Archive for the ‘Peer Review’ Category

Horizontal divider

Multimodal Mondays: Using Listicles to Help Students Engage with Sources

posted: 5.18.15 by Andrea Lunsford

Today’s guest blogger is Caitlin L. Kelly, a Marion L. Brittain Postdoctoral Fellow at the Georgia Institute of Technology where she teaches multimodal composition courses using 18th– and 19th-century British literature and serves as a Professional Tutor in the Communication Center. Alongside work on the intersection of religion and genre in British literature of the Long Eighteenth Century, she is also interested in exploring applications of a multimodal approach to composition to traditional literature pedagogy.

One of the most difficult assignments to teach is the one at the heart of most college composition courses: the research project. Taking students from brainstorming a topic to a polished argument over the course of a semester is daunting; in the composition classroom, we are tasked with teaching—under very inorganic circumstances—a research process that should evolve organically. And one of the most challenging parts of that process for many students is learning how to engage with sources once they have found them. This is where the listicle comes into play in my courses. [read more]

Comments Off on Multimodal Mondays: Using Listicles to Help Students Engage with Sources
Categories: Andrea Lunsford, Assignment Idea, Digital Writing, Genre, Guest Bloggers, Multimodal Mondays, Peer Review, Teaching with Technology, Uncategorized, Visual Rhetoric
Read All Andrea Lunsford

Horizontal divider

The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part IV

posted: 4.29.15 by Barclay Barrios

In this series we’ve looked at a few ways to make the craft of peer revision more “crafty.”  All of these exercises tend to be a big hit in my classes and I usually end up with stronger papers to grade because of this work.

But why?  Why do students do this work so enthusiastically and so well?  I have some theories: [read more]

Comments Off on The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part IV
Categories: Activity Idea, Drafting, Learning Styles, Peer Review, Revising, Teaching Advice, Writing Process
Read All Barclay Barrios

Horizontal divider

Multimodal Mondays: Radical Revision ~ The Sequel ~ Student Multimodal Hacks

posted: 4.27.15 by Andrea Lunsford

Today’s guest blogger is Kim Haimes-Korn. She continues her series on Radical Revision – and includes assignments and examples of student projects that you don’t want to miss!

In my last post, Radically Revising the Composition Classroom, I challenged others to hack their traditional, tried and true assignments.  I decided to enact this advice in one of my own classes this semester and gave the same challenge to my students, asking them to Radically Revise a collaborative class project through a multimodal lens.   [read more]

Comments Off on Multimodal Mondays: Radical Revision ~ The Sequel ~ Student Multimodal Hacks
Categories: Andrea Lunsford, Assignment Idea, Digital Writing, Document Design, Guest Bloggers, Multimodal Mondays, Peer Review, Revising, Teaching with Technology
Read All Andrea Lunsford

Horizontal divider

The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part III

posted: 4.22.15 by Barclay Barrios

So far in this series, we’ve looked at coloring (essentially that’s what they’re doing with highlighters), cutting, and taping.  In this part we’re going to move into drawing.

“Drawing the Argument” is one of my favorite class activities when discussing a new reading.  Working in groups, students draw the argument of the essay, locating quotations that support their visual interpretation. [read more]

Comments Off on The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part III
Categories: Activity Idea, Barclay Barrios, Drafting, Peer Review, Teaching Advice, Writing Process
Read All Barclay Barrios

Horizontal divider

Peer Groups in the Technology-Enabled Writing Classroom

posted: 4.21.15 by Steve Bernhardt

I suspect we all use peer review in some form or other. If we can help students become effective peer reviewers, then we give them a skill that helps them improve their writing without a teacherly intervention. Peer review makes writing public, so students see what others are doing and learn indirectly. We also help students become valuable workplace writers, because they know how to interact with others to improve writing within an organization. [read more]

Comments Off on Peer Groups in the Technology-Enabled Writing Classroom
Categories: Collaboration, Pedagogy, Peer Review, Steve Bernhardt, Teaching with Technology, Writing Process
Read All Steve Bernhardt

Horizontal divider

The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part II

posted: 4.15.15 by Barclay Barrios

In my last post, I suggested ways to use highlighters in peer revision.  In this one, we’re moving into dangerous territory—dangerous because scissors are involved (no running!).

Bring a few pairs of scissors to class and some tape.  Ask students to cut up a copy of their paper into individual paragraphs and then to shuffle them.  (You can also ask them to do this part before class, bringing in the cut up paragraphs in an envelope.) Peers are given the individual slips of writing and then asked to put them in the right order, taping them back together. [read more]

Comments Off on The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part II
Categories: Activity Idea, Barclay Barrios, Drafting, Peer Review, Teaching Advice, Writing Process
Read All Barclay Barrios

Horizontal divider

The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part I

posted: 4.8.15 by Barclay Barrios

Though we have diverse approaches to teaching writing, my experience suggests that one of the commonalities we all share is some sort of peer feedback. Whether we call it peer revision or peer editing or something else, there seems to be wide agreement that seeking feedback is an important part of making writing better. The creative writers in my department would perhaps call this part of the “craft” of writing.  We are more likely to call it part of the writing process.  Regardless, in this series of posts I want to riff a bit on that notion of “craft” by sharing some peer revision strategies I use that are “crafty.” These exercises are all class-tested and Barclay-approved.  I have some theories on why they tend to work so well, which I will share in a later post. For now, though… highlighters! [read more]

