Finucan !

1
Kristen Finucan
Dr. Shana Hartman
ENED 683
November 29, 2016
Inquiry Project Write Up
I began this project by addressing teaching issues I was facing in my classroom. Over the
course of the last two years, I have noticed the quality of my students research papers declining.
While students might satisfy the basic requirements of the paper, the thesis statements were often
unclear and the arguments were often weak. Students have always presented me with a rough
draft and I have supplied feedback. However, I was not seeing students utilizing that feedback.
Concurrently, there has been a significant push in my district to move to a collaborative learning
model. In fact, it is expected that collaboration occur in every lesson. I began to look into steps I
could take to improve my students revision work on their research papers while meeting the
collaborative learning requirements of my county. Over the years, I had a small peer editing
assignment consisting of a yes or no checklist for grammar mistakes that students completed
with partners. I began to ask myself if I could take that checklist and turn it into a more
meaningful assignment. From this question, I began to research the topic of peer review and how
I could successfully implement it in my classroom.
Research
While I began my research with the question, What happens when students engage in
peer review? I quickly realized that I should have begun with the question, What is peer
review? I mistakingly considered my peer edit checklist as an effective tool of peer review.

Finucan !2
However, Pamela Bedore and Brian O'Sullivan, directors of the writing centers at the University
of Connecticut, Avery Point, and St. Mary's College of Maryland point out, Student peer review
emulates peer review in academic publication and/or daily workplace reviews of colleagues'
writing, since peer review becomes most valuable when students understand it both as a
classroom activity that can improve their critical reading and writing skills and as a real-world
process in which writers address the needs of their audiences. This really illuminated the
seriousness of peer review for me. By likening it to professional peer review, I better understood
how must effort should be put into the assignment, but both teachers and students. Peer review at
its most basic means to read and respond to the writings of others, but there are multiple types of
peer review that can be employed to grow student writing. One of the first articles I read, Peer
Review in the Classroom: Is it Beneficial? by Gary Woodward began by explaining that, while
peer editing can fall under the scope of broad definition of peer review, which it is a small aspect
of it that simply holds students work up to a set of conventions. He goes on to emphasize that
this type of review can send the message that conforming to norms is what matters. I knew at
the point that I needed to create an activity that was much deeper in order to foster active
learning among my students. I wanted to send a message concerning strength of arguments,
powerful reasoning, and clear structure - not conformation to norms.
While surface level, this type of peer review is often used simply because it is easy to
manage and, by addressing grammatical errors, often appears to have improved the writing by
making it more visually appealing. However, in order to help improve writing at its heart, a
deeper peer review is required. Woodward suggests effective peer review is born from peer
response using a teacher created template or guided questions about the writing, and peer

Finucan !3
conferencing which involves a conversation between the reader and writer; the reader responds
to the text with questions and comments. These questions are used to clarify and expand a
writer's intended meaning. This continues in a cyclical motion until all questions have been
exhausted . . . I knew this was the type of peer review I wanted to see in my classroom, so I
began the daunting task of learning how to train students in this type of review and guide them
successfully though the process of evaluating a partners paper, then using their partners
suggestions to revise their research papers to be much stronger.
Designing the Assignment
Woodward points out that teachers need to accept that social interaction is going to
happen when students get together. He points out that, in the business, world adults exchange
pleasantries before getting down to business. Additionally, I discovered a paper presented at the
Annual Meeting for Council of Teachers of English in 1983 by Dr. Luann Reid, former editor of
English Journal (a publication for secondary English teachers) that addressed the fact that
talking is the most often neglected aspect of the writing process. Dr. Reid asserted, . . .
speaking is natural, and students come to the writing classroom linguistically well-developed and
confident . . . Building on this strength motivates much more powerfully than
the traditional approach to writing instruction. I was inspired by these insights to attempt to
make the social nature of my students work in my favor as I put this assignment together. I had
already surmised that I needed to put together a detailed list of steps for students to follow to
guide them through this task due both to Woodwards assertion that a lack of detailed guidance
allows students to lapse into surface level comments and own inherent knowledge of the nature
of my students. After reading Dr. Reids paper, I decided to make the first step simply talking

