Objectives
Peer critique is a vital skill for working within teams. Specific to policy, peer critique’s allow you to identify well-developed and articulated opinions and the ability to produce effective dialogue.
Objective(s):
Understand the skills required for peer review in scholarly writing and advocacy efforts.
Understand and apply peer review as an essential part of the writing process and advocacy efforts.
Apply concepts learned and demonstrate the peer review process in the HPM Critique Assignment.
Relationship to Learning Outcomes
As future Advanced Practice DNP leaders and Nurse Scientists, you will be working in collaborative teams where peer review is a part of the workplace environment. In this assignment, we are utilizing peer review to develop your ability to provide useful feedback. This is also an opportunity for you to receive feedback on your own draft, which should help you refine your own policy memo prior to submitting the final draft.
Assignment Rationale
Now that the HPM drafts are in, you will review a peer’s submission. This review will be done by a Peer Review Table, which is commonly used when you have a manuscript that has been accepted for publication. Once accepted, the journal’s editor will return your paper with a table that has the first column completed. You will then have the opportunity to review each of those suggestions. You will then provide a justification of why you did or did not agree with those comments. If you agreed, you would then show how you made the appropriate changes. We are going to mimic that process.
Peer Review Overview
The peer review process is not just a requirement in this course. Throughout this program and in your professional career, peer review is an essential part of the writing process that all successful writers engage in at some point. This practice is an integral part of refining scholarly writing to become an effective writer in your academic and professional fields.
The process of producing academic and professional writing involves the following three steps: drafting, revising, and editing. Peer review is most helpful after a completed draft is produced and there is still time to make substantial changes. As a writer you can learn from peer-reviewers areas of strength in your paper, parts that need clarification, gaps in logic, or unanswered questions. The purpose of peer review is to help determine which parts of your paper are effective, and which are unclear, incomplete, or unconvincing.
Active engagement in the peer review process is an opportunity for you to learn how to write for an audience and prepare you for work in the professional world. The quality of your ideas and your work will be judged by how well you can communicate in writing to diverse audiences and stakeholders. Thorough participation in this peer review assignment will help you and your peer shape your written language for effective communication with readers. You will gain the skill to construct a convincing argument by anticipating and answering counter-arguments that readers might pose. This is an important skill when enacting aggregate and systems-level change. Objectives
Peer critique is a vital skill for working within teams. Specific to policy, peer critique’s allow you to identify well-developed and articulated opinions and the ability to produce effective dialogue.
Peer Review Overview
Directions
1. Attach a blank Peer Review Table to the end of your peer’s draft as an appendix.
2. You, as the reviewer, will provide your colleague with an edited paper with “Track Changes” on.
3. You will also complete the first column of the Peer Review Table with at least five suggestions. Please note: You are responsible for both editing your peer’s paper and completing the table.
4. Once your peer review is complete, it is to be uploaded to the HPM Drafts and Critiques Discussion Board.
Rubric
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|