# data[].attributes.headline
Why every student needs Critical Friends (ASCD article)

# data[].attributes.subject
Why every student needs Critical Friends (ASCD article)

# data[].attributes.body
2009

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
November 2009 | Volume 67 | Number 3
Multiple Measures Pages 54-57

Amy Reynolds

The final bell rings on the last day of class before the semester break. Students stream out of the room as the teacher stands by the door. Glancing back at her desk, she sighs. It is piled high with posters, compact discs, index cards, and papers, the stack so tall that half of it falls to the floor in a heap. This pile represents 10 weeks of student work, reflecting students' creativity and mental effort. Only the teacher will look at these projects now, and only she will provide detailed assessment, which will reach students long after they have stopped caring about these projects. There has to be a better way to give meaningful feedback.

I have found a better way that I use in middle school enrichment and mainstream classes in many content areas-peer critiques. As my students work on major projects-both during the creation process and once they have a finished product-they present those projects to the entire class. Each student receives a formal critique with suggestions for improvement from fellow classmates. Through peer critiques, students learn to appreciate the diversity and richness of one another's work-and to enrich their own work.

Authentic Feedback for Authentic Assessments

Using peer critiques to evaluate and improve student work is a natural outgrowth of the movement toward more authentic assessments in education (Henderson & Karr-Kidwell, 1998). Both formative and summative assessments now commonly go beyond multiple-choice tests to include live performances, digital presentations, simulations, and so on. We have moved from a focus on judging whether students know isolated facts to a focus on assessing whether students can apply newly acquired skills and concepts.

One rationale for authentic assessment was a desire to better mirror "the real world." Educators realized that student performance on tests did not ensure successful transfer of skills to the outside world. Just as our forms of assessment have become more authentic, so our means of providing feedback on students' projects should reflect the kinds of real-world feedback they will face.

Formalized peer critiques simulate the experiences students will have in the workplace. They will need to consult with colleagues and supervisors to get an honest evaluation of their efforts. To succeed in their field, they will need to receive such information graciously and apply it to their work-and offer detailed feedback diplomatically to coworkers. Thus, peer critiques help students prepare one another for life.

What Are the Benefits of Critiques?

Students Get More Out of Feedback

The authentic assessment approach has led students to craft more diverse, complex final products-which deserve a wider audience than the teacher. As learners critique one another's work, they might notice praiseworthy points or pose questions that the instructor has not thought of. A student might ignore feedback from a teacher but suddenly pay attention when a peer voices the same observation. I have found that this effect only increases with student age.

Discussion Becomes Lively

Peer critiques create a more active, engaged classroom environment. In many classrooms that use traditional assessment methods, teachers ask students to present their final projects to the class. The usual result? One student at the front of the room reading PowerPoint slides aloud to a room of dozing fellow students. Peer critiques, in contrast, demand dynamic participation. Listeners must not only attend to each presentation, but also offer concrete suggestions for its improvement while commending aspects of the work that they appreciate.

This is show-and-tell for the 21st century, and students are probably familiar with the concept: On many television shows, the audience can vote singers off the stage and survivors off the island. I find that students are very comfortable with actively evaluating others, although, of course, we should guide their evaluations toward helpfulness rather than the harshness of some reality shows.

Peer critiques can also create a collegial classroom atmosphere. Although I still evaluate students on each project with a rubric, when students exchange feedback, the focus shifts from grades and competition to tangible aspects of a learner's work. Peer critiques make the assessment experience constructive rather than punitive. Students glean from their peers both an understanding of where they have succeeded and concrete ideas for strengthening weak areas. For example, when a student-created Web site featured little color or graphics, several students gave the whole class an impromptu demonstration of how to skillfully use these features in Web design.

An Audience Emerges

This classroom community becomes an authentic audience. Teachers often stress the importance of keeping an audience in mind as students consider what they want to say and how, but without a real audience, the discussion is always abstract (Ede, 1984). Peer critiques make audience more than a theoretical construct; they give that audience a voice.

