1. Yes, the article is peer reviewed. It is noted at the bottom of the first page, that the article is fourthcoming in the Economics of Education Review, and since the article is dated in 2003, surely it has been peer reviewed already. The article went through a blind peer review since the reviewers names were not stated in the paper, leaving them anonymous. Also, the journal is of a reputable source, this being the Economics of Education Review.

2. The research problem is evident, it deals with the rate Blacks and Hispanics are participating in Advanced Placement (AP) courses as compared to whites in high school. The research was conducted in Texas. This information can be found in the “Data and conceptual framework” part of the journal, on page six. It states that the research was conducted in Texas Schools Microdata Panel (TSMP) for the 1998-1999 academic year. The research focused on statistics of whites, blacks and Hispanic students attending Texas public high schools in which at least one Advanced Placement course was offered.

3. The article is not very logically organized for me, since the tables and figures are the bottom of the article and are difficult to read since you have to go down to refer to them. Although, the article itself is well organized in terms of its written work. The paper does not have a statement of purpose, though the purpose of the study is pretty clear in the introduction as well as the title of the paper. Also, there are references to previous work, you can find the list of references on page 28 and 28, but the paper is missing a review of related literature portion (or at least the title signifying that the portion is the RRL), which could have been used to validate the importance of the study’s purpose. The sampling procedure and methods of collecting data are clearly placed in the article’s conceptual framework. I would improve the paper by clearly dividing the paper up into parts which are recognizable by the reader, the only clear labeled area is the data and conceptual framework portion of the paper. Also, putting the tables to where the corresponding text is would definitely be an improvement, and would make it much easier for the reader. The methodology as well as the scope and limitations of the study was also not clearly explained.

4. The methodology is not clearly explained, I believe it can be determined in the data and conceptual framework portion, as well as the introduction of the paper, although there is no clear-cut portion devoted to the methodology of the research. The data was gathered by getting results of students who took the SATs, which is a case study article. No other evidence of how research was conducted is to be found. It is possible to replicate the study based on this article, although maybe you would need a wider scope and not only focus in Texas, since the article title does not imply that it is a focused study, it leads to believe that it is general. Also, if I were to replicate this study, I would conduct it in a longer span, not only for one school year; as this study was only from the school year 1998-1999. Since the year now is 2010, the data might not be relevant since statistics would have changed by then, I would need a newer more updated set of data.

5. I believe that there was a slight bias in the study; it did not reveal how many whites were taking part in the Special Education course, although data revealing minorities in low-status income families was given. To make the study less biased, I think that the status of the whites not enrolled in Advanced Placement classes should also have been part of the study. To be equal in data gathering and sampling, I think that all areas and all variables should have been well covered and given equal part in the study. You should not only include data or statistics which will back you claim up, you should also place the ones which are contradicting to your study, and find a way to break it down to make your claim more valid.

6. The method of data collection is well-described, it is found in the first portion of the data and conceptual framework. It shows how many students were sampled, and what sort of data was collected. This data were post-test data, showing which students part-took in the SATs from high schools which offered Advanced Placement courses. The data did provide an insight into answering the research question, because the general statistics showed a clear idea of where the study was leading, even without reading the Introduction. From the data collected of how many students and of which race participated in the Advanced Placement classes, you can see that whites very much outnumber blacks and Hispanics. Although more detail into why this is happening was also studied, therefore other data and statistics were gathered to justify the research, as well as to make sense of the statistics.