






 |
 |
PEER REVIEW
Thinking of using peer review in your writing-intensive course? Looking for some information and guidelines to get you started?
These sections follow:
Or, for a quick overview of the basic information contained in this section, we recommend checking out
Peer Review and Feedback Forms (Writing Matters #7) or Peer
Groups.
Simply stated, peer review involves sharing one's writing with a group of peer readers who offer feedback and suggestions for improvement.
Most experienced instructors use some form of peer review in their UH Mānoa writing-intensive courses. They have found that getting students to respond to each other’s drafts has numerous benefits. These benefits include:
-
Providing a wider audience for student-writers
-
Offering students the opportunity to receive feedback on the strengths and weaknesses of their writing
-
Teaching students to critically analyze their own writing and the writing of others
-
Motivating multiple drafts and substantial revisions
-
Familiarizing students with the format, style, criteria, and expectations of writing in the discipline studied
-
Promoting active learning
-
Building classroom community
-
Modeling the interpersonal, interactive, and group problem-solving nature of most workplace writing
-
Reducing the teacher's feedback workload
Simply telling students to respond to each other’s writing, however, is seldom sufficient. Experienced instructors have found they must teach students how to respond. One particularly effective way to guide them is by
developing and using feedback forms.
Just as journal editors provide criteria lists to guide readers'
comments and evaluations for a professional peer review, you can
similarly guide your students' feedback on each others' drafts by
providing them with a list of characteristics that are key to
their success on the assignment. Such lists have the added benefits of :
- promoting students' familiarity with characteristics of writing
that are important in your field
- making explicit your evaluation criteria
A feedback form is simply that list converted into an
easy-to-use format designed for your students. By following a few simple
steps, you can develop your own feedback forms:
- Decide what characteristics you're aiming for in your assignment
- Describe those characteristics in language your students will find
useful and understandable
- Convert your list of characteristics into a peer feedback form
(such as a criteria grid or an open-ended question format)
Here's an example. Let's say your goal is to help students
recognize and construct assertion-plus-evidence arguments which
are well-organized, error-free, effective, and convincing. You can
devise a criteria grid (Sample
1, below) with these kinds of characteristics to guide students' feedback
on their classmates' drafts. If you want fuller responses, you can leave
more space for "Reader's Comments" and ask students to fill
the space with specifics.
Sample 2 (below) provides
a more detailed criteria grid geared
toward a research paper with appropriate format, style, and
adequate references and citations. Such a grid provides many
opportunities for more specific feedback.
To prompt even fuller feedback, you can develop a list
of open-ended questions. Some tips:
Try to avoid questions that evoke a simple "yes/no"
response (i.e., "Is the essay well-developed?").
Follow questions up with instruction that require a more
elaborated response (i.e., "Is the essay well-organized and
clear? Explain the factors that you think contributed to its success
or problems.")
The amount of space you leave for students to write their
responses will indicate how much commentary you expect.
The examples listed below are genre-specific.
Instead of using paper, some instructors like to put their list of
open-ended questions into a computer-based format.
For example,
- if students will be working on giving feedback outside of class
time, you could send out an email version, which
students fill out, sending copies of the feedback to both the author
and you.
- if you have a class homepage, you might want to construct a web-based
version to do the same (see http://parallel.park.uga.edu/~lisaboyd/102M/s98/peerrev.html
for an example).
- if you have access to a computer lab and an integrated writing
environment program such as Daedalus, you could run your peer
feedback sessions using the options that come with that application.
- Whatever form(s) you choose, you can easily modify them to fit
different assignment guidelines or to emphasize additional aspects of
the assignment. With feedback forms in hand, you
are ready to bring peer review into the classroom.
Skip to "How do I
teach students how to respond using feedback forms?"
Sample 1: CRITERIA GRID
|
Weak |
Satisf |
Strong |
CRITERIA |
READER'S COMMENTS |
| _____ |
_____ |
__X__ |
Assertion:
Clarity, importance |
Your position is clear. I also like the way you explored points
that conflict with your main point. |
| __X__ |
_____ |
_____ |
Evidence:
relevance, strength, credibility |
I don't see how your second and third pieces of evidence
support your assertion. |
| _____ |
__X__ |
_____ |
Organization:
arrangement of ideas, guiding the reader |
Pretty good. But the middle paragraph on the second page seemed
in the wrong place. |
| __X__ |
_____ |
_____ |
Mechanics:
spelling, grammar, punctuation |
Many careless mistakes. Better proofreading needed. |
| _____ |
__X__ |
_____ |
Overall effectiveness |
I'm not completely convinced. Your assertion still needs to be
supported with better evidence. |
back
Sample 2: CRITERIA GRID
|
Criteria |
Excel. |
Fair |
Poor |
Comments |
|
Layout/Organization |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Table of contents/page numbers? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Paper structure (organization into sections, subsections,
appendices)? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Figures and tables (clearly labeled and professional looking)? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Clearly stated purpose and objective(s)? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Accomplished its purpose? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Good overall structure? Ideas ordered effectively? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Transitions used? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Introduction & conclusion focus clearly on the main point? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Paragraphs right length for reading (not too long or too
short)? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Development & Support |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Major ideas/topics received enough attention and explanation?
