User talk:Vicentiagyau/sandbox

Selecting Possible Articles
Articles for Area (Ghana): 1. Ghana 2. Education in Ghana Vicentiagyau (talk) 19:33, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Articles for Sector (Education): 1. State School 2. Leadership Development Vicentiagyau (talk) 09:08, 1 February 2018 (UTC) 3. Poverty reduction Vicentiagyau (talk) 20:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Evaluating two articles
Education in Ghana

This article is part of two wiki projects; WikiProject Education and WikiProject Ghana/Africa. The article was nominated for social sciences and society good article, however, it was unable to meet the criteria and was thus rejected. This article is rated C Class, High importance. Everything in this article is relevant and useful. There is a lot of background information and specific characteristics/features of the Ghanaian education system in this article. The article did not talk about private schools and institutions in Ghana and their contribution towards education in Ghana. This provides an avenue for further discussion and further learning, as I will have the opportunity to include it in the article and further the discourse relating to private education in Ghana. The article is generally fair, without any bias. It basically provides information on the Ghanaian educational system, how it operates and the various characteristics of education in Ghana. Most of the in-text citations work, however, some of the citations do not. One particular citation/reference led to a page that does not exist. Some of the links took a long time to load and open to the articles. Generally, the links supported the claims made in the article. Usually, the academic journal citations provided great evidence to support claims made in the article. Claims made were supported by both academic and online articles. There seemed to be more pdf and online sources than books. Most of these sources were fairly reliable and worthy of citation. There was also a lot of statistical sources cited. It would be good to add a Wikipedia link that lists the number of universities or tertiary in institutions in Ghana (List of universities in Ghana), just to add more information to the article. The conversations on the talk page are mostly about restructuring the article. One comment claimed that the article was messy and needed to be restructured and rearranged. Wikipedia does not allow for individual comments and thoughts about a subject, and this is different from my learning in GPP so far. GPP encourages me to critically think about issues and topics concerning development and make my own synthesis and conclusions, but Wikipedia articles do not encourage that.

Leadership development

This article is rated B-Class, and of Top-importance. It is part of the WikiProject Business. For further learning, including a section about leadership training in the education of elementary school students will open up a discourse about the role of leadership training in education and people will be able to learn more about how leadership training in education can lead to poverty alleviation. The article clearly mentions that some words and claims are vaguely phrased, indicating bias and or unverifiable information. In terms of citations and link, this article needs additional citations and verifiable sources to supports sentences and claims made in the article. Most of the sources are not credible enough and do not necessarily support the claims of sentences made. This article needs a lot of citations and needs to be supported by verifiable and credible sources. Most of the in-text citations work. There are a few citations, with links that work as well, but then again, most of the sources are not credible enough. It would be great to add a Wikipedia link that introduces the concept of leadership training in education, as a way of poverty reduction. There were only two comments on the talk page. One mentioned that the article was inconsistent and the other mentioned that the article was odd. Overall, the major problem with this article is that its citation and sources need to be improved tremendously and worked on. Again, just like I mentioned in the article for education, it is difficult for me to remain unbiased in my claims and present the many sides of an issue. GPP has taught me to be critical and make observations and comments about an issue, forming a strong argument and finding proof for an argument, so being unbiased on Wikipedia is difficult and different for me.

Vicentiagyau (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

=
Vicentia's Peer Review: (see Vicentia's Sandbox) ===== FrancessO (talk) 02:38, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Main Space Final Thoughts
I really like the additions you have put on main space for Education NGOs. I particularly like the chart that you added. I would just suggest that in your introduction, I do not think you need to have "NGO" as an acronym when in the lines before it the author has already written non-governmental organization (NGO). Either write out the word or use the acronym. I am also not sure you need to label the first part of this wiki article as "introduction" as it is implied since it is the first part of the article. There is also a comma misplacement before the "which" in the section labeled "Effects of Globalization on Education."

These are small suggestions and are in no way a final thought on what you need to do. You are the author and have been working with this material all semester, so you are have the final say it what is appropriate and what is not.

best,

(Rbuell (talk) 05:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC))

Zecheng's Peer Review
1. Overall, the article is very comprehensive, and each point is explained in such detail as to give the reader a solid overview of each concept mentioned. Relevant points are always cited in correct wikipedia conventions and using relevant and valid sources, which adds further credibility to the article. I would like to see more expansion on this interesting point in “Neocolonialism”: “In reality its economic system and thus its political policy is directed from outside”. What does “from the outside” mean? It may also be worth expanding a little on this point to clarify the two opposing positions of economists: “While most economists hold the view of aid as the driver for economic growth and development, others argue that aid has rather led to increasing poverty and decreasing economic growth of poor countries”.

2. Although all the information/content is very solid, at times the article loses consistency of flow. For instance, in this section: “Foreign aid kills local industries in developing countries.[5] Foreign food aid in particular, is responsible for the death of the local farm industries in poor countries who receive food aid from the developed world. Local farmers end up. Going out of business because they cannot compete with the abundance of cheap imported aid food.” The sentences and grammar need some revision, and there has to be a bit more continuity between the sentences as at the moment they seem like abrupt and slightly disconnected statements. Overall the whole article could benefit from proofreading to correct minor mechanics errors like these.

3. The content and citations are outstanding, and the author has researched the topic very well. The most important thing to concentrate on now is the flow and mechanics of the writing, which is mostly already very good. At times I felt the article was somewhat biased in regards to the position that foreign aid has a negative impact; I would have liked to hear more of the other side, which argues it is positive.

4. The structure does make sense, although improved flow would benefit the whole piece. It may also be worth incorporating something on how foreign aid could be beneficial. This point came a little abruptly: “Aid actually damages economic growth and development before ‘traction’ is attained.[4]”.

5. I noticed the author made a real effort to back points up with credible sources, which is a point I will take away for my own piece as it adds a lot of credibilities.

6. I would like to see a more balanced position regarding the positive/negative impact of foreign aid. Zechengding (talk) 08:45, 8 April 2019 (UTC) Zechengding (talk) 08:46, 8 April 2019 (UTC)