Peer Review of a Draft Project

PEER REVIEW 1

Institution affiliation:

Peer review of a draft project

This paper is a peer review of your draft project about the SecondWorld Was and possible influence on third industrial revolution. Thepaper briefly describes the events of the Second World War aspertains to their significance to the industrial revolution at thattime. You use specific examples to back up the main ideas of thepaper, as well as using secondary information to substantiate thearguments. In this regards, the peer assessment pursues to identifyyour paper’s strengths, weaknesses and use of language. There arealso some point for improvement that I will suggest as the reviewmaterializes.

Strengths

You started off your paper with a good title, which draws theattention of the reader to what the content will be all about. Inaddition to the grabbing of the reader’s attention, the title is aperfect explanation of your paper’s main thesis. Additionally, youselected an area to be covered, which has not been covered by otherauthors on the topic. The paper is also very descriptive, as it hasthe capacity to lead a reader with little or no knowledge about theevents of the Second World War. It is also easy to read and the flowis quite smooth. Additionally, you have backed up your ideas wellwith some counter-arguments that make the paper interesting to read.

Additionally, throughout the paper, you have used examples that backup the essence of your thesis, which is a significant tactic forwriting a good academic paper. Integrating the events and facts ofthe First World War was a good tact to building arguments thatsupported the main ideas of your paper. By doing this, the reader isable to create a picture of their own regarding the topic and gets aneasy time flowing along with your ideas. This helps to clear anysuspicions of substandard of importance is that you wound up thepaper with remarks that backed up your thesis statement.

Weaknesses

The major problems in the manuscript are basic grammar andreadability, lack of substantial statistical analysis andinconsistency in the methodology. Given your topic research area, Itend to believe that there is need for you to have valuable data toback up your claims. Lack of this makes your paper lack substance andhence, become unrefined. There exists a superfluity of materialregarding the Second World War and industrialization, for instance,the evolution of industrialization in Europe and America. This is whyI believe that using such information to back up your arguments wouldmake your paper more interesting and convincing to read.

Your methodology and consistency with writing formatting is wanting.Firstly, your paper’s citing and referencing needs work. In properacademic writing and formatting, one has to put in-text citations andcorresponding references. You only put your sources in the referencessection without duly acknowledging the authors in the in-textcitations. Additionally, you did not consistently provide rebuttalsto challenge your counter-arguments, which would add a great deal ofprofessionalism to your paper. Finally, you made too many grammarmistakes in the paper, for example confusing tenses, weak sentenceconstruction and use of wrong verbs. I hope that this critique willbe helpful in making your paper better for academic purposes andpossible publication in peer reviewed journals.