Professional Capstone Peer Review Worksheet

Please see attachment for further instructions.

Attached is the “Peer Review Worksheet” you will use to write a 1,300-1,500 word review of the proposal of a colleague in the discussion forum. You will turn one copy of the completed worksheet in here for your instructor to grade; the other you will attach in the Peer Review Forum.

PSY-693 – Professional Capstone

Peer Review Worksheet

 

Please provide quality feedback to your peers that will help them to improve their research writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing that feedback. You will provide feedback for each one of your CLC colleagues; in turn, they will review your presentation.

Attach the completed Peer Review Worksheet for your colleague to review.

Name of the proposal’s author:

Name of the peer reviewer:

Reviewer

1. After viewing the proposal, write a one paragraph summary of the research proposal. The summary should present the reason for the research, the participants, the data collection method, and hypothetical results. The summary does not present your opinion of the study.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. You must specifically discuss the strengths and weaknesses for each of the following proposal sections:

Title:

Does the title give a clear and concise description of the scope and nature (quantitative, qualitative, mixed) of the research?

Is it too long or too short?

Does the title clearly specify the variables or issues under study, the type of research (descriptive, correlational, experimental, survey, or action research), and the target population?

Introduction/Background:

Does the introduction provide enough information about:

(1) why the research is important

(2) how this research will add to the body of knowledge in this area?

Support your answer with the argument and a brief quotation from the proposal.

Research Question/Problem:

Is each research problem/question clearly stated? If not, how could it be more clearly stated?

Is the purpose of the study clearly stated?

Does the purpose statement express what the study intends to accomplish?

Literature Review:

Based on your reading of the literature review, do you think the researcher has a good grasp of current (published within the past 5 years) research regarding the issue? Why or why not?

Are the works presented relevant to the research question?

Hypotheses:

How many hypotheses are being stated?

How clearly each one is stated?

Do they match the research purpose?

Are the hypotheses a prediction of the expected outcome of the study?

Methods:

What is the research method and design?

Is it appropriate for achieving the objectives and types of data to be collected and analyzed?

Participants:

Does the proposal describe who the population is and how to recruit the participants?

Data Collection Instrumentation and Techniques:

Does it include the specific technique, its procedure, and the instruments for collecting data?

Is it consistent with the research method/design?

What type of statistical analysis is suggested? Is it appropriate with the obtained data?

Also, are procedures to follow for conducting the study described effectively? Are the procedures consistent with the research objectives and method/design?

 

3. List any potential ethical considerations you foresee. Every researcher developing a proposal for research must demonstrate how the rights of the participants will be upheld. Specifically, state:

How were the participants fully informed about the nature of the research?

How was the autonomy/confidentiality of the participants guaranteed?

How were the participants protected from harm? How was ethical permission granted for the study?

4. Describe the quality of sources provided in the proposal. Specifically comment on:

Are all the citations that appear in the proposal body presented in the References list? Explain the importance of citing all references.

How recent are the sources and are they appropriate for the topic investigated?

Explain the author’s familiarity with the body of knowledge that is investigated?

How was the application of the source comprehensive (depth and breadth)?

5. List any other suggestions/accolade you have for the researcher or the proposal. Using at least one full paragraph, you must address at least one of the following and specifically explain why this is a suggestion for improvement or specifically explain why you feel that this component of the proposal was done well.

The introduction and background to the study

The research questions/hypotheses

The literature review/theory

The data collection method

The data analysis method

The hypothetical data presentation/findings

The discussion of future research based on the results of this study

Open chat