Finucan !4
about the paper with their partners. Often, students are nervous before sharing a piece of writing
and this would give them the chance to let their partners know where they felt that they needed
special attention in their papers. From that point, I created steps for them to follow based on what
I wanted to see in their research papers - strong arguments, clear structure, quality analysis, etc.
All of my consulted sources agreed that clear rubrics were at the heart of a successful
peer review (Woodward). Creating a rubric that addressed this issue was my biggest struggle. I
worked for hours coming up with descriptive criteria for each section. Knowing my students, I
knew they would read the rubric before even beginning the assignment and those would be the
standards they held themselves to. See appendix for assignment and rubric.
Classroom Experience
I was extremely nervous about conducting the peer review with my students. I did not
like the idea of essentially giving them control of the classroom for an entire period. I focused
on returning to my original research question, What happens when students engage in peer
review? and reminded myself that I would never know the answer to that question if I did not
step back and allow my students to truly become stakeholders in their own learning. As students
began to work with their partners, I began to gather primary research data by simply walking
around and listening to their conversations. I first observed that students are vulnerable when
sharing their writing with their peers in a way that I have not observed when they share their
writings with me. For instance, instead of simply saying, I have had trouble with my
conclusion or something of the like, a student said, I was worn out after the game last night so
I know the end of my paper isnt good.

Finucan !5
One bit of direction I had to insert was to remind students to make their comments in text
on their partners papers. I overheard one set of partners verbally discussing their papers and
attempting to make corrections directly on the paper. I realize that I need to make it clear to my
students that errors are part of the drafting process. They do not need to worry about hiding them.
My students quite intent during the peer revision process. I observed that they appeared
to desire to give their partners constructive feedback. The desire students have to please their
peers seemed to work very much in my favor. In the days leading up to the activity, I repeatedly
stated that if each student did not complete the paper, their partners would not have anything to
work with. All students had their assignments ready to go. It is ironic that I control the grades,
but they wanted to do so well for each other. When I look back at my original question, What
happens when students engage in peer review? I would argue, based on my observations of
these students, that quality of work automatically increases due to the sharing of that work with
peers.
The day following the activity, I administered a survey with two questions so that I could
gauge the students reactions to the activity. The first question I asked was, Did you find the
peer review to be beneficial? Why or why not? Overwhelmingly, the students expressed
appreciation for their partners feedback. At this point, I already suspected that they worked
harder for the approval of their peers. Their responses confirmed my suspicion. The first student
response I read stated, Structure and flow for me are problems, so when someone close to my
age edits my paper and gives me tips for structure, I take it closer to heart than when an
instructor grades my essay. At this point I am considering how I can further utilize peer review
to use this factor in my favor. I garnered equally eye-opening data from the second question I

Finucan !6
asked, which was Do you feel that reviewing a partner's paper can improve your own writing?
Why or why not? Up until this point, I had been more focused most heavily on how students
could improve their papers by having a partner respond to it. However, my students felt that they
gained writing skills by reading their partners papers. As one students pointed out, I do feel that
reviewing someone else's writing can improve my own because I get to experience different
styles of writing and I can correct the things that they do, but also learn from them. It helps me to
see the different things that I can do to improve my writing and it opens me up to new
vocabulary as well. See appendix for student responses.
Throughout the process, I debated the presence of step seven in my assignment, which
asked students to address common errors in grammar and convention I see in these assignments.
I struggled with the presence of the step because I emphasized to students that they were not to
red pen their peers, however in hindsight I believe that step requires them to do just that. In my
Inquiry Project Share Out, I asked my peers to give feedback on this part of the assignment and
they suggested that I allow students to do that part separately. When I coded my survey
responses, it became apparent that I should remove that step. My students used the word
mistake(s) twenty-five times in answering the two questions Did you find the peer review to
be beneficial? Why or why not? and Do you feel that reviewing a partner's paper can improve
your own writing? Why or why not? In my mind, every use of the word mistake is a
proverbial stroke of the red pen. I want to keep students focused on strengthening their writing
skills by learning how to better introduce and develop arguments through this activity as opposed
to spotting errors.

