Peer Review Huntington's Disease

Peer Review and Commentary—Science Feature

The Lead:

How does the lead pull the reader in and entice her to read on?  Is it surprising, or are claims made that are common knowledge (note: the reader shouldn’t be able to say, ‘well duh.’)?  Is it effective?  Can it be made more effective?  (think details, human drama, evocative language—why do/don’t you want to read on?)

The lead introduces a sympathetic tone to illustrate how devastating Huntington’s disease is. The claims are not common knowledge and were engaging.

Does the lead give a clear indication of what the story will be about, or rely on mystery, or both?  Would more of a focus be helpful?  Is the reader aware of the importance of a topic—why it matters and is worth learning about?  Adversely, if for more entertainment purposes, is the topic engaging enough to compel reading?

The lead is very clear that the story is about Huntington’s Disease. It is not mysterious.

Organization:

Consider how the story is structured.  Chronological, thematic, chapter/section-based, inquiry-driven?  Is it effective?  Be specific—if a paragraph doesn’t transition well into the next, mention it and provide suggestions for improvement.

The story is very structured and flows well. The science is backed up well with explanations.

Is each paragraph well focused, or are several ideas competing for attention?  How can better focus be achieved?

Each paragraph has its own ideas and they do not mesh with each other.

Are there certain points (factual or narrative based) that require more development?  Are you, the reader, unclear at certain points?  Are any ideas superfluous or distracting?

I liked all of the points, I don’t think they need more development. I followed each point well.

Balance of human interest and information.  Point out sections that become too bogged down in dry facts or heavily specialized concepts.  Adversely, find sections that rely on narrative without giving the reader proper background information and factual points of reference.

I think that you have plenty of prickles. Perhaps you could add more goo to the writing, but the science flows well still without it.

Are claims backed up by examples, evidence, research?  Are sensory details employed effectively?  Are abstractions made concrete through use of examples and details?

There are plenty of examples and statistics, just add a works cited.

How is the story concluded?  Does it wrap up the topic neatly and provide closure?  Does it ask bigger questions or compel the reader to search for more?  Are you left wanting more (and is this a good thing)?  Is it effective?

The story is concluded with the current options and how they are not good enough. There is a need for newer and more effective treatment options for Huntington’s Disease and that is what the author conveys.

Voice and Audience

Characterize the story’s voice and tone?  Is it suitable for the topic?  Is it engaging?  Is it consistent throughout the piece?  If first person POV is used, is this effective or jarring (remember, most story’s should rely on the strength of the topic for engagement, not the evidence of authorial intrusion).

The voice was very scientific and professional except in the lead, where the author wanted to express how awful of a disease it really is.

Try to characterize the audience.  What venue (publication) do you think this story suits?  Why?  Does the author effectively address this audience (too dumbed-down or sensational, too dry and esoteric)?

The audience is an average person that has some experience with science and higher level material. The paper is not for a lower level reader, but it still remains interesting and does not bog down with challenging details.

Mechanics

Mark any ineffective or over-used word/phrase choices.  Mark any repetitive sentence structures.  Offer advice on vocabulary, syntax, and sentence structure.

Mark other grammar issues and typos.

The vocabulary and mechanics were good.

Peer Review Autism

Peer Review and Commentary—Science Feature

The Lead:

How does the lead pull the reader in and entice her to read on?  Is it surprising, or are claims made that are common knowledge (note: the reader shouldn’t be able to say, ‘well duh.’)?  Is it effective?  Can it be made more effective?  (think details, human drama, evocative language—why do/don’t you want to read on?)

The lead takes the narrative of how autism has affected his life, and more importantly his brother’s, and entices the reader into the issues in autism.

Does the lead give a clear indication of what the story will be about, or rely on mystery, or both?  Would more of a focus be helpful?  Is the reader aware of the importance of a topic—why it matters and is worth learning about?  Adversely, if for more entertainment purposes, is the topic engaging enough to compel reading?

The lead is incredibly clear as to what the story is about. The reader does not rely on mystery.

Organization:

Consider how the story is structured.  Chronological, thematic, chapter/section-based, inquiry-driven?  Is it effective?  Be specific—if a paragraph doesn’t transition well into the next, mention it and provide suggestions for improvement.

The structure is good and the narrative flows well through the points. There may be too many questions at the beginning though.

Is each paragraph well focused, or are several ideas competing for attention?  How can better focus be achieved?

The opening paragraph seems a little cluttered. Maybe use less questions and focus more on those.

Are there certain points (factual or narrative based) that require more development?  Are you, the reader, unclear at certain points?  Are any ideas superfluous or distracting?

You developed each point that you addressed.

Balance of human interest and information.  Point out sections that become too bogged down in dry facts or heavily specialized concepts.  Adversely, find sections that rely on narrative without giving the reader proper background information and factual points of reference.

