| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Keeley

Page history last edited by Priscilla Patten 5 years, 8 months ago

Keeley, S. (2014). Peer Editing in College Composition: A Teacher's Analysis of Successful

            Practices. Writing & Pedagogy, 6(2), 379-397.

Article Summary

In this article, Keeley investigated three other professors’ peer-editing techniques that they employed in their composition classes in order to determine which technique to use in her own composition classes.  Keeley pointed out the benefits as well as challenges of peer editing by sharing the results of a classroom study that she conducted in a composition course at Wake Technical Community College in Raleigh, North Carolina. In addition to Keeley querying three composition professors, she also surveyed a total of 60 students from two of her first-year composition classes. Students participated in four types of peer editing workshops—Peer Editing in Groups of Two, Peer Editing in Groups of Three, Round-Robin Workshop, and Buddy Reading Workshop. Ninety percent of her students indicated positive reactions to peer editing techniques. This author used several practices and showed how to make the peer-editing techniques meet the essentials of each class setting.

Article Assessment

Keeley has effectively made the case that peer-editing techniques should be employed in first-year college English classes. Among Keeley’s strengths included her initially researching approaches to peer editing from other composition instructors by sharing the questionnaire, her having tested those approaches and having shown how to implement them, her having shared students’ responses on questionnaires, and her having shared clear analysis and reflection of the results. Keeley’s weakness in this article was that she did not satisfactorily address how to provide various ways to include students within a first-year college English class who may be reluctant or even refuse to participate in the peer-editing process altogether. Although Keeley mentioned a number of her students who were dissatisfied with the time constraints of a typical college class of 50 minutes, she only mentioned one alternative way that show teachers how to adequately cope with these time constraints.

Key Article Quotation

Subject: The Value of Peer Editing Workshops

Keeley (2014) asserted, “Peer editing workshops can be valuable to students as both writers and editors. To increase the benefit of this activity, instructors should alter the methods of peer editing workshops throughout the semester” (p. 391).

Keeley, S. (2014). Peer Editing in College Composition: A Teacher's Analysis of Successful

            Practices. Writing & Pedagogy, 6(2), 379-397.

Article Summary

In this article, Keeley investigated three other professors’ peer-editing techniques that they employed in their composition classes in order to determine which technique to use in her own composition classes.  Keeley pointed out the benefits as well as challenges of peer editing by sharing the results of a classroom study that she conducted in a composition course at Wake Technical Community College in Raleigh, North Carolina. In addition to Keeley querying three composition professors, she also surveyed a total of 60 students from two of her first-year composition classes. Students participated in four types of peer editing workshops—Peer Editing in Groups of Two, Peer Editing in Groups of Three, Round-Robin Workshop, and Buddy Reading Workshop. Ninety percent of her students indicated positive reactions to peer editing techniques. This author used several practices and showed how to make the peer-editing techniques meet the essentials of each class setting.

Article Assessment

Keeley has effectively made the case that peer-editing techniques should be employed in first-year college English classes. Among Keeley’s strengths included her initially researching approaches to peer editing from other composition instructors by sharing the questionnaire, her having tested those approaches and having shown how to implement them, her having shared students’ responses on questionnaires, and her having shared clear analysis and reflection of the results. Keeley’s weakness in this article was that she did not satisfactorily address how to provide various ways to include students within a first-year college English class who may be reluctant or even refuse to participate in the peer-editing process altogether. Although Keeley mentioned a number of her students who were dissatisfied with the time constraints of a typical college class of 50 minutes, she only mentioned one alternative way that show teachers how to adequately cope with these time constraints.

Key Article Quotation

Subject: The Value of Peer Editing Workshops

Keeley (2014) asserted, “Peer editing workshops can be valuable to students as both writers and editors. To increase the benefit of this activity, instructors should alter the methods of peer editing workshops throughout the semester” (p. 391).

Annotated by Priscilla Patten (2018)

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.