Article Peer -Review The Popular Article written in the previous workshop provided you with an opportunity to explore an academic topic of your choosing based on the needs of your applied doctoral project and or a specific business-related topic of interest. As you wait for feedback from your facilitator, you will actively pursue feedback from your fellow classmates by sharing a draft of the article for peer review. Consider this submission an opportunity to strengthen and enhance your writing skills as well as collaborate with peers through the sharing of insights and the exchange of recommendations to enhance one another’s writing.
For this assignment, you will submit your Popular Article for review by another student. Likewise, you will also conduct a review of another student’s article. Throughout the review process, seek to incorporate the knowledge and information you have gleaned from the texts and resources and writing practice in this course. This task affords you the benefit of a peer review where multivariant perspectives and viewpoints are used to analyze and critique your work in a safe, productive, and collegial way—as you reciprocate in the same process. There is no expectation that anyone is an expert; indeed, the goal of this assignment is to share and receive feedback and affirm good writing habits.
Upon successful completion of this discussion, you will be able to:
Demonstrate doctoral level writing skills.
Why learn to peer review?
Those involved in peer review recognize how important the process is to maintain the quality and integrity of scientific literature. It can be [a bit] daunting — but it comes with huge benefits.
The benefits of peer review include staying abreast of the latest research trends in your field, improving your own writing skills and learning how to better present your own research to journal editors. Peer review also helps you to forge those critically important relationships with editors at the elite journals in your field, which can work in your favor when you submit your own work for publication.
So, with all these benefits on offer, what can new academics do to get onto an editor’s peer review database? (Want to Peer Review, n.d., Why Learn)
Top ways to tap into the benefits of becoming a reviewer:
Contact editors or publishers directly. (Check out the info below.)
Join researcher networks. One example is ResearchGate(new tab).
Network and make connections. Consider starting with a LinkedIn group or member organization.
Attend conferences and seminars (a great way to network . . . and volunteer!).
Publish, publish, publish.
. . . . Uh oh, two of the more significant benefits were left off the list— becoming a better writer and critical thinker.
To put the above into perspective, consider one example, the Christian Business Faculty Association(new tab), whose mission is to “empower Christian business faculty to transform the world for the glory of God” (About CBFA, n.d., Mission). Each year, the CBFA conference(new tab) is held on site at a Christian university. Typically, attendees can stay on campus while attending the conference or staying in a hotel nearby. So, what are the benefits of CBFA?
The annual conferences are reasonably priced, and they provide a wealth of new learning as you ‘hang out’ with thought leaders.
There are opportunities to present your research at the conference when they send out a call for papers.
You can also volunteer to become a peer reviewer of the submitted presentations.
Or consider volunteering to be a moderator at a conference.
Moreover, CBFA publishes two journals: Journal of Biblical Integration in Business (JBIB(new tab)) and Christian Business Academy Review (CBAR(new tab)). Check out the links where you can access archived journals.
Networking and making connections . . . and all for the annual fee of $50 (see CBFA membership(new tab)).
Wow! The above list looks quite impressive. The CBFA provides the up-and-coming and seasoned academic business professionals with a wealth of resources that clearly are aimed at helping you to become the best professional you (academic, businessperson, author, reviewer….).
Christian Business Faculty Association. (n.d.). About CBFA. https://www.cbfa.org/about(new tab)
Want to peer review? Top 10 tips to get noticed by editors. (2020, January 8). Publons. https://publons.com/blog/10-things-you-need-to-know-to-get-noticed-by-editors/(new tab)
Review the rubric to make sure you understand the criteria for earning your grade.
Review The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking: Concepts and Tools.
Read Part II Writing Rules – Chapter 34 (pp. 89–100) in Everybody Writes.
Upload your Popular Article assignment a Word document by DAY TWO (2) to give your student reviewer ample time to complete their review.
Write a paragraph for the initial post to include the title of the article and summarization of it to help establish context for the reviewer and other readers in the course.
The instructor will assign each student to a specific student paper for conducting a peer review. Do not conduct a peer review until the instructor has assigned you an article.
Download the Article Peer-Review Template(Word document).
