Abstract
When students are committed to the process, peer review can improve myriad skills; it can enhance written work (Topping, 1998, Mulder et al, 2014), improve collaborative and communication skills (Topping, 2000, Topping, 2009, Mulder et al, 2014, Nicol, 2010), and increase students’ abilities to self-evaluate (Nicol et al, 2014). Self-evaluative skills are hypothesized to contribute benefits beyond the classroom, contributing to overall career and life success (Adachi et al.; Fastre et al.; Nicol et al.).
Yet effective peer review requires a relationship of trust between the reviewer and reviewee. Students must feel their peers will treat them fairly and understand their objectives (Cheng and Warren; Liu and Carless) or they may not feel comfortable exposing their work. When students are able to articulate their needs, and believe peers will understand their goals (Rushton et al.; Cheng and Warren; Davies; Smith et al.; Liu and Carless), student engagement and learning is enhanced.
After two years of research and experimentation, our cross-disciplinary action research group – representing Animation, Creative Writing, Design, Drama, History, Literacy Education, and Literature – has developed a three-part protocol for effective peer review/critique, outlining strategies we’ve found to be helpful before, during, and after the peer review/critique process. This workshop will guide participants through Step I of the Protocol, building a classroom environment to prepare students to engage in the process, in which instructors will learn and practice strategies to use in their classrooms.
References
- Adachi, C., Tai, J. H. M., & Dawson, P. (2018). Academics’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 294-306.
- Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1997). Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 233-239.
- Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in education and training international, 37(4), 346-355.
- Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: the new psychology of success. New York, New York: Penguin Random House, LLC.
- Fastré, G. M., Van der Klink, M. R., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Towards an integrated model for developing sustainable assessment skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 611-630.
- Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher education, 11(3), 279-290.
- Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157-171.
- Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517.
- Nicol, D. (2010). The foundation for graduate attributes: Developing self-regulation through self and peer assessment. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Scotland.
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: A Peer Review Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation In Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
- Rushton, C. (1993). Peer assessment in a collaborative hypermedia environment: A case study. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20(3), 75-80.
- Smith, H., Cooper, A., & Lancaster, L. (2002). Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in education and teaching international, 39(1), 71-81.
- Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review Of Educational Research, 68(3), 249.
- Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.
- Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., & Swanson, I. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-169.
Start Date
27-3-2019 3:00 PM
End Date
27-3-2019 3:50 PM
Room Number
U-Hall 3-092
Presentation Type
Workshop
Disciplines
Arts and Humanities | Education
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Full Text of Presentation
wf_yes
‘I Hate Peer Critique!’: Building a Foundation for Effective Peer Review/Critique
When students are committed to the process, peer review can improve myriad skills; it can enhance written work (Topping, 1998, Mulder et al, 2014), improve collaborative and communication skills (Topping, 2000, Topping, 2009, Mulder et al, 2014, Nicol, 2010), and increase students’ abilities to self-evaluate (Nicol et al, 2014). Self-evaluative skills are hypothesized to contribute benefits beyond the classroom, contributing to overall career and life success (Adachi et al.; Fastre et al.; Nicol et al.).
Yet effective peer review requires a relationship of trust between the reviewer and reviewee. Students must feel their peers will treat them fairly and understand their objectives (Cheng and Warren; Liu and Carless) or they may not feel comfortable exposing their work. When students are able to articulate their needs, and believe peers will understand their goals (Rushton et al.; Cheng and Warren; Davies; Smith et al.; Liu and Carless), student engagement and learning is enhanced.
After two years of research and experimentation, our cross-disciplinary action research group – representing Animation, Creative Writing, Design, Drama, History, Literacy Education, and Literature – has developed a three-part protocol for effective peer review/critique, outlining strategies we’ve found to be helpful before, during, and after the peer review/critique process. This workshop will guide participants through Step I of the Protocol, building a classroom environment to prepare students to engage in the process, in which instructors will learn and practice strategies to use in their classrooms.
References
- Adachi, C., Tai, J. H. M., & Dawson, P. (2018). Academics’ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 294-306.
- Cheng, W., & Warren, M. (1997). Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise. Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), 233-239.
- Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in education and training international, 37(4), 346-355.
- Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: the new psychology of success. New York, New York: Penguin Random House, LLC.
- Fastré, G. M., Van der Klink, M. R., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2013). Towards an integrated model for developing sustainable assessment skills. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 38(5), 611-630.
- Liu, N. F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: the learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher education, 11(3), 279-290.
- Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157-171.
- Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517.
- Nicol, D. (2010). The foundation for graduate attributes: Developing self-regulation through self and peer assessment. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Scotland.
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: a peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking Feedback Practices in Higher Education: A Peer Review Perspective. Assessment & Evaluation In Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122.
- Rushton, C. (1993). Peer assessment in a collaborative hypermedia environment: A case study. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 20(3), 75-80.
- Smith, H., Cooper, A., & Lancaster, L. (2002). Improving the quality of undergraduate peer assessment: A case for student and staff development. Innovations in education and teaching international, 39(1), 71-81.
- Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review Of Educational Research, 68(3), 249.
- Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 20-27.
- Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., & Swanson, I. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-169.