How to Make Critiques Work

Introducing critiques into classroom culture requires setting up an environment of trust and being patient while students learn to act as confident critics. The following practices help students get the most from peer critiques:

Help Students Critique Sensitively

Peer critiquing runs counter to the everyone-gets-a-trophy philosophy prevalent today. Some students may hear that they are not performing as well as others. But we should not assume that frank peer critiques will hurt young people's self-esteem. Realistically, students have different strengths and weaknesses; they should have the opportunity to view one another's work and learn from mistakes and triumphs. It would be a shame to ignore this diversity when we might use it to promote learning.

Students can learn to express their opinions and offer detailed feedback in a sensitive manner. There is a big difference between saying, "Your work is bad" and saying, "Did you ever think of adding larger text and more color to that slide? People would see it better and like it more."

Give students explicit guidance and practice in providing detailed feedback sensitively. In the beginning, students tend to say things like, "It's boring" or, "That's confusing." I have to prompt them to be more concrete and to expand on their observations with examples from the actual work ("What specifically makes it confusing for you?") or to rephrase comments in a more helpful manner. Gradually, such interjection becomes rare.

During the first few critiques, write simple sentence stems on the board and encourage students to begin their comments with these prompts. In the beginning, keep the focus of prompts general to enable students to individualize their responses; for later critiques, prompts might emphasize a specific skill or aspect of a project. A few of my standard prompts are

One thing I really like about this is ...

One way to make this stronger could be ...

Did you ever think about ...

If the work can be viewed before the critique-such as on a class blog-have students complete these stems and bring them to class. This ensures that everyone, even students who process things more slowly, has something to share. It's best to conduct the critiques during several periods, tackling only a few individual projects each day. Student comments maintain their freshness and potency, and boredom doesn't set in.

Wait for the Transformation

It takes time to create a classroom climate in which students feel comfortable standing in front of their peers, allowing critical eyes to evaluate days or even weeks of effort. Your first few student critiques may be characterized more by reluctant speakers who look to you for direction than by self-assured presenters and critiquers. I know mine were.

I remember the first time I required all students in a class to share a recently completed project with the entire group. After I asked, "Who would like to share first?" a few students tentatively raised a hand. Most were ready to yank their hands down should my eye stray in their direction. I called on one brave soul-I'll call her Susan-to come to the front of the room and open her project file on our Smart Board. For this project, students designed a house using computer-aided drafting software and drew up a budget for furnishing one of the bedrooms. Susan was showing the class a blueprint, a plan for bedroom furnishings, and a spreadsheet outlining her budget.

"Why don't you tell us what's unique or interesting about your work?" I suggested. "Did you face an especially difficult challenge? Is there something you're really proud of?"

Haltingly, Susan began pointing to particular aspects of her project. Often, her eyes drifted downward or she turned her back to the class while manipulating the Smart Board; each time, I redirected her attention to the students in front of her. When Susan had finished, I asked who had compliments or comments on her work.

Again, hands rose cautiously, and I had to direct Susan to call on her peers. Many students came out with ambiguous or unclear phrases such as "Your point didn't really come across." I needed to prompt students to provide concrete examples of what they meant.

Only one semester later, as the same students again began to formally share a recently completed project, the picture was quite different. The minute I asked who wanted to share first, every hand was raised high. Students rose out of their seats, begging to go first. When the presenter had finished, students eagerly offered helpful praise and criticism.

Create a Trusting Community

To go from fear to eagerness, students need an environment of trust and caring (Noddings, 2009). I purposefully try to make all students feel like valued members of the learning community in large and small ways. I remark on new haircuts, ask about vacation plans, and commiserate over upcoming tests. I keep a wall calendar noting student birthdays and carry a pad of sticky notes to write down specific questions students ask that I cannot immediately answer. There is no one best way to create a trusting community; your own methods must reflect your personality and that of your students.

Model Acceptance of Criticism

When students alert me to errors I make in writing, speaking, grading, and so forth, I try to model mature acceptance of critical feedback. I openly thank them and remark that everyone makes mistakes and that we all need our fellow learners' help to improve.

I also solicit feedback. At the end of any unit or project, I ask students for specific comments about individual activities. I often distribute a form that lists the different activities we did accompanied by the following questions:

What activity do you wish we could have spent more time on? Why?

