Share
Explore BrainMass

CBA Peer Review Guide

Please help in putting together information that I can use and I also need guidance for the structure on writing a two- to three-page peer review for each of the two cost-benefit analyses that I attached. In addition to my critique of the methodological approach my peers have taken, I also need to provide an assessment of how my peers have dealt with the impact on existing public policy, resources, ethics, and diversity.

Attachments

Solution Preview

A peer review is essentially an academic review of the work of fellow scholars/experts/students with the latter applying in this case. How to do that requires thought and following a process applicable to the field and the purpose of the work. I suggest using this simple outline:

1. About the Review (including process) - 150 words
2. Study 1: (100 words per section)
a. Details
b. Topic
c. Relevance & Impact
d. Procedure & CBA
e. Scholastic Process
3. Study 2: (100 words per section)
a. Details
b. Topic
c. Relevance & Impact
d. Procedure & CBA
e. Scholastic Process

CBA Peer Review

It is the task of the academic community to review scholastic work and knowledge claims so as to ensure the relevance, scholasticism and expertise behind a knowledge claim. While at a much less scholastic level in terms of expectation & expertise, review of the work of fellow students provide scholastic expertise, knowledge training and insight into important concepts relevant to a body of knowledge or a field of study. In this particular stage, students are expected to provide a well-thought-out review of each other's work just as they are expected to be able to glean knowledge and draw ideas and concepts from their study materials so as to apply theory to abstracts and practice said abstracts in practical ways of study. Below, 2 works of this nature have been reviewed from a peer perspective. The current body of study involves the study of cost benefit analysis (CBA) of 2 public initiatives/policies that my peers have chosen to investigate. They are of different topics as one involves the study of parents as teaches with a focus on father involvement and the other explores the CBA of gun returns program. The former is a national initiative that involves the cooperation of similarly inclined agencies from both e private and public sectors while the latter is rural program still under a proposed status undergoing official review. Whereas the latter can be considered micro, the former can be labelled as a macro program although both can be said to be initiatives conceptualized to resolve a social issue/problem. Below I have undertaken an open peer review of these 2 works based on the purpose of the undertaking and the expectations the undertaking comes with.

Study 1

Details

• Title - Parents as Teachers Implementing Father Involvement
• Author - Creshanda Riley, 2014
• Subject of Study - Parents as Teachers fatherhood involvement program, a widely acknowledge necessity and initiative
• Organizations Involved - Parents as Teachers (PAT), Champions for Children & associate organization Fathers Resource and Networking Center (FRANC)

Topic

Riley (2014) explains her topic in the first 3 sections of her Review (Purpose, Scope, Background) where she declares that, "Parents as Teachers fatherhood involvement program training is needed for Parent Educators to be successful in the recruitment and enrollment of fathers into the program." From this position, it appears that the author is studying the program 'Parents as Teachers', with the main idea of the program initiative coming from the position of the 'Parents as Teachers' charity organization, a national charity organization with various branches and ...

Solution Summary

The solution provides information, assistance and advice in tackling the task (see above) on the topic of undertaking a open peer review of fellow student's policy review/CBA of 2 selected programs/initiatives (parents as teachers and gun-return program). An outline is suggested, ideas provided and the body of the solution shows how such an outline can be embodied in relation to the required work and the work under review. resources are listed for further exploration of the topic.

$2.19