Peer Review of Liat Greenwood
Cognition: Your proposition is not entirely clear. It seems like you're doing two or three different things that could be your proposition. I would say it may be worth your time to simplify the last few sentences of your introduction so that your proposition is more apparent. However, each of your reasons and the evidence are good. Make the proposition clear, and this will be an awesome literature review. Score: 3
Invention: This fits the genre of a literature review well. You do a great job of focusing on the field and how the authors from different fields have looked at and contributed to this new field. You stay away from focusing on the content of the articles and make sure that you're focused on the main idea
…show more content…
Your footnotes are not showing up or you have not added them in yet. I'm not sure which, but I would check into it if they should be there by now. Also, In your last body paragraph, you don't have a clearly stated reason at the beginning (a topic sentence); maybe you want to consider adding one to prepare your readers for the evidence. Also, this paragraph is a little short in comparison with your other ones. I would consider adding some more evidence or explanation to the paragraph. Your conclusion is also short, but you acknowledge this. Score: …show more content…
You are using the content from the articles you cite to make a unique argument rather than talking about the field as a whole. Maybe consider focusing on how the authors are similar or differ in how they make their arguments or instead describe how the authors talking about incest have changed over time (for example, saying that at first scholars have shifted from focusing of the reason for nicest being maintaining the divine bloodline to it being keeping wealth and power within the family-not what you are saying but just an example). You have some elements of a literature review already in here, so the transition should not be a huge difference. Score:
Another key problem was going over the 2000 word limit. I reached the word limit in the conclusion making me have to cut things out of the conclusion, introduction and background information.
1. Briefly explain the authors argument and whether you agree or disagree with their position. Why or why not?
Last, and most important, is that studies have not shown that more hours spent on homework leads to more knowledge. Time spent on homework does not correlate to better test scores. Some students can spend twice as much time as others and still not do as well. Grades do not necessarily improve with more hours of homework.
One criticism of this research is that it is correlational. Therefore, we cannot infer a causal
74. Raymond remembers, “When I was a sophomore, I took the hardest physics test of my life, and I was happy with my C.” This memory represents a(n)
Paste all of your revised body paragraphs and conclusion in the space below. Bold the
It will consider previous empirical research in the field from Salem et al (2013) as well as
| The argument is presented in a logical order that shows clear expression of ideas. All supporting facts and statistics are
perceive it to be better, however; current research shows it may be more beneficial to limit
I have always found the peer review process to be beneficial on both ends, whether you are the writer or the reader, are being reviewed or are the reviewer. Having multiple sets of eyes proofread your paper should help more than hurt. It is your choice if you want to take the advice your peers gave. You have the option of not making any changes at all, so whether you decide to take the advice or not, it does not hurt to receive them. In Paper One, I found that peer reviewing others was a bit difficult because any comments made could be offending them. I felt that I would come off as criticizing the kind of person one is, instead of one's work since the assignment was to write about something that is personal.
Great job! I would put a space between David Fling. I would say the new conclusion that found was Alice was the daughter of Abigail Buffington and the late Edward Seeds. I think this sounds a little better. :) I like how you gave facts in your paper. I found this very helpful. You said he also makes it clear there is a lot if- (typo of) information yet to be found about Rachel Hill in order to prove this conclusion. You might want to give examples here after this statement. This is a sentence fragment-After going back and reading the evidence, the author provided. You didn’t finish the thought. I would put a comma after that last line and start off with one....This also is a sentence fragment. Since you didn't finish your thought. I would
First, let me reiterate please, that I’m simply not in the position to critique anyone’s work, as I, also have key disputes in this class. Sorry for the length as I tried to help you and cover the prompts in the discussion response as well. Although, we have to retort, I pray that I don’t offend you in any way, I tend to be straight forward and I’m working on that sorry. I see your essay through my word doc, it’s showing every word on the left side to be underlined in blue, I thought possibly there’s a margin offset somewhere in the format. It should also be set at double space as such in between paragraphs you will need to double click twice for the next paragraph, it’s showing only one. I was thinking maybe your thesis might
The authors relied heavily on two studies to create their argument. The first study mentioned was the Pinto et al article. In this study, "Pinto and colleagues (5) assessed the
Be sure your analysis is written in a scholarly voice and uses your scholarly writing skills.
Conclusion section is also an example of weak writing and abrupt ending. In my opinion, this article lacks good writing, strong facts, graphs and