Suggestions for Peer Review
Suggestions for Peer Review In my experience, the Peer Review process can be a difficult aspect of the UWS assignment sequence to implement, and it is my hope that the following model will contribute useful suggestions that may be incorporated into many different course frameworks. These comments are addressed to the context of the Close Reading Essay, but I have found the basic technique adaptable to the other course assignments. To begin the process, I first assign a Peer Review letter, which must be brought to class on the day of our Peer Review session. This assignment (which borrows very heavily from that of Andrew Albin) includes a brief introduction to the concept of essay revision and then presents students with a series of tasks to complete as they read their peers’ essays. These tasks are tied to specific concepts upon which we have focused as a class, and may be adapted to best serve the topic of the paper and the writing skills upon which the class has recently focused. For the Close Reading unit, the students are asked to respond to their peers' Thesis, Evidence and Analysis, Structure, and Citations. In addition, they are asked to respond to any particular questions that their peers may have posed in the cover letters to their drafts. When the students arrive in class, I first have them gather in their assigned groups and exchange the letters they have prepared with their peers. This allows them to read the comments provided by each of their reviewers and ask questions or seek further clarification about any aspect of the letter that is not immediately understandable. I find that this process generally takes about 10 minutes, and I am wary of allowing it to extend longer than 15 minutes, as students inevitably begin drifting into conversations unrelated to the material. As the conversation about the letters and general comments about the papers begin to die down, I call the class to attention and begin giving them short, specific review and revision tasks to perform in their groups. With the Close Reading paper, I often begin with thesis and motive: “Do each of your papers have a thesis and motive? What are they? Are they two separate sentences? Where do they come in the introductory paragraph? You have 5 minutes to discuss this with your group.” Again, as the conversation begins to stray or die down, I call the class to attention and provide another task: “I would like you to think now about evidence in each of the papers. Does each body paragraph contain at least one quote from the primary text? If not, can you think of one that would support that portion of the argument? What is the balance between evidence and analysis in each of the body paragraphs? You have 5 minutes to discuss this with your group.” I continue in this manner for the remainder of the session, interrupting the class whenever the students begin to drift away from their discussion of the papers at hand, and refocusing their attention by providing a new task for them to complete with their peer review group. I have found this process successful over several semesters, and believe that it provides an effective way to reinforce many of the writing skills, grammatical points, and revision lessons that we teach during the course of the UWS. I have appended below a brief class outline for my Peer Review sessions as well as my assignment for the peer review letter, described above, and I would welcome any questions or suggestions.
Adam Rutledge (2011)