What activity should next year's class skip altogether? Why?

What activity would you add to this unit? Be as specific as possible.

I use this information (along with my own professional judgment) when deciding which activities to alter, add, or delete from a unit, and I let students know that I use their feedback for this purpose.

Train Students to Take the Lead

The student whose work is being critiqued should stand at the front of the room so that the entire audience can clearly view the project under discussion. This arrangement also makes the critique less personal, with comments and suggestions that classmates offer pertaining to the work itself, not the student as a person.

I usually stand to the side of the room so that all comments travel directly from student to student. Because the goal is to make the teacher simply a fellow member of the discussion, the student presenter should call on his or her peers as they raise a hand to comment. It takes a while for student ownership to become ingrained. At first, students try to address their comments to me and look at me for confirmation. But when the shift finally occurs, and the presenter smiles, ignores my raised hand, and calls first on a peer, it's amazing.

I take brief notes during the critique to give to the student receiving the feedback- or I rotate this role among students. No one can present articulately, field comments and concerns, and look at the audience while also remembering verbal comments.

Experiment with Format

There is no one best method to use for peer critiques. The process should be individualized to fit the kind of work being examined, the time constraints of the class, and students' ages. Experiment with the format until you feel confident that your students are learning from critiques. I recommend using peer critiques during the creation of a project rather than just at the end; I have seen definite improvement in the quality of student work when students get feedback along the way.

Peer critiques work in a wide variety of settings. Students can watch a video of the previous evening's music concert and offer evaluations of their own band or choir performance. Students can share different methods of solving the same math problem, examine blueprints for house designs, or offer feedback on science fair proposals.

Although peer critiques improve students' critical-thinking ability and provide them with a broader spectrum of evaluation, the less obvious benefit is motivational. Students love to offer their opinions. As they share what they think, they take genuine pleasure in seeing-and contributing to-the work their peers have created.

References

Ede, L. (1984). Audience: An introduction to research. College Composition and Communication, 35(2), 140-154.

Henderson, P., & Karr-Kidwell, P. J. (1998). Authentic assessment: An extensive literary review and recommendations for administrators. Retrieved from ERIC Database ED41840.

Noddings, N. (2009). Teaching themes of care. In Allan C. Ornstein, Edward F. Pajak, & Stacey B. Ornstein (Eds), Contemporary Issues in Curriculum (pp. 64-70). Boston: Pearson Education.

Amy Reynolds coordinates the gifted program at North Salem Middle/High School, North Salem, New York; aer96_98@yahoo.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Every Student Needs Critical Friends

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
November 2009 | Volume 67 | Number 3 Multiple Measures Pages 54-57 Amy Reynolds The final bell rings on the last day of class before the semester break. Students stream out of the room as the teacher stands by the door. Glancing back at her desk, she sighs.

# data[].attributes.headline
But will it improve their writing? (Francis)

# data[].attributes.subject
But will it improve their writing? (Francis)

# data[].attributes.body
2011

# data[].attributes.headline
To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing (Lundstrom)

# data[].attributes.subject
To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing (Lundstrom)

# data[].attributes.body
2009

# data[].attributes.headline
Improving Student Peer Feedback (Nilson)

# data[].attributes.subject
Improving Student Peer Feedback (Nilson)

# data[].attributes.body
2011

# data[].attributes.headline
Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning (Gielen, et al.)

# data[].attributes.subject
Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning (Gielen, et al.)

# data[].attributes.body
2010

# data[].attributes.headline
An Exploration of the Reliability and
Validity of Peer Assessment of Writing
in Secondary Education

# data[].attributes.subject
An Exploration of the Reliability and
Validity of Peer Assessment of Writing
in Secondary Education

# data[].attributes.headline
Peer review in higher education:
Student perceptions before
and after participation (Mulder, et al.)

# data[].attributes.subject
Peer review in higher education:
Student perceptions before
and after participation (Mulder, et al.)

