Peer reviewers learn from giving comments

Instructional Science

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 629-643

  Cho, Young Hoan ^a   Cho, Kwangsu ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b Sungkyunkwan University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Learning; Peer comments; Peer review; Writing

Indexed keywords

EID: 79961167787     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1     Document Type: Review

References (64)

1. Althauser, R., & Darnall, K. (2001). Enhancing critical reading and writing through peer reviews: An exploration of assisted performance. Teaching Sociology, 29, 23-35.
2. Anderson, T., Howe, C., Soden, R., Halliday, J., & Low, J. (2001). Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students. Instructional Science, 29, 1-32.
3. Beach, R., & Friedrich, T. (2006). Response to writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 222-234). New York: Guilford Press.
4. Beason, L. (1993). Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in Teaching of English, 27(4), 395-422.
5. Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215-241.
6. Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2002). Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 405-415.
7. Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition & Instruction, 22, 1-36.
8. Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Albertson, L. R. (1996). Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 8(3), 239-297.
9. Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Plumb, C. (1994). Topic knowledge, linguistic knowledge, and revision processes as determinants of text revision. In E. C. Butterfield (Ed.), Children's writing: Toward a process theory of the development of skilled writing (pp. 83-143). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73-105.
11. Chi, M. T. H., & Bassok, M. (1989). Learning from examples via self-explanations. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 251-282). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
13. Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
14. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010a). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338.
15. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010b). Learning writing by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology (under review).
16. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting in the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409-426.
17. Cho, K., Schunn, C. D., & Charney, D. (2006). Commenting on writing: Typology and perceived helpfulness of comments from novice peer reviewers and subject matter experts. Written Communication, 23(3), 260-294.
18. Coleman, L., Jussim, L., & Isaac, J. (1991). Black students' reactions to feedback conveyed by Black and White teachers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 21, 460-481.
19. Conati, C., & Vanlehn, K. (2000). Toward computer-based support of meta-cognitive skills: A computational framework to coach self-explanation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 389-415.
20. Couzijn, M. (1999). Learning to write by observation of writing and reading processes: Effects on learning and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 9, 109-142.
21. Crampton, C. D. (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371.
22. DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58(2), 119-149.
23. Faigley, L., & Witte, S. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 400-414.
24. Ferris, D. (1997). The influence of teacher commentary on student revision. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 315-339.
25. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387.
26. Flower, L., Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Schriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37(1), 16-55.
27. Gick, M. L., & McGarry, S. J. (1992). Learning from mistakes: Inducing analogous solution failures to a source problem produces later successes in analogical transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(3), 623-639.
28. Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304-315.
29. Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 104-137.
30. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445-476.
31. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
32. Holliway, D. R. (2004). Through the eyes of my reader: A strategy for improving audience perspective in children's descriptive writing. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 18, 334-349.
33. Holliway, D. R., & McCutchen, D. (2004). Audience perspective in young writers' composing and revising: Reading as the reader. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision of written language: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 87-101). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
34. Hull, G. (1987). The editing process in writing: A performance study of more skilled and less skilled college writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 21(1), 8-29.
35. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
36. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
37. Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.
38. Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 525-536.
39. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401.
40. Ohlsson, S. (1996). Learning from performance errors. Psychological Review, 103(2), 241-262.
41. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
42. Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265-289.
43. Peterson, S. S., & Kennedy, K. (2006). Sixth-grade teachers' written comments on student writing: Genre and gender influences. Written Communication, 23, 36-62.
44. Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41, 219-225.
45. Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H., & Mandl, H. (1998). Learning from worked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 90-108.
46. Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36, 321-350.
47. Sadler, P. M., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1-31.
48. Siegler, R. S. (2002). Microgenetic studies of self-explanation. In N. Granott & J. Parziale (Eds.), Microdevelopment: Transition processes in development and learning (pp. 31-58). New York: Cambridge University.
49. Sommers, N. I. (1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378-387.
50. Strijbos, J.-W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender's competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291-303.
51. Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2(1), 59-89.
52. Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
53. Traxler, M. J., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (1992). Improving written communication through minimal feedback. Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, 1-22.
54. Traxler, M. J., & Gernsbacher, M. A. (1993). Improving written communication through perspective-taking. Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 311-334.
55. Tsai, C.-C., & Liang, J.-C. (2009). The development of science activities via on-line peer assessment: The role of scientific epistemological views. Instructional Science, 37, 293-310.
56. van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & van den Bergh, H. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 316-327.
57. Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366-389.
58. Webb, N. M., & Mastergeorge, A. M. (2003). The development of students' helping behavior and learning in peer-directed small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 21(4), 361-428.
59. Wyngaard, S., & Gehrke, R. (1996). Responding to audience: Using rubrics to teach and assess writing. The English Journal, 85(6), 67-70.
60. Yang, Y.-F., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20, 72-83.
61. Zellermayer, M. (1989). The study of teachers' written feedback to students' writing: Changes in theoretical considerations and the expansion of research contexts. Instructional Science, 18, 145-165.
62. Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zinder (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
63. Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (2002). Acquiring writing revision and self-regulatory skill through observation and emulation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 660-668.
64. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research and practice. New York: Springer.