To: Alexander Clements
From: Trisha Bhamra
Peer Review: Proposal for Determining the Feasibility of Moving Computer Science Classes to a Hybrid Educational Model
Thank you for your submission of the ENGL 301 Research proposal assignment. The document was informative and made for an enjoyable read. Please see the comments and suggestions for improvement in the review below.
First Impressions
- The introduction does a good job of establishing the parameters of the assignment and provides a relatable scenario to many potential readers.
- Overall, the proposal is easy to digest for a non-technical audience.
Organization
- The bolded subheadings are well used in organizing the document. It allows for smooth transition into different parts of the research proposal.
Introduction
- The introduction to the assignment was well thought out. It could be beneficial to touch on the different learning models (remote, hybrid, and in-person educational models) used in university setting.
Statement of the problem
- Good description of the problem- it seems the concern is that too much time is wasted with in person classes amidst hybrid/remote classes.
- The acronym UBC is used without explaining with it stands for.
Proposed solution
- Proposing the hybrid model would allow students to have the choice of partaking in courses online or in person. Thus, making better use of their time. Good proposal.
Scope
- Good list of questions to investigate. Please see some suggestions below to improve on the questions:
- Regarding Q1- The time savings or lack thereof and cost savings should be considered for the instructors and university as well.
- Regarding Q2-4 – The perspective of the instructor and or institution should be considered as well
- The above suggestion should help provide a more objective view on the topic while reducing bias. A research paper should consider opposing points of view and then conclude. It is easy to find/ research information that supports our own bias.
Methods
- Surveys and interviews are a great way to gather primary research. What measures will be in place to reduce bias in conducting these interviews and surveys?
Qualification
- Good list of qualifications.
Conclusion
- Good concluding statement as well.
Grammar/Typos
- There are some typos throughout the document
- There should not be a “s” after the word conclusion
- Parentheses around University of British Columbia with the acronym UBC is needed.
Concluding Comments
Overall, the document was well written. The proposal is informative, concise, and easy to understand. The following suggestions will help to improve the quality of the document and make it even better:
- Please review the grammar/typos
- Please ensure an acronym is explained appropriately Ex, UBC
- Consider different ways of reducing bias
- Consider both sides (students and professors) when answering the questions under “scope”
Thank you for the quality work, and for considering the points in this review. Please ask any clarifying questions if required!
Leave a Reply