# data[].attributes.body
2014

# data[].attributes.headline
Peer and Self-Assessment in High Schools (Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation)

# data[].attributes.subject
Peer and Self-Assessment in High Schools (Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation)

# data[].attributes.body
2005

# data[].attributes.headline
Informing Writing (The Carnegie Corporation of New York)

# data[].attributes.subject
Informing Writing (The Carnegie Corporation of New York)

# data[].attributes.body
2011

Notes:

- Ideas about how formative assessment, including peer assessment, during the writing process affects students' writing

# data[].attributes.headline
Students' perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work (Kaufmann, Schunn)

# data[].attributes.subject
Students' perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work (Kaufmann, Schunn)

# data[].attributes.body
Kaufmann, J.H., & Schunn, C. (2008). Students' perceptions about peer assessment for writing: their origin and impact on revision work. Pittsburgh, PA: Springer.

Notes:

- ideas about why students might resist peer review and assessment and/or view it negatively

# data[].attributes.body
More good strategies to consider.

# data[].attributes.body
Could something as simple as a checklist that you provide make a difference?

# data[].attributes.body
Critical Friends was interesting and only you can decide which strategy really fits your needs / kids' needs.

# data[].attributes.body
Graff has good ideas with the discussion of the read aloud /
think aloud strategy.

# data[].attributes.body
Gallagher makes a good point when

the difference in revising and editing

is noted.

# data[].attributes.body
You will only use one group. Baseline

data will be collected before you

use your chosen intervention and then

you will continue to collect data to see

how effective your intervention is.

# data[].attributes.body
For your project you will probably only

use one type of peer review since the

implementation timeframe is only 4 weeks.

# data[].attributes.body
- The peer review processes I might focus on could be teacher-structured peer review (with guiding questions for consideration of each other's work) versus peer review that takes place in a student-guided group (with the only teacher input being general suggestions for tone of feedback, like "warm" feedback and "cool" feedback used in Olio's Critical Friends video).

# data[].attributes.body
I plan to study peer review of writing in the high school English classroom because I want to find out how students’ writing is affected by various peer review processes. I hope to show which methods for peer review are most effective so that I may better understand how to improve students’ writing and encourage a more collaborative writing process.

# data[].attributes.body
How will my experimental and control groups differ? To avoid ethical concerns, I must provide instructional opportunities (peer review? simply the opportunity for feedback during the writing process?) to all students, so what variable will be absent in the control group?

# data[].attributes.body
What are my variables for this action research? Written peer review versus conversational peer review? Degree of teacher-provided structure in the peer review process?

# data[].attributes.body
As I review literature, I wonder how my action research will add to the current body of knowledge about peer review methods?

# data[].attributes.headline
Questions arising about topic/research process

# data[].attributes.subject
Questions arising about topic/research process

# data[].attributes.headline
Creating Effective Peer Review Groups to Improve Student Writing (University of Delaware Writing Center)

# data[].attributes.subject
Creating Effective Peer Review Groups to Improve Student Writing (University of Delaware Writing Center)

# data[].attributes.body
The University of Delaware Writing Center. (2006). Creating effective peer review groups to improve student writing. Retrieved from http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/peerReview1.doc

Notes:

- Ideas on how to motivate students to invest in peer review (and why they might not)

- Ideas about how to assess peer review sessions

# data[].attributes.body
Cady, P. (2013) Peer review activities. Retrieved from http://libarts.wsu.edu/english/composition/Peer%20Review%20Activities.pdf

Notes:

- A college professor's work (for an English 101 course) detailing methods for peer review and rationale for peer review

- Multiple strategies provided

- "I purposely never use the same peer review twice in a semester for a few reasons...while one peer review activity may work for some, it leaves others confused and dissatisfied with the peer review process" (Cady, 2013, p.1).

# data[].attributes.headline
How to Plan and Guide In-Class Peer-Review Sessions

# data[].attributes.subject
How to Plan and Guide In-Class Peer-Review Sessions

# data[].attributes.body
The Teaching Center. (n.d.) How to plan and guide in-class peer-review sessions. Retrieved from http://teachingcenter.wustl.edu/strategies/Pages/peer-review-how-to.aspx#.VLF-0xGCOrU

Notes:

- How to plan to implement peer review in class

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Teaching Center has created this collection of strategies, tips, and teaching commentaries to address common pedagogical challenges-and to share ideas that may improve student learning and engagement. These resources draw on research on teaching and learning, and on the expertise of experienced instructors.

