Posted: March 13th, 2023

Term Paper based on a Field Interview Assignment

Term Paper based on a Field Interview Assignment

For your term paper, you may write a comprehensive review, or a research proposal, related to any of the topics covered throughout the course. If you choose to write a review paper, it must have a clear thesis and present a novel argument or synthesis of the ideas presented and/or discussed in the course (e.g., you may choose to compare, contrast, and evaluate two competing theories). If you choose to write a research proposal, it must include an introduction providing the context and rationale for the study, and a methods section (participants, materials, procedures, proposed analyses, and hypothesized results). Your paper must be a maximum of 10-12 pages (double-spaced, 12-point font, 1-inch margins all around) not including the title page, abstract, or references. The paper must be written in APA format (see Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th Edition, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association).

Peer Review
You will be required to submit a rough draft of your Final paper and your Field Interview by March 22, 2023. Upon submission, you will receive drafts from other peers to review. The purpose of the peer review is to help your peer improve his/her paper. You will be evaluated on the quality of your suggestions and the thoroughness of your reading. Failure to submit a draft will result in not having the opportunity to participate in peer review and losing the mark. This will be worth a total of 10%. In reviewing the paper, you may want to follow the six section headings listed below.

1. What is good about the paper (in being critical, we must not forget to be encouraging and supportive as well!)?
2. Is the purpose of the paper clearly laid-out in a succinct introduction?
3. Are there any terms or concepts that need further clarification?
4. Is the evidence that the author provides to support his/her position good? Sufficient?
5. Are there other factors that the author might want to consider (other types of evidence, other points of view, etc.)?
6. Anything else that might be helpful to the author.

Write the peer review as though it were a letter to the author. Speak to him or her directly; there is no need to refer to him/her in the third person. There is no need to summarize the work either. The author knows what he/she has written. Include in the peer review only suggestions on how to improve the paper and what you have found valuable in the work. If you wish, the peer review can be written in bullet format (as long as you can still clearly express your suggestions to the author). I would expect that the review would be about 2-3 pages long.

Dear [Author],

Thank you for sharing your paper with me. I found your paper to be interesting and engaging. You have done an excellent job of presenting your ideas in a clear and concise manner. Your writing style is engaging, and your arguments are well-supported by evidence. I would like to offer some constructive feedback that I hope will help you to improve your paper.

What is good about the paper?
I appreciated the clarity of your writing, and the way you have presented your ideas in a logical and coherent manner. Your thesis statement is clear, and your arguments are well-supported by evidence. I also appreciated the way you have integrated your field interview into your paper, which has provided valuable insights into your research question.

Is the purpose of the paper clearly laid-out in a succinct introduction?
Yes, I found your introduction to be clear and succinct. You have provided a clear overview of your research question, and you have outlined the key issues that you will be addressing in your paper.

Are there any terms or concepts that need further clarification?
I think you have done a good job of defining key terms and concepts, but there were a few instances where I felt that some terms could benefit from further clarification. For example, when you used the term “social capital,” I wasn’t entirely clear on what you meant by this term. It might be helpful to provide a brief explanation of this term to help your readers better understand your argument.

Is the evidence that the author provides to support his/her position good? Sufficient?
Yes, I found the evidence you provided to be sufficient and well-supported. You have provided a good mix of theoretical and empirical evidence to support your arguments.

Are there other factors that the author might want to consider (other types of evidence, other points of view, etc.)?
One area where I think you might want to consider providing additional evidence is in relation to the limitations of your study. While you have acknowledged some limitations in your paper, it might be helpful to provide some additional evidence to support your claims.

Anything else that might be helpful to the author.
Overall, I think you have done an excellent job with your paper. If I were to offer one piece of advice, it would be to make sure that you clearly articulate the implications of your research. In other words, what are the practical implications of your findings? How can they be applied in real-world settings? If you can address these questions in your conclusion, I think it will help to strengthen your paper even further.

Once again, thank you for sharing your paper with me. I hope you find this feedback helpful, and I wish you all the best as you continue to work on your paper.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]