Cardiovascular pathology fundamentals and clinical applications

Cardio

AUTHOR ____ REVIEWER

SUBMITTED TO REVIEWER ____DATE RETURNED

FINAL CRITIGUE GRID

Weak

Satisf

Strong

CRITERIA

READER'S COMMENTS

Quality of the writing (See Writing Rubric)

Nothing special but solid nonetheless. Appropriate.

Thorough, and all appropriate.

Formatting (APA 6th Edition)

Accurate.

Physiology & Pathophysiology

Explained well.

Synthesis of the research

The review of literature is thorough.

There should be more written about future research possibilities.

SUPPORTING REVIEW COMMENTS

The goals of peer review are 1) to help improve your classmate's paper by pointing out strengths and weaknesses that may not be apparent to the author, and 2) to help improve editing skills.

INSTRUCTIONS

Read the paper(s) assigned to you twice, once to get an overview of the paper, and a second time to provide constructive criticism for the author to use when revising his/her paper. Answer the questions below.

CITATIONS

1. Did the writer cite sources adequately and appropriately? Note any incorrect formatting.

The writer uses APA formatting correctly when citing, and the sources used are strong. Moreover, the citations are used adequately to support the research.

1. Were all the citations in the text listed in the Literature Cited section? Note any discrepancies.

Yes, all of the citations correspond with the References page.

CONTENT

1. Did the writer adequately summarize and discuss the topic? Explain.

Yes, the author does give a good summary and overview when explaining the topic in the introduction.

1. Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials available from the standard sources? If no, what's missing?

There is nothing missing. In fact, the author does not need to include as much detail. The detail does not detract, though.

1. Did the writer make some contribution of thought to the paper, or merely summarize data or publications? Explain.

In this case, the writer does seem to offer mainly summaries of the data. Some more opinion, interjection, or personal "voice" would be helpful.

WRITING RUBRIC - Circle the score you give to the paper. Use this information to complete the CRITIQUE GRID

LEVEL

CRITERIA

Research Paper Advanced Physiology and Pathophysiology

25-22

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: Thesis is clear and adequately reflects the purpose of the assignment; evidence is relevant and adequately supports the thesis.

21-18

GOOD TO AVERAGE: Minor weakness in thesis and/or use of evidence (e.g., thesis somewhat ambiguous or vague or slightly off the topic; evidence sometimes irrelevant or inadequate to support all statements.)

17-11

FAIR TO POOR: Major weakness in thesis and/or use of evidence (e.g., thesis ambiguous or very vague or ignores the purpose of the assignment; evidence scanty or not related to the points under discussion).

10-5

VERY POOR: Absence of thesis and/or absence of relevant evidence.

ORGANIZATION

20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: Sequence of ideas (paragraphs) in the paper is clear, logical, and complete; paragraphs have topic sentences, transitions, and are internally coherent.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: Minor weaknesses in overall organizational pattern and/or paragraph structure (e.g., some irrelevant ideas/paragraphs included; some ideas omitted or not fully developed; some paragraphs with no major point).

13-10

FAIR TO POOR: Major weaknesses in organization and/or paragraph structure (e.g., frequent digressions; few transitions; serious omissions or underdevelopment).

9-7

VERY POOR: lack of overall organization and/or absence of coherent paragraphs (e.g., no explicit relationships among ideas in the paper; many one-sentence paragraphs, etc.).

VOCABULARY

20-18

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: Vocabulary of sophisticated range; effective use of word/idiom choice and usage, word form mastery, appropriate register.

17-14

GOOD TO AVERAGE: Vocabulary shows adequate range; occasional errors of word/idiom form, choice, and usage, but meaning is not obscured.

13-10

FAIR TO POOR: Vocabulary has limited range, frequent errors of word/idiom form, choice, usage; meaning is confused or obscured.

9-7

VERY POOR: Vocabulary is essentially translation; clear projection from English.

LANGUAGE USE

25-22

EXCELLENT TO VERY GOOD: Good construction of sentences, including proper word order, referents, subject-verb agreement, parallel structure, modifier and clause placement; few errors of agreement, tense, number, articles, pronouns, prepositions.

21-18

GOOD TO AVERAGE: Minor weaknesses in grammar; few grammatical errors that, in the context of the essay, cause the reader some distraction; effective but simple constructions; several errors in agreement, tense, number, word order/function, articles, pronouns, prepositions, but meaning seldom obscured.