Research Proposal: Beginning Draft—How to do the peer review

  • Due Oct 23, 2015 past xi:59pm
  • Points 5
  • Bachelor after Oct 21, 2015 at nine:10pm

I. INSTRUCTIONS: READ CAREFULLY

PEER REVIEW IS DUE ON ELMS Friday 10/23 at 11:59.

Yous will be assigned a peer review automatically and anonymously. Not submitting the peer review by the deadline (Fri night at midnight) volition deduct 10 points (one letter course) from your proposal final grade. Your peer review partner is counting on you. Completing peer reviews is required to maintain good standing in the grade and receive full participation credit (15% of the final course class).

---------

PEER REVIEW Process:

  • Read your partner's inquiry proposal draft. Spend time with it. Take notes.
  • Use the rubric provided to type in your answers to the 12 questions based on the SMART goals principles. Be curtailed but answer the questions completely.
  • When finished, click "Salve Comment" button below the rubric.
  •  You are responsible for submitting the rubric comments correctly. If you are not certain how to do it, read the ELMS peer review help documents provided on the grade home page (Peer Review module). If you practise this incorrectly, yous will lose 10 points on your final assignment grade.

If you did not upload a proposal, y'all yet accept to peer review the other student'due south work. You will not receive your partner's review unless you also submit a review.

PEER REVIEW Groundwork

  • The peer review requires y'all to closely read and analyze the proposed project and make up one's mind its feasibility or viability.
  • If the proposal is incomplete, vague, poorly written, or incorrectly framed, you may non exist able to answer every question. In that case, explain WHY you cannot answer and say what the proposal author must provide to make it possible to institute the SMART goals.
  • Some of the questions may seem repetitive; however, answering each in total volition ensure a thorough analysis of your partner's commencement draft.
  • This is a challenging peer review, but doing information technology volition help yous to clarify what yous demand to do in your own project (in addition to helping your fellow educatee).

2. PEER REVIEW QUESTIONS

Specific

  1. Is the topic manageable enough that the proposal writer can feasibly offer a apparent, thorough response or solution past the end of the course. Why or why not?

Measure

  1. Has the proposal author established the trouble beyond his/her own personal concerns and the local context through secondary research? If not, how would the author do this? Is this feasible within the time-frame of the course?
  2. What research is already available on the topic? Is it more than persuasive or less persuasive than the proposed master research?
  3. Does the primary inquiry add to the value of the project? Explain and suggest other methods of obtaining results.
  4. In what means will providing the document to the principal audition be measurable or definable? In other words, what would a successful outcome of the project be?

Agreed Upon

  1. Is the proposed audience relevant to the stated problem or opportunity? Why or why not?
  2. How is this topic relevant to the proposal author?
  3. Does the proposal author take plausible access to the audience? Would the primary audition mind to this person, have him/her seriously, and be willing to deed on the document? If so, why?
  4. If not, have they reached out to any of the audience members in order to establish credibility or access?

Realistic

  1. Can the author realistically encounter the needs of the audiences with the proposed certificate?
  2. Tin the author realistically produce the sort of credible certificate the principal audience requires? Why or why non?

Fourth dimension

  1. Based on the information provided, does the proposed research project seem viable to complete past the end of the form? Why or why not?
  2. What is the approximate time span that this project will take to consummate? Would you lot say this is time-bound or more of a long term development programme? Explain how this impacts the relevance/credibility of the proposed document/solution.

1445659140 10/23/2015 eleven:59pm

Rubric

Tin can't alter a rubric once yous've started using it.  

Title

Yous've already rated students with this rubric. Whatever major changes could touch on their assessment results.

Title

Criteria Ratings Pts

Edit criterion description Delete criterion row

Clarification of criterion

threshold: 5 pts

Edit rating Delete rating

5 to >0 pts

Full Marks

bare

Edit rating Delete rating

0 to >0 pts

No Marks

blank_2

This area will exist used by the assessor to leave comments related to this benchmark.

pts

/ five pts

--

Additional Comments

Full Points: five out of 5