User:Kkaitlyn0304/Resource room/Christiana Dalton Peer Review

Hi Kaitlyn,

Great work on this article! I think it was a wise choice to take out the sentence that read “At least one study has found that resource rooms focusing on homework completion are an effective delivery model to remedial instruction and build academic skills.” This part is not adding solid evidence to the topic as there is no citation for the research and therefore it is not verifiable. It is also not a strong argument as possibly only one study would prove this claim. Therefore, it’s important that you decided to take this out of the article.

Your additions to the rationale section are strong and enhance the article overall. The sources that you cited are primary sources filled with high quality content. The first source you added, “The Effects of a Structured Classroom Management System in Secondary Resource Classrooms” is verifiable and provides strong evidence that resource rooms are effective in supporting students through structured classroom management systems. The next source you added, “Students' Perceptions of Inclusion and Resource Room Settings” is also a verifiable source. However, I would suggest changing the wording of the last sentence that you added to the rationale section. Instead of saying “In multiple studies, research showed that special education students prefer resource rooms as opposed to having a special education teacher in their general education classroom setting. The most common reason for preferring resource rooms was that they students learned more in these settings.,” I would say “Research shows that students enjoy the ease and straightforward academic environment of the resource room.” I would make these changes because in this part of the article, you are referencing one study that discusses how students enjoy the research room. Therefore, saying “multiple studies” would not be precise language. From my understanding, that research study discusses how students like that the resource room is relaxed and the work is easy, the main idea is not that they necessarily prefer the resource room to their homeroom class environments. This is why I would alter the wording for this part, I don’t think your current edit is fully representative of the main research findings that you cited.I think that you’ve done a great job adding important information and sources. I do think that adjusting the language a bit in the rationale section with those edits could provide a more precise overview of the additional sources that you have added to the article.

I found a source that might be a useful addition to your edits: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1510425. This source, Resource Room Support Services for Regular Teachers by Deborah L. Speece and Colleen J. Mandell, discusses the effectiveness of resource room services in the elementary school setting.

I think that the Resource Rooms in Other Countries section is a great addition to the article! The information that you provided is interesting, useful to the article, and verifiable. It was interesting for me to read about how resource rooms abroad are similar and different to the system we have in the US. I would just suggest adding the rest of the information about Saudi Arabia or cutting that phrase out.

You’ve done a great job with your edits thus far. I think that changing the language a bit in the rationale section could make that part stronger. I think the section you added is important and useful information that will add to the quality of the article. Really nice work!

Take care,

Christiana Dalton

General info
(provide username)
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)