Trusted by 2+ million users, 1000+ happy students everyday
Showing pages 1 to 2 of 4 pages
Name of Reviewer: Student: Margie u121910Name of Author or Student No. Joyce u3136322Date of Review: 6/10/16Criteria 1Reviewer’s Comments...Structurei.Follows the structure, format and style of the selected journalii.Length: 4000-5000 wordsiii.Concise informative title of between 8-10 words maxiv.Reflects the article topic and contains key words(i)The structure of this article follows the style of APJE tosome extent. Between the clear, strong introduction and therecommendations, the structure is unclear. A suggestionwould be to group the section into a ‘Literature Review andAnalysis’ with subheadings of the different themes.(ii) 4753 words is within word limit.(iii) & (iv) Title is within word limit but does not encompassfull depth of article. Suggestion –The Future of NigerianDistance Education: Student Attitudes and RecommendationsAbstract i.Provides background to the topicii.Identifies problemiii.Informs about the main focus and methodsiv.Outlines major findings (i)- (iv) All aspects of the criteria are covered in the abstract of this article. There is a spelling mistake of the word ‘been’ in the second line.Introductioni.Explains background to the general topic, area of concern; ii.Identifies research/review questionsthat indicate and establish “the problem” and the author’s purpose/motivation/justification for reviewing the literature; iii.Argument or author’s position is stated; iv.Outlines the focus of the article andpreviews the organization of the text. (i)- (iii) The introduction covers all aspects of the criteria efficiently giving background, outlining argument and providing focus. There are however, no research questions identified.(iv) Effective preview of the organization of the text in final paragraph. However, this organization is not followed in the article. It is suggested that the subtitles indicated in the preview be used (analysis etc.) in the article or the preview be adjusted to accordingly.Method i.Explains the scope of the reviewii.Identifies the research questionsiii.Provides an overview of the methods of selecting and procedures for analyzing articlesAlthough there is a lot of information contained in the methodology, the flow and relevance of the presentation of information is confusing to the reader.No research questions are identified.Data or Analysisi.Reports on the findings (from analysis) of the research questionsThis analysis section again contains a lot of useful, relevant information. However, its organization is confusing and would benefit from stronger topic sentences and paragraph organization with constant reference to the topic.It would also be helpful if the definitions of distance education came earlier in the article.Discussion and InterpretationDiscusses and interprets the main Clear recommendations are made with implications for the problems identified in the introduction.1
findings and the implications for theproblem or issue identified. Presents any limitations to the reviewThere was no mention of limitations of the review.Conclusion i.Summarizes main findings ii.Present the implications for the problem identifiediii.Identifies future directions e.g., research, policy, practice needed and any unresolved questions iv.Makes a clear take home statement about the importance of the review findings and follow-up.The conclusion of the article covered implications, future directions and makes a clear take home statement. However, new information was also included.Criteria 2Reviewer’s Comments...A.Quality of analysis and reviewi.Provides a critical, constructive analysis of the literature in the specific field and relates to research questionsii.Presents a coherent review of literature and discussion iii.Uses literature to inform and support discussioniv.Links to research focus and contribution are signposted throughout the articleThis article presented a lot of information about distance learning and its benefits and the problems associated with its implementation in Nigeria. The reader is persuaded that the recommendations in the article are necessary and overdue. However, the structure of the analysis of literature is confusing and it not always related to the research problem. It is also difficult to distinguish between the author’s opinion and data obtained from the literature.Criteria 3Reviewer’s Comments...A.Uses suitable and accurately cited literature i.Accurate and consistent in-text citation method usedii.Reference list includes all texts cited in the text and is consistent with the APA (6th Ed.) citation methodAs mentioned above, it is difficult at times to distinguish the author’s voice which points to the need for more referencing.APA is observed in most instances, however there are 2 references in the reference list which do not appear in the text.Saunders et al. is also incorrectly cited in the text with no dateor additional names of authors.Criteria 4Reviewer’s Comments...A.Displays quality of written communication i.Use of subheadings and a concise paragraph structure –one idea or The abstract, introduction, recommendations and conclusion display clear communication and structure. However, other sections need work on paragraph structure and topic sentencesfor clarity of argument and meaning. Some sentences are too 2
Found this document preview useful?
You are reading a preview Upload your documents to download or Become a Desklib member to get accesss