ECE-211:Technical Writing for Electrical and Computer Engineers- A review of “There Really, Really Isn’t a Silver Bullet for Climate Change” paper


Review Assignment: Professional Papers


Due: Before the Start of Class, Week of 9/16/2019




1)  Note:

  • Provide a review of the following two papers. The purpose of your review paper is to contrast and compare the quality of the two papers.
  • Audience: You are a reviewer for a journal and you are writing a recommendation to the Editor for which one to publish.
  • Length: Approximately three pages of 2.0 spaced typed text.
  • Font: 12 point, Times New Roman at 2.0-spacing
  • Margins: 1 inch for Top, Bottom, Left and Right margins (the “normal” setting in Word)
  • Submission Format: this assignment must be submitted both onlineas a typed, text-based PDF document and as anidentical printed hardcopyin-class with your portfolio.


2)   Your review must be organized as shown below and all questions must be answered.  Do not simply answer the required questions in a series of statements. You must present the answers to the questions in an organized manner with good flow.


Paragraph 1


Provide a short summary of each paper. What was the main thesis the author was trying to convey in each paper?


Paragraph 2


Answer for each paper.  Were you supplied with adequate background information to understand the topic? What pieces of background information did you find the most important in helping you understand the papers?  Was there background information that you wish you would have had? If so, what?  Were you supplied any background information that you found was unnecessary or unrelated to the rest of the paper. If so, what?


Paragraph 3


Which pieces of evidence did you find most compelling in support of the authors’ positions? Why? Which pieces did you find least compelling? Why? What evidence was lacking that would have helped persuade you to accept the authors’ positions?  Were the authors credible? Why or why not? Did the authors do a good job providing citations to increase their credibility?



Paragraph 4


      Were the papers clearly written? Why or why not? Where were you confused? Which areas or sections did you think were well-written? Why?  Were the papers well-organized? Why or why not? Did the authors write at the correct level of the audience? Why or why not? What suggestions do you have to improve the clarity? Did the authors use visual aids effectively? Would additional visual aides have assisted in the clarity of the presentation? Did the authors adequately explain the visual aids?  Did the conclusion summarize the arguments?


Paragraph 5


Did the authors convince you to accept their position? Why or why not? What could the authors have done different to convince you if the answer is no?Which paper do you recommend to publish and why?



Value 100 points (Peer Review Category)

There is a 20 percent reduction (20 points) on this assignment if the initial submission is not deemed acceptable by the instructor.  After notification of an unacceptable submission, you have 3 calendar days to resubmit.  An additional 20 percent reduction will occur every 3 calendar days until an acceptable submission is received.  The instructor will grade your submission once it is deemed acceptable.


  • “Acceptable” on this assignment means:
    • You make a good faith attempt to answer all the questions specified above.
    • You make a good faith effort to produce a high quality review paper.
    • You do not simply provide a list of answers to the required questions.
  • Submit your Assignment to your instructor in class AND on Blackboard.


Grading Rubric


You will receive a holistic grade based on your instructor’s evaluation of each section shown in the table below.


Paper summary and thesis analysis 15
Background information analysis 15
Evidence analysis 15
Clarity analysis 15
Were you convinced analysis 15
Quality of review writing 25
Total 100