Finucan !7
Conclusions
The activity, however, was one of the most successful I have done with students. I have
learned a tremendous amount about peer review. I have made a great deal of progress answering
my research question, What happens with students engage in peer review? In this experiment, I
found that students greatly enjoyed the opportunity to work with partners. Perhaps for this
reason, students engaged and grew as writers. I did find that even with a great deal of specific
instruction, students focused more than I would have like on conventions. Looking deeper at this,
I realize that, just as teachers tend to use the peer edit checklist because it is easier, students will
reach for convention questions because they are more comfortable addressing them. After all, it
is simpler to point out that a peer should reword a sentence to avoid second person point of view
than it is to address breaks in logic and how to fix them. There are other issues I would like to
look into in the future with this subject. For instance, does gender play a role in how students
approach peer review. In the future, I am planning to take the idea of peer review and move
forward with it. Ideally, I hope to create a writing environment where constructive peer review is
part of the regular environment rather than an anomaly requiring a great deal of separate
planning and preparation.

Finucan !8
Appendix
Assignment: Peer Edit
Initial Thoughts:
Now that you have completed a rough draft, you are ready to begin the process of revision and
moving towards completing a strong synthesized argument. I want to remind you of our class
discussion where I encouraged you to consider the word revision in a whole new context. Our
focus is on seeing our paper with fresh eyes. One of the most efficient ways to do this is to
engage in a peer edit with a partner. Not only will you be encouraging and assisting a classmate,
but, through this process, you will find your own writing has improved.
Objectives:
Through this activity, students will complete a peer edit of a partners paper in which they
evaluate the paper with a focus on the following areas:
1. Introduction
2. Argument
3. Development
4. Tone
5. Conventions
The Process
Step One: Take a few minutes and take turns talking. Voice any concerns you may have about
your paper to your partner. For instance, is there a particular section of the paper or aspect of
your argument you would like specific feedback on?

Finucan !9
Step Two: Read your partners paper straight through without adding any comments verbally or
on the google doc. Think back to all the times we have analyzed an authors purpose. Can you
see the purpose in partners paper?
Step Three: The Introduction - Go back and reread your partners introductory paragraph.
Highlight or underline the hook in your partners paper. What can the writer do to further connect
with the reader in the introduction? Underline the thesis statement. Judging by their thesis
statement alone, what argument is the writer making? How does the writer plan to prove his or
her argument to the reader? Remember our discussion about thesis statements and how they
function as roadmaps for the reader. Address these issues in the comments you leave on the
paper.
Step Four: Argument - Take a look at the writers argument. Did he or she convince you of the
merit of their argument? On their google doc, highlight the evidence the writer provides to
support the claim. Examine the quotations the writer chose. Do they further the writers
argument? What steps can the writer take to strengthen the argument? Address by adding
comments to your partners paper.
Step Five: Development of the Argument - This is a time to look closely at the body paragraphs.
Each should support the thesis statement. Is the argument presented logically from beginning to
end? Is there anywhere in the paper where the logic falters? Did the writer present the evidence
in such a way that it fully supported his or her argument? Does any of the evidence presented
require further explanation or analysis? Address this in your comments.

Finucan !10
Step Six: Tone How would you describe the tone of this piece? Identify diction that you find
instrumental in creating the tone. Are there any words or phrases that could be replaced (check
for colloquialisms) to contribute to a more formal tone?
Step Seven: Conventions For this step, I would like you to check for the five most common
errors I see when I grade papers. They are as follows:
1. Second Person Point of View (As you can see . . ., When you study . . ., etc.)
2. Quotations that are not introduced
3. Information that is not cited correctly
4. Shifts between past and present tense
5. Lack of solid transitions from one paragraph to the next.
Assessment
Criteria

Accomplished
(20 points)

Proficient (15
Points)

Developing (5
points)

Evaluation of the
writers opening.

Provided
meaningful
feedback of the
papers
introduction.
Multiple examples
of specific
suggestions are
evident.

Provided feedback
of the papers
introduction. One
to two examples of
suggestions, which
may have been
more general than
specific, are
evident.

Attempted to
Did not attempt.
provide feedback.
Comments were
surface level rather
than constructive.

Evaluation of the
writer's
development of
the argument.

Provided
meaningful
feedback of the
arguments
development.
Identified
weakness in
argument or
structure. Multiple
examples of
specific
suggestions on
how to strengthen
the argument,
improve the
papers
organizational
structure,
correcting any
breakdowns of
logic etc. are
present.

Provided feedback
of the arugments
development.
Identified week
points in the
argument and
attempted to offer
suggestions for
strengthening the
argument.

Attempted to
Did not attempt.
provide feedback
or point out
weakness in the
argument.
Comments were
surface level rather
than constructive.

Evaluation of the
writers tone

Provided
meaningful
feedback to help
the writer achieve
a professional or
semiformal tone.

Provided some
feedback
concerning the
writers tone.

Attempted to
Did not attempt.
provide feedback.
Comments were
surface level rather
than constructive.

Evaluation of the
papers
conventions.

Caught all of the

errors listed on the
checklist

Caught most of the Caught a few of

errors listed on the the errors on the
checklist.
checklist.

Figure1. Assignment and Rubic for Peer Review

Not Attempted (0
points)

Did not attempt.

Finucan 1! 1
Student Survey Questions and Responses
Student Survey Question One: Did you find the peer review to be beneficial? Why or why
not?
Student Responses

I thought the peer review was very beneficial to me. It allowed me to see what one of my
classmates thinks about my writing, which can help me make tweaks and changes, in order to
improve my paper as a whole.

I found it beneficial because it gave me another perspective on what I wrote, helping me how
I can improve my writing through the eyes of another.

Not exactly. I find that if I'm not interested in the paper, or it drones a bit, I cannot give the
best review, not being able to really focus on certain aspects of the paper. As well as this, if
the peer reviewing my paper has a different writing style than me, I get feedback to write it
the way they'd write it in some small aspects. In example, a logical toned person trying to
correct a passionate view (like reason vs. romanticism).

I found the peer review to be very beneficial to me because it gave me a better idea of the
best way to write my paper. I thought that B. gave me very good feedback, and reading
someone else's paper also helped me understand how to properly write my paper.

I found the peer edit to be beneficial because I had several typos that I missed while writing
my rough draft.

I found the peer review to be beneficial, because it allowed me to be able to fix many of the
small mistakes made in my paper. It allowed me to see what one of my peers thoughts about
my paper and wether they understood it or not.

Finucan !12

Yes, I felt that it gave me some things to think about and help me fix things in order to
benefit my grade and my paper. My partner helped me to remember to put some things that I
had left out, and to correct my words and make them sound more proper. I found it beneficial
because I feel like it helped me to fix parts of my paper that I wasn't sure about and it gave
me a sense of completion.

Yes, my peer helped me fix the structure of my sentences. Also, I was shown the punctation
errors and incorrectly spelled words I had.

Fairly useful. My partner made a few good suggestions in terms of my structure and thesis.

I did find the peer review beneficial. M. gave me honest opinions that helped me make good
corrections. She found some spelling errors that I would have missed if she hadn't. I liked
getting feedback from another student.

Yes I find it very beneficial because the person reviewing your paper might catch some
mistakes you made that you didn't see. It also helps having another opinion say something
about your paper.

I think peer review can be kind of beneficial. While it's always good to have an outside view
on your work I don't think it can always be the best. Many tips are often about things you
should include in your paper, whether it would fit or not. I think peer review is great for
grammatical checks, occasionally it takes a different person to see if a sentence sounds wrong
or not, because what you hear is not always correct.

I found the peer review to be very beneficial because after reading someone else's paper and
seeing their mistakes, I was able to go back to my paper and find things that was in the other
person's paper and fix it. I was also given the truth about my paper and the person that

Finucan !13
reviewed mine was very honest which helped me understand what's good and what's not so
i'm able to fix it.

Yes, I think that it helped me further understand what I needed to accomplish in my paper
and how to do so.

