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

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: Sston008 (talk) 15:59, 11 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
Learning Target(s)
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?) Yes
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:
Sston008 (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Grammar and Mechanics Review
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.
In most schools around the country, teachersâ salaries are based almost completely on their educational background as well as experience (Schencker, 2009)....TEACHERS NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED
An article in the Salt Lake Tribune states, âThe amount of pay will depend on each schoolâs plan. According to the law, the programs must base 40 percent of the pay on student progress, which will likely be measured by test results; 40 percent on instructional quality; and 20 percent on parent, student or community satisfactionâ (Schencker, 2009). In my opinion, this new âPay for Progressâ plan definitely has the potential to not only increase the quality of education for students but also raise the standard and motivation for teachers....THE SPOTS WITH THE SQUARES NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT
In most schools around the country, teachersâ salaries are based almost completely on their educational background as well as experience (Schencker, 2009). For five elementary schools in Utah, this story is beginning to change. Recently, lawmakers in Utah passed a bill that will allow these selected schools to receive a total of $300,000 per year for two years in an effort to increase the quality of education for the students (Schencker, 2009). The money is to be divided between the five chosen schools. During the first year of the program, each school will use a portion of the funds to create a plan that will measure teacher and student successes (Schencker, 2009)...THESE FIRST FEW SENTENCES ARE A BIT CONFUSING ONLY BECAUSE THE FIRST SENTENCE TALKS ABOUT SALARAIES BEING BASED ON THE EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE THEN THE NEXT SENTENCE SAYS THIS STORY IS GOING TO CHANGE FOR FIVE SCHOLLS. THESE ARE FINE BUT THE THIRD SENTENCE SAYS THESE CHOSEN SCHOOLS ARE GETTING THE MONEY TO INVREASE THE QUALITY EDUCATION. I MAY BE READING IT WRONG BUT POSSIBLY JUST READING OVER THE BEGINNING TO SEE THAT IT IS CLEAR.
âNational disgrace.â These are words used by U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, to explain the Detroit Public School System (Mrozowski & Esparza, 2009). This Michigan school district is in dire need of radical changes, according to Duncan, emergency financial manager Robert Bobb and Mayor Dave Bing, to name a few (Mrozowski& Esparza, 2009). Due to problems like decreased enrollment, low graduation rate and financial fraud, the cityâs school system has been under intense scrutiny by federal, state and local education officials (Dawsey, 2009). Duncan has $5 billion available in stimulus money to offer to those school districts making drastic changes; included in these changes, he admits he would like to see mayoral control of the Detroit school system. (Dawsey, 2009) ....CHECK FOR ALL OF THE SQUARES. ALSO AT THE END OF THE LAST SENTENCE I PASTED THE PARIOD GOES AFTER THE PARENTHESIS.
Duncan has $5 billion available in stimulus money to offer to those school districts making drastic changes; included in these changes, he admits he would like to see mayoral control of the Detroit school system. (Dawsey, 2009) ....POSSIBLY WITH THIS SENETENCE CHECK TO SEE IF YOU NEED QUOTATION MARKS OR NOT.
National disgrace.â These are words used by U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, to explain the Detroit Public School System (Mrozowski & Esparza, 2009). This Michigan school district is in dire need of radical changes, according to Duncan, emergency financial manager Robert Bobb and Mayor Dave Bing, to name a few (Mrozowski& Esparza, 2009). Due to problems like decreased enrollment, low graduation rate and financial fraud, the cityâs school system has been under intense scrutiny by federal, state and local education officials (Dawsey, 2009). Duncan has $5 billion available in stimulus money to offer to those school districts making drastic changes; included in these changes, he admits he would like to see mayoral control of the Detroit school system. (Dawsey, 2009) On Wednesday, May 13, 2009, Bobb requested that the federal government place the school district under special circumstances and grant additional emergency financial support to help facilitate rapid changes (Mrozowski & Esparza, 2009). These emergency funds are generally reserved for areas that have been struck by natural disasters; because this is not the case in Detroit, it could mean that the request will not be honored (Mrozowski & Esparza, 2009). A mayoral takeover of the Detroit Public Schools is one suggestion to help aid in the struggling situation. Duncan has supported this idea, although many others are very hesitant to believe that this is the answer to the problems (Dawsey, 2009). 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 (Dawsey, 2009). Those who support this idea look to recent changes for hope; Bobb has already begun making transformations that include closing 29 schools, firing principals at low-performing schools as well as diminishing $305 million from the district deficit (Dawsey, 2009). On the other hand, those who oppose this suggested change see the previous mayoral takeover that was supported by Gov. John Engler, in 1999, as a failure (Mrozowski & Esparza, 2009). In a similar situation to today, after the mayor took control of the school district in 1999, the condition of the district worsened with the leadership change. The possibility of a mayoral takeover of the school system continues to be a highly debated issue with lawmakers, politicians and interest groups all weighing in (Dawsey, 2009). One thought, however, remains agreed upon, serious measures must be taken to revamp the Detroit Public School System to bring it to a functioning level without corruption and failure (Dawsey, 2009). ....I THINK WITH THIS WHOLE PARRAGRAH YOU SHOULD JUST CHECK WHETHER YOU NEED QUOTATION MARKS OR NOT. THERE WERE SOME SPOTS THAT I THOUGHT WERE A LITTLE QUESTIONABLE AS TO WHETHER THEY WERE PARAPHRASED OR QUOTED.
