peer review
Mathematics
In the week following the first part of the assignment complete the following peer review (Links to an external site.) of the other members of your assigned Canvas group. You must include feedback in the reviews that will enable the writers to improve their final submittal. As a minimum, address the following after considering the approach and justification of your peers’ work:
- Did your classmate use the appropriate header for their memorandum? Is the information in it correct? If not, specify what is incorrect. Is the subject line clear and concise? If not, offer an idea of what needs to be stated differently.
- Are there parts of their approaches and justifications that are unclear to you? Specify what part(s) of their memorandum, and why it is unclear. What changes would help to make it clearer?
- What aspects of their responses were particularly helpful in making their memorandum clear?
- Did your peers utilize a professional writing style as outlined in the assignment? Provide examples of how they did or did not meet this requirement.
- Did their use of visuals in their document help make their ideas more clear?
At the end of your review, offer an honest assessment of how your peers completed their assignments. Utilizing the exact language below, indicate whether they:
- Met minimum writing requirements
- Exceeded minimum writing requirements
- Did not meet minimum writing requirements
To complete reviews, reply to the posted work of each of your group members. Feedback MUST be actionable, that is something specific that they can continue to do, do more of, change or add to their work. For example “your analysis was good” or “your analysis was weak” does not provide feedback they can work with; Use “How to write a business memorandum” as a resource to determine specifically what makes the document strong, what may be missing that needs to be added or when a part of the document is not formatted correctly or achieving what it should. Specific feedback may look like:
- Including the provided data in text form is long and difficult to read, consider using a table instead.
- The second sentence of your analysis does not read clearly to me, consider rewording it.
- You omitted the recommendation in the summary, it should be included there.
GRADING RUBRIC – 10 points total (assignments 2.3 and 2.4 will be graded together)
Memorandum header is included & formatted per reading – 1 point
Executive Summary is included – 1 point
Memorandum is divided into sections with titles – 1 point
A minimum of one graphic is included – 1 point
A conclusion is included – 1 point
Reviews are completed – 1 point
Reviews include actionable feedback – 2 points
The specific required evaluative language is included at the end of each review – 2 points