I found it to be beneficial because it helped me see mistakes that I may have not seen
otherwise and it helped give me ideas on how to finish certain things in my paper or give me
ideas on things to write in in paragraphs to complete them.

Yes I found the peer review to be very beneficial, because my partner was very helpful, and
helped me see some of my mistakes in my paper.

Yes. I think that it's very beneficial to have a peer review because they have had (for the most
part) the same education you have and can see why you made the mistakes you did, and help
you understand how not to make those same mistakes. For the most part, they view writing
the same way you do and understand where you are coming from.

I was indifferent about it. Im terrible at helping people revise things because most of the time
I just don't know what to say. It did help me a little because I understood my argument
better..

In a sense, it was beneficial because there was a different set of eyes looking at my research
paper, meaning that it was being read from a different perspective. It was good to have
someone read over my paper and tell me things I was doing correct and things I was doing
wrong. I think it would have been more beneficial to have more than one person read over a
classmate's paper so there was no bias and one more viewpoint. Having a partner peer review
my paper did come with many benefits, such as I now know the strong suits of my paper.

Finucan !14

Because our peers had the time and opportunity to review our papers making sure we had no
grammatical errors, running sentences, capitalizations, etc., it was quite beneficial in my
point of view.

I found it to be beneficial because it helped me see mistakes that I may have not seen
otherwise and it helped give me ideas on how to finish certain things in my paper or give me
ideas on things to write in in paragraphs to complete them.

Yes I found the peer review to be very beneficial, because my partner was very helpful, and
helped me see some of my mistakes in my paper.

Yes. I think that it's very beneficial to have a peer review because they have had (for the most
part) the same education you have and can see why you made the mistakes you did, and help
you understand how not to make those same mistakes. For the most part, they view writing
the same way you do and understand where you are coming from.

I thought that it was extremely beneficial, I loved getting feedback from my peers. It is
always good to have someone else look over your paper because they can catch things that
you have not noticed.

Student Survey Question Two: Do you feel that reviewing a partner's paper can improve
your own writing? Why or why not?

I think it can because it can show you how they have formatted and written their paper and if
your paper is unorganized or scatter you can fix it. You can bounce ideas off of each other
and help each other with completing the papers.

Finucan !15

Yes, I think that reviewing my partner's paper can improve my writing because I can look to
see if I made the same mistakes my partner made in my writing and I will be able to fix those
so my paper is accurate.

Yes I definitely believe reviewing a partner's paper can improve my own writing, because
looking over someone else's paper helped me think of new ideas and topics to write about.

Yes, I believe that reviewing a partner's paper can improve my writing. It helps me make sure
I don't make the same mistakes they do, when writing my paper. It helps me grow as a writer
and perfect my paper.

It gives you ideas on how to use words differently but in my opinion I don't think it really
helps with out own writing because we all have different styles and we all want to take a
subject a different way so when someone else sees something they may interpret it a different
way then we do.

I think that reviewing a partners paper can help me improve my own mistakes within a paper.
I learn by trial and error, by my own faults and the faults of others.

Reviewing a partners paper can benefit my own writing because it can help me see the
writing skills they have. Also fixing things on their paper can help me fix things on mine.

I think it can definitely help improve your own writing. Being able to read over someone
else's paper helps you to find any mistakes you've made and review with yourself why it was
wrong as well as helping you discover the mistakes you've made in your own paper. Seeing
how their paper is set up gives you clarity to whether you have likely written your own paper
correctly or if your's needs to be adjusted. I enjoyed reading my partner's paper because it
gave helped me to understand them and how they put themselves into their writing so that I

Finucan !16
may understand how I can do the same in my writing so that I may be able to reflect myself
in my paper which I think is important in any and all writing I will come across.

Yes it does. We as students and young writers come across errors that we don't recognize
ourselves and it's helpful to have someone help and correct us.

I do feel that reviewing a partner's paper can improve my own writing. It can show me things
that I may have done as well and not noticed and allow me to go back and fix my mistakes,
and it can show me what not to do in future writings.

