• 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!



Page history last edited by Mariah Fairley 5 years, 2 months ago

Woodward, G. M. (2015). Peer review in the classroom: Is it beneficial? Literacy Learning: The Middle Years23(1), 40.



This article reviews some of the literature on peer review, sharing principles and structures to engage students on a deeper level during the process. Woodward starts off by elaborating on the various labels or forms that the peer review process has taken – including peer editing, peer response, peer evaluation, and peer conferencing – and discusses the merits of each. He suggests that the way in which we label the process strongly influences the focus of the peer review. He also suggests that rather than just choosing a form, we should consider affordances for making the peer review process more meaningful and engaging for students, whichever form we end up using. Woodward goes on to describe these affordances, including social interaction, accountability, groupings, sharing, modelling, questioning, and timing.



This article does a really good job of distinguishing the differences between the various types of peer review currently being employed in the composition classroom. By distinguishing these types in the ways that he does, as well as in describing a number of affordances for improving the quality of peer review, Woodward helps the reader to see some of the complexities of the process that they might otherwise have overlooked. For example, the reader might not have thought about the benefits of peer review partners discussing their work orally with each other, and if they do so, how the activity might be structured to best facilitate engagement and appreciation. Another useful idea is that students can provide feedback to their partners on the comments that they have received from them, thus increasing accountability. I think this article offers a good number of ideas that can help enrich the peer review process, and Woodward includes references for each idea presented. The proof, however, always remains in the pudding. I would have liked to have heard about Woodward’s experiences with implementing the ideas he presents in his article.


Key Quotations

“Teachers cannot expect students to miraculously contribute stellar feedback that will transform writing” (p. 40).


“Whatever form of peer review that is implemented in the classroom…students’ writing will benefit from the experience if teachers model the core skills necessary” (p. 46).


Annotation by Mariah Fairley, 2018


Comments (0)

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