A validation study of students' end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor

Journal of Writing Research

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 124-152

  Patchan, Melissa M ^a   Charney, Davida ^b   Schunn, Christian D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Content instructor feedback; Peer feedback; Writing instructor feedback

Indexed keywords

EID: 85014877964     PISSN: 20301006     EISSN: 22943307     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.17239/jowr-2009.01.02.2     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ashbaugh, H. A., Johnstone, K. M., & Warfield, T. D. (2002). Outcome assessment of a writingskill improvement initiative: Results and methodological implications. Issues in Accounting Education, 17(2), 123-148. doi: 10.2308/iace.2002.17.2.123
2. Cho, K. (2005). When multi-peers give better advice than an expert: The type and impact of feedback given by students and an expert on student writing. Cho, Kwangsu: U Pittsburgh, US.
3. Cho, K., & Schunn, C. D. (2007). Scaffolded writing and rewriting the discipline: A web-based reciprocal peer review system. Computers & Education, 48(3), 409- 426.doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.004
4. 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. doi: 10.1177/0741088306289261
5. 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
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Dragga, S. (1991). Responding to technical writing. Technical Writing Teacher, 18(3), 202-221.
8. Fife, J. M., & O'Neill, P. (2001). Moving beyond the written comment: Narrowing the gap between response practice and research. College Composition and Communication, 53(2), 300-321. doi: 10.2307/359079
9. Flower, L. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37(1), 16-55. doi: 10.2307/357381
10. Herrington, A. (1992). Composing one's self in a discipline: Students' and teachers' negotiations. In M. Secor & D. Charney (Eds.), Constructing rhetorical education (pp. 91-115). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
11. 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
12. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 31(1), 159-174. doi: 10.2307/2529310
13. Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1(4), 476-490. doi:10.3758/BF03210951
14. Nathan, M. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). An investigation of teachers' beliefs of students' algebra development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 209-237.doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1802 03
15. Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science,37(4). doi:10.1007/s11251-008- 9053-x
16. Ochsner, R., & Fowler, J. (2004). Playing devil's advocate: Evaluating the literature of the wac/wid movement. Review of Educational Research, 74(2), 117-140. doi:10.3102/00346543074002117
17. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117 - 175. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0102 1
18. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
19. Salahu-Din, D., Persky, H., & Miller, J. (2008). The nation's report card: Writing 2007: National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
20. Smith, S. (1997). The genre of the end comment + composition instruction: Conventions in teacher responses to student writing. College Composition and Communication, 48(2), 249-268. doi:10.2307/358669
21. Smith, S. (2003a). The role of technical expertise in engineering and writing teachers' evaluations of students' writing. Written Communication, 20(1), 37-80. doi:10.1177/0741088303253570
22. Smith, S. (2003b). What is "Good" Technical communication? A comparison of the standards of writing and engineering instructors. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12(1), 7 - 24. doi:10.1207/s15427625tcq1201 2
23. Sperling, M., & Freedman, S. (1987). A good girl writes like a good girl. Written Communication, 4(4), 343-369. doi: 10.1177/0741088387004004002
24. Wallace, D. L., & Hayes, J. R. (1991). Redefining revision for freshmen. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(1), 54-66.
25. Wooley, R. S. (2007). The effects of web-based peer review on student writing. Unpublished Dissertation, Kent State University.