CS 552 Fall 2008
Position Paper Review Assignment

Overview

In this assignment, you will review 2 of your classmates' papers. The goal of this assignment is to give you practice doing more in-depth reviews than before, as well as get feedback on your position paper. In order to make the reviews as realistic as possible, DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME ON THE REVIEW. The set of papers is available at the end of this document.

Due Date

Midnight, Wed November 5, 2008

Email your reviews in PDF format to the instructor and the TA.

The Review

For each review you will have to provide (1) a set of numerical scores for the 9 main sub-topics below. (2) Comments to the author how to improve the paper, and (3) comments to the professor on what you think is the overall quality of the work. For the numerical scores, a 10=positive, good, well done, and 1=negative or poorly executed.

1. Numerical scoring. Give 9 scores from 1-10, for items (a)-(i), for a total 90 possible points.

   1. The position well defined. (10=crystal clear, narrow, manageable. 1=can't understand anything)

      1. The paper defines an issue with genuine controversy and uncertainty

      2. The issue is narrow enough to be manageable

      3. The position quantified, that is, put in numerical terms (if possible)

   2. The communities of people involved with the position (and their positions) are identified. (10=specific groups of people identified, 1=no groups identified).

   3. The opposing positions are clearly articulated. (10=counter positions clearly stated, 1=no counter position defined).

   4. Rebuttals are given to the opposing positions. (10=Strong counter-counter arguments given, 1=only arguments supporting the position are included).

   5. Evidence is used to support the position (10=irrefutable evidence, 1 = opinions only).

      1. Quantitative evidence based on experimentation are included.

      2. General facts about the systems in question are included.

      3. Anecdotes are included.

   6. The paper logically organized (10=Little/no effort on the reader's part is required to follow the paper, 1=the paper is incomprehensible).

      1. It is easy to follow the position, counter-positions and evidence.

      2. There are transitions between sections.

   7. A consistent writing style and tone is used throughout. (10=Consistent voice used, 1=multiple people must have written this paper).

   8. Correct vocabulary and conforming standard practices are used. (10=Little/no effort on the reader's part is required to follow the paper, 1=the paper is incomprehensible).

      1. Are the grammar and spelling correct?

      2. Is a consistent tense used throughout?

   9. Most importantly, a skeptic would be convinced, or at least swayed, to the position in the paper.

2. Comments to the author on how to improve the paper.

3. Comments to the professor and author on the quality of the work as a position paper.

The papers are below: