User:Rmeaso/Bilingual education/Mfs2162 Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

Rmeaso


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Rmeaso/Bilingual education


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Bilingual education

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? - The new lead touches on the new content added - it seems like you are focusing on the models of bilingual instruction and adding in the short sentence about there being different models was a good primer for that.
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? - The introductory sentence is very clear and appropriately describes what bilingual education is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? - There is a brief mention on models of bilingual education but it might be helpful to provide a short definition of what "model" actually means. I think that would help with the clarity of what you are preparing because I don't think there was a definition of what a model is anywhere in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? - I think the lead is VERY concise, but like I mentioned earlier, adding the introduction to what a model is would help prepare me for what is coming up later.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added relevant to the topic? - Yes, I think you did a great job of adding in new content that really simplifies but enhances the article. The explanation for why you opted to include the new models was really good too.
 * Is the content added up-to-date? - Yes, everything is more or less from within the past 10 years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - I'm unsure if you are taking out the parts about immersion, translanguaging, transitional, etc but it might be worthwhile to leave some of that content in since it does seem relevant to the topic overall. That said, all the things you did include are really important and make sense to include.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? - I would say yes, we often think of education in English as the default but bilingual education is a part of American education system as well (just not as represented). I'm unsure if you plan to include deaf ed or not - but I think if you opted not to that would be ok as that is a very complex topic all on it's own.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added neutral? - Yes but just be careful about using italics to emphasize since it can seem biased (people on the internet will always read into things, even if that is not what you said). This sentence is the one that caught my attention, "English as a second language (ESL) programs are not considered bilingual..." just because of how nitpicky people can be when they already have a pre-conceived idea and want their confirmation bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? - I am sure you intend to include ed neuroscience research in this but at this point it seems underrepresented. Also as mentioned earlier, deaf ed could be included but I do think I would likely shy away from that (and wouldn't fault you for doing that either) because of all the extra information that goes into explaining how it's bilingual when many people don't fully recognize ASL as a language in it's own right.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Does the content accurately reflect what the cited sources say? (You'll need to refer to the sources to check this.)
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? - Yes, overall it's very clear. Just want to mention using "both/all" in the lead since I think some people will get hung up on that - it might be best to just say "both" since you are focusing on bilingual. I think "all" may convey multilingual education. This is just a very small point.

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


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? - You did mention that you might included some sort of chart/infographic and I think that might be helpful. It's just another way to make it easy to look at very quickly and collect the important information.

Overall I think you did a lot of overhaul and I like the new direction you took! The original article was not easy to follow even though it had a lot of information. I think the article would benefit if you can expand a little bit more on parts you are including if you are removing some of those sections that are still present. Great job and I'm excited to see your final product!