Were well developed? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Supporting material persuasive? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Adequate references and resource material? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Unnecessary repetition avoided? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Style |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Topic and level of formality appropriate for audience? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Sentences and words varied? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Wordiness avoided? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Grammar and Mechanics |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Grammar? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Spelling? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
Punctuation? |
_____ |
_____ |
_____ |
- |
|
If you could recommend three specific changes in the writing,
what would they be? 1.
2.
3.
(adapted from material found at http://ate.cc.vt.edu/eng/bse/dillaha/bse2106/peer_review.html;
accessed 1/99)
|
back
Sample 3: OPEN-ENDED FORM (SCIENCE RESEARCH PAPER)
(leave
adequate space for review comments)
|
Author____________ Reviewer_____________ The goals of peer review are 1) to help improve your
classmate's paper by pointing out strengths and weaknesses that
may not be apparent to the author, and 2) to help improve editing
skills.
INSTRUCTIONS
Read the paper(s) assigned to you twice, once to get an
overview of the paper, and a second time to provide constructive
criticism for the author to use when revising his/her paper.
Answer the questions below.
ORGANIZATION (10%)
1. Were the basic sections (Introduction, Conclusion,
Literature Cited, etc.) adequate? If not, what is missing?
2. Did the writer use subheadings well to clarify the
sections of the text? Explain.
3. Was the material ordered in a way that was logical, clear,
easy to follow? Explain.
CITATIONS (20%)
4. Did the writer cite sources adequately and appropriately?
Note any incorrect formatting.
5. Were all the citations in the text listed in the
Literature Cited section? Note any discrepancies.
GRAMMAR AND STYLE (20%)
6. Were there any grammatical or spelling problems?
7. Was the writer’s writing style clear? Were the
paragraphs and sentences cohesive?
CONTENT (50%)
8. Did the writer adequately summarize and discuss the topic?
Explain.
9. Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials
available from the standard sources (e.g., UH, NMFS, FWS
libraries)? If no, what's missing?
10. Did the writer make some contribution of thought to the
paper, or merely summarize data or publications? Explain.
|
back
Sample 4: LAB REPORT (SCIENCE) OPEN-ENDED FORM
(leave adequate space for review comments)
-
Does the Introduction adequately explain the theory behind
the experiment and the objective of the experiment? What is
missing? What could be deleted?
-
Are all of the materials used listed in the Apparatus and
Supplies section? Is enough detail given about the
instrument's size, range, accuracy, etc.? Does a drawing
illustrate the set-up? If no, what is missing?
-
Does the writer describe, in detail, all procedures
(Procedures section)? What needs more explanation? What could
be deleted?
-
Does the writer provide all equations used? Are they correct
and appropriate? Explain.
-
Does the writer clearly present the results in the Results
section? Are data, figures, and charts clearly labeled?
Explain and list any problems.
-
In the Error Analysis section, does the writer discuss the
cause of any significant errors? Are the errors quantified and
are their influences explored? Explain.
-
Does the writer state his/her conclusions (in the
Conclusions section) accurately and clearly? Explain.
-
Does the abstract summarize the whole experiment, including
the findings, in no more than 100 words? What could be added
or deleted?
-
Does the writer use phrases such as "The pressure was
measured by the mercury monameter" instead of "I
measured the pressure..."? (Does the writer use the
passive tense as appropriate?)
|
back
Sample 5: SCIENCE ARTICLE OPEN-ENDED FORM
(conducted like a
journal review)
|
Reviewer's Name:
______________________________________
Title:_________________________________________________
Author(s):_____________________________________________
-
Does this manuscript warrant publication in this journal?
_____ Acceptable in present form
_____ Acceptable with minor revision, no further review
necessary
_____ Major revision and a second review is required
_____ Not acceptable (provide detailed explanation under
"comments" below)
-
Is the title satisfactory? Explain.
-
Does the abstract adequately summarize the paper or could it
be more complete or concise? Indicate suggested revision on
the manuscript or under "comments" (below).
