BIO21PeerReviewHandoutSMCF20 (1)
.pdf
School
Santa Monica College**We aren't endorsed by this school
Course
BIOL 21
Subject
Biology
Date
Dec 21, 2024
Pages
5
Uploaded by SargentDiscoveryWallaby16
Name/Section_____Davis__________________BIOL 21 Peer Review Lab HandoutThe peer review process is an important aspect in science because it provides a mechanism to critique, evaluate, anddouble-check the work of a scientific expert. Peer reviewing is required for the publication of scientific work, whichensures that the quality of the science is strong. In this exercise, you will mimic the peer review process that is requiredfor the publication of primary literature in scientific journal articles. You are not to re-write the author’s entire paper.This assignment is worth 50 points and is due 12/17. You will be graded on the quality of your peer review.STEP 1:●Skim through the lab report to see if the format, font, and all components are present. If any aspect is missing orincorrect, make a note on your peer’s lab report.Component UnderEvaluationQuestionYes/NoTitle PageIs the spacing correct and all required information present?Formatting●Are all sections of the lab report present?●Are scientific names written appropriately?●Are the subscripts and superscripts being used properly (CO2andnot CO2)?●Are there appropriate sub headings in the methods and resultssections?●Are figure legends and titles in the correct locations?STEP 2:●Carefully read through the lab report. As you are reading, pay close attention to the overall content and overallorganization of the report. If you answered “No” to any question, provide commentary to the author.Part A: Analyzing the Overall Content of the Lab ReportComponent UnderEvaluationQuestionYes/NoPurpose andInterpretationIs the overall purpose of the report and the central question/hypothesis tobe tested clear?●Identify and highlight the purpose statement in the report●Underline the signal elements that clued you in to the purpose(e.g. To determine…, We hypothesized that…In this study weexamined…)Is the gap in knowledge that the researcher is trying to fill clearly stated?●Place brackets around the gap in knowledge statement.Does the interpretation of the findings answer the overall questions of thepaper?●Underline the signal elements that clued you in to theinterpretation aspects of the report (e.g. Our findings indicate…,Xis important forY…)SupportIs there sufficient scientific evidence to support the researcher’sconclusion(s)?●Review the numerical values in the results section. Then look in thediscussion section to see if the work was placed into the greaterCreated by Dr. Andria P. Denmon
context of the field (compared and contrasted to the results ofsimilar studies)Is every paragraph and sentence in the paper relevant to the overallquestion being asked?Are there portions of the text that can be omitted?●Strike through overly verbose statements.●Provide revisions to sentences that begin with filler phrases “Forexample…,” “What I mean is…,” “In order…” etc. If there isexcessive usage of filler phrases, revise up to 4 and circle theremaining filler phrasesOverallWould this report be helpful in advancing the understanding of enzymefunction, metabolism, and experimental design to a BIO 21 student?Does this report provide interesting and relevant insights into the topicbeing study?If only given this lab report, would it be possible to replicate the conditions(e.g Temperature, concentrations, time, etc.) for all the experiments?Part B: Analyzing the Overall Organization of the Lab ReportComponent UnderEvaluationQuestionYes/NoOverall OrganizationIs the overall organization of the paper clear and effective?Are there any specific portions that are unclear?●Put brackets around the unclear sections and provide suggestionson how to make the section clear, but do not rewrite the sectionCould the clarity be improved by changes in the order of the paper?●If yes, provide suggestions to the authorDoes the language seem appropriate for the intended audience?●If abbreviations or key terms are not defined, then draw theauthor’s attention to thisSTEP 3:●Read the report for a second time, but this time pay close attention to specific details pertaining to the contentand organization of each section.Analyzing the Content and Organization of Each SectionComponent UnderEvaluationQuestionYes/NoTitleDoes the title contain key terms to clue the reader in on the maindependent variable, independent variable, and/or subject underinvestigation?●If no, provide suggestions for a stronger title. Remember, the titleshould avoid nonstandard abbreviations, be succinct, and clear.●The title should have the same key terms as the overall, mainpurpose of the study. Locate the overall purpose statement andunderline the key terms mentioned.AbstractAre all of the necessary elements present (Background w/purpose,experimental approach, summary of major findings,conclusion/implication)?●Highlight the signal phrases in the text that clued you in to eachelement.●If an element is missing, inform the author.