This section also includes video commentaries featuring Washington University faculty from across the disciplines discussing the insights, goals, and methods that shape their teaching.

Please note that this section of our site is always growing, so check back with us from time to time for new content.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Teaching Center has created this collection of strategies, tips, and teaching commentaries to address common pedagogical challenges-and to share ideas that may improve student learning and engagement. These resources draw on research on teaching and learning, and on the expertise of experienced

# data[].attributes.headline
Using Peer Review to Help Students Improve Writing

# data[].attributes.subject
Using Peer Review to Help Students Improve Writing

# data[].attributes.body
The Teaching Center. (n.d.) Using peer review to help students improve writing. Retrieved from http://teachingcenter.wustl.edu/strategies/Pages/peer-review.aspx#.VLMrX7iCOrV

Notes:

- Ideas about why students provide vague responses during peer review and why students ignore peer feedback

- Strategies to structure and teach effective peer review

- Thoughts about getting students to invest in peer review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Teaching Center has created this collection of strategies, tips, and teaching commentaries to address common pedagogical challenges-and to share ideas that may improve student learning and engagement. These resources draw on research on teaching and learning, and on the expertise of experienced instructors.

This section also includes video commentaries featuring Washington University faculty from across the disciplines discussing the insights, goals, and methods that shape their teaching.

Please note that this section of our site is always growing, so check back with us from time to time for new content.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Teaching Center has created this collection of strategies, tips, and teaching commentaries to address common pedagogical challenges-and to share ideas that may improve student learning and engagement. These resources draw on research on teaching and learning, and on the expertise of experienced

# data[].attributes.headline
Bridging High School and College Writing (Teacher Guide from ESC6)

# data[].attributes.subject
Bridging High School and College Writing (Teacher Guide from ESC6)

# data[].attributes.body
Need citation; dated 2014

Notes:

-Methods for implementing peer review described

# data[].attributes.headline
Article about objections to peer review in the high school classroom

# data[].attributes.subject
Article about objections to peer review in the high school classroom

# data[].attributes.body
Swedien, J. (2014, December 10). Classroom controversy at a Rio Rancho high school. Albuquerque Journal. Retrieved from http://www.abqjournal.com

Notes:

- A Creative Writing teacher forced to resign her position when parents objected to the use of peer review in the high school classroom, citing issues with idea of forcing students to read others' work.

- Ideas about importance of allowing students to opt out of peer review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CORRECTION: Katrina Guarascio's name was spelled wrong in an earlier version of this story.

What seemed at first to be an innocuous creative writing assignment sparked a controversy at a Rio Rancho high school that ultimately cost Katrina Guarascio her job, the former English teacher said Tuesday.

In response to the assignment, one student wrote an essay about Jesus distributing marijuana. Another student complained to her parents about it.

Guarascio, an English teacher at V. Sue Cleveland High School, ended up being put on paid leave for three weeks, and then later asked to change her creative writing class or resign - which on Dec. 3 she did.

The district contends it was addressing what it considered unprofessional behavior on her part, not the writing assignment or student's essay.

In early October, Guarascio asked students in her creative writing class to retell a classic tale. That's when one of Guarascio's students refashioned the biblical story in which Jesus gives loaves of bread and fish to the poor - except in the student's story, Jesus gave marijuana to the sick.

The story offended another student when she was asked to read it as part of a peer review, meaning students read and critique each other's work. The offended student told her parents, who in turn complained to the school's administration.

Guarascio was then put on leave for three weeks while the administration interviewed students about her classroom behavior. On Nov. 5, the school asked Guarascio to come back, she said.

Guarascio said it was not made clear to her why she was put on leave, which she said was frustrating. She said she was reprimanded for having students read each others' work - peer review is a writing and editing process that is part of the class - and for having former students who were still at Cleveland as Facebook friends.

The district said the student's story was not the administrators' primary concern.

