discussion

Reviewer: Tom Taylor. Author: Niniana Oehler. Article: Saving the Burnt

Article Peer-Review: Using the Essential Intellectual Standards

Criteria for the peer-review of articles.

Paul and Elder’s (2020) Universal Intellectual Standards, as found in The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking, are used as criteria for conducting peer-reviews of the two articles assigned in this course. When routinely, consistently, and deliberately put to practice in your daily thinking, research, and writing, the standards will cultivate the development of intellectual virtues over time. Instructions: Complete this review form in its entirety.

1. Mark a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ for the three criteria listed under each of the intellectual standard headings. 2. Provide scholarly feedback in the text boxes for all 10 of the intellectual standards. 3. Identify two areas of strength, two areas for content-related improvement, two alternate word

choices, and two alternate sentence structures.

Clarity Feedback

Elaborates where needed þ Yes | ¨ No

Incorporates excellent examples þ Yes | ¨ No

Describes or illustrates what is meant þ Yes | ¨ No

Accuracy Feedback

Presents supporting/contrasting views ¨ Yes | þ No

Conveys research findings accurately þ Yes | ¨ No

Verifies with other information findings þ Yes | ¨ No

Precision Feedback

Provides specificity where needed þ Yes | ¨ No

Furnishes sufficient details þ Yes | ¨ No

Expresses proper amount of exactness þ Yes | ¨ No

Relevance Feedback

Correlates content to the topic(s) þ Yes | ¨ No

Arouses interest, is applicable/current þ Yes | ¨ No

Develops content suitable for journal þ Yes | ¨ No

Good use of statistics. The app example was powerful. Would have like to hear more from your experience as an administrator in healthcare. Some sentences were long and difficult for me to read.

Good use of resources to backup viewpoint. No contrasting view or argument.

Uses statistics well to support need of policy maker support and action. Good call out that mental health benefits not only support current employees but create a culture to attract talent.

As I read your article, I applied the concept to myself and workplace. The points you raised have been topics in my workplace. It is relevant and I was able to associate to it personally.

Reviewer: Tom Taylor. Author: Niniana Oehler. Article: Saving the Burnt

Depth Feedback

Addresses the complexities of the topic þ Yes | ¨ No

Explores specific topic(s) extensively þ Yes | ¨ No

Defines/describes/models key factors þ Yes | ¨ No

Breadth Feedback

Identifies the big picture þ Yes | ¨ No

Examines span of topic knowledge þ Yes | ¨ No

Deliberates various viewpoints or sides þ Yes | ¨ No

Logic Feedback

Makes sound, rational connections þ Yes | ¨ No

Reasons well, orderly, and cohesively þ Yes | ¨ No

Draws sensible and reliable conclusions þ Yes | ¨ No

Significance Feedback

Discusses impact/importance of topic þ Yes | ¨ No

Identifies implications and magnitude þ Yes | ¨ No

Considers meaning and consequence þ Yes | ¨ No

Fairness Feedback

Discloses information fully and fairly þ Yes | ¨ No

Represents others’ views objectively þ Yes | þ No

Minimizes bias and promotes inclusivity þ Yes | ¨ No

Sufficiency Feedback

The depth of the article met the guidelines of the assignment. I have mentioned before I wanted to read about your experiences and how they supported your findings. You have a passion for what you do. Use it!

Opening statement set the stage and told the big picture. The article contained viewpoints from administration, frontline workers, and HR policy administrators.

The article flowed well from setting the stage of burnout and its acceleration during the pandemic. It transitioned from the different viewpoints smoothing. The article provided statistics to support the need for action. It ended with a strong call to action

I have already provided feedback above. I was able to engage in the article at a personal level. The references support the implications and magnitude. The conclusion clearly states the consequences and call to action.

The article was written without bias but was missing opposing viewpoints. Missed an opportunity to use VBM principals in exploring the empathy and virtuous leadership needed in supporting team members mental health.

Reviewer: Tom Taylor. Author: Niniana Oehler. Article: Saving the Burnt

Cites ample evidence-based support þ Yes | ¨ No

Discloses gaps or missing information þ Yes | ¨ No

Produces a sense of completeness þ Yes | ¨ No

Two Areas of Strength in the Article

Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article.

1. Strength Area: The example of the app that saved a nurses life was powerful and strongly supported the argument of the article

2. Strength Area: Use of visual to show the zone of confluence of burnout and resilience.

Two Areas for Content-Related Improvement in the Article

Include sufficient detail and evidence-based support from the article. Provide supporting links, resources, or other means, as applicable and appropriate.

1. Content-Related Area for Improvement: I would have liked to have read examples of how your experience of a senior care administrator supports your findings.

2. Content-Related Area for Improvement: There a few longer sentences. An example is in the opening paragraph. “What was once considered a slowly spreading burn in the healthcare industry, an opportunity for employers, organizations and policymakers to shift their focus on the mental hardships of working in one of the most demanding industries, has become a raging fire.” I am slower reader and need the processing pause a period can provide. While longer sentences are easier for some readers to digest, I may have to read thru them a few times. This is a preference item for thing. I find times new roman harder to read. The new modern fonts like Calibri are better for my eyes. Remember to empathetic to the reader.

Two Alternate Word Choices

Identify two words in the article that could be replaced for improved readability. Select a word you are familiar with or use a thesaurus to identify synonyms. Identify the word and the location (e.g., Paragraph 2, Sentence 3).

v Original Word (and Location) biggest P2 S5

v Substitute Word: significant\most significant

v Original Word (and Location) advancements P2 S5

v Substitute Word: advances\innovations

Two Alternate Sentence Structures

Select two sentences that may be enhanced with revision. Copy and paste the original sentences in this template and provide the altered sentence structure. You are encouraged to explain why you made the change (e.g., The most important words were moved to the start of the sentence as detailed by Handley(2014) in the fifth chapter of Everybody Writes).

v #1 Original Sentence: While the causes of burnout vary across professions and industry sector, the healthcare industry is unique in that quick advancements and rapid policy changes have shaped the daily routines of healthcare workers especially during a pandemic.

v #1 Revised Sentence: While the causes of burnout vary across professions and industry sectors, the healthcare industry is unique in that quick advancements and rapid policy changes have shaped healthcare workers' daily routines, especially during a pandemic.

References are used well to support the article viewpoint and tone. Concepts flow well building an argument to support the call to action.

Reviewer: Tom Taylor. Author: Niniana Oehler. Article: Saving the Burnt v #2 Original Sentence: As consequence of these combining factors, healthcare workers are

unable to accommodate the needs of a larger, aging population (Schmidt, 2020).

v #2 Revised Sentence: As a consequence of these combining factors, healthcare workers cannot accommodate the needs of a larger, aging population (Schmidt, 2020).