Critical Analysis

minWeek 10 Assignment: Peer Review
This week, your primary assignment will be to conduct a peer review of a classmate's intelligence assessment. 
The guidance for this assignment from the syllabus is: "After the term papers/intelligence assessments have been submitted, students will conduct a peer review of one classmate- paper, following the guidelines for peer review that are widely used in the US intelligence community. The intent is for students to understand the value of critical peer review in intelligence practice; meaning that only substantive comments will receive credit. No credit bill be given for corrections to spelling and grammar, or for favorable comments on the papers. T
Here's how it will work: After I receive your term paper(intelligence assessment), I will briefly review it and email it to another student. Check your email, download the paper, and conduct the critical review of the paper. You may make your comments directly in the paper (the most efficient way), using either track changes or a different color or all-caps font. Alternatively, you may make your comments in a separate paper. Then submit the peer-reviewed paper in the assignments folder. I expect to have all papers graded quickly, but I will not look at the peer reviews until I have graded the term papers, in the interests of fairness. The point is, I expect you to provide a critical review, but I don't want it to affect the paper's grade. I also request that you not contact your fellow student directly about the paper that you receive for a critique. I'd like to protect the anonymity of the students who provide critiques (for that reason, please don't put your name on the critique).
The instructions are given above, but let me reiterate: what I’m looking for is a critical review, meaning that if you turn in a reviewed paper with only corrections for spelling and grammar, and favorable comments, you’ll receive no credit for the assignment. You ARE encouraged to identify things like failures of logic, misuse of analysis methodologies or failure to use them, not supporting conclusions with evidence, or poor logical development in the paper (e.g., not starting a paragraph with the main point of the paragraph; or writing in a stream-of-consciousness form instead of organizing the paper to flow logically).
Why do we do a peer review? Because it is one of the most important processes conducted in any competent intelligence analysis unit. Its purpose is not to make the writer feel bad (though that is often one of the outcomes) but to make the analytic product solid and defensible. The first few analysis papers I wrote at CIA were torn apart by my peers, and the result was demoralizing - because I thought that I was a good writer. But those were great learning experiences, and the reviews saved me from starting my career with a reputation for poor analysis. So the reviewer should be your friend. After all, you may know what you meant to say; but it may not come out that way in the paper, and the reviewer should catch that