-
Are sufficient references provided? Are they appropriate and
free from obvious omissions? If not, explain.
-
Does the paper present material effectively? Indicate
suggested changes on manuscript or under "comments"
(below).
-
Could the clarity or efficiency be improved by changes in
the order of the paper? ____
-
Should the language or grammar be improved? _____________
-
Are there portions of the text that could be omitted?
____________________
-
Are there errors in factual information, logic, analysis,
statistics, or mathematics? ______ Address these issues in
detail in the "comments" (below). Suggest
improvements.
-
Mechanical Errors (address on the manuscript)
____ Figures or tables improperly or incompletely labeled or
titled or not cited
____ Misuse of references (failure to cite, reference needed
and not provided)
____ Other:______________
-
Comments (Attach additional pages as necessary)
(found at www.che.umr.edu/Che/faculty/dludlow/fall97/243/prrep.html;
accessed 1/99)
|
back
Sample 6: BUSINESS WRITING FEEDBACK FORM (MEMO)
(leave
adequate space for review comments)
- Does the memo begin with the most important
information?
- Does the memo build rapport by involving the reader in the
opening paragraph?
- Does the memo provide sufficient, relevant, and
interesting details? Is it focused and brief?
- Does the memo focus each paragraph on one idea?
- Is the memo informed and accurate, demonstrating the
author's grasp of the situation?
- Is the final paragraph calling for a specific action? Is
it brief? Does it build good will?
- Is the memo format correct, with concise subject line,
initialed name, and correct spacing?
- Is the information arranged (indentations and numbering)
in a way that makes it easy to skim and still get central
information?
(found at http://www.goshen.edu/english/critique.html#anchor495275;
accessed 1/99) |
back
Sample 7: BUSINESS WRITING FEEDBACK FORM (COVER LETTER)
(leave adequate space for review comments)
-
Does the first paragraph identify who the
author is, briefly state why he/she is writing, and refer to
how he/she found out about the job?
-
Does the second paragraph highlight specific strengths,
special abilities, or features of the résumé to be noted?
-
Does the third paragraph make a specific request of the
reader or address what action is to be taken?
-
Does the letter provide sufficient, relevant, and
interesting details to make the request convincing?
-
Is the letter brief and focused? What elements could be
eliminated?
-
Does the writer achieve his or her purpose? Does it make
you want to consider the résumé more carefully?
-
Is the tone of the letter courteous without being too
formal, relaxed without being too familiar?
-
Is the letter's form appropriate (heading, spacing,
greeting, etc.)? Is the letter addressed to a specific
person rather than a general "Dear Madam/Sir"?
(found at http://www.goshen.edu/english/critique.html#anchor495275;
accessed 1/99) |
back
Sample 8: BUSINESS WRITING FEEDBACK FORM (RÉSUMÉ)
(leave
adequate space for review comments)
-
Does the résumé contain the necessary
features for the position (name/address, position desired,
education, work experience, achievements, relevant personal
information, references)?
-
Does the résumé contain only essential, relevant
information for the position desired?
-
Does the résumé emphasize applicant's strengths?
-
Does the résumé emphasize what is unique about this
person's experience? Does it demonstrate a common interest
or ability (leadership, teaching experience, dedication,
creativity, etc.)?
-
What additional information might you like to have about
this applicant?
-
If you were leading an interview based on this résumé,
what are two questions you might ask?
-
Does the résumé look neat (appropriate spacing, clear
headings, good quality paper)?
-
Is the résumé easy to read?
-
Is the information presented as concisely as possible?
-
Are the elements of each section of the résumé presented
in a parallel format and style (begin w/ active verbs, put
date in consistent place, use of parallelism of elements,
consistent underlining or italics)?
(found at http://www.goshen.edu/english/critique.html#anchor495275;
accessed 1/99) |
back
Sample 9: ESSAY ON FICTION OPEN-ENDED FORM
(leave
adequate space for review comments)
-
What is the central idea of the paper?
-
Why is the central idea an arguable point?
-
What are the points (events) from the novel used to
support the central idea?
-
Do you find the points listed in #3 convincing or not?
Why?
-
What points of support might you have used to make this
argument that the writer did not use? (If there is no
identifiable central idea, what do you think the writer is
trying to argue?)
-
Is the conclusion effective?
-
Does it get beyond the story and relate the argument to
the writer or society today? How so? (If not, can you think
of a conclusion one could make based on this paper?)
(found at http://www.ltcc.cc.ca.us/programs/english/peeredit.htm#PGID2;
accessed 1/99) |
back
Sample 10: CREATIVE WRITING OPEN-ENDED FORM
(leave
adequate space for review comments)
-
Paraphrase the plot of the story in one or
two sentences.
