Student peer assessments are structured opportunities for students to provide and receive meaningful feedback on their work from their classmates. Engaging in peer assessment (also called peer review) fosters important skills for both the student doing the review and the one receiving the review. By serving as a reviewer, students learn how to provide constructive feedback. Moreover, students receiving feedback can gain a fresh perspective on their work and make improvements prior to their final submission. By helping students learn how to give and receive constructive feedback, peer assessments provide students with valuable skills that transfer to real-world settings where collaborative work is common. This is especially the case for students in STEM disciplines, where peer review is an important component of the publication process. Partaking in a collaborative process to improve each other’s work also promotes higher engagement with the course material, better understanding evaluation criteria and increases a sense of belonging among students, all of which are known to improve student academic success (Cho and MacArthur, 2010; Gilken and Johnson, 2019).

Best Practices to Incorporate Peer Feedback in Assessments

Peer assessments can improve student work without a proportionate increase in instructor workload. Nonetheless, with adequate instruction and examples to be effective. Expand the boxes below to learn more about best practices and resources to incorporate student peer assessments in your courses.

Before Peer Review

Instructors should identify a particular assignment or task that could benefit from peer-review in the course. This includes multi-step projects and formative assessments (e.g., low-stakes homeworks or 5-minute essays). Ideally, use peer review for formative feedback, and not as a basis for grades since students may sometimes be inconsistent in how the rubric is applied. Instead, consider those assessments on which students have ample time to improve their work in response to the feedback received before a future higher-stakes submission or summative assessment. Some examples of summative assessments which can include a component of peer review on initial drafts include: written essays, storyboards, project reports or presentations. Another way to incorporate peer review is to allow students to reflect on and to a project/presentation, what worked well and what could be done better.

Clearly explain why peer review is important and how it connects to the learning objectives of the course.

Anticipate what tools will be used for the peer-review process, and provide students with instruction and support for using these tools. For example, students can be taught to use the suggesting or track changes feature in Google Docs or MS Word to provide feedback. Certain of documents in which the name of the student or commenter is not known, limiting potential biases in review. You may also ask students to bring in a named copy and an unnamed copy of their work to class for engaging in double-blind peer-review. You can create a to evaluate individual or . Alternatively, you may adopt a template to use or .

Consider in advance what process you will use to assign peer reviewers to students. . Always leave room for flexibility in changing assigned groups depending on student needs.

Set expectations around the timeline for providing feedback and if this will be done as an in-class activity or will be completed outside of the classroom. If the assignment for review is shorter than 4 pages, does not require detailed written feedback and the class sizes are small (< 40 students), consider allocating time in class itself. If assigned outside the classroom, provide students with guidelines regarding the time they should spend to review an assignment. You may also assign points for completing the review, to ensure all students receive feedback on their assignment.

Construct a rubric that allows students to provide detailed feedback–for example, a checklist rubric (docx) or single-point rubric (docx) with space for comments. Alternatively, you may create a feedback form that contains specific process accompanied by a detailed analytic rubric. Co-creating rubrics with students may also provide an additional avenue for students to engage with the material because it requires students to identify and consider on what criteria their work should be evaluated.Ìý

Train students on the rubric so that they can apply it effectively and consistently. For example, you may set aside time in class for Ìýstudents to practice applying the rubric to a sample of work. Then, facilitate a discussion on how students used the rubric and what are ways to provide effective feedback. Consider using at least one class session to discuss best practices in providing feedback, the distinction between reviewing and editing. Remind students that they are evaluating the work and not the person. At the same time, remind them of the vulnerability of the person in sharing their work and avoiding value judgements.

Model the type of feedback students should expect to receive or provide in assessments.This may include providing a short summary of the work, along with what aspects work well and what could be improved on. If needed, take time in class to discuss what good feedback looks like. Some sample prompts include (Bean, 2009):

  1. Write out at least two things that you think are particularly strong about this draft.
  2. Identify two or three aspects of the draft where there is room for growth or improvement.
  3. Make two or three directive statements recommending the most important changes that the writer should make in the next draft.

After Peer Review

The review work has been done; now what? How can you help students integrate what they have learned in the review process and improve their work?

Here are a few options for how to proceed:

  1. Before receiving peer feedback, students do a self-assessment using a rubric or based on embedded prompts. Then, they compare their observations to the peer feedback.
  2. Instead of directly sharing all feedback with individuals or groups of students, as an instructor you may summarize quantitative and qualitative feedback and address common themes during class.Ìý
  3. Students discuss the peer feedback with the instructor to help develop strategies for improvement.
  4. In a non-blind review process, students could discuss the feedback with their peer reviewer to seek clarification and prioritize the comments to address.
  5. After revising their work in response to peer feedback, students can summarize the feedback they received, describe the changes they made in response to the feedback or provide a justification for not incorporating suggested changes.
  6. After revising their work, students can conduct a self-assessment in the form of a memo that describes the changes they made in response to peer review and their reflection on how review improved their work.Ìý

References:

Bean, John C. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom (second edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Center for Teaching Innovation. (n.d.). . Cornell University

Center for Teaching Innovation. (n.d.). . Cornell University

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). . Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338.

Gilken, J.M. & Johnson, H.L. (2021). . Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 45:3, 155-166.

Stearns Center Writing Across the Curriculum (n.d.). . George Mason University.

Stearns Center Writing Across the Curriculum (n.d.). . George Mason University.

WAC Clearinghouse. (2006, April). . Colorado State University.

Further reading and resources:

Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2013). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning (second edition). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Sweetland Center for Writing.(n.d.). . University of Michigan.

Ìý