The Reliability and Validity of Peer Review of Writing in High School AP English Classes

Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy

Volumn 60, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 13-23

  Schunn, Christian ^a   Godley, Amanda ^a   DeMartino, Sara ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

4 Adolescence; Attitude; Audience; Genres; Purpose; Rubrics; Writing process; Writing strategies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84963620749     PISSN: 10813004     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jaal.525     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Andrade, H.L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students' writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2), 3–13. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2008.00118.x
2. Applebee, A.N., & Langer, J.A. (with Wilcox, K.C., Nachowitz, M., Mastroianni, M.P., & Dawson, C.). (2013). Writing instruction that works: Proven methods for middle and high school classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press; Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project.
3. Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
4. Brookhart, S.M., & Chen, F. (2015). The quality and effectiveness of descriptive rubrics. Educational Review, 67(3), 343–368.
5. Chang, C.-C., Tseng, K.-H., Chou, P.-N., & Chen, Y.-H. (2011). Reliability and validity of Web-based portfolio peer assessment: A case study for a senior high school's students taking computer course. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1306–1316. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.014
6. Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2011). Learning by reviewing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 73–84. doi:10.1037/a0021950
7. Cho, K., Schunn, C.D., & Wilson, R.W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(4), 891–901. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.4.891
8. Christianakis, M. (2010). “I Don't Need Your Help!”: Peer status, race, and gender during peer writing interactions. Journal of Literacy Research, 42(4), 418–458. doi:10.1080/1086296X.2010.525202
9. ® English Language a Composition 2013 scoring guidelines. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from media.collegeboard.com/digitalServices/pdf/ap/apcentral/ap13_english_language_scoring_guidelines.pdf
10. Fleiss, J.L. (1986). The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
11. Freedman, S.W. (1992). Outside-in and inside-out: Peer response groups in two ninth-grade classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 26(1), 71–107.
12. Gan, M.J., & Hattie, J. (2014). Prompting secondary students' use of criteria, feedback specificity and feedback levels during an investigative task. Instructional Science, 42(6), 861–878. doi:10.1007/s11251-014-9319-4
13. 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. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
14. Gilbert, J., & Graham, S. (2010). Teaching writing to elementary students in grades 4–6: A national survey. The Elementary School Journal, 110(4), 494–518. doi:10.1086/651193
15. Godley, A., Loretto, A., & DeMartino, S. (2014, December). The dialogic construction of academic writing through peer review in secondary classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy Research Association, San Marco Island, FL.
16. Godley, A., Monroe, T., & Castma, J. (2015). Increasing access to and success in Advanced Placement English in Pittsburgh Public Schools. English Journal, 105(1), 28–34.
17. Goldberg, G.L., Roswell, B.S., & Michaels, H. (1995). Can assessment mirror instruction? A look at peer response and revision in a large-scale writing test. Educational Assessment, 3(4), 287–314. doi:10.1207/s15326977ea0304_1
18. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
19. Hillocks, G., Jr. (1984). What works in teaching composition: A meta-analysis of experimental treatment studies. American Journal of Education, 93(1), 133–170. doi:10.1086/443789
20. Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O.E., & Zacharia, Z.C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133–152. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.019
21. Kaufman, J.H., & Schunn, C.D. (2011). Students' perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387–406. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6
22. Kiuhara, S.A., Graham, S., & Hawken, L.S. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 136–160. doi:10.1037/a0013097
23. Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin.
24. National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The Nation's Report Card: Writing 2011 (NCES 2012-470). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
25. Newell, G.E., VanDerHeide, J., & Olsen, A.W. (2014). High school English language arts teachers' argumentative epistemologies for teaching writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 49(2), 95–118.
26. Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J.W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(4), 195–203. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2013.10.005
27. Patchan, M.M., Hawk, B., Stevens, C.A., & Schunn, C.D. (2013). The effects of skill diversity on commenting and revisions. Instructional Science, 41(2), 381–405. doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9236-3
28. Peterson, S. (2003). Peer response and students' revisions of their narrative writing. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 3(3), 239–272. doi:10.1023/B:ESLL.0000003605.45224.b5
29. Porter, S.R., & Whitcomb, M.E. (2003). The impact of contact type on Web survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67(4), 579–588. doi:10.1086/378964
30. Sadler, P.M., & Good, E. (2006). The impact of self- and peer-grading on student learning. Educational Assessment, 11(1), 1–31. doi:10.1207/s15326977ea1101_1
31. Simmons, J. (2003). Responders are taught, not born. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 46(8), 684–693.
32. Sung, Y.-T., Chang, K.-E., Chiou, S.-K., & Hou, H.-T. (2005). The design and application of a Web-based self- and peer-assessment system. Computers & Education, 45(2), 187–202. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.002
33. Tseng, S.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161–1174. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007
34. Tsivitanidou, O.E., Zacharia, Z.C., & Hovardas, T. (2011). Investigating secondary school students' unmediated peer assessment skills. Learning and Instruction, 21(4), 506–519. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.08.002
35. VanDeWeghe, R. (2004). “Awesome, dude!”: Responding helpfully to peer writing. English Journal, 94(1), 95–99. doi:10.2307/4128855
36. Varner, L.K., Roscoe, R.D., & McNamara, D.S. (2013). Evaluative misalignment of 10th-grade student and teacher criteria for essay quality: An automated textual analysis. Journal of Writing Research, 5(1), 35–59. doi:10.17239/jowr-2013.05.01.2
37. Peerceptiv: www.peerceptiv.com
38. Calibrated Peer Review: cpr.molsci.ucla.edu/cpr/cpr_info/index.asp
39. Eli Review: https://app.elireview.com
40. PeerMark (a feature of Turnitin): https://guides.turnitin.com/01_Manuals_and_Guides/Student/Student_User_Manual/19_PeerMark