Peer review as alearning tool (original) (raw)
Related papers
Student Success
Learning how to give and receive peer review is a skill that science students need support in developing. We included student peer review in an assessment for a large first year science subject. Class time was dedicated to introducing and developing peer review skills and increasing engagement among students and between students and teachers. Students worked in pairs, small groups, and facilitated group discussions and were encouraged to learn from each other. The student peer review exercise provided students with the opportunity to reflect on and improve their work prior to submission. Survey results showed 78% of students agreed that peer review developed their ability to give constructive feedback. Training and resources provision for the teaching staff was crucial to the integration of peer review activities. Supported teaching staff were able to engage with and support the students, and the students valued this engagement and guidance.
Student peer review in the classroom: a teaching and grading tool
It is helpful for instructors to provide students with critique, not only upon completion of a writing assignment but also during the writing process. However, due to time constraints, instructors may not be able to read writing assignments more than once during a particular course, especially in large classes. Students may gain only limited feedback from a single source (the instructor). This paper discusses the use of student peer review to provide students with feedback early in the process of writing a term paper, and to give students experience in reviewing scientific material. Students were assigned a term paper that was then reviewed by classmates. The term paper consisted of the student's laboratory report summarizing the experiments performed during the course, and integrating both lecture and laboratory materials. The review process was double-blind to provide anonymity for both authors and reviewers, but was otherwise handled in a fashion similar to that used by scientific journals. Students were accountable for the quality of their reviews as well as their term papers. Peer review provided students with feedback early in the writing process, and required little additional time investment by the instructor. It also gave students important experience in critical thinking. The qualit)' of the final product (the finished term paper) was improved a result of the experiences of reviewing classmates' work, and receiving and implementing comments from peers. Peer review may be a valuable teaching and grading tool for the instructor who wishes to focus course activities on writing, but has limited resources or time for reviewing writing assignments.
Student peer review as a process of knowledge creation through dialogue
Higher Education Research & Development, 2020
This study contributes to a better understanding of the potential of student peer review in higher education by examining how repeated practice influences student learning. The study reports on the experiences of undergraduate science students who were systematically trained in peer review over three years. Twelve were interviewed in both their second and third year. It was found that multiple experiences had a positive influence in shaping and embedding a culture of peer review in the programme. The reviews used both formal and informal dialogic processes, and through these, students developed an advanced skill set that enabled them to provide and utilise quality feedback. Students saw peer review as a type of research inquiry that led to a deeper understanding of (a) disciplinary knowledge, (b) being a peer reviewer, (c) knowledge about self and (d) knowledge of others. These results demonstrate the impact of long-term training in peer review on students' learning experiences in higher education.
BioScience, 2002
P eer review or peer assessment is a process of evaluating work performance and products by peers. It is a vital part of professional life. For example, peer review is routinely used in two important phases of a research project: proposal evaluation and product assessment. Grant proposals are peer reviewed to ensure the quality, originality, and feasibility of the proposed work (Cole et al. 1982, Gaugler and Freckman 1990, Swift 1998). Research products such as papers for scientific journals are usually peer reviewed as well to enhance the quality of the journals, to maintain the integrity of the authors' work, and to provide accurate information for the scientific community (Waser et al. 1992, Bloom 1999). Despite the importance of peer review in scientific research (Cole et al. 1977, Kostoff 1997), few students receive formal training in reviewing proposals or manuscripts. Although some graduate students are exposed to the peer review process informally through their major professors, many graduate students and the vast majority of undergraduate students never have such experiences. Yet the value of peer review in the classroom has been recognized for many years (Gaillet 1992). Researchers have found that effective peer review in the classroom stimulates learning and critical thinking (
2019
The notion of utilizing peer review to assist student’s performance in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classrooms has been the focus of research, yet there are still some shortcomings emerged in its implementation from both students’ and teachers’ sides. This study aims to determine students’ perspectives towards the implementation of peer review technique in their English writing class. The relevant data of this study are obtained by giving online survey questionnaire consisting of 14 questions regarding their perception towards the implementation of peer review technique in the students’ previous Argumentative Writing classroom of Syiah Kuala University. The responses are analyzed by employing both of quantitative and qualitative method. The result of the analysis indicates that most of the students perceive that peer review is useful for the success of their learning, while at the same time 50% of them still get anxiety while giving feedback due to lack of English competence...
Exploring the use of peer review in large university courses
IxD&A, 2015
Double blind peer review is a standard practice in the scientific community. It acts as a means of validating work as well as of getting feedback to improve it. As such, it seems prudent to also use it as a learning tool in large lectures to provide students with personalized feedback on their work. The general process can be directly adopted for the lecture context, but details need to be modified and adapted to create a better learning experience. The structure of a large lecture has been adjusted to provide the context for a double blind peer review process. Not only has the evaluation of activities during the semester changed to fit in with the double blind peer review, but also the organization of said activities was adapted to accompany the evaluation change. The first semester yielded promising results, but also pointed towards some issues with the current state of the system. We devised a list of design implications for future revisions of the double blind peer review system...