Download the one Popular Article assigned for your peer review.
Complete the peer review using the template as the guide, following the prompts below:
Carefully read the instructions on the Article Peer-Review Template.
Insert your full name in the header or the footer of the blank template.
Save a copy of the template for use when conducting the peer review.
For the file-naming convention, use:
(Reviewer Last Name (You)_Abbreviated Title of the Article_Other Student’s Last Name
Example: Jones_Falling Profits in the Airline Industry_Jackson
Complete the template in its entirety, assessing the other student’s article based on the critical thinking intellectual standards criteria, as adopted from The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, and the other comment sections in the template.
Include appropriate, evidence-based, honest and respectful feedback using single-line spacing in the areas provided in the template.
Once the review is complete, review and edit, then save the Word document template as a PDF file.
Submit a PDF copy of your peer review in the discussion forum by the end of the workshop.
Write a brief paragraph response in the discussion forum summarizing your peer review to the student.
Upload the PDF copy of the completed Peer-Review Template to the discussion response.
You are encouraged to engage in dialogue with other students as well in the discussion forum. Article Peer-Review: Using the Essential Intellectual Standards
Criteria for the peer-review of articles.
Paul and Elder’s (2020) Universal Intellectual Standards, as found in The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, are used as criteria for conducting peer-reviews of the two articles assigned in this course. When routinely, consistently, and deliberately put to practice in your daily thinking, research, and writing, the standards will cultivate the development of intellectual virtues over time.
Instructions: Complete this review form in its entirety.
1. Mark a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ for the three criteria listed under each of the intellectual standard headings.
2. Provide scholarly feedback in the text boxes for all 10 of the intellectual standards.
3. Identify two areas of strength, two areas for content-related improvement, two alternate word choices, and two alternate sentence structures.
Elaborates where needed Yes | No
Incorporates excellent examples Yes | No
Describes or illustrates what is meant Yes | No
Presents supporting/contrasting views Yes | No
Conveys research findings accurately Yes | No
Verifies with other information findings Yes | No
Provides specificity where needed Yes | No
Furnishes sufficient details Yes | No
Expresses proper amount of exactness Yes | No
Correlates content to the topic(s) Yes | No
Arouses interest, is applicable/current Yes | No
Develops content suitable for journal Yes | No
Addresses the complexities of the topic Yes | No
Explores specific topic(s) extensively Yes | No
Defines/describes/models key factors Yes | No
Identifies the big picture Yes | No
Examines span of topic knowledge Yes | No
Deliberates various viewpoints or sides Yes | No
Makes sound, rational connections Yes | No
Reasons well, orderly, and cohesively Yes | No
Draws sensible and reliable conclusions Yes | No
Discusses impact/importance of topic Yes | No
Identifies implications and magnitude Yes | No
Considers meaning and consequence Yes | No
Discloses information fully and fairly Yes | No
Represents others’ views objectively Yes | No
Minimizes bias and promotes inclusivity Yes | No
Cites ample evidence-based support Yes | No
Discloses gaps or missing information Yes | No
Produces a sense of completeness Yes | No
Two Areas of Strength in the Article
Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article.
1. Strength Area:
2. Strength Area:
Two Areas for Content-Related Improvement in the Article
Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Provide supporting links, resources, or other means, as applicable and appropriate.
1. Content-Related Area for Improvement:
2. Content-Related Area for Improvement:
Two Alternate Word Choices
Identify two words in the article that could be replaced for improved readability. Select a word you are familiar with or use a thesaurus to identify synonyms. Identify the word and the location (e.g., Paragraph 2, Sentence 3).
· Original Word (and Location)
· Substitute Word:
· Original Word (and Location)
· Substitute Word:
Two Alternate Sentence Structures
Select two sentences that may be enhanced with revision. Copy and paste the original sentences in this template and provide the altered sentence structure. You are encouraged to explain why you made the change (e.g., The most important words were moved to the start of the sentence as detailed by Handley(2014) in the fifth chapter of Everybody Writes).
· #1 Original Sentence:
· #1 Revised Sentence:
· #2 Original Sentence:
· #2 Revised Sentence: