Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 59 views

    Peer Review Guide Updated

    Uploaded by

    api-298914652

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Peer Review Guide Updated

    Uploaded by

    api-298914652
    59 views2 pages

    Original Title

    peer review guide updated

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    59 views2 pages

    Peer Review Guide Updated

    Uploaded by

    api-298914652

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    ADI Investigation Report Peer-Review Guide – Fleetwood Park Secondary

    Report By: ___________________________ Author: Did the Reviewers do a good job? 1 2 3 4 5


    ID Number Rate the overall quality of the peer review

    Reviewed By: ___________________ ____________________ ____________________ ____________________


    ID Number ID Number ID Number ID Number
    Total _____/38
    Section 1: Introduction & Guiding Question Reviewer Rating Teacher Score
    1. Did the author provide a context for the study? o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2

    2. Did the author provide enough background information about the o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    phenomenon being studied?
    3. Is the background information correct? o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2

    4. Did the author make the guiding question clear and explain how the o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    guiding question is related to the background information?
    Reviewers: If your group made any “No” or “Partially” Author: What revisions did you make in your report? Is there anything you decided
    marks in this section, please explain how the author to keep the same even though the reviewers suggested otherwise? Be sure to
    could improve this part of his or her report. explain why.

    Section 2: Method & Analysis Reviewer Rating Teacher Score


    1. Did the author describe the procedure he/she used to gather data and o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    then explain why he/she used this procedure?
    NOTE: This should be a paragraph explanation of the procedure, NOT a
    step-wise recipe lab procedure

    2. Did the author present the data in an appropriate manner by


    o including a correctly formatted (embedded in the text) and properly o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    titled table, and/or graph, and/or flow chart
    o using correct metric units (e.g., m/s, g, ml) o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2

    3. Did the author sufficiently explain their evidence (ex. how he/she o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    analyzed the data)
    NOTE: This may show mathematical calculations with the data using a
    formula
    4. Is the analysis of the data (i.e. processed data) shown appropriately and o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    free from errors?
    Reviewers: If your group made any “No” or “Partially” Author: What revisions did you make in your report? Is there anything you decided
    marks in this section, please explain how the author to keep the same even though the reviewers suggested otherwise? Be sure to
    could improve this part of his or her report. explain why.

    Section 3: The Argument Reviewer Rating Teacher Score


    1. Did the author provide a clear and complete claim that answers the o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    guiding question?
    2. Did the author use scientific concepts and state assumptions made to o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    justify the evidence? The justification of the evidence explains why the
    ADI Investigation Report Peer-Review Guide – Fleetwood Park Secondary
    evidence matters.
    3. Did the author reference the graph, table or data evidence in the body o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    of the text?
    4. Does the evidence support the author’s claim? o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    5. Did the author discuss how well his/her claim agrees with the claims o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    made by other groups and explain any disagreements?
    6. Is the justification of the evidence acceptable? o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    7. Did the author use scientific terms correctly (e.g., hypothesis vs. o No o Partially o Yes 0 1 2
    prediction, data vs. evidence) when referencing the evidence (e.g. Using
    supports or suggests instead of proves)?
    Reviewers: If your group made any “No” or “Partially” Author: What revisions did you make in your report? Is there anything you decided
    marks in this section, please explain how the author to keep the same even though the reviewers suggested otherwise? Be sure to
    could improve this part of his or her report. explain why.

    Mechanics & Report Setup Reviewer Rating Teacher Score


    1. Organization: Is each section easy to follow? Do paragraphs o No o Partially o Yes 0 ½ 1
    include multiple sentences? Do paragraphs begin with a topic
    sentence?
    2. Grammar: Are the sentences complete? Is there proper o No o Partially o Yes 0 ½ 1
    subject-verb agreement in each sentence? No run-on sentences.
    3. Conventions: Did the author use appropriate spelling, o No o Partially o Yes 0 ½ 1
    punctuation, paragraphing and capitalization?
    4. Word Choice: Did the author use the appropriate word (e.g., o No o Partially o Yes 0 ½ 1
    there vs. their, to vs. too, than vs. then, etc.)?
    Teacher Comments

    You might also like