Student Experiences With Peer Review and Revision for Writing-to-Learn in a Chemistry Course Context

Solaire A. Finkenstaedt-Quinn University of Michigan–Ann Arbor ; Safron L. Milne ; Michael N. Petterson University of Michigan–Ann Arbor ; Jasen Chen ; Ginger V. Shultz University of Michigan–Ann Arbor

Abstract

Peer review is useful for providing students with formative feedback, yet it is used less frequently in STEM classrooms and for supporting writing-to-learn (WTL). While research indicates the benefits of incorporating peer review into classrooms, less research is focused on students’ perceptions thereof. Such research is important as it speaks to the mechanisms whereby peer review can support learning. This study examines students’ self-reported approaches to and perceptions of peer review and revision associated with WTL assignments implemented in an organic chemistry course. Students responded to a survey covering how they approached peer review and revision and the benefits they perceived from participating in each. Findings indicate that the assignment materials guided students’ approaches during both peer review and revision. Furthermore, students described various ways both receiving feedback from their peers and reading their peers’ drafts were beneficial, but primarily connected their revisions to receiving feedback.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
10.1177/07410883241263542
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (5)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Written Communication
  3. Computers and Composition
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
Also cites 63 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1002/tea.3660310910
  2. 10.37514/ATD-J.2016.13.4.13
  3. 10.3200/CTCH.53.1.27-31
  4. 10.1016/j.asw.2017.03.001
  5. 10.1037/xap0000119
  6. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00945
  7. 10.37514/PER-B.2009.2324.2.14
  8. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00660
  9. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  10. 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354
  11. 10.17239/jowr-2016.08.01.03
  12. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
  13. 10.1037/a0021950
  14. 10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1
  15. 10.1080/02602938.2020.1730765
  16. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00018
  17. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00313
  18. 10.1039/C9RP00292H
  19. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01482
  20. 10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00711
  21. 10.20429/ijsotl.2023.17118
  22. 10.1016/j.asw.2024.100808
  23. 10.1007/BF00119655
  24. 10.1039/D0RP00266F
  25. 10.1187/cbe.17-10-0212
  26. 10.1016/j.asw.2021.100530
  27. 10.3102/003465430298487
  28. 10.1080/02602938.2018.1545896
  29. 10.1080/02602938.2018.1424318
  30. 10.1016/j.asw.2017.10.002
  31. 10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6
  32. 10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.02
  33. 10.17239/jowr-2015.07.01.08
  34. Klein P. D., Boscolo P. (2016). Trends in research on writing as a learning activity. Journal of Writing Rese…
  35. 10.17239/jowr-2012.04.02.4
  36. 10.1016/j.asw.2023.100725
  37. 10.1016/j.jslw.2008.06.002
  38. 10.1002/sce.21454
  39. 10.1039/C8RP00090E
  40. 10.17226/13165
  41. 10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x
  42. 10.1080/02602931003786559
  43. 10.1080/03075070600572090
  44. 10.1080/02602938.2021.1924620
  45. 10.1080/02602938.2013.795518
  46. 10.17239/jowr-2009.01.02.2
  47. 10.17239/jowr-2016.08.02.03
  48. 10.1039/D1RP00181G
  49. 10.1080/03075079.2010.483513
  50. 10.1187/cbe.11-08-0064
  51. 10.1021/bk-2013-1145.ch009
  52. 10.1039/C8RP00260F
  53. 10.3102/0034654307313795
  54. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008
  55. 10.1080/00405840802577569
  56. 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.001
  57. 10.1039/D1RP00007A
  58. 10.1039/D1RP00301A
  59. 10.1039/C9RP00185A
  60. 10.1080/00461520.2016.1207538
  61. 10.3102/0002831220945266
  62. 10.17239/jowr-2021.12.03.02
  63. 10.1039/D3RP00197K
CrossRef global citation count: 1 View in citation network →