Mini Review of Literature for Peer Review

Here's the link to the google doc itself - not sure if I was supposed to allow editing or not, or just comments, so if it doesn't work for some reason, let me know! I'll also post the essay below the link, so that it's out there! In the world! Up with People!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1usEh499yiyLqxRk0GtyCFQi1c9KLutQ0EzOcV05hxSY/edit?usp=sharing

Dusty Neibauer

Bill Knutson and MJ Nairn

M.ED. Program

18 April 2013

Review of Literature

The picture at the top of this assignment portrays Snoopy, on top of his favorite location for writing and introspective thinking (on top of his red doghouse - red denoting passion! There are not many symbols that will go un-analyzed by an English teacher) with a typewriter poised and ready, thinking to himself that “Good writing is hard work!” (Schulz). Indeed, it is for many people, if done well, one of the more challenging academic skills to acquire and master, with its subjective parameters for quality, breadth of stylistic flourishes (or lack thereof), and gosh darn it -- grammatical quandaries! While writing / English teachers strive to provide meaningful and timely feedback that will matter to students and help them improve, we (writing / English teachers) also know that the more meaningful revision and consideration that is done, the more students will improve their own writing. Thus, the idea of “Peer Review” was born. The concept has been a mainstay for writing instructors for many years, but the feedback that most instructors seem to give regarding its practice is that it is not as useful as it should be; students either do not take it seriously, focus on the wrong things (more often than not, only searching for grammatical errors and type-o’s), or don’t give the practice its proper weight. I have struggled with these very same issues in my classroom; that is why I chose to focus my review of literature on the subject of peer review -- in hopes of not only finding out why peer review has not been very successful in my classroom, but also because I intend to refine my emphasis on community, clarity of terminology and focus, method of questioning / facilitating feedback, and technology integration so that students improve their writing as much as all of my college English professors said that they could through the peer review process.

To achieve the desired result of creating a community of writers that not only values, but benefits, from the peer review process, I find that the aforementioned word “community” is key; I must establish a collaborative, respectful spirit amongst the students who will be doing the writing and editing. Some classes take to this more easily than others -- my Pre-AP English 9 students already benefit from the inclusive spirit that comes with taking said elective honors class, and also typically have smaller numbers as a class (over the 3 years it has existed, the average is seventeen per class); both of these characteristics aid in the willingness of students to participate in a more communal manner with regard to many things -- classroom discussions, taking chances on ideas and stances, and writing feedback. My more mainstream classes, such as Composition 12, or English 9, suffer from the ailments to most peer review sessions -- the more skilled writers do not benefit as much as the poorer writers, and feel both used and apathetic; the less-skilled writers are not as engaged in their own or others’ success, and lack the skill sufficient to provide meaningful feedback; and most reviewers are too easily-distracted in the wrong sorts of goals for the review -- most frequently in the search for type-o’s (the word itself looks like a mistake!) and grammatical mistakes (ironically, studies reveal that all but the most skilled secondary and postsecondary writers have the grammatical competency to give anything but limited and often times flawed input in this area). These significant challenges are not easily overcome, as the peer-review process hinges on students’ willingness to improve their writing (which is a sometimes over-sensitive topic when being critiqued) and on a level of academic honesty and trust that must be present amongst the writers / reviewers. Thus, establishing a closely-knit “writing community” is essential if the peer review process has a chance of succeeding.

Once a community is established (which, honestly, is an ever-evolving process), the clarity of the goals of the peer review process must be established. One commonly-made mistake made (I initially made it as well) is to call the whole process “peer editing.” The word “editing,” however, implies looking for those tertiary issues previously-mentioned -- grammatical errors and type-o’s. “Review” is more apt, and helps students think more conceptually about the writing, shifting their focus to the “big ideas” like thesis statements, organizational methods, transitional phrases, the use of evidence and quotations -- these are the things that English teachers (typically) want their students to think critically about. While the changing of one word seems small, most writers / English teachers know that one small word can change the meaning of an entire work, and so it is with the Peer Review process.

Another important determining factor in the success of the peer review process is the phrasing, focus, and level of questioning that students are required to apply to each others’ writing. Shifting the focus from “low-level” focuses (formatting, grammar, etc.) to “high-level” focuses (thesis, focus, coherence, support) is important (although mixing in specific grammatical focuses for each assignment is a great way to improve writing - more on that in the following paragraph). To achieve more “high-level” focus, using the “PQP” method of questioning is effective. P (praise) Q (question) P (polish) questioning forces students to comment upon good qualities of others’ writing as well as the areas in which they can improve. Forcing them to ask the “right” questions and emphasizing coherence and flow also benefits the reviewer when they are revising their own essays later on. Thus, asking the right questions in the right order will greatly affect the final products of both writer and reviewer, and the overall success of the peer review process.