Yes, I do believe so. With my peers being so close in age, it gives me more insight on how I
should be structuring my paper. For example, my partner enjoyed how I went from killer to
question, to question to killer, to killer to question, then to analyzing and supporting my
thesis.

Yes it can because it gives you another perspective, seeing how they write and seeing what
they do that you do not it helps.

Maybe if I had understood exactly what I was doing with peer review.

By reading another person's paper, I was able to compare my writing to his. It helped me to
see the ways that my paper needed work, and also made me better as a writer.

I did. Having someone look over your writing can help catch any mistakes the eye may have
missed because you are used to it. I also found myself struggling when I was first writing. I
think this can be very beneficial because they provide their input.

I do feel that reviewing someone else's writing can improve my own because I get to
experience different styles of writing and I can correct the things that they do, but also learn
from them. It helps me to see the different things that I can do to improve my writing and it

Finucan !17
opens me up to new vocabulary as well. It also lets me learn about new things and gives me
more information.

Yes, it shows you mistakes other peer made. It helps you to learn from their mistakes and not
repeat what they did.

Yes, because a partner might have different writing skills to bring to a paper than I do, and
getting a second opinion never hurts.

I do feel that way. I learned new strategies and perspectives that I added in my paper. Her
paper was more informal and persuasive to learn about food allergies and that mine was more
informal about the dangers that can come from going in the mission field. This gave me a
look on how to write a persuasive paper.

I think that it can. It showed me how someone else writes, and gave me a new way of
thinking. My peer writes with a lot of her feelings and I think that is something that I might
be able to use in the future. I think that it really is a way of improving my own writing.

Yes, I feel like it can help you cause you notice some common mistakes that aren't noticed in
their paper and you can make sure you don't have the same mistakes in your own paper. Also,
helping others review their paper makes it more easier to find mistakes in your own paper.

It might help me learn what to do and what not to do in the future whenever I'm writing a
paper. It also helps knowing what kinda mistakes you have made so you won't make the same
mistakes later on.

I think reviewing a partner's paper can be beneficial. If they make a mistake it is easy to see if
you made the same mistake as them, that way both people can fix their paper. It is also good

Finucan !18
to see what kind of writing they applied in their paper, how their sentence structure went.
This way you can see if you'd want to use something similar.

Yes, because you can gain mass amounts of knowledge from it. You might see how someone
worded something, and you may like it. You may see that you did something wrong and you
need to change yours. There are vast amounts of knowledge you can gain from a peers paper.

I did find that reviewing someone else's paper improves my writing because after looking to
see what mistakes they made, i can step back and try to look for their mistakes in my paper
and fix it. Going over their paper helped me with grammar and different things like that.

Yes because of all of my grammar errors. She helped me with words like we me and I, that i
thought I could use but couldn't. The only problem with my partner is the understanding of
the paper because we both really didn't know what we were looking for in each others until
the next day.

Yes, I feel that reviewing someone else's paper can improve my writing tremendously. When
reviewing someone else's paper it is easier to notice mistakes, this will also translate to when
I am writing my paper in the future.

I do think that reading and reviewing someones paper could help. I think when you catch
mistakes in their paper, you might go back and look for that in your paper. Since the topics
differ the papers will have different problems since we are not all writing a paper on same
topic but, I do find it beneficial to peer edit and review.

Legend
Red - Negative
Green - Neutral

Finucan !19
Blue - Statements addressing conventions
Purple - the word mistakes
Figure 2. Student Survey Questions and Responses

Finucan !20
Works Cited
Bedore, Pamela, and Brian O'Sullivan. "Writing Centers Go To Class: Peer Review (of Our)
Workshops." Writing Lab Newsletter 35.9-10, 2011, pp. 1-6. MLA International
Bibliography. Accessed 8 Dec. 2016.
Reid, Louann. Talking: The Neglected Part Of The Writing Process. n.p.: 1983, ERIC,
Accessed 29 Nov. 2016.
Woodward, Gary M. "Peer Review In The Classroom: Is It Beneficial?." Literacy Learning: The
Middle Years 23.1, 2015, 40. Supplemental Index. Accessed 1 Nov. 2016.