WK 4 Case Study 1 – Peer Review
(Respond to two teams case study)
This discussion board facilitates the opportunity to clarify information and check out each other’s thoughts by engaging with each other about the material. Subsequently, your discussions reinforce what you are learning, invites critical thinking and reflection by learning about different perspectives, approaches, and overall helps you articulate the information in a clear and logical way. As future clinicians, you will often conduct peer review tasks to keep yourself and other practitioners accountable to best practices. These assignments will allow you to practice this skill with your peers’ case studies. Reading the discussion threads throughout the week will allow more time to process the information and formulate responses.
There is not a minimum or maximum of words, however, your posts must exhibit a well thought out scholarly posts and responses. You are also to “avoid quoting” material, as that will not help you articulate and synthesize the material. The purpose of your peer review is to not scrutinize your peers’ writing (e.g., spelling errors, etc.), but to comment on what you found informative (be specific) and offer further knowledge you gained (e.g., additional interventions, ways of coding and justifying a diagnosis, etc.). Note: comments like, “I agree with you,” “good presentation … learned a lot,” or “That’s a good idea” does not reflect critical thought and are not scholarly. By providing critical thought you will prevent your grade from being reduced.
Tip: Please remember to add a subject line to your post. Use descriptive subject lines for your posts; some find it easier to write the subject line after writing the post.
Each person is required to respond two team case study peer review posts to the discussion board. Posts must be well written, include APA in-text citations and references and logically support your discussions. Incorporation of scholarly material must be from within the last 10 years of the publication date and cited correctly.
Down below I will attach team D and E team case study ( The ones I’m suppose to respond separately to)