Peer Editing
Faculty asked students to edit or comment on each other’s work in class.
About
The ability to write well and persuasively is one of the explicit goals of a college education, and peer editing is a time-honored activity that Bucknell faculty feel can help achieve it. As students advance from being novice writers, peer editing helps them practice the kind of critical analysis of arguments that they can subsequently use to improve their own academic work. Because students often have a long way to move, this skill needs to be practiced repeatedly so they can build their skills up over time. If students are not committed to the process, or do not trust each other, they can do shallow work and remain at the novice level, so faculty need to carefully structure the expectations and steps of these powerful interactions.
The original study's data and analysis for "Peer Editing" can be found on this link.
What Faculty Have To Say
Strengths (11)
- Students see other styles and quality:
- Can compare and contrast with their own
- Helps reveal argument and evidence
- Puts students in a helping role
- Teaches constructive feedback
- Helps with assessment
- Models scholarly practice
- Shows writing as a process, not a product
- Shows a broader audience than the professor
- Motivates students
- Makes the assignment more serious
Weaknesses (6)
- Takes a lot of time
- Lack of trust in peers creates varied buy-in
- Critical skills and writing expertise may be lacking
- Feedback is weak if they don’t read the texts
- Varied writing quality can stifle conversation
- They are too naive and kind to really make this work
Pedagogy Usage
Bucknell faculty was asked their best estimate for how often in the semester they used Peer Editing and the average class time it took.
Average Duration: 27 min (mode=30)
Remote Suggestions
There are numerous benefits to having students review each other's work. They get a window into the quality of other students' writing, they get feedback on their own work in a low stakes, formative manner, and they improve their writing without adding to the grading load of the instructor. It is important to establish clear guidelines for the peer editing sessions, which could include rubrics, checklists, or summative responses. Bucknell's Writing Center recommends a process where the writer reads their paper out loud, while the peer-editor takes notes to share at the finish. Contact them for more information. Faculty have developed many different methods, but in a remote or hybrid course, it will be important to set clear expectations for these online sessions.
Resources for Additional Learning
Articles & Books
- Why Peer Review? https://app.shoreline.edu/doldham/Why%20Peer%20Review.htm
- Peer Editing/Revising. University of Washington. http://depts.washington.edu/pswrite/Handouts/PeerEditing.pdf
- Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. Bean, John C. (1996).
Websites
- University of Washington Center for Teaching and Learning
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology