Eli
Eli Demo
http://bedfordstmartins.com/catalog/demo/eli
Flynn, Elizabeth A., "Re-Viewing Peer Review." The Writing Instructor. December 2011. http://www.writinginstructor.com/30review
Cho, Kwangsu and MacArthur, Charles. "Student Revision with Peer and Expert Reviewing." Learning and Instruction, 20 (2010), 328-338. Elesevier. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475209000747
In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.
CompPile FAQ on Using Peer Reivew
Entries from the Bedford Bibliography for Teachers of Writing
Spear, Karen. Sharing
Writing: Peer Response Groups in English Classes. Portsmouth:
Heinemann-Boynton/Cook, 1988. Print.
Peer-response
groups must first learn how groups work. Peer interaction needs to be seen as
part of the composing process, and students need instruction in how to read
each other’s drafts to overcome confusion about sharing writing. Students’
tendency to stand in for the teacher should be replaced by real collaborative
behavior. The teacher’s role is to recognize successful group work and foster
it. Spear offers detailed advice on running a class with groups, focusing on
interpersonal relationships.
Peter
Schiff, “Responding to Writing: Peer Critiques, Teacher-Student Conferences,
and Essay Evaluation” in Language
Connections: Writing and Reading across the Curriculum. Urbana:
NCTE, 1982. Print.
Sommers, Nancy, and Laura Saltz.
"The
Novice as Expert: Writing the Freshman Year." CCC 56.1 (Sept.
2004): 124-49. Print.
Findings from the Harvard Study of
Undergraduate Writing indicate the importance of the freshman year in the arc
of writing development. Writing gives students a sense that they belong
in the academic community and therefore helps in the transition to college.
Students report far more understanding or interest in courses that required
writing despite the prevalence of the novice-as-expert paradox, which, while it
“invites imitative rather than independent behavior,” nevertheless enables
students to practice with various writing tools and discover their passions.
Sommers, Nancy. "Responding to
Student Writing." CCC 33.2 (May 1982): 148-56. Print.
“Teachers’ comments can take
students’ attention away from their own purposes in writing a particular text
and focus that attention on the teachers’ purpose in commenting.” In this
study, comments by teachers directed students to edit sentences and to rethink
and expand the topic at the same time. This is contradictory advice, urging
students to treat the text as finished while treating the subject as unfinished.
Sommers, Nancy. "Revision
Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers." CCC
31.4 (Dec. 1980): 378-88. Print.
Revision is a recursive process
essential to developing ideas, not merely the last stop in a train of writing
tasks. Students usually describe revision as choosing better words and
eliminating repetition. They revise to develop ideas only when redrafting the
opening paragraph. Adults, on the other hand, usually describe revision as the
process of finding the form of an argument and accommodating the audience.
Adult writers are more likely to add or delete material and to rearrange
sentences and paragraphs as they revise.
Spear, Karen. Sharing
Writing: Peer Response Groups in English Classes. Portsmouth:
Heinemann-Boynton/Cook, 1988. Print.
Peer-response
groups must first learn how groups work. Peer interaction needs to be seen as
part of the composing process, and students need instruction in how to read
each other’s drafts to overcome confusion about sharing writing. Students’
tendency to stand in for the teacher should be replaced by real collaborative
behavior. The teacher’s role is to recognize successful group work and foster
it. Spear offers detailed advice on running a class with groups, focusing on
interpersonal relationships.
From Around the Web
Flynn, Elizabeth A., "Re-Viewing Peer Review." The Writing Instructor. December 2011. http://www.writinginstructor.com/30review
Cho, Kwangsu and MacArthur, Charles. "Student Revision with Peer and Expert Reviewing." Learning and Instruction, 20 (2010), 328-338. Elesevier. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475209000747
In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.
CompPile FAQ on Using Peer Reivew
CompPile FAQ Peer Review Bibliography
CompPile Results for a search of peer review
