You are here:

Online Peer Review: Encouraging Student Response and Development
ARTICLE

, New York City College of Technology, United States ; , Hunter College, United States

Journal of Interactive Learning Research Volume 26, Number 1, ISSN 1093-023X Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

** Invited as a paper from ED-MEDIA 2011 ** This study explored the use of a tailored online peer review program for first-year undergraduate students at an urban college of technology. The program facilitated group peer review in meaningful and technologically elegant ways. Students in a composition class were divided into two groups. One group acted as first reviewers, and the other group acted as second reviewers in a process of linear, two-person blind review. In contrast to a comparison group, these online peer reviewers improved their own writing proficiency with statistical significance. While there were no significant differences in writing gains between the second or first reviewers, patterns seem to emerge regarding the kinds of feedback—micro versus macro-level feedback—which each group gave.

Citation

Lansiquot, R. & Rosalia, C. (2015). Online Peer Review: Encouraging Student Response and Development. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 26(1), 105-123. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 9, 2022 from .

© 2015 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Chien, C.L. (2002). Strategy and self-regulation instruction as contributors to improving students’ cognitive model in an esL program. English for Specific Purposes, 21(3), 261-289. Doi: Review: Encouraging Student Response and Development
  2. Kwok, R., & Ma, J. (1999). Use of a group support system for collaborative assessment. Computers& Education, 32, 109-125.
  3. Lansiquot, R.D. (2013). Real classrooms in virtual worlds: scaffolding interdisciplinary collaborative writing. In A.P. Ayala (series ed.) Smart innovation, systems and technologies: Vol. 17. Intelligent and adaptive educational-learning systems: Achievements and trends (pp. 269-292). New York:
  4. Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better that to receive: the benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43.
  5. Rosalia, C., & Llosa, L. (2009). Assessing the quality of online peer feedback in L2 writing. In P.L. Torres& R. Marriott (eds.), Handbook of research on e-learning methodologies of language acquisition (pp. 322-338). Hershey,

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read