User:Mgmari19/English-language learner/Amchu24 Peer Review

Peer review

Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects:

Lead

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic?
Is the content added up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Are images well-captioned?
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

For New Articles Only

If the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
What are the strengths of the content added?
How can the content added be improved?

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Peer review of "Homemaking"
Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Additional Resources

Check out the Editing Wikipedia PDF for general editing tips and suggestions.

General info

Whose work are you reviewing?

Mgmari19

Link to draft you're reviewing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mgmari19/English-language_learner?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
Link to the current version of the article (if it exists): English-language learner

Evaluate the drafted changes

Hi Mariela,

Great job with the article edits. I am going off of the article draft in your sandbox and assumed most is original content. If some of my feedback doesn’t apply, please disregard.

Lead

Overall: Very clear explanation, good use of sources, wording clarifications
When possible, see if you can shorten sentences for clarity.
- "Several methods have been suggested to effectively teach ELLs including: bringing their home cultures into the classroom, involving them in language-appropriate content-area instruction, and integrating literature into their learning programs". —> “Several effective ELL teaching methods include…"
I think the word “some” can be taken out if the entities are stated or cited
- You can say "educational advocates [such as ____] classify these students as non-native English speakers or emergent bilingual.^[1]
Does "ELL achievement” mean the general success of ELL students or is this a specific term? If it’s a separate term/concept, please clarify

History

Overall: Interesting content, good use of sources, take a step back to see paragraph flow
Main question: Consider what you want the focus of the history section to be. I like that it covers both the terminology and the policy aspect, although I think these two could be broken up into sub-sections. While one is more how the term came about, the other is about the impacts and role in institutional policy.
- Going through the different policy changes is a really interesting – see if you can build off existing information to help elaborate in the second paragraph (can you cite other wiki articles? or link the text of the specific bills in the footnotes).
- Try to add a line to each of the bills mentioned if possible or cite out for more context.
- If interested, add photos for the history section – the English-only instruction law from 1872 may have some powerful photos and media archive websites.

Let me know if you have any questions about this feedback. Great job and good luck on final revisions!

^ García, Ofelia; Kleifgen, Jo Anne; Falchi, Lorraine (2008). "From English Language Learners to Emergent Bilinguals". Campaign for Educational Equity.

[1] García, Ofelia; Kleifgen, Jo Anne; Falchi, Lorraine (2008). "From English Language Learners to Emergent Bilinguals". Campaign for Educational Equity.

[1]