Is the abstract concise (150-200 words), but effective at summarizing themajor points of the paper?●If not, provide suggestions for improvement to the authorIntroductionDoes the introduction follow a funnel structure (Broad statement in thebeginning, and focused statement at the end▽)?Is the overall question/purpose of the paper identifiable?●The question/purpose should address the unknown that theauthor is attempting to identify. This will be in the focused regionnear the end of the introduction section (final paragraph)Has the question and experimental approach been stated in the lastparagraph? Is the power position strong?●The last paragraph is the power position. This is where the authorsignals to the reader the major unknowns that he/she/they wereattempting to solve, the types of experimental approaches thatwere used, and the major finding(s).Are all elements (knowns, unknowns, question/purpose, experimentalapproach, major results) clearly signaled?●Identify and highlight the signal phrases for each element. If anyelement is missing, inform the author.Was the background information relevant to the questions being asked?Materials and MethodsHave all experiments or methods of observation been describedadequately? Is it in story format?●The methods section should not be in pure recipe format (e.g. 1.Obtain a glass tube 2. Draw a line 2 cm from the bottom) or a list ofmaterials (e.g. 12 snails, 3 different colors of chalk, 1 ruler). I●Story format: Why the method was used, how the method wasperformed, what materials were required, equations etc. If not instory format, select one aspect to revise, but do not re-write theentire methods section for the author!●Identify and highlight the signaling phrases within the methods(e.g. To determine the speed…, To assess the purity of thesample…) These will serve as topic sentences and inform thereader of the “why” elementIs the correct voice and tense being used?●Passive voice. The reader does not need to know who performedthe experiment (We performed…, I observed…)●Past tense for completed actions (Snails were placed…)●Present tense for referencing a table (Criteria for selecting subjectsis listed in Table 4…)Are methods detailed enough that the conditions that the study wasperformed in can be repeated by a current or incoming Bio 21 student?Are the experiments and observational methods organized logically?Are all equations used for data analysis reported?●If equations were not used then reference to the statisticalfunction used in Excel or other program must be mentionedIs the main finding stated in the opening paragraph for each experimentalpart (To determine…, To elucidate…, etc.)?●This is the power positionResultsAre there errors in how the data is described, logic, data analysis, orstatistics?
●Make the author aware and provide correction. If the errorappears multiple times, provide correction to the first error anddirect the author’s attention to the other errors.●Are all figures and tables explained sufficiently?Are the numerical values of the dependent variable stated?Raw data should not be reported unless it is in reference to an outlier●Are outliers mentioned?Is the data (dependent variable) being described as a function of theindependent variable (e.g. When the temperature was increased to 40°C,the average CO2produced when sucrose was metabolized by the yeast was450 ± 35 ppm. However, when the yeast were given starch…)?Are all elements present (purpose of experiment, brief statement ofexperimental approach, results, brief interpretation of the results)?Identify and highlight the signaling phrases for each element.●Do all tables have descriptive titles in the correct location and nofigure legends? If statistics were done, is there information at thebottom of the table?Figure evaluation:Are the figure legends acceptable and descriptive (Appropriate title, briefdescription/statement of method used, overall main finding with statisticalvalues or sample size if applicable, and description of symbols orabbreviations if used)?●Are all axes labeled?●Is the correct dependent and independent variable beingrepresented on the graph?●Is the correct type of graph being used?●Are there error bars (if applicable)?●Are there gridlines or titles on the graphs? If yes, inform the authorthat they need to be removed.●Are all tables and figures labeled and numbered properly? Are theyreferenced in the text?Are the results written in past tense?Is the overall goal/purpose of the study reiterated in the openingparagraph (e.g. Our goal was to…)?DiscussionIs the overall interpretation of the results clearly stated in the firstparagraph (e.g. Our results suggest that…)?Is supporting evidence used to back your scientific finding?Reference published experimental evidence that shows a similar outcomeor effect. Citation should be referenced in the text.Are the limitations of the study explained?●Discussion of why outliers exist●Inadequate or insufficient number of resources●Are unexpected finding reported (if applicable)?Does the author end with a strong conclusion statement that indicates thesignificance of the work? The key findings should answer or address thegap in knowled or ge that needed to be filled and provide a future directionor usage for the significant finding
Summarize main findings and indicate their importance (e.g. Insummary…, mutations inProtein Xmay result in enhanced susceptibilityto chemotherapy drugs)●Is the organization of the discussion section logical, clear, and easyto follow?Are all elements signaled (purpose, key findings, summary, significance)?Identify and highlight the signal phrases for each element●Are the references cited properly within the text?ReferencesAre statements being properly cited?If a citation is required, inform the author●Are all the citations in the text listed in the references section?STEP 4:Based on your in-depth analysis and critique, provide comments regarding the style and composition.Type a response tothe author informing him/her/them of the main strengths and weaknesses.Address the following points whenproviding the author your feedback regarding the quality of their work and what specific recommendations you have inregards to revising their manuscript.●Were topic sentences present for each paragraph and did the sentences that follow relate to the topic sentence?●Were the key words repeated and emphasized throughout the document?●Are the transitions between sections and paragraphs logical?●Are there excessive grammar, punctuation, or spelling errors in the document? (more than 5 total)●Are there other strengths or weaknesses that the author should be aware of?