Student Peer Review An introductory tutorial. The peer review process Conduct study Write manuscript Peer review Submit to journal Accept Revise Reject.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Methodology and Explanation XX50125 Lecture 3: Interviews and questionnaires Dr. Danaë Stanton Fraser.
Advertisements

An introductory tutorial
Doug Elliott Professor, Critical Care Nursing The final step: Presentation and publication Research Workshop: Conducting research in a clinical setting.
Professor or Editor? Time-Saving Strategies for Effective Grading of Writing Assignments DR. DAVID S. HOGSETTE.
HOW TO WRITE AN ACADEMIC PAPER
BOOK REVIEW typically evaluates recently-written works
 Take Roll  Discussion – BA 8  Questions?  Tips for revising the introduction  Workshop Time  Homework for next week.
Assisting Peers to Provide W orthwhile Feedback UC Merced SATAL Program.
Week 8: Ms. Lowery.  Large-scale revision and examining higher- order concerns  Revision techniques for content, structure, and adherence to the assignment.
Week 8: Ms. Lowery.  Large-scale revision and examining higher- order concerns  Revision techniques for content, structure, and adherence to the assignment.
WRITING CRITIQUE GROUP GUIDELINES Writing responses to your group members’ work and receiving responses from others is the most important step in revising.
Chapter 12 – Strategies for Effective Written Reports
Perfecting Your Portfolio.  Apply what you have learned.  Reflect on your progress.  Demonstrate your writing competence.
1 Practical Skills: Thesis Statements Sarah Prince, PhD Writing Center Instructor.
EVALUATING WRITING What, Why, and How? Workshopping explanation and guidelines Rubrics: for students and instructors Students Responding to Instructor.
Providing Constructive Feedback
Introduce the Peer Review Project
COWL Pilots in Economics These slides contain tips on using the COWL site for peer review Peer review means giving and receiving feedback on draft assignments.
Looking at Texts from a Reader’s Point of View
Proofreading, Editing & Revising Customized & Workplace Training AAI/Portland Community College Facilitated by George Knox.
The Peer Review Process. What is a Peer Review? A peer review is a formal review of a document produced by a colleague, fellow scholar, or expert. Peer.
BOOK REVIEW. typically evaluates recently-written works offers a brief description of the text’s key points often provides a short appraisal of the strengths.
A method for preparation and execution By Keith Barker-Jones.
Peer Review Expectations Practice With Sentence Types.
Essay Writing Tips Presented by: Calumet College Student Peer Advisors Date: Thursday, January 27, 2011.
Academic Essays & Report Writing
The Writing Process The process of writing varies for each individual who sets out to begin a task, however as a high school student, you are still developing.
How to Revise an Essay. Done-ness  After you finish the first draft of an essay, a sense of calm settles over your body. “At last,” you say, “I’m done.”
How to Evaluate Student Papers Fairly and Consistently.
Module 5 Week 11 Supplement 12. SPEAKING TRUTH EFFECTIVELY How to provide insightful and effective peer reviews.
Writing Welcome to Lesson #23 Today you will learn: 1.To evaluate your 1 st draft. 2.To give feedback on peer work. 3.To take new ideas to revise and edit.
Start of class Sign out a computer and logon – Must share - 15 computers Have your final project folder If you were absent, look in the box Have out your.
Learning Objective Chapter 6 Business Writing Copyright © 2001 South-Western College Publishing Co. Objectives O U T L I N E Developing Written Documents.
MedEdPORTAL Reviewer Tutorial Contact MedEdPORTAL
How to Satisfy Reviewer B and Other Thoughts on the Publication Process: Reviewers’ Perspectives Don Roy Past Editor, Marketing Management Journal.
Critical Thinking Lesson 8
College Writing Survival Guide. Before Classes Start Find out about the different services offered  Communications Centre – Fennell Campus call ext.
Welcome to Seminar 8 “The wastebasket is a writer’s best friend,” by Isaac Bashevis Singer. -- Why do you think that is ?
GRAMMAR: RUN-ON SENTENCES AND MORE. Run On Sentences This chapter starts on p. 125 of your Pathways textbook. A RUN-ON occurs when two (or more) independent.
Textbook Recommendation Reports. Report purpose u Starts with a stated need u Evaluates various options –Uses clearly defined criteria –Rates options.
Gasp! An Essay! What do I do now?. Attitude is Everything! Don't worry! If you feel overwhelmed by the assignment, think of it as a series of small, manageable.
 An article review is written for an audience who is knowledgeable in the subject matter instead of a general audience  When writing an article review,
Written Presentations of Technical Subject Writing Guide vs. Term paper Writing style: specifics Editing Refereeing.
Instructor Availability AIM address: EleBranch Office Hours: Mondays & Thursdays 9:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. And by appointment.
 Reading Quiz  Peer Critiques  Evaluating Peer Critiques.
How to publish paper in journal. Step 1.Familiarize yourself with potential publications.
Technical Writing: An Editor’s Perspective Michael K. Lindell Hazard Reduction & Recovery Center Texas A&M University.
Welcome Please get out your rough draft and get ready for a peer editing workshop! You need a funky colored pen. Random fact of the day: 1.
Writing Exercise Try to write a short humor piece. It can be fictional or non-fictional. Essay by David Sedaris.
DISCUSS WORKSHOPS AND PEER EDITING How to get the most out of your Peer Review.
APA Style Abstract.
Smart Reading Strategies Webinar Presentation. How to use this recording Watch Do activities Webinar slides & further resources:
Developing an Effective First Draft of your Manuscript Start writing !!
ENG 113: INTRODUCTION TO COMPOSITION THE ART OF COMPOSITION.
Abstract  An abstract is a concise summary of a larger project (a thesis, research report, performance, service project, etc.) that concisely describes.
B200- TMA Requirements 1. Page Layout A cover page must contain the following: the name of university, name and title of the course, TMA number and title,
REPORTING YOUR PROJECT OUTCOMES HELEN MCBURNEY. PROGRAM FOR TODAY: Report Reporting to local colleagues Reporting to the Organisation Tips for abstract.
Reporting your Project Outcomes Helen McBurney. Program for today: Report Reporting to local colleagues Reporting to the Organisation Tips for abstract.
Revising Your Paper Paul Lewis With thanks to Mark Weal.
Eliciting Effective Peer Feedback Edward F. Gehringer Department of Computer Science North Carolina State University The Peerlogic project has been funded.
Why Peer Review? Rationale #4
ESSAY WRITING SKILLS How to improve them.
Why Peer Review? Rationale #4
From Revising to Editing: Working with Peer Groups
Revising and editing Week 3.
Unit 4 Introducing the Study.
Analysis of Figurative Language & Reader’s Understanding
April 25th, 2017 CEGO 2: Brendan, Lida, Ivan and Lindsay
Peer Reviews Tips for the author.
Writing A critical Review
Presentation transcript:

