Philosophy of Computer Science
Suggestions and Guidelines
for Peer-Group Editing
Position Paper #1
Last Update: 1 February 2010
material is highlighted
- When you get into your small groups:
- introduce yourselves quickly,
copies of your papers with each other,
- and write each other's names on your paper
(so that we have a record of who peer-reviewed whom)
- Choose one paper to discuss first.
- Suggestion: Go in
alphabetical order by family name.
The other people in the group might find it useful to imagine themselves
as members of a committee set up by the Provost to make a
Their purpose is to try to help the author clarify his
or her beliefs and arguments,
so that they will be able to make a
recommendation to the Provost on purely logical grounds (again: ignore
Start by asking the author to state (or read) his or her beliefs about
whether computer science is a science,
giving his or her reasons
for those beliefs.
Be sure that the author has discussed:
- the validity of the argument
- the truth value of (or their (dis)agreement with) premise 1
- the truth value of (or their (dis)agreement with) premise 2
- the truth value of (or their (dis)agreement with) any
- the truth value of (or their (dis)agreement with) the
- And for each of the above, their reasons
Any time you have a question, ask it.
Here are some suggestions:
- Why did you say rather
- What did you mean when you said
- Can you give me an example of
- Can you give me more details about
- Do you think that
is always true?
- Why? (This is always a good question to ask.)
The author should not get defensive.
The committee members are
friendly. Critical, but friendly.
Keep a written record of the questions and replies.
This will be useful
to the author, for revision.
After spending about 10 minutes on the first paper, move on to
the next, going back to step (2) above, changing roles.
more than 15 minutes per paper (because you've only got about 45 minutes
Perhaps one member of the group can be a timekeeper.
At home, over the next week, please revise your paper to take
into consideration the comments made by your fellow students
(a.k.a.(*) your "peers"):
Perhaps defend your claims better, or clarify statements
that were misunderstood, etc.
- At the top of the first page of your revision, please put all and only the
the title "Position Paper #1: 2nd Draft"
- your name
- the course you are enrolled in (CSE 484, CSE 584, or PHI 584)
- the due date
- Please staple copies of your first draft,
(with peer-editing comments, if any) to your second draft.
- Your second draft should be substantially different
from your first draft!
1–2 PAGE (250–500 WORD) REVISION, 1 COPY, TYPED,|
DUE MONDAY, FEBRUARY 15.
NO LATE PAPERS WILL BE ACCEPTED!
(*) a.k.a. = also known as
Copyright © 2004–2010 by
William J. Rapaport