Weblog Article Peer Review Form B – Second Review
Writer’s Name M. Glas
Assessor’s name J. De Groot
Date 10-10-2007
Rating Scale: 1 = Yes 2 = Somewhat 3 = No
Rate the article by giving a 1, 2 or 3 for each question. Read the article once to get
a general idea of what it is about, then read it a second time to rate it.
1. Is the topic interesting? 1
2. Is the title original and appropriate?1
3. Is the introduction complete? 1
4. Is the body of your article complete?1
5. Is the conclusion well-developed?1
6. Is the article well-organized overall? 1
7. Is the article easy to understand? 1
8. Is the article interesting to read? 1
9. Has any plagiarised material been removed? 1 ( there was no plagiarized material)
Do you feel that the writer has improved the article? Why or why not? Be specific.
-Yes, he changed the title of the article
Has the writer changed the article adequately according to your suggestions for
improvement of your first assessment? Describe the changes and state specifically
whether you think they are an improvement.
-Yes, because he changed the title, the article is now more attractive to read.
Are you happy to have this article on your weblog? Why or why not? Be specific.
-Yes, because is easy to read and a good subject for the O’Neill project.
