User:Jerseryq/Education in the United States/Ahmyers10 Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing? (provide username) Jerseryq
 * Link to draft you're reviewing: User:Jerseryq/sandbox

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer?
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
Not creating a new article - not applicable.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content added up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
'I am glad you are providing a more historical background to education, and especially glad you are connecting it to groups that continue to be marginalized. That being said, I think there is room for more description on that history - each time period you include could benefit from some more detail. If you add more information about the 1600's, the Industrial Revolution, immigrants in recent times, etc. that could make the understanding stronger.'

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
'The writing is very neutral and unbiased, so no need to change anything there. But again, the history seems to be underrepresented and could go deeper into explanation of education if it is standing alone as its own section.'

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
'All the sources are recent and trusted - the links work and they all seem to be scholarly. The only thing I would suggest is that you keep your citations consistent. For example, I think one of the sentences is still formatted in MLA [(Cassidy, Ortlieb, and Grote-Garcia 96)], so just make sure to cite it through Wikipedia before transferring it the actual page.'

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
Gramatically, there could be a smoother flow to the information (which I think may be able to be achieved through simply more information on the subject itself) and minor edits to run on sentences.

If I was to make any edits this is what they would be:

'In early U.S. colonial history, teaching children to read was  for the purpose of understanding the Bible and  the responsibility  of educating them fell on the parents.   However this dynamic shifted  in the mid 1600's  when '' Massachusetts Law of 1642 and Connecticut law of 1650 required that not only children but also servants and apprentices were required to learn how to read.  Later in  the industrial revolution, there began a rise in nursery schools, preschools and kindergarten to formally teach children.  Additionally in more recent U.S. history , there has been  a notable  increase of immigrants in urban cities,  where  the majority of children  do not know  the English language and thus  fall behind their peers in school  (Cassidy, Ortlieb, and Grote-Garcia 96).  However , a number of resources were created to support socioeconomically disadvantaged students (see Literacy in the United States)  in combatting this issue .'''

Images and Media
Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
No new media - not applicable.

For New Articles Only
If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.


 * Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject?
 * How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject?
 * Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

New Article Evaluation
Not creating a new article - not applicable.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?

Overall evaluation
'Similar to the literacy additions, the information is very valuable, interesting and supports the article in a productive way. However it feels limited in the amount of information presented. Objectivity and citing are good with only a few minor changes in grammar, but I think the biggest thing to focus on is filling out the description of the history to make it more complete and expand what those facts or events communicate in a more detailed way. Nonetheless very interesting information!'