address the comments 1

Instructions: Use these questions to help you comment on the article you are reviewing. Your answers should give the author a guide in revising his or her work. These are the ideas we studied in class, so if you need more information, please consult the course text, your notes, or any information posted to Canvas. This peer review will constitute a major portion of your participation grade for the course.

Title, Abstract, and Introduction

1. Does the title reflect the content of the paper?

The title can be more concise.

2. Does the abstract contain the information listed on page 138 of the course text? If something is missing, say what and whether it should be included.

I’m not sure, between these two sentences, which one tells the purpose of the literature review.

· This literature review assesses the literature on the special education system in KSA, the values of democracy in special education with the vision 2030, special education curriculum, and teacher preparation programs in light of democratic values.

· The paper aims at redefining teacher education to advocate for democracy in education.

3. Does the introduction state the article’s topic?

I think so.

a. What is the topic of the article in three or four words?

Democratic values in a special education classroom

4. Is the hook interesting to you? If not, what would make it more interesting?

It is ok, but I’m not quite sure about the word “stockholder.” Do you mean stakeholder?

It might be nicer if you can portray vividly how democratic value can change the educational system.

5. Does the introduction state the problem and purpose clearly? If not, please explain.

Yes.

6. Does the introduction include a description of the content and/or organization of the paper?

Maybe not. The description of the organization appears in the first paragraph of the literature review.

7. Did the author define any words that readers might not understand? If not, list here words that

you think the author should define.

No.

You might need to explain KSA (in the abstract) and democratic values.

8. Who appears to be the audience for this paper?

The ministry of education, school principals, and special education administrators.

Content

9. Is the content organized in the order that the author provides in the introduction?

The description is not clear.

There are more headings than I expected.

I expected to see only these

· the literature on the special education system in SA,

· the values of democracy in special education with the vision 2030,

· special education curriculum teacher preparation programs.

Maybe, you can add subheading to each minor points?

10. Is it clear in each sentence whose opinion or idea is being presented? If not, provide an example.

Yes

11. Does each section have a clear “so what”? Write one example here.

Not really. For example, at the end of the first part of the literature review, you end with the seven goals of the NTP, instead of telling the readers why you have reviewed the whole picture of the current Saudi educational system.

12. Were any parts of the article redundant or not relevant? If so, specify where.

No, but he last part that you write about education reform could be combined with the first section that talks about the current situation of the Saudi educational system.

13. Could the author’s argument be better supported? If so, specify where.

You might want to find some research papers on the effects/ impacts of democratic value integration in a classroom to support the need to incorporate the democratic values.

14. Is the wording clear? Are any “$10” words used where a shorter or simpler one might do? Show where the paper could use simpler words or phrasing.

NO

15. (if it applies) Does the research proposal follow the guidelines for methodology according to chapters 4, 5, and 6 in the text (see pages 136 and 137 for a summary of the guidelines)?

16. Does the conclusion clearly reflect what was found in the paper? If not, provide a suggestion of how it might better reflect it.

The conclusion does not talk about the current state of the Saudi educational system.

Organization

17. Does the conclusion circle back to address the problem/purpose stated in the introduction? If not, specify what might tie the paper together better.

Yes.

18. Are there any unclear or missing transitions between sentences, paragraphs, or sections? If so, specify one.

Yes.

From this heading “Saudi Special Education through the Values of Democracy”, I thought you would focus on special education, but you talked about this only in one short paragraph. It might be better to elaborate more on the democratic values in relation to special education.

19. Was there any section where you lost interest? If so, specify what might have held your interest better there.

I didn’t really lose interest, but I felt like I have read similar claims many times. I think it might be more interesting if you have one section devoted to discussing democratic values, and from there you can develop the connections between democratic values and other ideas.

20. Did you feel the structure of the article could be clearer or stronger? If so, specify how it could be clearer or stronger.

You might consider revising the headings to make them relevant to the contents.

Surface Features

21. Does the paper appear to have many surface errors? If so, point out one or two.

The common surface error is the subject-verb agreement grammar point and the singular/ plural noun usage.

Ex.

“These transformation comes as part of the country vision.” (p.5)

“In order to establish a bases for integrating democratic values in special…” (p.4)

22. Does the paper use hedging language (e.g., can, might, may, etc) to avoid overgeneralizations and stereotypes? If not, point out at least one place where it should use it.

You rarely hedge.

I think you can use hedging in the following sentence:

“When integrating the democratic values in Saudi education this will benefit all students especially students with disabilities so they can be an active part in their future and through their education process.” (p.7)

23. What are the strengths of this article? List at least 2.

· You repeat the keyword from the beginning until the end of the paper.

· You synthesize the information very well. You interweave pieces of information smoothly.

24. Does the citation format appear to be correct both in the narrative and the references? If not, give an example where it’s not.

The in-text citation is mostly correct.

You might have to check the period after et al., for example, “Stone et al” on page 10.

In there reference section, the title of an article is not italicized.

Ex.

Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Periodical, volume number(issue number), pages.

https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy