Focus: Peer Revision

It has been said that the greater the writer, the more he revises. Revision is an essential component in the writing process, and quite possibly, the most difficult to execute. At its core, revision is the ability to look critically at one's own work. This skill, once mastered, is one of the most important skills a writer at any level can obtain. Peer revision is one of the most effective tools in teaching this ability. Since so much in writing and life relies on the ability to assess one's self honestly, teachers, tutors, and students must work together to utilize this writing resource effectively.

Peer revision involves equal participation from two (or more) parties in analyzing the structure, content, and mechanics of a piece of writing and offering suggestions for revision. Ideally, this process sparks a dialogue about writing and builds critical skills necessary in self evaluation and revision. The fact that these sessions usually take place between two peers makes the process much less formal than a tutoring session. There is a lot more opportunity for reader reactions such as, "..this made me feel" and " didn't get this." Another benefit to peer revision is chances are, the other student is also intimately familiar with the assignment and maybe even the text and materials. This aspect of joint familiarity furthers the discussion which benefits both students equally. Revision is a skill that must be mastered by all students, not just those adept at writing. Honest and critical evaluation crucial to self improvement.

Many educators avoid peer revision for several valid reasons. The foremost concern of teachers and tutors is that students will not take the activity seriously. They fear that students will waste the allotted time socializing and doing other things. Another concern about peer revision is that less advanced writers may not know what to look for when revising a peer's paper. This inexperience may lead some students to believe that peer editing is a form of spelling and punctuation check. On the contrary, those students who do have feedback to give might be hesitant in speaking it for fear of stepping on toes and being offensive. All of these concerns are legitimate, but they also serve as evidence for the need of peer revision education.

Therefore, I am providing a peer revision resource that writing center tutors can utilize to teach peer editing to students. I believe this can be taught most effectively if tutors spend time discussing peer revision in the classroom, but it can also be done in an individual writing center session. I believe that the importance of peer editing within the context of one paper and within the much broader context of life is vital to success and therefore, must be learned as an integral part of the writing process.

The following is a list of helpful tools that generate effective peer revision

The rubric/checklist

A well-crafted rubric, paired with an editing checklist is crucial to the writing and peer revision. Although the rubric generally comes with the assignment from the teacher and it is not the responsibility of the peer reviser, it can be very useful for the writer to write with the rubric in mind. A well written paper is one that follows the guidelines in the rubric very carefully. Once the paper has been crafted, the peer reviser can make good use of the rubric by using it as a sort of checklist. This method is very useful for those students who are overwhelmed by the task of editing and do not know where to start.

Should there not be a rubric for the assignment, or even if there is, a checklist is another very helpful tool in peer editing. These should most probably be designed by the tutor and/or teacher and then given to the students. There are several generic checklists which include items such as spelling, grammar, capitalization, topic and concluding sentences� Tutors can also create more specific checklists for specific types of writing, audiences, and styles. The following checklist is one composed by Kappa Delta Pi, The International Honor Society in Education, for the specific case of letter writing. This is a self checklist, however, it can easily be adapted to a peer review perspective.

Letter-Writing Checklist __My letter tells the problem __My letter tells details about the problem __My letter tells why the problem happened __My letter tells how the problem was solved __My letter is complete __I use the form for a letter with a greeting, body, and closing __I use words that make my meaning clear. I do not use the same words over and over __I try to spell words correctly __My sentences and proper names begin with a capital letter __My sentences end with a period, exclamation mark, or question mark

Descriptive Outline

The descriptive outline is one of Kenneth Bruffee's techniques discussed in Mara Holt's article, "The Value of Written Peer Criticism." A descriptive outline is simply a paragraph by paragraph explanation of what is being said and how the paragraph functions as a part of the whole. Typically, both the writer and the peer critic will read the paper and develop a descriptive outline. The real benefit of this exercise comes from the discussion that ensues when the two students compare the descriptive outlines of the same paper. This is a great way to identify topic and idea based issues that are otherwise hard to pinpoint.

Student Accountability

One of the less creative ways of addressing the issue of students who don't take peer revision seriously is student accountability. Basically this method involves the teacher's judgment of how much effort the peer reviser put into the project. This is most easily assest by comparing the revised draft to the final draft. The grade component associated with the effort put into revision is an effective way of motivating students to take the exercise seriously; however, it is hard to give an absolute fair grade based on something so intangible.

The Art of Suggestion

Since many students struggle with the thought of making suggestions about a peer's paper, the art of suggestion is an important topic to discuss in the classroom. It is very important to instill in students a sense of the balance between appropriate and inappropriate suggestion. A good way for the student doing the revising to generate suggestions is to ask him/her self several questions.

Where was I confused when reading this paper? Was there anything I did not understand? Is there any place where I felt uncomfortable as a reader? Do I feel like the writer knew the topic well?

Those sort of questions give the student a basis for suggestion making. Commenting on another persons work is one of the hardest aspects of peer revision, but it is necessary and very helpful. Classroom discussion about the difficulties that arise in this situation and a review of questions for the reviser are helpful tools to sharpen this skill.

Sources:

"Building a Whole-Language Writing Program." Kappa Delta Pi Record. 39 (2003): 74-79.

Holt, Mara. "The Value of Written Peer Criticism." College Composition and Communication. 43 (October 1992): 384-392.