Student Peer Review An introductory tutorial

The peer review process Conduct study Write manuscript Peer review Submit to journal Accept Revise Reject

What is student peer review? Students give & receive feedback on each other’s work Use feedback to improve assignment before final assessment Objectives: Critically evaluate Highlight strengths & weaknesses Offer suggestions for improvement

How does it work? Step 1: Prepare & submit a draft copy of assignment Step 2: Review 1-3 assignments Step 3: Receive feedback on own assignment Step 4: Incorporate feedback & submit final assignment Process is “double blind” to ensure fairness

What are the benefits? Feedback before assessment allowing time to improve Get insights into your own work by reviewing other assignments Learn from comparison by seeing other students’ work Improve understanding of subject matter Develop generic skills – Critical thinking – Problem solving – Delivering constructive feedback

Writing a review When writing a review: Aim for balance – highlight strengths as well as areas for improvement Be specific – include explanations & examples (page or line numbers) Prioritise – attend major issues first (message, structure, organisation) then move onto finer detail Focus – on material & content (NOT the writer) Be diligent & respectful – take care & think about how you would feel if you received the review

Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback Helpful feedback is: Constructive Specific Balanced Succinct Respectful vs. Unhelpful feedback is:  Too positive or too negative  General & unspecific  Rambling  Aggressive – makes reader feel ‘attacked’