-
Paraphrase the theme of the piece in one or two sentences.
-
Describe the narrator's point of view. Is the point of
view consistent? If not, where and how does it shift?
-
Describe the tone of the piece. Is the tone consistent? If
not, point out where it wavers.
-
Are the characters believable? Why or why not?
-
What more would you like to know about the characters?
-
Were there any parts of the story that were confusing or
unclear?
-
If the writer uses dialogue, is it clear who is speaking?
Does the writer describe how the speaker says the dialogue?
-
Has the writer dramatized rather than summarized the
experiences in the story?
-
What parts of the piece are most vivid for you?
-
What questions did you have when you finished reading the
piece?
-
Anything else?
(modified from form found at http://www.ltcc.cc.ca.us/programs/english/peeredit.htm#PGID2;
accessed 1/99) |
back
Even with a feedback form in hand, students will not necessarily know how to respond to peer drafts. Most students need to be taught how to give constructive, useful feedback.
One approach:
- Hand out copies of a sample completed assignment (perhaps written by a student in the previous semester).
- Discuss the criteria on the feedback form so that the language becomes meaningful to everyone.
- Show how you would apply the criteria by "thinking out loud" as you read the first paragraph of the paper.
- Ask students to read the paper and complete the feedback form (alternatively, they can complete the form out of class).
- Discuss the responses as a class.
Student responses such as "This is good" or "This is bad" are too general to be helpful and don't give a writer enough information on how or what to improve. Show students how to go beyond generalities by reinforcing appropriate and effective comments as students offer them in discussion. Encourage them to specify what needs improvement and what works well. (For
ground rules/guidelines for peer response, see below).
Practice sessions are important for the success of peer review. They give you a chance to clarify the criteria and even aspects of the assignment if that proves necessary.
Once your students become familiar with how to respond appropriately using peer feedback forms, they are
ready to try it out on their own drafts.
Okay, you've developed your
feedback forms and taught your students how to
respond. Now, you're ready to run your peer review session in class.
Have students bring copies of their drafts to class,
break them into groups, pass out the feedback forms, and away they go.
Below you'll find some Frequently Asked Questions about setting up and facilitating peer review sessions:
-
"How should I set up the peer
groups?"
-
"How many students should I have per
group?"
-
"Should peer feedback groups do
their work in or out of class?"
-
"What if my students are
uncomfortable showing their paper to their peers?"
-
"What do students do after they've
finished responding on the forms?"
-
"What do I do while they’re in
their groups?"
Once the students have gotten feedback on their writing,
the final step is to help students use that feedback.
If you assign group work throughout the semester, you
can have students in the same groups or in new groups each time. Maintaining
the same groups allow students to get to know their classmates better,
to be more confident around each other, and perhaps be more invested in the
success of their peers in the group. Placing students in new groups
each time gives students exposure to many reader perspectives during the
semester.
When forming the groups, you might consider creating
groups that have a balance among men and women, age groups, ethnicities,
first languages, etc. Another method is to assign each student to respond
to someone who is working on a similar topic/assignment. Other
instructors prefer random assignments. You may wish to vary and
experiment with group member set-up to see what works best for you and your
students.
It depends on a number of factors, including your
purpose, the length of the draft to be read, the type of feedback activity you
have planned (e.g., informal group discussion, feedback form, essay-style
written report, etc.), the number of peer reviews you want each student to
receive, etc. Below are some examples:
- You want students to read or listen to each other's
short drafts (of five pages or less) in class and comment on general
strengths and weaknesses via feedback forms. Because you want them to
receive responses from at least two readers, you choose to set them
up in groups of 3 or 4 students (45-55 minutes).
- For longer assignments or for more detailed analysis,
you can have students take home a classmate's draft to review and comment
on.
"Should peer feedback groups do their work in or
out of class?"
Either way! Again, it depends on a number of factors,
including your purpose, the length of the draft to be read, the type of
feedback activity you have planned (e.g., informal group discussion, feedback
form, formal written report, etc), the number of peer reviews you want each
student to receive, etc. For example,
- If each member is to take a 5-7 page draft and write
a 1-2 page reaction on its organization and development of content, it
would probably take far too long to complete the assignment in class and
would be better left for more serious time and attention outside of
class.
- If, however, the task is for groups to comment on
appropriate format, language, and detail on a short lab report draft, via
a feedback form, the instructor may choose to have the groups work in
class.
- Also, if it is an activity where the students may
need extra help or guidance from the instructor, such activities should be
structured for the classroom.
- And, of course, there is always the option of having
the peer feedback work take place both in and out of class. For
example, students could take copies of a draft and a feedback form home as
homework, and then the next class can be used as a time to discuss the
feedback, make suggestions, do some in-class revisions, and get feedback
on those revisions.
"What if my students are uncomfortable showing
their paper to their peers?"
Sharing writing with others can produce anxiety for many
students. Instructors often set out response
ground rules or guidelines (perhaps class-generated ones) so that the
feedback students receive from others is constructive, useful, and
pertinent. One effective rule: "Never say 'This is bad.' Instead, describe
what confused you or what you didn't understand." Some instructors
distribute drafts anonymously (student names deleted) to reduce student
tension.
"What do students do after they've finished
responding on the forms?"
Instead of just simply handing back the feedback form,
you might set aside class time or encourage them to discuss their responses
with the writer. There is always the possibility that the writer might
misunderstand the comments the peer reviewer made, and so allowing time for
discussion will allow time for clarification and elaboration.
"What do I do while they’re in their
groups?"
Some instructors like to visit each group to listen
to the comments students give each other. In general, it's not a good idea
to interfere too much with the normal functioning of the group or the task at
hand. You do have to keep an eye on things, though, intervening if a group
becomes completely dysfunctional (having to reassign students), strays off
task, or is having difficulty.
If groups are functioning well, you can always turn
your attention to other matters. For example, you could spend the class
period checking students' thesis statements or outlines (assigned in advance)
and still have time to answer any questions or concerns that may arise from
students in their peer feedback groups.
Here are a number of suggestions (mostly from http://www.richmond.edu/~writing/dosdonts.html; accessed 1/99). It may be helpful to discuss some of these tips in your practice sessions for guidance or include them as reminders on your peer feedback forms.
GROUND RULES/GUIDELINES FOR PEER REVIEW
-
Read a draft all the way through before you begin to comment on it.
-
Give yourself enough time to read and respond.
-
If something on the feedback form is unclear, ask the instructor.
-
Point out the strengths of the draft.
-
When discussing areas that need improvement, be nice. Offer appropriate, constructive comments from a reader's point of view.
-
Make comments text-specific, referring specifically to the writer's draft (NO "rubber stamps" such as "awkward" or "unclear" or "vague," which are too general to be helpful).
-
Don't overwhelm the writer with too much commentary. Stick to the major issues on the feedback form that are problematic.
-
Make sure your suggestions are reasonable (i.e., don't suggest that they totally rewrite the paper because you didn't agree with the author's point of view or didn’t like the topic).
-
If something appears too complicated to write in the commentary, just mention that you have something that you would like to talk to the writer about when you discuss the draft afterwards.
-
Before giving your written comments to the author, reread your comments to make sure they are clear and make sense.
"As a peer reviewer, your job is not to provide answers. You raise questions; the writer makes the choices. You act as a mirror, showing the writer how the draft looks to you and pointing our areas which need attention." - Sharon Williams
APPROPRIATE, CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS
-
Be respectful and considerate of the writer's
feelings.
-
Use "I" statements.
-
Offer suggestions, not commands.
-
Raise questions from a reader's point of view,
points that may not have occurred to the writer.
-
Phrase comments clearly and carefully so that
the writer can easily understand what needs to be improved.
-
Make sure comments are constructive and specific
(not "This paper is confusing. It keeps saying the same things over and
over again" but rather "It sounds like paragraph five makes the
same point as paragraphs 2 and 3.").
-
Avoid turning the writer's paper into YOUR paper.
Final tip: Although it might not be on the feedback form, you can
always ask the writer if there is something he or she wants you to comment
specifically on in the paper. (This is related to developing writing awareness
and self-assessment - see Writing Matters #5
for more information on this topic).
The final step is getting students to use the feedback
they obtain from the forms. Here are several activities that may be helpful
after students give and receive feedback:
-
Students briefly summarize in writing the
feedback they received and jot down the changes they plan to make in
their upcoming revision.
-
Students submit a cover memo along with their
finished writing in which they explain how they revised in response to the
reviews they received.
-
Students fill out a feedback form on their own
draft. Then they compare their self-analysis with the peer feedback they
received and make plans for the next round of revisions.
-
Students use the feedback forms as a checklist
before turning in their next drafts.
-
Students discuss the feedback they received during teacher
conferences or in their journals to help develop strategies for
improvement.
Note: Students need not change everything just
because a reader thinks they should. However, they should consider all comments
seriously before dismissing any.
HOW HAS PEER REVIEW BEEN USED IN OTHER
WI-CLASSES AT UH MANOA?
|