The point of peer review is not to help each other feel better!
This is what I had them do: The students came to class prepared with two typed copies of what my class began to call their "first final draft. Peer-review partners were randomly selected. By using this pairing technique, students ended up working with different partners almost every time.
Partners took turns reading their work aloud to each other. The partner reading aloud made corrections to his or her essay while reading aloud. Partners took turns discussing and explaining their editing suggestions. Reviewers signed the bottom of the checklist.
This emphasized the importance of the editing phase—for which reviewers received a grade—and also reminded the author of who to ask for clarification of an editing suggestion.
Students then drew the name of a new partner from the pile of index cards. They exchanged a second clean copy of their essay with their new partner.
The new partner actively reviewed the essay using the checklist. The second set of partners took turns discussing and explaining their editing suggestions.
The second reviewer signed the bottom of checklist. Students took both checklists and the reviewed copies of their own essays with them to revise the final copy. Although going through the peer review process twice was time consuming, it was time well spent. Having two peer editors also offered each student the chance for a quality review, even if one partner might be "less able.
For example, if both reviewers pointed out the same errors or suggested a different way to approach a topic, the student could be reasonably assured that they needed to heed the advice. Candice, a struggling writer, was defending her right to choose abortion when she wrote, "I would disagree with using the word murder because it is for a good reason, which is to save the mother.
Wade and Doe vs. Bolton as sources and changed her conclusion: She changed phrases and verb tenses, noted spelling errors, and added punctuation that made the essay much easier to read.
Candice had just the right two editors for her essay. She needed both the content developed as well as the mechanics corrected. Her essay became much better for it; in fact, this was to be her best essay for the semester.
When I first introduced my Two-Peer Editing Strategy to the class, some students were hesitant to comply. For some students, as Hansman and Wilson found, "asking a peer in the classroom to critique their writing was something unfamiliar.Effective Peer Review When requiring your students to write essays, peer review provides your students with • Establish clear expectations for student roles and behavior Implementing Peer Review In order to have an effective peer review, students must be willing to participate.
The best way to complete a peer review is to analyze the three basic parts of every essay: the introduction, the body paragraphs, and the conclusion.
The Introduction The first section to read in. Peer Review Times Two. By: Denise Marchionda Publication: The Quarterly, Vol.
26, No. 3 Date: Summary: Noting that the classroom logistics of peer response to writing can get dicey, Denise Marchionda developed a two-peer editing strategy for her college composition arteensevilla.com describes her system in detail and shares the checklist she created to elicit productive discussion between the.
Teachers frequently use student peer review to increase the amount of feedback students receive on their writing and speaking assignments.
Choose any item below to learn more about how to integrate peer review into your classroom. Official Web site of the University Writing Program, Brandeis Univ., Waltham, Mass. You should review completed peer-review worksheets when you grade papers not only to evaluate individual student performance, but also to gauge the success of the peer-review sessions and to determine what you might do to improve them.