Conducting peer review essay College paper Writing Service

Use the links below to learn about writing application essays and personal statements

Step Five: Write out any minor criticisms of the article. Once you have laid out the pros and cons of the article, it is perfectly acceptable (and often welcome) for you to point out that the table on page 3 is mislabeled, that the author wrote “compliment” instead of “complement” on page 7, or other minutiae. Correcting those minor errors will make the author’s paper look more professional if it goes out for another peer review, and certainly will have to be corrected before being accepted for publication.

Do not begin this discussion until you have thoroughly reviewed all areas and resources in Unit 5. In this discussion, you will post a rough draft of your Explanatory Essay for your peers to review. You will also write a brief explanation of your writing process for your classmates. You will then review the papers of at least two of your classmates.

PhD2Published has several informative posts about writing journal articles, and more recently has featured a post outlining a potentially revolutionary collaborative peer review process for this kind of publishing. Todays post offers an alternative perspective; that of the journal article peer reviewer. Doing peer reviews provides important experience for those writing their own papers and may help writers consider what they should include based on what peer reviewers are looking for.

Open Document. Below is a free excerpt of "peer review" from Anti Essays, your source for free research papers, essays, and term paper examples.

Reference this paper as: Smith, M. “Essay Peer Review Online Can Online Peer Review Assignments Replace Keywords: peer assessment; peer review; blended learning; LMS; essays.

It's called peer review for a reason ..

Now that I’m done plugging for digital submissions and the PBworks wiki system, I’ll go into how peer reviews work via the wiki during in-class review sessions. At the start of the semester, I envisioned that students would provide comments on papers digitally—much like I do with their papers. However, before the first review session, students were very vocal about having hard copies to work with as well. So, that has been our practice. And, as fellow bloggers and Jay Voss have pointed out, this preference is clearly an uncommon one. So, in my class, I require both. Students ask for printed copies, and they get what they want for those peer reviews. Here’s the rationale for requiring that these first drafts be uploaded to the wiki as well:

Your role is that of a scientific peer

Because I give student work high security restrictions on the wiki (only the writer and I can see that student’s work), peer review is the one time when students can peer into and access their partners’ work on the wiki. I grant assigned peer groups security privileges (but only to their peer group’s papers—and only for that particular paper). They are then able to type up a review and reflect on the paper copy and use the electronic copy as needed. Also, if a student is absent on peer review day, they already have access to the paper via the wiki, and I do not need to ask certain students to email their paper to their absent partners (this was an issue on several occasions last semester but hasn’t occurred this semester as this group has perfect attendance on peer review days!) The peer review process requires online collaboration because students usually do not finish their reviews during class time; they can use the wiki or BlackBoard to email their reviews to their partners. I also ask that they post their reviews on the wiki so I may see what kind of responses they had. Last, for multimodal compositions, electronic submissions are the only kind that make sense. For their final paper of the semester, I’ve encouraged students to showcase their understanding of visual and spoken rhetoric and incorporate a variety of multimedia evidence—whether podcast recordings of interviews they conducted, images they found or took themselves, or links to video sources that display authoritative testimonies.

Reference this paper as: Smith, M. “Can Online Peer Review Assignments Replace Keywords: peer assessment; peer review; blended learning; LMS; essays.

Define peer review: a process by which a scholarly work (such as a paper or a research proposal) is checked by a group of experts in the same field to…

Peer Review Essay example - 811 Words | Cram

both unambiguous and obligatory in a paper-based classroom peer review became Keywords: Essay Peer Review Online Essay Peer Review Online peer review, online course, online teaching, online learning,


Open Document. Below is an essay on "Peer Reviewed Papers" from Anti Essays, your source for research papers, essays, and term paper examples.

Carefully review all areas of Unit 5.
Compose your Explanatory Essay draft in full APA format, with your two required sources cited in text and in a References page at the end.
Use your prewriting materials from Unit 4 and the feedback you received from your instructor to write a full draft of 3–4 pages. (This page length requirement does not include the title page, the reference page, or the revision statement.)
Your Explanatory Essay should explain your topic using rich information from your two sources and from your own understanding of the topic. Integrate quoted and paraphrased information from both sources (your choice from the List of Approved Articles for Writing and your scholarly, peer-reviewed library article) throughout your essay. Incorporate source materials smoothly into your paragraphs, and fully cite the articles in text and in a reference page at the end of your essay.
For instructions and examples related to in-text citation and end referencing of articles from your book and from the library, please refer to the Explanatory Essay Sample resource. Refer also to the APA section of A Writer’s Reference, under Article or Chapter in an Edited Book or an Anthology, and Article from a Database, and/or to The Prentice Hall Guide for College Writers, page 527, Work in an Anthology, and the two options for Article from a Journal, at the top of page 529.
After you have completed these steps, write a main discussion post in which you give your classmates some information about your paper.
Explain which techniques for explaining (definition, process analysis, or causal analysis) you used, what plans you have for revisions, and what questions you would like your reviewers to answer.
Then attach your draft to the post. Do not write your draft in the text field for the message. Be sure to return to the discussion to find out what your peers and instructor have said about your draft.
You are also strongly encouraged to make use of Smarthinking during this drafting and revision stage of your Explanatory Essay. Smarthinking is a free service provided to you as a Capella learner that allows you to submit any writing assignment for a free review from a qualified tutor. If you would like to use this excellent tool, click the link in the Resources section.
Do not begin reading and reviewing your classmates’ essays until you have thoroughly reviewed the media piece, Performing Peer Review: Explanatory Essay.
Response Guidelines
Read the drafts of at least two of your peers. Answer these questions in your response:The current retractions are not a new case of integrity breach but are the result of a deeper manual investigation which became necessary after our previous retractions from Tumor Biology in 2016. The extent of the current retractions was not obvious from the earlier investigations in 2015. We are retracting these published papers because the peer-review process required for publication in our journals had been deliberately compromised by fabricated peer reviewer reports.