There are no sections that are bogged down with facts.

Are claims backed up by examples, evidence, research?  Are sensory details employed effectively?  Are abstractions made concrete through use of examples and details?

You did good research and your points are all supported with research. You used concrete ideas that were all explained with research and examples.

How is the story concluded?  Does it wrap up the topic neatly and provide closure?  Does it ask bigger questions or compel the reader to search for more?  Are you left wanting more (and is this a good thing)?  Is it effective?

The story is concluded with a reflection of how autism affects everyone somehow. There are bigger questions asked about how we can change the lack of knowledge on the subject in the general public.

Voice and Audience

Characterize the story’s voice and tone?  Is it suitable for the topic?  Is it engaging?  Is it consistent throughout the piece?  If first person POV is used, is this effective or jarring (remember, most story’s should rely on the strength of the topic for engagement, not the evidence of authorial intrusion).

The tone is shown through the care and interest for the topic. The author clearly wants the readers to take interest in the topic.

Try to characterize the audience.  What venue (publication) do you think this story suits?  Why?  Does the author effectively address this audience (too dumbed-down or sensational, too dry and esoteric)?

The audience is everyone. The author wants the topic to be spread as much as possible and does not limit the audience at all.

Mechanics

Mark any ineffective or over-used word/phrase choices.  Mark any repetitive sentence structures.  Offer advice on vocabulary, syntax, and sentence structure.

Mark other grammar issues and typos.

Read the first page again for grammar and a few small spelling things, but after that its fine.

Peer Review Video Games

Peer Review and Commentary—Science Feature

The Lead:

How does the lead pull the reader in and entice her to read on?  Is it surprising, or are claims made that are common knowledge (note: the reader shouldn’t be able to say, ‘well duh.’)?  Is it effective?  Can it be made more effective?  (think details, human drama, evocative language—why do/don’t you want to read on?)

The lead took a very interesting story about a small child who plays violent video game who killed his grandmother in real life. I think that the story was effective because it did not give away the plot at the beginning of the lead.

Does the lead give a clear indication of what the story will be about, or rely on mystery, or both?  Would more of a focus be helpful?  Is the reader aware of the importance of a topic—why it matters and is worth learning about?  Adversely, if for more entertainment purposes, is the topic engaging enough to compel reading?

The lead gives a clear segway into the topic of video game violences, but starts out with mystery. This setup works because the essay needs a little bit of mystery, but not enough to bother the reader. The reader is shown the importance through the mass of examples of shootings in recent history.

Organization:

Consider how the story is structured.  Chronological, thematic, chapter/section-based, inquiry-driven?  Is it effective?  Be specific—if a paragraph doesn’t transition well into the next, mention it and provide suggestions for improvement.

The story is effective because it takes the lead and works out an inquiry about whether shooting games inspire shooting in real life.

Is each paragraph well focused, or are several ideas competing for attention?  How can better focus be achieved?

Each paragraph is well focused and stays on topic throughout. Each paragraph has an individual focus and obeys it.

Are there certain points (factual or narrative based) that require more development?  Are you, the reader, unclear at certain points?  Are any ideas superfluous or distracting?

You wrote that you were going to expand on some of the points you had no touched yet, so expanding on those will complete your points.

Balance of human interest and information.  Point out sections that become too bogged down in dry facts or heavily specialized concepts.  Adversely, find sections that rely on narrative without giving the reader proper background information and factual points of reference.

I think you meshed science with goo very well. Each study contains more text about the study than the data from this study, which is good. You reflect on the data and studies well.

Are claims backed up by examples, evidence, research?  Are sensory details employed effectively?  Are abstractions made concrete through use of examples and details?

There is a lot of evidence for research in this paper. The abstractions are made concrete in this paper through the examples and research that you put in.

How is the story concluded?  Does it wrap up the topic neatly and provide closure?  Does it ask bigger questions or compel the reader to search for more?  Are you left wanting more (and is this a good thing)?  Is it effective?

The story concludes with a reflection on violence in the real world. There are bigger questions asked in this conclusion and it is effective.

Voice and Audience

Characterize the story’s voice and tone?  Is it suitable for the topic?  Is it engaging?  Is it consistent throughout the piece?  If first person POV is used, is this effective or jarring (remember, most story’s should rely on the strength of the topic for engagement, not the evidence of authorial intrusion).

The story has an engaging narrative tone that suits the topic well. The author has consistent voice throughout the story.

Try to characterize the audience.  What venue (publication) do you think this story suits?  Why?  Does the author effectively address this audience (too dumbed-down or sensational, too dry and esoteric)?

The audience is anyone that cares about the issue as well as the general public because they are all affected by this topic.

Mechanics

Mark any ineffective or over-used word/phrase choices.  Mark any repetitive sentence structures.  Offer advice on vocabulary, syntax, and sentence structure.

Mark other grammar issues and typos.