"We would note that the primary concerns raised with Ms. Guarascio were not focused on the written product produced by students but on other issues, including the fact that students were required to read other students' essays and comment on content they found objectionable," read a statement issued by the district.

Superintendent Sue Cleveland, for whom the school is named, said Tuesday that the topic of peer review has been a controversial one in Rio Rancho. She said some parents don't like the idea that other students will read their children's work, while other parents like peer review.

Cleveland said the issue has been raised in the courts before and it's important that if teachers use peer review they let students opt out.

But Guarascio said her students were never forced to read each other's work and they could always choose whether to do so.

Guarascio also said she sent a course description for her creative writing class home with students to show their parents. In it, she said she would not censor their creative writing in the elective class and that students would be asked to read each others' work. She provided the 21-page description to the Journal on Tuesday.

After she came back to the school, administrators asked Guarascio not talk to students about why she was gone for three weeks, she said.

"There were a lot of rumors that were untrue," said Alicia Borillo, a 17-year-old senior at Cleveland. Many of the rumors were not very nice and students would ask her why she had been gone, Borillo said.

After initially refusing, Guarascio did tell students why she'd been gone but did so without identifying the student who complained, she said.

"I didn't want my reputation to be jaded," Guarascio said.

On the day before Thanksgiving, administrators told Guarascio she could either resign or write a plan describing how she would become more professional in the classroom, she said. She said she doesn't understand how she had not acted professionally.

"Ms. Guarascio chose to resign her position rather than follow the district's direction that classes be administered in a professional manner and that all persons on a school campus behave appropriately," the district's statement said.

"Any suggestion that the teacher was forced to resign because of students' exercise of free speech rights is simply not true."

Guarascio is popular with many students and is known for organizing poetry readings in the community.

On Tuesday, the day after KOAT-TV ran a piece on Guarascio's resignation, her social media pages erupted with support.

Heather MacNeil, whose son Wil had Guarascio in his pre-Advanced Placement English class, said she is upset over the way Guarascio was treated.

MacNeil said her son is smart but had never shown much interest in writing until he took Guarascio's class. But now his class has been taught by a string of substitutes, MacNeil said.

"Now over 100 kids are affected by this, whereas only one was offended by the piece of writing," she said.

Cleveland said she understands Guarascio's departure was very upsetting for some parents and teachers.

"I do understand there were parents of students who liked her very much, and I think her departure is a very sad thing for them," Cleveland said. She also said the district didn't want to hurt Guarascio.

Borillo, who was in Guarascio's classes during her sophomore and junior years, said she encouraged them to express themselves.

"She taught her students to express themselves and how to speak up even when no one was listening," Borillo said. "She's important to a lot of people and what happened was really unfair."

Guarascio said she plans to seek a teaching job in another district.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Classroom controversy at a Rio Rancho high school

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CORRECTION: Katrina Guarascio's name was spelled wrong in an earlier version of this story. What seemed at first to be an innocuous creative writing assignment sparked a controversy at a Rio Rancho high school that ultimately cost Katrina Guarascio her job, the former English teacher said Tuesday.

# data[].attributes.headline
Concerns & Criticisms Regarding Peer Review

# data[].attributes.subject
Concerns & Criticisms Regarding Peer Review

# data[].attributes.body
Resources that detail concerns and issues with peer review

# data[].attributes.headline
No One Writes Alone: Peer Review in the Classroom, A Guide for Students (Video from MIT)

# data[].attributes.subject
No One Writes Alone: Peer Review in the Classroom, A Guide for Students (Video from MIT)

# data[].attributes.body
MIT. (2011). No one writes alone: Peer review in the classroom, a guide for students [Video file]. Retrieved from http://video.mit.edu/watch/no-one-writes-alone-peer-review-in-the-classroom-a-guide-for-students-8336/

Notes:

- Benefits of peer review for academic work

- Role of peer review in all academia

- Potential resource to motivate students to engage in constructive peer review?

-Resource to show students examples of quality constructive feedback?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
mit news engineering science research community education teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Videos from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The mission of MIT is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other area...

