Was the content at an appropriate level for a graduate class? Were there areas within the content that were unclear or unsupported? Based on the data do you agree with the conclusions made by the author? Based on your interpretation of the data is there material that the author should add or revise? Was equal or appropriate weight given to each main idea? Was too much or too little focus given to particular points?

Analysis of Temperature and activity

Write a detailed peer reviews of file uploaded((file name:Brian) self-study and its contents. Reviews should be professional in nature and should touch on both positive and negative elements of the student’s self-study.

1) OVERVIEW/SUMMARY: Summarize the technical content and organization of the manuscript in 3-4 sentences.

2) PURPOSE: The presentation was a discussion of an individual’s students circadian data delivered to a group of peers in order to impart knowledge and stimulate critical thinking. Did the author accomplish this purpose? Why or why not?

3) ORGANIZATION/OUTLINE: Main ideas stated clearly and logically? Was the manuscript easy to follow? Were the main points explained and supported by research/data? Did the conclusion adequately sum up the main points and purpose?

4) CONTENT: Was the content at an appropriate level for a graduate class? Were there areas within the content that were unclear or unsupported? Based on the data do you agree with the conclusions made by the author? Based on your interpretation of the data is there material that the author should add or revise? Was equal or appropriate weight given to each main idea? Was too much or too little focus given to particular points?

5) VISUAL AIDS: Were visual aids simple and easy to read/understand? Did the visual aids clearly support the conclusions of the author? Were they of professional quality? Were they appropriately labeled? How could the visual aids be revised to improve clarity and better support the conclusions of the author?

6) DELIVERY: Was the writing at an appropriate level for a graduate class? Was the appropriate format used? Are there specific typographical errors in the manuscript? Did the author hold your attention throughout the manuscript? Was the material presented in an effective way?

7) RECEPTION: What were your personal feelings? Did the manuscript hold your attention? Did you feel a connection with the author?

8) OVERALL RATING: