Hi students,
Here are some tips we covered in lab today regarding assignment 9.
-
For part E): if you find some errors, fantastic! Well, not fantastic for the authors, but fantastic for you for the sake of writing assignment nine. Report this/these within your referee report composition. If not, Josh and I would suggest finding some sentences or paragraphs that are unclear structurally, and suggesting how you might rewrite them to become more clear. If there are no clear errors, it's okay if this is a small paragraph; the other components of the assignment are plenty to fill up a full 3 - 5 page composition.
-
Even if you don't feel like an expert in the field, or feel qualified to make these sorts of critiques, your goal is to make your composition as well written and eloquent as possible. Try to put together something that makes sense and will allow you to be valued as a viewer. Be clear in your arguments and critiques and perspective, even if you aren't leaning towards one way or another in terms of "accept or reject".
-
For part D): consider this not necessarily as a logistical question (e.g., a question about properly citing) but more as as a question of what citations would you suggest that help backup your critique to the author. For example, if in Parts B & C, you've made suggestions in terms of what the paper may be missing or what concepts / factors the author may benefit from, do a mini literature review and see what papers you believe would help aid the author that the author does not cite. It's OK to be subjective; when we receive reviews, often times the reviewers are trying to help us not in terms of point out what main papers we've missed, but what tangential papers may help us to make our overall argument.
Hi students,
Here are some tips we covered in lab today regarding assignment 9.
For part E): if you find some errors, fantastic! Well, not fantastic for the authors, but fantastic for you for the sake of writing assignment nine. Report this/these within your referee report composition. If not, Josh and I would suggest finding some sentences or paragraphs that are unclear structurally, and suggesting how you might rewrite them to become more clear. If there are no clear errors, it's okay if this is a small paragraph; the other components of the assignment are plenty to fill up a full 3 - 5 page composition.
Even if you don't feel like an expert in the field, or feel qualified to make these sorts of critiques, your goal is to make your composition as well written and eloquent as possible. Try to put together something that makes sense and will allow you to be valued as a viewer. Be clear in your arguments and critiques and perspective, even if you aren't leaning towards one way or another in terms of "accept or reject".
For part D): consider this not necessarily as a logistical question (e.g., a question about properly citing) but more as as a question of what citations would you suggest that help backup your critique to the author. For example, if in Parts B & C, you've made suggestions in terms of what the paper may be missing or what concepts / factors the author may benefit from, do a mini literature review and see what papers you believe would help aid the author that the author does not cite. It's OK to be subjective; when we receive reviews, often times the reviewers are trying to help us not in terms of point out what main papers we've missed, but what tangential papers may help us to make our overall argument.