English hw

Mutombo

[Last Name] 4

Maurille Mutombo

Mr. Fernando

English 101

February 4th, 2021

5:1 My Literacy Analysis on Peer Reviews

Learning has been a long and continuous process for me and believably, for everyone who is studying at a given level. Despite numerous aspects that I have learned successfully, peer review has been among a major milestone, especially in this course. I started by interrogating what peer review is since this concept was commonly heard from my classmates and tutors of different course units. First, I thought that one does not have to review the work of their colleagues or other scholars since they might be founded on credible and questionable research. However, learning the entailment of peer review enlightened me that an evaluation of another person’s academic work does not necessarily imply disapproving them but adding one’s views on their research topics and recommending other approaches that one can use. Examining how I learned about peer reviews and my perception about it is one key thematic concerns that I would wish to share among my colleagues.

I first learned peer review when I joined college, when a lot of colleagues’ argumentative posts required insightful critiques. The first post that I reviewed did not meet all the requirements to be regarded as excellent. For example, the post encompassed social stigmatization and how to address it. Despite presenting a contextual discussion post, my colleague had omitted some key issues that would have made the post even greater. However, even though I perceived that the research lacked some elements, I still rated it as a satisfactory one and failed to cite those issues. My explicitness in that peer review justified lack of coherence and courage to opinionate on someone’s research.

Learning what peer review entails enabled me to conduct an excellent peer review on the subsequent researches from my colleagues and other scholars. I remember critiquing Liamputtong research on "Stigma, discrimination, and HIV/AIDS: An introduction" vividly, to an extent that I could simplify inconsistencies with other researches. For example, I noted that despite being in the same context as Taggart and Bailey, the two made different analysis, which made them establish inconsistent recommendations on issues. That peer review was the first one that I felt to have conducted it satisfactorily followed by series of peer reviews to my colleagues’ researches. I now understand that peer review does not necessarily implies that one must disapprove the content of another academician but they can recommend appropriate approaches and critique them positively to ensure that future researches are conducted credibly.

Peer reviews comprise of different elements including the thesis presentation, examination of the background information, literature used, and the credibility of the research findings. I understand these issues now despite taking long to realize its importance and what one need to consider when conducting peer reviews. Initially, my peer reviews were immaterial since they only dwelled on the researchers’ works regardless of whether they met the credibility criteria for the contextual study or not. I believe that practice with my colleagues’ works and critiquing the works of other scholars built my current unquestionable skills in peer reviews.

Works Cited

Liamputtong, P. "Stigma, discrimination, and HIV/AIDS: An introduction." Stigma, Discrimination and Living with HIV/AIDS, 2013, pp. 1-19

Taggart, H., and S. Bailey. "Ending lethal discrimination against people with serious mental illness." British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 207, no. 6, 2015, pp. 469-470