Wednesday, April 26, 2006

Journal Article Major Peer Review for Rachel Powers:

Dear Rachel,

Overall I think your article does a good job of grabbing the readers’ attention by using a descriptive, interesting narrative in the introduction. Using an example in the beginning gives readers an example that they can hopefully relate to. I gather that your general thesis or claim is that men and women speak, act, and think differently and this causes great conflict in communication and specifically work environments. You explain how men and women view communication in very different ways and how this impedes women and men communicating affectively. I like the example that you use of your job at Ukrops, but some of the ways that you use it to support the ideas of social hierarchy and communication barriers between men and women do not work as well as other examples might. If you do use the example of your job at Ukrops you may want to explain more in depth how the boys you worked with were trying to maintain social hierarchy or how communication barriers caused the sexual harassment you experienced from the boys. I think that the points that you make concerning communication barriers between men and women, and the concept of social hierarchy are good ones…you may just need to elaborate on your examples or find new ones to support your points.
The journal appears to be mostly informative of two authors’ claims and not so much a central claim that you are making. You may want to be more forceful in stating your claim and use more evidence to support your claim. I realize that this is just a rough draft and I am sure that you have a lot more that you would like to incorporate into your journal, so I am sure that you are aware of this.
You state two main ideas concerning interactions between men and women in the workplace: social hierarchy and communication barriers between men and women. I think that the interaction between men and women is probably a lot more complex than what is represented and you will establish better credibility with your reader if you inform them of the complexities involved in these interactions. You do a really good job of establishing yourself as a credible writer with they way you depict yourself in your example of working at Ukrops.
You establish what the article is going to be about in the fourth paragraph on the second page. You begin by discussing Malcah Yaeger-Dror’s article about how men and women speak in different ways. You may want to have a couple sentences (or one) that somehow transitions the narrative to Yaeger-Dror’s article. By the end of your article I have a clear sense of what you are claiming.


Post a Comment

<< Home