Reference no: EM132697956 , Length: word count:1500

Research Methods Training

Advice on providing constructive peer reviews

1. Choosing the criteria and the structure for the constructive review

It can sometimes be challenging to provide constructive peer review. Here is some advice on how to do so.

First, consider the criteria that should be used, based on what the submission represents. For example, if the submission was to include the research methodology and research method(s) then these would be criteria for the review.

Second, consider how you will write the review. One simple yet effective structure to use follows this order:
• Strength (S): Identify a strength of the submission and why.
• Improvement (I): Identify an aspect that could be improved, why, and perhaps how.
• Insight (I): What insight did YOU gain from reading your peer's submission that will be helpful to you in your own understanding of the activity associated with the submission.
Combining these two processes provides you with both the criteria by which to constructively review the peer submission and the structure to use when writing the critical review.
In Weeks 3 and 4 of the RMT module, you provide constructive review for 2 peer colleagues' submissions posted to the Discussion Board.

Criteria for Week 3
In Week 3, the constructive review is of a Problem Statement. For Week 3, use the following criteria when reviewing the submission.
The Problem Statement should include:
• The Problem, its context and why it is important to further research
• The Methodology and Method with which the problem will be studied
• The Purpose, in which the objectives and scope are identified

Additionally, the submission should:
• Include evidence from the literature to support the need to conduct further research into the problem.
• Be clearly written so that the reader can understand the context of the problem.

Criteria for Week 4
In Week 4, the constructive review is of an IT artefact. For Week 4, use the following criteria when reviewing the submission.
The IT artefact should include the following characteristics:
• Representative of a new, original deliverable developed by the researcher
• Capable of being used to answer the problem or questions
• Results from application of theory or gathering of data
• Designed so that it can be tested for validity, feasibility or usability Additionally, the submission should:
• Be clearly written so that the reader can understand the context in which the IT artefact will be produced