Recent Changes - Search:

CompFAQs Home

CBW Home (new window)

Basic Writing @ CompFAQs

Feedback and Basic Writing

Technology Tools

Generation 1.5 Students

Teaching Basic Writing

Assess & Respond

Course (Re)Design

Teaching Strategies

Basic Writing and Service-Learning

Teaching Reading in Basic Writing

ELL Student Writing

Trends Shown in the CBW Survey of Basic Writing Programs

Basic Writing Resources

Best Practices Home

Personal Writing

Collaborative Practices
Course Credit
Theme-Based Courses

BW Teacher Reading List

BW Grad Syllabi Home

edit SideBar

Peer Review Bibliography

BestPractices-Writing Instruction

For more resources, visit CompPile and use “peer evaluation” as a search term.

Bruffee, Kenneth A. Collaborative Learning; Higher Education, Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge Second Edition. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999.
Casey, Moira E. “Rotating Teacher Participation in Workshop Groups.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College. Mar. 2005: 278–281. In this “Instructional Note,” Casey reports her frustration with the “often superficial” responses her students offer in peer-review. She finds success in eliciting more substantive comments as well as increased responsiveness to those comments on the part of student-writers when she participates in groups on an irregular basis.
Christian, Barbara. “The Read-Around Alternative to Peer Groups.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College. Mar. 2000: 308–311. This article argues that the opportunity to respond anonymously in writing to peer papers is valuable for students in basic writing courses who may be reluctant to respond critically to one another’s work in face-to-face situations. Student-writers respond in writing to the comments of their classmates, thereby providing an opportunity not only for student-writers to defend their original decisions but also for student-writers to analyze their peers’ comments closely before revising their text.
Crank, Virginia. “Asynchronous Electronic Peer Response in a Hybrid Basic Writing Classroom.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College. December 2002: 145–155. Crank reports her observations of using asynchronous electronic peer response methods in a basic writing course. Benefits include carefully composed responses that themselves amount to a writing exercise, closer reading and use of textual citations to support response due to the cut-and-paste feature of email, and increased time in which to read, reread, and analyze a text thoroughly before responding in contrast to in-class, face-to-face review.
Fox, Tom. Defending Access: A Critique of Standards in Higher Education Portsmouth, N.H.: Boynton/Cook, 1999.
Fox, Thomas. “Race and Gender in Collaborative Learning.” In Writing With: New Directions in Collaborative Teaching, Learning, and Research. Sally Barr Reagan, Thomas Fox, and David Bleich, eds. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994. Here Fox, while “searching for ways that [collaborative learning’s] power can be used to provide educational contexts for silenced groups to speak and help higher education become more democratic”, notes that small groups tend to reproduce the power structure of the larger society along racial, class, and gender lines (112). In response, he offers a “broad and tentative” set of guidelines for preserving the radical potential of small-group collaboration (119).
Grobman, Laurie. “Building Bridges to Academic Discourse: The Peer Group Leader in Basic Writing Peer Response Groups.” Journal of Basic Writing. Fall 1999. Vol. 18, No. 2: 47–68.
Harris, Joseph. “Negotiating the Contact Zone.” Journal of Basic Writing 41.1 (1995): 27–42.
Holt, Mara. “The Value of Written Peer Criticism.” College Composition and Communication. Oct. 1992. Vol. 43, No. 3: 384–392. Holt argues that written peer criticism elicits more substantive analysis and also provides students with an opportunity to practice written textual analysis. She offers a method of peer-review that synthesizes “exercises from Peter Elbow and Pat Belanoff’s book Sharing and Responding with the series of written peer critiques Kenneth Bruffee describes in his text A Short Course in Writing” (384).
Houp, G. Wesley. “The Interpretive-Paraphrase Workshop.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College. May 2004: 408–411. Here Houp describes his use of peer-review to provide student-writers with the language necessary to talk about writing and texts. He uses Ann Berthoff’s concept of “interpretive-paraphrase” to facilitate student-writers in “offering concrete, substantive suggestions in the form of inquiry” in face-to-face peer-review (409).
Rubin, Lois. “’I Just Think Maybe You Could…’ Peer Critiquing through Online Conversations.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College. May 2002: 382–411. Rubin reports on her decade of experience “trying to use the computer for peer critiquing in [her] composition courses” and the format she currently employs with success (383). She offers analysis of the quality of electronic peer critique discourse, length of response, conventions of politeness, and student response to peer evaluations.

Edit - History - Print - Recent Changes - Search
Page last modified on April 26, 2006, at 10:27 PM