Why do we peer review?

A key component of practicing science is reviewing the work of our peers. This helps to ensure the integrity of scientific work by having another scientist who has similar expertise evaluate the strength of research findings. Often, this means a scientist may need to go back and run additional experiments, make additional observations, or reevaluate how they articulated or interpreted their findings. While it can be extra work, it invariably makes the work of scientists better. The peer review process itself can be challenging, because it requires careful critical thinking about the work and writing of another person. By practicing peer review in this course, we learn how to become better at critically and constructively evaluating the work of another and communicating that feedback in a way that is useful to our peers.

Peer review of field notebook

For this peer review exercise you will review and provide feedback on the field notebook of a peer. For each of these, you will exchange notebooks with a classmate, read through their recorded observations and reflections, and provide a written response. This will give you a chance to see alternative approaches you might be interested in trying with your own field notebook as well as an opportunity for you to make suggestions to your peers to help them grow in their observation and reflection skills. Spend some time reviewing what they have recorded. Make note of things you like as well as areas you feel they could develop more deeply. You can also offer ideas for other approaches they could try in their field notebook based on your own experience with it so far. Feedback should be constructive. It is fine to offer criticisms, but try to offer them with the lens of growth and how it can help your peer improve in their observations. If there are things you feel they are doing well, be sure to communicate that too! You will provide a typed summary of your impressions as well as any questions that arose while you were reviewing their field notebook for them to think about going forward. See Appendix 3 for rubric with peer review guidelines.

Formatting: 1 inch margins, 12 point Calibri font, and double spaced. Your first and last name should be placed in the header of the document, not in the main body. All assignments should be submitted as .docx or .pdf file types. Files should be named thoughtfully and intentionally e.g., Lastname_PeerReview1.docx

Peer review of peer professional materials

This peer review exercise will examine a peer’s professional development materials which includes their email template, their CV, and their personal statement. Feedback should be provided on all three components, but focus the most on the personal statement, as this is the most challenging piece to develop. A good personal statement tells a story, gives a sense of who the writer is, and what experiences they have that make them a good fit for the position to which they are applying. Consider whether their statement communicates a story. Which parts of the story are most compelling? Where would do they need more detail, where do they need less detail? It should also describe why they are a good fit—do they draw from their CV appropriately? Are there pieces referenced on their CV you would like to see incorporated into the personal statement? See Appendix 3 for rubric with peer review guidelines.

Formatting: 1 inch margins, 12 point Calibri font, and double spaced. Your first and last name should be placed in the header of the document, not in the main body. All assignments should be submitted as .docx or .pdf file types. Files should be named thoughtfully and intentionally e.g., Lastname_PeerReview1.docx.