Peer Review of IMRaD Paper

(Post your paper to your blog or create a post for your peers to provide feedbacks.)

1.      Read the whole paper quickly and see if you get a clear picture of the problem, findings, and implications. Does the paper flow well? Identify major areas/sections that did not flow well or was not clear to you. Mark them and suggest ways to improve clarity and flow in the paper.

2.      Format and Language Use:

a.       Is language used formal, concise, and clear? Does the writer use first and second person pronouns?

b.      Are there any pattern errors? Identify them and suggest ways to improve.

c.       Does the paper fulfill length requirement? Does it have “Appendix” and “References”?

d.      Does the paper follow APA style (in-text citations, references, headers, page numbers, headings and sub-headings)?

3.      Organization/IMRaD Genre: Does the report follow IMRaD format/genre?

a.       Now read one section at a time and see if all the sections satisfy the requirements mentioned in the assignment prompt. Provide suggestions to improve each of the sections in the paper.

b.      Abstract: Does it mention major information from all the sections?

c.       Introduction: Does it clearly identify why the topic is important? Does it discuss related research and identify gap? Does it state research questions/hypothesis?

d.      Methods: Does it use clear headings? Does it clearly discuss participants, procedures, and data analysis? Do you think the writer needs to provide more details?

e.       Results:

                                                              i.      Does it present the main findings by using effective tables/figures? Does it describe the tables/figures well, explaining the major trends first and then providing specific data to back that up? Are tables/figures numbered? Does the writer use title/caption for them?

                                                            ii.      Is this section organized well? Does it answer major aspects of research question(s)?

f.        Discussion: Does it connect the findings with the introduction? Does it summarize what the most important findings are in the study? Does it acknowledge any problems with the study methods? Does it clearly explain implications? Does it suggest potential directions for further research?

4.      Quality of the survey and analysis/experiment:

a.       Does the survey/experiment provide sufficient data for a good report? Is the data analyzed well in the text?

b.      Do the introduction and discussion sections clearly indicate how the experiment/study contributes to our understanding of the topic?

Review:

5.      After reading and analyzing your peer’s paper, write a review on the paper including 3-5 most important areas for improvement. Try to be as specific as possible. Post it to your peer's blog. 

6.      Go to your own blog and post your reflection on how the comments you wrote on your peer’s paper would apply to your own paper.