It was good.

Science Feature Narrative Lead

The topic that I am discussing is space imaging and the significance of analyzing bodies in deep space. I will draw my audience in with the narrative about Edwin Hubble and his discovery of the red shift in the universe. This story is scientific, but it doesn’t have equations and turnoffs to average readers. The story is a good segway into the topic because then I can mention how he has a space telescope named after him and that several of these telescopes provide us with all of the information we have about outer space. There is not much conflict that can be addressed in the story, but Hubble probably got criticism from the scientific community as most large and revolutionary ideas sustain. This conflict can be poised as an uphill battle in the narrative and show the readers that Hubble persevered and showed the scientific community that his ideas were right. The ideas had a huge impact on the community and the way that people went about looking at the stars. I can incorporate this context to help illustrate the importance of space imaging to the audience. I think this story can effectively gather interest to a broad audience because space is a topic that gathers natural curiosity and because the story addresses the topic of the paper well. Space is the vast unknown that everyone in the world sees and admires. Curiosity to know what is up there is hardwired into everyone and the right introduction can gather interest quickly.

Science Feature Outline

The topic of my science feature is space imaging. I am going to start with the story of Edwin Hubble and the original reason that we knew the universe is expanding. This story is integral to the topic of space imaging because it is the reason that we sent out telescopes and decided to observe the universe. Hubble’s discovery that the universe is expanding was so important that the most known telescope in space is named after him. The angle that I am going to address space imaging with is why we decide to explore the universe through it and what methods we use to do so. I aim to find the significance in different bodies in space and what they mean for humanity. What do planets orbiting in other stars’ habitable zones mean for us? I do not want to focus on whether extraterrestrial life exists or not, but I would like to focus on how we can tell these worlds can support life using space imaging. I want to explore the different filters and signatures that we use on these telescopes that give us results. The main focus of my paper will be to explore the significance of space imaging and connect that back to the normal human being. I think that will strengthen the relevance of my ideas and will interest a broader range of people. Everyone has an interest in space because there are so many unanswered questions. Some of the things that I do not know are which filters and lenses that are used on the telescopes. I also do not know which other space telescopes we use and what they specialize in. The main ones I will start to concern with are Kepler, Hubble, and Chandra.

Student Science Feature Comparisons

               The two student science features that I read were Abu Ghraib and The Neanderthal: An exploration into modern people’s common ancestry. Both of these essays were exciting to read because they used elevated word choice and interesting approaches to their topics. The essay entitled Abu Ghraib could have talked about military brutality as the main focus of the writing, but instead they went from a psychological approach and entertained the idea of why military prison guards may gain such a mentality. I believe formulating an interesting viewpoint and angle to the topic is crucial to gaining and maintaining the readers’ interest throughout your writing. That is what made these papers effective from an overall standpoint. The Neanderthal was very interesting because it was very personal at times. The author talks about how interest in this topic has affected his knowledge and opinion as well as how it has helped him learn about his ancestral heritage. An author’s impact on the paper can make it much more enjoyable to read and the author of the Neanderthal paper certainly accomplished that feat. His or Her use of this impact makes the readers interested in how it affects them. For instance, they ask “where am I from?” and “Could I be a descendent of a Neanderthal?”. When the reader is actively engaged in the writing, then they read it with more intent to reflect on it after they are finished. The goals of these writers were to get their readers from the start to the finish with a level of interest that would cause them to reflect on what the author had written. They both succeeded through their usage of author’s impact on the topic and through their interesting angles they addressed the topic from.

All is fair in love and twitter response

               “All is fair in Love and Twitter” by Nick Blinton takes a scientific topic and analyzes the social and economic aspects of it. Twitter is a social media application, so it is the cross pollination of social connectivity between people as well as a mass of code written by tech-savvy computer scientists. Blinton manages to utilize an approach that focuses on the people behind the company and their many creative differences rather than the science and engineering that stands behind the application. Blinton chooses to appeal to a more general audience when addressing his readers rather than the narrower technology crazed group that the title suggests it would please at first glance. This choice positively affected his writing because he covered an angle that is not generally covered and he chose to follow research that is not the same as everyone else’s. Differences in writing that make similar ideas seem different are what keep the papers interesting and the reader’s attention longer. I noticed that Blinton chose to write a lengthier piece about the twitter founders, but he was able to make that choice because he captured the attention of the readers by attacking the topic from a unique angle. In terms of the prickles that the author uses to make his story flow, he hardly uses any. There are seldom comments about the length of code or the marketing numbers that Twitter and similar companies can boast. Much like the approach Stephen Hawking took in his book “A Brief History of Time,” Blinton uses no equations or math in his writing, but altogether it remains a scientific topic. He still uses a mix of prickles in his story in order to keep the audience from drowning in goo, but the story remains mostly a narrative about the conflict between executives in the twitter company.