While grammatical and format-related issues have been labeled “low level,” that does not imply that they should be wholly disregarded. Much like previously-mentioned issues, if the things students are asked to review are specific and focused, they will be more useful to the writers. The most effective method could be described thusly: either before or during the writing process, teachers use mini-lessons with a specific grammatical focus in mind that will be emphasized in the current essay -- whether it be implementing appositive phrases, preventing comma splices, or maintaining a consistent tense -- the focus depends on the skill level of the grade, a particular class, etc.; students work with the skill and implement it in their writing; during the peer review process, teachers have one dedicated question to said skill, encouraging the mastery of it to both writer and reviewer; voila! Meaningful grammatical feedback used specifically to benefit students’ writing! This specific method is more effective in getting students to retain a focused, specific skill, and will encourage its use in future assignments as well.

The final tool I have worked to use more often in the peer review process (at both the request / encouragement of both students and my school district, as well as my desire to be “gadgety”) is the specific use of technology to enhance the process -- and, perhaps, make the students feel cooler about what they are doing, which I hope subtly tricks them into doing a better job. I’ve used Turnitin.com’s Peer-Review functionality to both hold students accountable for what they write, but also to remove some of that grammar-related feedback out of their focus (it has a computer program that recognizes, albeit inconsistently at times, grammatical errors in writing). I could have them respond to papers anonymously, or conspicuously (I prefer things to be out in the open, however). I’ve also used Schoology, an academically-focused website similar in format to Facebook, to hold online thesis statement discussions, or thematically-focused discussions, which help students’ critical thinking (and writing, as a byproduct - one must be sneaky!) and engagement in their classes’ communities. If used well and focused, technology is no different than the other parts of the peer review process -- it can greatly aid and enhance the final product (as well as cut down on the time it takes teachers to grade and hand back assignments!).

A good peer review session is very tough to implement and achieve. In fact, a few of my articles actively discouraged the practice, saying that its results are never what instructors want them to be, and since the practice varies so widely in its goals and implementation across the academic spectrum, it is different-- thus, inconsistent and “dicey” -- every time a student changes instructors. This, however, doesn’t discourage me from trying to find that “sweet spot” in my quest (hopefully not of the “foolish” variety) to make it an effective tool for my students. Most research says that the more students write, as well as think critically about writing, the more writing skills they develop; they also become better readers and critical thinkers. This is an honorable goal; this is a goal that is shared by the majority of teachers that I know; this is something that our hyperactive modern society, with its ever-shifting focus on constantly shifting its focus, needs! With so many people striving to be part of a community-- whether it be one on Facebook, World of Warcraft, Twitter, or whatever future community-based craze comes to pass-- peer review has the potential to link students to a more focused and academically-relevant group - the writing community.

Semester 1 Professional Growth blog entry

                    Since student teaching, I've grown, but at what cost?!?!? (hair quantity and length)

1.  Think back (or revisit) the “Principles of Children’s Learning” or “Belief Statements” that you wrote at the beginning of this journey.

 a. What specific principle or belief do you most rely on as you interact with students each day?

I most rely on the notion that if I'm passionate, approachable, and well-meaning in my attempts to impart knowledge to students, that some of that will sort of seep into their sub-consciences and they'll get excited, or at least give some attention, to what I'm jabbering on about. Now, I know that that's a pretty big assumption, and I also know that no one can be forced to care about something without allowing oneself to (I'm not naive enough to believe that they all read the books assigned - in fact, in some classes, I'd wager it's less that 40-50% that really, earnestly read what they're expected to). However, I genuinely care about what I'm doing with my time and professional life, and sometimes, if I'm lucky, I get whole classes that buy into what I'm trying to do, and that's when teaching is the most rewarding for me. 

b. In what ways has this helped you reframe anxiety-producing problems into productive, solvable problems (maybe even opportunities)?

