Peer Review - what's in it for my learners?

Peer review is very important, as others have said, for building higher level thinking skills. Those skills need to be scaffolded like any other skills, however, and one way to do this, (which I stole from a colleague) is to give students lists of comments from which to choose at first. For example, if it's the first time that students are reviewing to see whether a peer's written evidence backs up a claim that a plant is Japanese Barberry, I might provide this sample list:
* Your evidence includes a description of part of the plant you observed and connects that evidence to the plant ID card's description
* Your evidence includes a description of part of the plant, but doesn't connect the evidence to the species ID card
* Your evidence claims that the plant matches the ID card, but doesn't describe any part of the plant

After students gain more expertise in the types of language and feedback that are meaningful, they can stray away from "You missed a capital letter." toward more meaningful feedback.

Having an essential question and objectives also helps to guide peer review, because students can be directed to keep their comments focused on whether or not the essential question is being answered, or a certain objective is being met with the work being reviewed.

I am a proponent of teaching kids to self-assess. One of the hardest things for my students is to look at an example and compare it to something that isn't as....'pretty'. I know that before they started to write out their first investigation pages I had them look through the Vital Signs database and had them pick out one excellent example and one that needed improvement. It was evident right away that they were only focusing on pictures, I had a number of students pick out examples that had great pictures but had very little written components (one student noted that that was why they picked it less reading). However it was a great opportunity to have them discuss what makes a good piece of written evidence. My only concern is the level of self assessment that 7th graders can handle. At this stage most don't have a very good eye for detail, they tend to gloss over 'boring' parts and focus just on what they find interesting. I feel the ideas in the article would be better suited for older students (at least in intensity).

After doing our field investigation, and while still in the field, we did a quick peer review to make sure that data was recorded (lengths, colors, species characteristics, GPS recorded correctly, etc) prior to leaving. This way students’ didn't rely only on the pictures for their species data or memories for other areas. It also assured the group that they covered all the areas necessary before having to leave.

In the classroom, the team members pooled their data, comparing how data was written, information used and relayed, etc. They then wrote a group team investigation using blank field notes. They then swapped with another group. This group then reviewed and made notes and/or comments, even offering suggestions and perhaps questions for further explanations. The leader of this group, then brought the ‘updated’ field book to the original group and explained their reasoning for the changes and/or comments.

The original group then made the necessary corrections, for a ‘final draft’ field notes. This was then given to me for a ‘final’ review, where I then offered my comments. This was then given back for a ‘final’ copy write-up. This handwritten draft is then put on the computer in ‘Word’ so they just need to copy and paste into the Vital Signs’ fields.

I keep all copies of the field notes in case of absences, so the remaining members can still work on the material. It also allows me to see the progression from initial investigations to the final team one. More importantly, it shows them the progression, and progress, they made!

I am firmly committed to peer review, and believe that its flaws are a reflection of the complexities inherent in authentic work. It is a messy process, indeed, but that should only give us more fuel to aggressively tackle the challenges and commit to making peer review a fundamental part of the ongoing learning experience of experiencing scientific inquiry in the classroom. Is it a pain? Yeah, it's hard. That's why it's so important.

The question as to whether I personally experienced peer review as a student dredged up memories of one lesson I had as a 10th grade English student. In retrospect, my teacher was clearly "experimenting" with using peer review, as we did it once and never repeated it. The experience for me was unforgettable. I had never been exposed to the work of random peers in my classroom before. I got a paper from a kid whose writing level was so simplistic and awkward, I recall being completely overwhelmed with where to start in giving him feedback to improve his writing. I muddled through; don't think I even made it past the first painful paragraph. I'm sure my feedback totally sucked, and I imagine that upon reading it, my teacher threw his hands up in the air and resolved never to try that failed lesson again. But the pathetic reality is that from that day, I didn't find myself in another situation to give feedback on someone's writing until years later in the workplace. And that was scary. Because by that time, the quality of the product really mattered, and I had no tools to describe what needed improving, nor any tact to do it in a way that didn't threaten my relationship with my colleagues. The bottom line is that that skill came eventually, but I had to develop it OUTSIDE of the safety net of academia, and doing so felt wicked risky and stressful. Of all the useless information that I expended energy memorizing and regurgitating over the long span of my academic career, why couldn't the hugely important skill of delivering frank and quality feedback have taken more precedence?

I gotta be honest; that single experience as a learner trying to use peer review was not pleasant. I felt bewildered and inadequate. I wanted to provide useful feedback, but wasn't practiced at it, at all. I think seeing an example of how teachers do it would definitely have helped, before tackling the task. But here's the thing: this is the reason that so many students give lame peer reviews. It's not that they don't care, or that they are too lazy. It's that delivering feedback (especially written) is a really, really hard skill to learn. And if we want kids to learn valuable skills in school, well, that's where our instructional efforts should be focused.

I'm going to just wrap this up by stepping off my high horse and divulging that I haven't done a whole lot of peer review in my career as a teacher. I shy away from it because, well, it's really hard and frustrating. But I liked the tools offered in this article, and think they might really help to improve my ability to get back in there and tackle it some more. And most importantly, by reflecting on the essential value of teaching peer review, my commitment to its importance is rejuvenated. So I'm off to try it again. And again, and again. Because neither I, nor my students, will ever master it. And that, right there, is the reason to keep trying.

While I think that peer review can be very helpful in certain instances, I believe, along with kmonitz, that most students probably wouldn't take it seriously.

Yes, I believe that the norms can be taught and that some students can be very good at it. There are very few students in my sphere of influence that would be able to handle it on more than an occasional basis. Not only that, but it would take a long time to teach and at this point, I have no more room to budge.

Next year with my incoming students I would start the peer review process from the beginning and make sure that they see it as a regular part of their learning process in science. Baby steps, that's how you have to move on some things. Knowing you are moving in the right direction, but maybe taking a little longer to get there.

Do you think middle school students would benefit in similar or different ways? I am skeptical about this working at the middle school level. As much as I would want to think that they could be objective about the work and not about the person, I just don't think they could do it. It would take a lot of practice-- a lot of practice and I'm not sure that I would be willing to invest that amount of time.

What support or training or practice would help middle school students get most value out of peer review? Did the article surprise you, and if so, how? I was surprised that the article advocated peer grading although it seemed geared toward older students. Again, I just don't think that middle school kids, on average, are able to comfortably peer review without letting emotion into their experience and to add the option to give grades seems too much. It would take several sessions of practice with sample pieces to work students into the role of reviewer. They would have to learn how to read work to give valuable feedback.

If you have used peer review in your classroom, share what you did and how your students responded, relating your experience to the ideas in this article. I have only used peer editing in my classroom thus far. Because I don't have major writing pieces in my science classroom, it hasn't been a priority for me as a tool for my students.