Sston008 (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Sources
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.)
.806 Million in Recovery Funds Now Available for Virginia to Save Teaching Jobs and Drive Education Reform. (2009) Retrieved June 7, 2009 from www.stimulus.virginia.gov
POPULAR - POPULAR NEWS SOURCE
.The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009: Saving and Creating Jobs and Reforming Education. (2009) Retrieved June 4, 2009 from www.ed.gov
POPULAR - POPULAR NEWS SOURCE
.Dawsey, C.P. (2009) Control of Detroit schools could be on ballot. Retrieved June 5, 2009 from www.freep.com
POPULAR - POPULAR NEWS SOURCE
.Mrozowski, J., & Esparza, S. (2009) DPS asks for federal disaster funding. Retrieved June 6, 2009 from www.detnews.com
POPULAR - POPULAR NEWS SOURCE
. Schencker, L. (2009) 5 schools chosen for teacher pay pilot program. Retrieved June 5, 2009 from www.sltrib.com
POPULAR - POPULAR NEWS SOURCE
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:
Did the author CITE at least 5 sources? ___YES___ and use at least 2 scholarly sources? __NO____
Are the citations in APA format? _NO_____
Here are two examples of citations in APA format, one for a paraphrase and one for a quotation:
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).
Unfortunately impoverished children are often attending “low-performing schools staffed by ill-equipped teachers” (Murnane, 2007, p. 34).
Are all the sources listed in APA format in a Reference list labeled "References"? __NO____
Here is an example of a reference written in APA format:
Bailey, J., & Barnum, P. (2001). The colon and its rise to prominence in the American circus. Journal of American Punctuation, 34(5), 2-3.
Taken together do the 5 sources represent a good balance of potential references for this topic? _NO_____
Does the author consider potential bias in the sources? __YES____
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:
I WASN'T ABLE TO FIND SCHOLARLY ARTICLES. I NEJOYED THE SOURCES THAT YOU DID PROVIDE AND YOU HAD THE FIVE THAT WERE REQUIRED I MAY HAVE BEEN MISTAKEN BUT CHECK OVER THEM TO MAKE SURE THAT TWO ARE SCHOLARLY. ALL OF THE IN TEXT CITATIONS WERE CORRECT FOR PARAPHRASING. THE CITATIONS OF THE RESOURCES NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED TO FIT THE FORMAT. I DID BELIEVE YOU HAD A NICE BALANCE OF REFERENCES HAVING TO DEAL WITH CONTENT BUT I DID NOT FIN SCHOLARLY.
Sston008 (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Multiple Choice Questions
What does each question assess: knowledge or reasoning (application of knowledge)?
Question 1 _____KNOWLEDGE_________
Question 2 ____KNOWLEDGE___________
Question 3 ____REASONING___________
Question 4 ____REASONING____________
Answer the following questions about the multiple-choice questions.
Are there 4 multiple-choice questions? __YES____
Do they each have four answer choices (A-D)? __YES____
Is there a single correct (not opinion-based) answer for each question? _YES____
Do the questions assess the learning target? __YES____
Are the questions appropriate and reasonable (not too easy and not too difficult)? __YES____
Are the foils (the response options that are NOT the answer) reasonable i.e. they are not very obviously incorrect answers? _YES_____
Are the response options listed in alphabetical order? _YES_____
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.
