Peer Review

reviewform.doc

CCJS 101: Introduction to Investigative Forensics

CSI Episode Analysis Peer Review

Carefully read your partner’s paper, keeping in mind the assignment description and the grading rubric. It would be best to have these open while you read.

Provide feedback to your partner through the form below. Be honest and, most importantly, be specific.

Your Name:

Classmates Name:

Formatting Requirements
	Yes	No
Cover/Title page?
900-1500 words?
12-point Times New Roman?
1-inch margins?
Double-spaced?

Body of paper
What is contained in the introduction? Is it missing anything?
What is contained in the short episode synopsis? Remembering that this synopsis should be brief, not a large percentage of the paper, should anything be deleted or added to this synopsis? Why?
How does the writer distinguish between realistic and unrealistic actions? Are these arguments convincing? Why or why not?
Refer to the questions below from the assignment description. Which have been addressed in the paper? Which have not? · Are the scientists’ jobs being portrayed accurately? · Are the examinations being performed accurately? · Are the examinations being performed in a timely manner? · Is the crime scene processed and documented accurately? · Is the evidence at the crime scene collected and packaged accurately? · Are the crime scene investigators jobs being portrayed accurately? · Are there other types of forensic occupations presented in the episode (pathologist, entomologist, anthropologist, etc.)? · Are these other types of forensic occupations being portrayed accurately?
What does the conclusion accomplish?

Incorporating Research
What are the two outside sources used in the paper?
How are these sources incorporated: quotes, paraphrases, or summaries? Does the choice make sense in context? Are direct quotes introduced and explained?
Are in-text and reference citations properly done? Check the Library’s tutorial on APA citations: http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/apa_tutorial.cfm
If there are places that need more outside support, identify them. If there are places that need more independent analysis, identify them.

Writing Style
How is the paper organized? (Does one point lead logically to the next, or are transitions confusing? Cite examples from the paper.)
How does the writer support the claims made in the paper (i.e. what is realistic vs. non-realistic, and how non-realistic actions would be carried out in reality)?
Do grammatical issues make reading the paper difficult? If so, identify the problem and provide an example.
Is the paper written in the 3rd person (he/she/they) and not in the 1st person (I/me)?
Is the verb tense consistent throughout the entire paper? Was either the past tense (was) or the present tense (is) used throughout?

Is there anything else you’d like to address about this paper? Any comments here should not restate information provided above in this review: it should be new or additional information that will help your classmate write a better paper.