1. What are the main strengths of this report?  Unhelpful comment: “Your report was really good! I enjoyed reading it.” Author’s response: “I’m flattered you liked my report, but I don’t have a sense of what you thought was good about it.” Helpful comment: “This report was succinct and well written. The aims of the report were clear and I found it easy to identify your take- home messages...” Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback

2. Where are the main areas for improvement?  Unhelpful comment: “Your report was poorly written and hard to read!” Author’s response: “This comment doesn’t really help me to improve anything!” Helpful comment: “There are a few areas that might make this report stronger. Expanding the Introduction to include more background information would help set the scene a little more (para 2). The arguments could also be strengthened by adding additional references, for examples lines 3, 16 and 55...”

Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback 3a. Is the balance between the sections about right?  Unhelpful comment: “No – there wasn’t enough space left for covering the background of the study.” Helpful comment: “The balance feels very good; however you may consider the possibility of expanding the background section with greater information on theoretical concepts being tested” Author’s response: “Although stating good and bad points, none of it was portrayed negatively. The comments were given helpfully, with clear points for me to follow.”

Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback 3b. Is the balance between the sections about right?  Unhelpful comment: “The overall balance was good, with no section out-weighing any other at all.” Author’s response: “Very positive review, but not much given that I can improve on - I highly doubt it was almost perfect.” Helpful comment: “Not the best balance: The introduction and rationale sections were too lengthy. While very clear, they could be trimmed down quite a bit and made to be much more concise. For example, I think lines 108 to 113 are unnecessary...”

Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback 4a. Did you feel the article had good flow and structure?  Unhelpful comment: “The paper flows really well from one section to the next and there is a logical progression.” Helpful comment: “It had good flow and structure from paragraphs 1-5, but somewhat lost it’s flow from then on. This can be fixed by adjusting the order in which you present your points. For instance, in paragraph 2...” Author’s comment: “Thanks for this comment – it was a good mix of positive comments and suggestions for improvement. It was insightful and helped me improve my paper.”

Helpful vs. unhelpful feedback 4b. Did you feel the article had good flow and structure?  Unhelpful comment: “The article flowed really nicely and it was easy to follow the author’s train of thought” Helpful comment: “Not the best balance: The introduction and rationale sections were too lengthy. While very clear, they could be trimmed down quite a bit and made to be much more concise. For example, I think lines 108 to 113 are unnecessary...” Author’s comment: “This comment is much more helpful because it gives me specific areas I can improve.”

“I like the writing style, and I think the article is relatively easy to follow and the paragraphs are well linked. The article might be stronger if some of the sentences were more simple and succinct such as line 1 and 7 in paragraph 1, and line 3 in paragraph 4.” Example review 1 Balanced? Constructive? Specific? Clear?

Example review 2 “This paper has poor structure and flow. There are several grammatical and spelling errors and some of the paragraphs should be shortened. I got confused about what you were trying to say at some points.” Balanced? Constructive? Specific? Clear?

“Some sentences lacked commas where there should have been one, or were too long at times (e.g. line 34 and line 41). Otherwise, the article as a whole had a smooth flow and the intent behind each paragraph clear and understandable.” Example review 3 Balanced? Constructive? Specific? Clear?

The review form Review questions are aligned with assessment criteria:

Writing a review: summary Read the draft thoroughly Annotate/make notes Decide on the strengths/areas for improvement Complete review form Be specific, constructive & balanced Proof-read review!

Receiving feedback When you receive a review: Understand that reviews will vary in quality Take time to gather your thoughts & digest the comments Think about every comment – even if you disagree, consider if it will be an issue for other readers Recognise the review as an opportunity for reflection & improvement

Receiving feedback: tips Don’t panic! Read all the comments & make notes Take time to reflect Address major issues Tackle smaller points Proof-read final document

Responding to reviewers Rate the reviews you have received along a scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree) according to: Balance – did the review both highlight strengths & suggest areas for improvement? Insight – did the review point out things you hadn’t thought of? Helpfulness – did the review contain specific suggestions you were able to implement? Authoritativeness – was it clear this reviewer knew their stuff? Clarity – was the review well-written and easy to understand?