Sston008 (talk) 18:55, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Comment:
Part 2 - Ratings
LIST and EXPLAIN your rating for each of the four criteria.
Importance:
I rated this article __4_ for importance because I THOUGHT YOU HAD A LOT OF GREAT IDEAS AND GREAT INFORMATION. I LIKED HOW YOU CITED EVERYTHING NICELY. I THOUGHT THERE WERE A FEW SPOTS WEHRE INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN QUOTED BUT STILL YOU QUOTED IT AS PARPHRASING. YOU DID PROVIDE VALID SOURCES THAT DID HAVE RESEARCH IN THEM. INFORMATION WAS RELEVANT TO THE WHAT IS GOING ON IN 2009. I THOUGHT THERE COULD HAVE BEEN MORE INFORMATION POSSIBLY WITH MORE IDEAS. I LIKED HOW YOU ADDED YOUR OWN THOUGHTS.
Interest:
I rated this article _3__ on interest because YOU MADE A LOT OF GREAT POINTS THAT I THOUGHT COULD HAVE BEEN ADDED TO OR EVEN HAVING MORE POINTS INCLUDED IN YOUR SECTION. I FELT YOUR PIECE WAS WELL DONE BUT COULD HAVE HAD A BIT MORE INFORMATION JUST TO GIVE THE READER/AUDIENCE A LITTLE MORE. YOU INCLUDED NICE SIDEBARS.
Credibility:
I rated this article _4__ for credibility because...I THOUGHT YOU PUT YOUR WORDS TOGETHER VERY WELL. JUST A BIT MORE EDITING WOULD MAKE YOUR PART EVEN BETTER. YOU COULD HAVE ADDED A FEW MORE PARTS AND OPINIONS TO YOUR PAPER TO MAKE IT HAVE A WIDER RANGE OF INFORMATION. I DID ENJOY READING ABOUT THE FEW POINTS YOU DID MENTION. THERE WERE A VARIETY OF SOURCES INCLUDED. I DID MENTION BEWFORE POSSIBLY FINDING SOME SCHOLARLY RESOURCES. EVEN WITHOUT THEM THOUGH YOU DID FIND CREDIBLE SOURCES AND CITED EVERYTHING IN YOUR PAPER WELL. YOU DID NOT TRY TO PASS OFF ANY INFORMATION THAT WAS NOT YOUR OWN. AS I MENTIONED BEFORE JUST CHECK OVER YOUR PIECE TO MAKE SURE SOME PARTS DO NOT NEED TO BE QUOTED.
Writing skill:
I rated this article _4__ on writing because YOUR MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS WERE PUT TOGETHER WELL. YOU ADDED THE TWO KNOWLEDGE AND APPLICATION. YOU ALSO MADE THEM TOWARDS THE LEARNING TARGETS. PERIODICALLY YOUR SECTION CAUGHT MY ATTENTION. YOU DID DISCUSS THE CITED MATERIAL WELL. POSSIBLY A BIT MORE CAN BE ADDED. THE ARTICLE FLOWED WELL AND IT REALLY HAD FEW MECHANICAL ERRORS EXCEPT FOR THE SMALL BOXE THAT APPEARED BUT I WOULD BELIEVE THAT IS JUST A CRAZY THING HAPPENING WITH WIKIPEDIA AND WOULD NOT TAKE LONG TO FIX.
Sston008 (talk) 19:10, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
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
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 teachersMostly 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 informationInterpretation/ 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.
Sston008 (talk) 19:12, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Part 3 - "2+2"
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
THE ARTICLE WAS VERY WELL WRITTEN WITH FEW GRAMATICAL ERRORS. THE SIDEBAR QUOTES WERE GREAT TO READ.
. THE QUESTIONS WERE WELL FORMATTED TO FIT THE TARGET GOALS.
Suggestions
CHECK OVER THE ARTICLE FOR THE QUOTATION CHANGES.
. POSSIBLY ADDING MORE INFORMATION THAT ONE MIGHT FIND IN THE NEWS. I AM SURE THERE IS A GREAT AMOUNT.
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. :
Sston008 (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2009 (UTC)