Aspect 1 Evaluation (80%):

Recent News Article: The peer did not specify if the article is from the assigned website, so
this aspect is unclear.
Summary Clarity: The paper effectively summarized the article, providing a clear
understanding of the study's purpose, methods, and findings without the need to read
the original article.
Key Terms from Textbook: The peer did not use any key terms from the textbook.
Limitations of the Study: The paper did not mention any thoughts about the limitations of the
study. Acknowledging potential limitations would enhance the critical analysis.
Course Learnings Integration: The peer did not explicitly explain how the article ties in with
what they learned throughout the course. Connecting the study to course concepts
would strengthen the paper.
Societal Impact: The paper did not discuss how the study may affect society, missing an
opportunity to explore the broader implications of the research.
Formatting Requirements: Unclear if the paper adhered to the specified formatting
requirements (12-point, Times New Roman, at least 2 pages).
Title Page and Source List: The presence of the title page and source list was not explicitly
mentioned. It is assumed that these elements are present based on typical academic
paper requirements.
Rating for Aspect 1: 4 (unclear if the article is from the assigned website, lacks key terms, and
does not discuss limitations or societal impact).

Aspect 2 Evaluation (10%):

Introduction and Conclusion: The paper includes both an introduction and a conclusion.
Use of Own Words: The peer effectively used their own words to summarize the article,
avoiding direct copy and paste.
Rating for Aspect 2: 2

Aspect 3 Evaluation (10%):

Organization and Readability: The paper is well-organized, easy to read, with clear
sentences and paragraph transitions.
Professional Writing and Language: The paper is professionally written, with few grammar,
syntax, or spelling errors, and uses college-level diction.
Rating for Aspect 3: 2

Overall Feedback and Comment:

The author did a good job summarizing the article, but there are areas that could be
strengthened. It's unclear if the article is from the assigned website, and the inclusion of key
terms, discussion on limitations, and exploration of societal impact would enhance the critical
analysis. Additionally, explicitly tying the article to course learnings would provide a more
comprehensive understanding. The paper is well-organized, and the use of own words is
commendable. Overall, with some improvements, this paper could be more robust and
insightful.