Ginger V. Shultz

5 articles
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor ORCID: 0000-0002-7285-748X

Loading profile…

Publication Timeline

Co-Author Network

Research Topics

Who Reads Shultz

Ginger V. Shultz's work travels primarily in Rhetoric (66% of indexed citations) · 3 total indexed citations from 2 clusters.

By cluster

  • Rhetoric — 2
  • Composition & Writing Studies — 1

Top citing journals

Counts include only citations from indexed journals that deposit reference lists with CrossRef. Authors whose readers publish primarily in venues without reference deposits will appear less central than they are. See coverage notes →

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

    doi:10.1177/07410883241263542
  2. Reading, receiving, revising: A case study on the relationship between peer review and revision in writing-to-learn
    doi:10.1016/j.asw.2024.100808
  3. Reflections on Learning: Revision Reflections As Insight into the Influences on Students� Revisions on a Writing-to-Learn Assignment
    doi:10.37514/wac-j.2024.35.1.02
  4. Undergraduate Writing Fellow Conceptions of Writing-to-Learn and Quality of Writing
    doi:10.37514/atd-j.2023.20.1-2.02
  5. Utilizing Peer Review and Revision in STEM to Support the Development of Conceptual Knowledge Through Writing
    Abstract

    While many STEM faculty believe Writing-to-Learn to be an effective instructional tool, instructional barriers such as the time and effort required to provide substantive feedback to their students limit the use of writing in STEM classrooms. Incorporating peer review and revision into the writing process can help mitigate these barriers while additionally supporting the learning process. This study presents an analysis of a Writing-to-Learn assignment that incorporates peer review and revision into a large introductory statistics course, where this study specifically focused on whether engaging with these processes results in changes in how students write about the content targeted by the assignment. Our results demonstrate that students made content-focused revisions between drafts that increased the amount of content they explained correctly. Additionally, our study provides evidence that students benefit from reading peers’ work in a content-focused peer review and revision process. Overall, this study shows that incorporating peer review and revision into writing assignments focused on developing content knowledge provides students with substantive feedback and enhances students’ conceptual learning.

    doi:10.1177/07410883211006038