From Wikigogy

• write (peer_evaluation peer_editing)
• college
• China

Originally by Linell Davis, 1999. Copied here with her permission, see talk page.

I also use peer evaluation and editing when I teach writing. I really had no choice about it, because my undergraduate writing classes grew from 16 students each to 30 students each and I was teaching two classes a semester. There is no way to give good feedback on sixty essays week after week. I had to teach the students how to help each other with their writing.

The writing textbook I use, College English Composition: book 2, Organizing an Essay published by Nanjing University Press, emphasizes peer editing. When students are planning an essay, they are encouraged to discuss their ideas with one or two classmates to get feedback from them. Then when they finish their first draft, they exchange papers with classmates for peer editing. After that they write a second draft.

For peer editing I teach the students to pay attention to purpose and audience first. Is the purpose clear? Who is the intended audience? Is the essay appropriate for the intended audience? Will the intended readers find it interesting, attractive, informative?

Then they go on to issues of organization. Is the essay well-organized? Introduction, conclusion, development of the topic? Is there a strong controlling idea or thesis that provides a focus for all the facts/ideas in the essay? Are the paragraphs well-organized. Is there a topic for each paragraph? Is there sufficient concrete detail? Are the author's assertions supported by evidence?

The final item to pay attention to is language. Is the English expression idiomatic? Is it grammatically correct? Does the author need to improve word choice, sentence structure, etc? I tell the students not to spend much time correcting language errors on the first draft. The students will revise their essays, so the sentences they could correct will probably be changed.

When students finish reading their classmates' essays, they write a note to the author using the Praise-Question-Polish format:

1. Praise what you appreciate about the essay. It could be topic, language, humor, introduction or anything else you think is praiseworthy.
2. Question: Ask the author questions to help him/her think about the essay again. For instance, "how do you know?" is a question that will encourage the author to give evidence for a claim. "Who do you want to read this?" will encourage the author to think about audience?
3. Polish: Make suggestions for improving the essay.

Sometimes the editors exchange their views with authors orally. After a couple of months of this I sensed the students were getting tired of the routine, so I tried a few crazy ideas for peer editing. Once I made up names for 3 magazines and told the students to submit their essays to one of them. Then students formed editorial committees to choose a few of the essays to be published in each magazine. After they chose the essays they told the class why they had chosen those particular essays. That is, they had to say what was good about them. Another time I had an essay clinic. Students submitted their essays to one of the clinics according to what "illness" they thought their essay might have. The design clinic was for essays with weak topics, purpose, uncertain audience, etc. Then we had a structure clinic, development clinic, and language clinic. The doctors in each clinic wrote "prescriptions" for the essays they read and referred them to other clinics as needed. After peer editing the students hand in their essays. I make additional comments, but sometimes I only need to say "follow the advice of your peer editor." Then I hand back the essays and the students revise them. Reading the revisions is much less time consuming than reading the first drafts. I just have to see if the student successfully solved the problems in the first draft. After peer editing sessions some students will ask if they can revise before I read their drafts. I always give them permission. After all the objective is get them to take more responsibility for their writing and asking for a chance to revise is a sign that they are doing that.

Mike says he is still analyzing the results of his work on peer evaluation. I have not been as systematic as he has been in assessing the results, but it is my impression that looking at another person's writing analytically helps students look at their own writing analytically. At the same time it is easier to be objective about someone else's writing than about your own. The students also learn that writing is a public act. Someone other than the teacher will read what they write. This helps them to pay attention to the issue of audience and to anticipate readers' responses when they write. They work harder because they do not want to be embarrassed in front of their peers.

--Linell