Comments Off on The “Craft” of Peer Revision: Part I
Categories: Activity Idea, Barclay Barrios, Drafting, Peer Review, Teaching Advice, Writing Process
Read All Barclay Barrios

Horizontal divider

Tutoring: What’s in It for the Tutor?

posted: 11.10.11 by Andrea Lunsford

During the second week of this term’s classes, I had my first tutoring appointment in Stanford’s Hume Writing Center. I don’t have to tutor—after all, I stepped down after 11 years of directing the writing program and am now teaching full-time while I move toward retirement. But I wouldn’t miss these appointments for the world!  Tutoring (or consulting or whatever label you may prefer) is in my blood.  Over the years, I have learned to value, even to cherish, these interactions with students that differ from but are so influential on my role as a classroom teacher.

So when I met my first tutee in October, I was excited:  who would I encounter?  What would the student’s interests and needs be?  Would I be able to help?  When I sat down next to a student near the completion of his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, my heart skipped a beat:  “fingers crossed” was all I could think.  And then this young man talked through his article—which he was writing in the hope that it would be accepted for publication in a prestigious general in his field—explaining  the series of experiments he and his adviser had conducted and what their significance was.  He was direct, providing me with a condensed version of his purpose.  Then he said, “I’ve come especially to talk about my introduction and conclusion, because they don’t do what I want.”  As I talked with him, I learned that he had studied articles published in his target journal and that he was completely dissatisfied with their introductions and conclusions as well as with his own.  He ended by saying that the conclusions in particular were “a complete waste of time.  They just say what the article already said.  Blah, blah, blah.” [read more]

Comments: (1)
Categories: Peer Review
Read All Andrea Lunsford

Horizontal divider

What Works With Peer Review (If That’s What It’s Called)?

posted: 10.20.11 by Andrea Lunsford

I recently followed a very interesting thread on the WPA List about peer review, where colleagues were talking about what this activity should be called, how it can work best, and how it should be evaluated. Some noted that “review” has a negative ring to it and preferred “response” instead. Others worried about how to encourage students to take peer review (or response!) seriously—and how to help students get something out of the process even if their fellow students don’t give them very good advice. Still others discussed ways to deal with students who don’t participate or who show up to class with slipshod responses—or none at all.

Peer review has been a foundational part of writing instruction ever since composition made the turn from “product” to “process,” and that’s a long time. So I’m encouraged to see such lively and engaged debate on this much-used classroom practice:  even our most time-tested strategies need to be scrutinized and rethought.

Over the years, I have certainly made adjustments in the way I use peer review.  First, I have learned to model it carefully for students, sometimes by asking a group from a previous term to come in and enact a substantive review/discussion of one student’s work, sometimes by doing a review myself with a willing student—and then asking for comments and suggestions for how my review could have been more helpful.  In addition, I take time to share research on peer review with my students, telling them that studies have shown that review and revision improve writing exponentially. I also ask them to put their cards on the table, sharing with the class their own experiences (bad as well as good) at being part of peer groups. This discussion inevitably gets to a number of problems: one student trying to dominate others, another not contributing to the conversation, others feeling like they are the ones doing “all the work,” and so on.  I find that talking through these issues in class helps to clear the air and get everyone on the same page: we are all in this together! [read more]

Comments Off on What Works With Peer Review (If That’s What It’s Called)?
Categories: Peer Review
Read All Andrea Lunsford

Horizontal divider

Revising Inside a Classroom Management System

posted: 8.23.11 by Steve Bernhardt

It’s typical for writing teachers to use peer review to help students learn to revise. And as I pointed out in a recent Bits post, we can’t assume that even practicing scientists in companies that rely on documentation are able to offer effective review commentary. Doing so is a refined and complex art.

One reason I like classroom management software is that it provides an environment for structuring and facilitating peer review of draft papers. I now use Sakai, an open-source program, to which we migrated following not-so-good experiences with WebCT (now Blackboard). Neither application is designed for working with classes of writers, and each is clumsy in its own way. But both make it possible to exchange drafts, collect commentary, and create the conditions for learning.

The Forum tool in Sakai, a bulletin board for threaded discussions, offers a pretty good setup for peer review. The instructor can create a topic thread for a given assignment, and students can post their drafts for peer review, along with a message describing the state of the draft and identifying places that need help, under that thread. Posting to the forum makes review a public activity—everyone can see who has posted when. Students can tell whose draft is advanced and whose is sketchy. They can get a sense for how other writers are handling the assignment. They will likely feel a bit of pressure from putting their draft out in front of classmates, where saving face is more critical than in any interaction with an instructor. [read more]

Comments Off on Revising Inside a Classroom Management System
Categories: Peer Review, Teaching with Technology
Read All Steve Bernhardt