# data[].attributes.headline
Guidelines for Writing Groups (Handout from NCTE)

# data[].attributes.subject
Guidelines for Writing Groups (Handout from NCTE)

# data[].attributes.body
Gere, A.R., Dickinson, H., Orzulak, M.M., & Moody, S. 2010. "Guidelines for Writing Groups." Taking initiative on writing: A guide for instructional leaders. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Notes:

-Helpful resource for implementing and structuring student writing groups for peer response to writing

# data[].attributes.headline
Critical Friends: Collaborating as Writers (Teaching Channel video

# data[].attributes.subject
Critical Friends: Collaborating as Writers (Teaching Channel video

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching Channel. (2014). Critical friends: Collaborating as writers [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/student-writing-peer-review-nea

Olio on the "Critical Friends" conversations:

"It really enables the writer to hear their work in another way" (Olio, as cited in Teaching Channel, 2014).

"This is really the crux to critical friends. It forces a student into an understanding that their text is indeed a text. And what they have are words. They must choose them carefully and wisely because those word choices have impact" (Olio, as cited in Teaching Channel, 2014).

"Because writing is revising, it's essential to have a strategy that compels students to apply the process of revision. And 'Critical Friends' is a strategy that accomplishes that" (Olio, as cited in Teaching Channel, 2014).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Critical Friends: Collaborating as Writers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High School students in David Olio's literature class critique each others' writing using a "critical friends" protocol.

# data[].attributes.headline
"Approaching Authentic Peer Review" (Graff article in EJ)

# data[].attributes.subject
"Approaching Authentic Peer Review" (Graff article in EJ)

# data[].attributes.body
Graff, N. (2009). Approaching authentic peer review. English Journal, 98(5), 81-87.

Graff on moving students beyond simply "correcting the text":

"If students are to respond to each other's drafts as they would to published texts, they need to practice responding to published texts as they would each other's drafts" (p. 81).

Graff on moving from peer feedback to revision:

"For students to make the best use of the feedback they receive from think-alouds (or any peer review), they need to see models of writers using the feedback to revise (p. 84).

Graff on benefits of read-alouds to student writing:

"Hearing their writing read in the same way they have heard published writing read can reinforce students' sense of authorship, that they are writing to communicate and must consider how their decisions affect readers" (p. 86).

# data[].attributes.body
The resources below do not have a date associated with them, but might be useful.

# data[].attributes.body
All resources below are current (within the last ten years):

# data[].attributes.body
Gallagher, K. (2011). Write like this: Teaching real-world writing through modeling and mentor texts. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Gallagher on the revision process:

"I tell my students that when they revise, their papers must 'move somewhere.' The 'stuff' of the paper must get better. When held side by side, the second draft must be better than the first draft. This does not mean that the commas need to be put in the correct places, which will occur later in the editing stage. This means that the substance of the paper - the writing itself - must first get better" (p. 204).

# data[].attributes.body
All resources below are current (within the last ten years):

# data[].attributes.body
Students often do not use feedback provided by peers to revise their writing. When looking for feedback to improve or change a written piece, they tend only to value the feedback of the teacher, even when their peers are their specified audience.

# data[].attributes.body
Students often provide peers with feedback only regarding the rules of writing; when they do provide feedback on the style or content of the writing, it often includes only superficial comments, like "I like this," "This is good," or "I don't understand," without offering additional, specific, constructive feedback.

# data[].attributes.body
Peer review is useful in the revision and editing stages of the writing process. Revision and editing are integral to the writing process, both as a skill addressed in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.5) and as a part of most writing instruction frameworks.

# data[].attributes.headline
Classroom Observations Related to Research Topic

# data[].attributes.subject
Classroom Observations Related to Research Topic

# data[].attributes.body
When engaged in a writing process that includes peer review, students often struggle to provide meaningful feedback to one another, instead focusing only on grammar, mechanics, and spelling, rather than style and content. Students thus find it difficult to use peer feedback to improve the content and style of their writing

# data[].attributes.headline
Students are used to writing in isolation

# data[].attributes.subject
Students are used to writing in isolation

# data[].attributes.body
Students craft writing in isolation from their classmates and peers, with only teacher feedback throughout the writing process.