Topics, Tools and Techniques in Paleoclimate Research
Proposal draft evaluation rubric  [written 4/21/04; revised 4/28/04]


Con`struct´ive Adj. 1. constructing or tending to construct or improve or promote development; "constructive criticism"
Crit´i`cism Noun 2. a serious examination and judgment of something; "constructive criticism is always appreciated"
Source: The Free Dictionary (http://www.freedictionary.com)


Goals of this assignment:
  1. Learn to effectively incorporate constructive criticism on your work via peer evaluation.
  2. Offer constructive criticism on your peers' draft proposals.
Product:
  1. A completed draft evaluation for the draft proposal of one of your classmates.  These will be used to grade your classmate's work.  You will also be graded according to the quality of your evaluations: How insightful and helpful can you be?
Schedule:
  1. Draft proposals to be brought to class Wednesday, April 28th.  Bring three copies of your proposal to class.  We will pair off and take 45 minute turns providing constructive written criticism on each other's proposal.  We will then take 15 minute turns  explaining the written comments to each other.  You will take home your peer evaluation to use in developing your final written proposal and your oral presentation.  You will turn in the peer evaluation of your draft along with your final written proposal (see instructions here).
  2. I will also evaluate the evaluations you wrote; rubric is here.
Expectations:
  1. An evaluation rubric, explaining expected outcomes for the draft proposal, is below.  Use this form while writing your own draft proposal to consider whether you have adequately addressed the proposal draft writing assignment.  Since your classmate will have a copy and I will have a copy, you may markup the proposal draft itself it that will be helpful to your classmate.
General remarks:
  1. Since you only have 45 minutes to evaluate your classmate's proposal, you are encouraged to focus on a few major critical points.  Do not waste time on spelling and grammar, for instance, except to note if there are excessive mistakes; writing is particularly clear and concise, etc. 
  2. Although you will focus on the major critical points, do identify specific problems, and suggest specific solutions.
  3. The best constructive criticism is straightforward to address: for instance, ask "what is the uncertainty in the estimation of sea surface temperature from coral Sr/Ca measurements?  How does it compare to the signal amplitude you expect to see?" 
  4. Please write legibly on the forms with a dark pencil or pen so your comments will be easily read, digested and incorporated.


Proposal Draft Evaluation
  1. Big Picture
    1. Has a scientific question to be addressed been clearly identified?  Describe it in a sentence, here:


  1. Argument
    1. Is this an imaginative use of appropriate paleotools to address the scientific question?


    1. What are the major strengths and weaknesses in the approach?  List your suggestions for minimizing or eliminating weaknesses. 






  1. Outcomes
    1. Do the expected products of the research directly address the scientific question?  Give suggestions for improving the ability of the proposed research to do so.





  1. Overall
    1. Rate this draft by assigning 0-2 points for each of the 5 evaluation criteria. Give the sum here: ____.  Comments on this rating, or additional comments on any aspect of the draft proposal not covered in the questions above, can be written below. 







Proposal author : ___________________________
Reviewer's name : ___________________________

Back to TTT04 syllabus.