PHIL 338A:  Peer Review Checklists for Final Projects (Research Papers)

 

                Below is a checklist for use for those doing research papers.  (Service learning reports don’t have to fit any particular format, though they are required to refer to two of the readings in this course.)  This checklist can be used when you are preparing your draft final project for peer review and when you are commenting on drafts.  Note that it is not necessary and not even desirable for you to write your papers in the order of the items on this checklist.  However you order them, all the following items should be included in your draft.  This checklist is not meant to cover everything to include in your draft.  It describes the minimum that you should include.  I expect you to be creative and go beyond this minimum. 

                When you are commenting on a draft in Peer Review, one of your roles is to make sure that the paper you are commenting on satisfies these minimum conditions.  Please feel free to make additional comments for improving the paper.

 

 

                                                                                                                                                    Paper #1   Paper #2

1.  Introductory paragraph or two in which the author gives an overview of the paper and makes it clear how s/he is proposing to change or augment the U.N. Universal Declaration.

 

 

2.  The author gives examples to explain how to interpret the right s/he is discussing.

 

 

3.  Author refers to at least two authors in the course readings and gives page references to support all attributions to those authors.

 

 

4.  Author includes cites at least four relevant Web sites

 

 

5.  Author evaluates the reliability of all Web sites that s/he cites.

 

 

6.  The author considers philosophical (not religious) reasons for and against his/her position. 

 

 

7.  At least some of the arguments against the author's position are forceful, not weak.  The author acknowledges their force.

 

 

8.  The author responds to the arguments against his/her position.  It is not necessary to refute the opposing arguments, just to respond to them intelligently.

 

 

9.  The author has a concluding paragraph that summarizes the paper and includes a final recommendation to the U.N.