words in the article that could be replaced for improved readability. Select a word you are familiar with or use a thesaurus to identify synonyms. Identify the word and the location (e.g., Paragraph 2, Sentence 3). Select two sentences that may be enhanced with revision. Copy and paste the original sentences in this template and provide the altered sentence structure. You are encouraged to explain why you made the change (e.g., The most important words were moved to the start of the sentence as detailed by Handley(2014) in the fifth chapter of Everybody Writes). |