User:BarbourLA/Virtual manipulatives for mathematics/Cagos068 Peer Review

General info

 * Hi Lauren! Great article, it was a pleasure to read :)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?

BarbourLA


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BarbourLA/Virtual_manipulatives_for_mathematics?preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Virtual manipulatives for mathematics

Evaluate the drafted changes
 Content Guiding questions: 

Is the content added relevant to the topic?

'The content is all very relevant to the topic. Sub-headings are used to specify elaborations of related content.'

Is the content added up-to-date?

While there are a few sources from the early to mid 2000s, the bulk of the sources are recent within the last few years.

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

'From what I can tell this is a great discussion on advantages and disadvantages of using mathematics manipulatives, and what that may look like for special education. Content is relevant and nothing seems out of place.'

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

'The article addresses special education for students with learning disabilities which could be considered an underrepresented population. Perhaps a note about equity and technology could be included in the disadvantages section - perhaps something referencing Selwyn's book we had to read?'

 Tone and Balance Guiding questions: 

Is the content added neutral?

The content is very neutral, advantages and disadvantages are both presented and discussed.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No there are not.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think both positive and negative viewpoints are equally represented.

Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No, this article provides factual information about virtual manipulatives for mathematics and in special education.

 Sources and References Guiding questions: 

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

'Not all content is backed up by more than 1 source. There are a few paragraphs that only have one source, such as the advantages and disadvantages section which are each supported by 1 source. Perhaps an additional source for the advantages and disadvantages section would be helpful.'

Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)

Yes, from what I can tell the content effectively reflects the sources.

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

The sources are definitely thorough and very specifically address virtual manipulatives for mathematics.

Are the sources current?

A bulk of the sources are current (within the last few years).

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

From what I can tell the authors names seem diverse.

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites?

All the sources are peer-reviewed articles.

Check a few links. Do they work?

The links seem to work, except the word "student engagement."

 Organization Guiding questions: 

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes the content is very clear and concise, and easy to follow along.

Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?

I did not find any errors.

Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

'Yes, the structure is well-organized. Advantages and disadvantages presented before special education seems like a good fit.'

 Overall impressions: 

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?

The existing article is more of an introduction to virtual manipulatives, so I think this section could be useful to elaborate on the strengths and weaknesses of virtual manipulatives and what they look like in special education.

What are the strengths of the content added?

'As mentioned just above, the discussion of advantages and disadvantages is very strong. As well as the specific section on special education, which provides an additional discussion on the practicality of virtual manipulatives for math.'

How can the content added be improved?

I think the only thing that could be improved is including a couple of additional sources for the advantages and disadvantages section.