It helps reassure me that I am, in fact, accomplishing something when things do go well, or when students have particular success with a given essay, socratic discussion, speech, etc. When students match my efforts with that of their own, I really get excited and feel valued; that helps to cancel out the interactions that are less than fulfilling. One might say that I enjoy teaching when things are good, and students aren't challenging; I can't deny it! Some people thrive on the challenge of engaging the most disenfranchised, checked out students and getting them to care - I've had less of that in my career, to be honest, and that kind of challenge doesn't intrigue me much. 

2.  In what ways has your Semester 1 learning impacted your interactions with colleagues?

It hasn't impacted my interactions much, other than the fact that I now have terminology to explain in what state our department's (and faculty's) state is: Pseudo-community! Faculty-wise, I'm not really the guy to take us into chaos and beyond - I'm not in that type of leadership position. In my department, I could make the efforts, but we're not in a state of change yet; perhaps in time I will work to move us past pseudo-community - it's just not the right moment presently. I am, however, respectful and mindful of other people's perspectives, and shall continue to be - a position that was reinforced by what we've learned. 

3.  What new nugget of learning (or insight) has impacted your practice most?  What are you doing differently as a result of this learning?

That has to do with my Review of Literature - I've changed the terminology with regard to one of the practices that I want to do more of in my classroom - "Peer Editing" became either "Peer Review" or "Peer Response." The definition and expectations that goes with that term change is a big deal, and shifts the focus of the practice to "searching for errors" to "critiquing big ideas," such as the thesis statement, evidence, fluency of the writing, etc. I'm considering adding a bit to the peer review process and making it my big project, which will result in the most effective writing practices I've engaged in (hopefully!), and that's a big deal for my teaching and students. 

4.  What are you still wondering about?

What kinds of focuses we move onto as a community now that the first class is over, and what that'll look like. I'm also wondering about the workload with regard to the two upcoming summer classes happening in conjunction with our "main" course of study. It'll be interesting to see how much we're done with by the start of the next school year. 

Data Tools Clarification:

Data Tools Clarification for the project: In what ways can both Peer Review and Feedback regarding students' writing benefit students' critical reading and writing skills, as well as foster a supportive learning community, in the secondary English classroom?

Type of data collection	Description of process	Type of data collected (quantitative, qualitative)	Useful Instruments	Advantages	Challenges	When to use
Peer Review Sheets	Students answer questions regarding other students’ essays they’ve just reviewed	Qualitative - look at and revise their essays based on the responses	Turnitin.com peer review response - students can check the responses regarding the same paper that multiple other students have reviewed, computer lab, ipads	Quick, stored for as long as I have them as a student (and beyond if I wish), questions tailored to what I want them to focus on - levels of difficulty, scaffolding, etc.	lab space - always a contest in our school	during essay review times - at least 3 times / trimester, up to as many as possible.
Peer Review Process Survey	Data collection of surveys pertaining to how the process itself went, what was most useful and least, etc.	Mix of Qualitative and Quantitative - will rank them and look at percentages, as well as making judgments about the process	can be done on Schoology, ipads, or just paper	allows me to see what I need to polish, change, review, or keep as the same	students’ willingness to say “everything isn’t useful or effective,” especially with the norms of that practice	Once or twice a trimester, to make changes based on personnel, classroom identity and needs, etc.
Grammatical Feedback checklist	Reminds the readers which grammatical issues they’re looking for to compliment and point out for that essay. On Turnintin.com’s ESS feedback, it’ll point out certain issues relatively consistently (fragments, tense shifts, awkward constructions, capitalization, etc.).	Mix of qualitative and quantitative - the essays, the checklist itself, looking at the rough drafts of their essays through the review filter	turnitin.com, schoology, or paper checklist	it keeps their focus on what they’re supposed to be looking at / improving for that assignment	Keeping the students from focusing purely on editing - all small mistakes, or “goof hunting” - too negative, not as relevant	During the review process, as well as the writing process - as they’re working on their rough drafts, they should have it out as well so that they focus their writing on succeeding with regard to said skills.

Dusty Neibauer's Golden Circle

My golden circle:

What can I learn from the world from literature / writing?
How can I prove what I think I know is in the literature / topic at hand?
Why does it matter (how does it affect the literature? my own views? effectiveness?)?

I try to teach from the inside out because students need to know what it is they’re trying to accomplish or do with their coursework. So in essence, I’ve realized that I’ve sort of inverted the circle into a target, with the middle being the end result or goal that I want them to be able to “hit.”This is with regard to literature analysis, but can be applied to writing, analytical thinking, thesis statements, etc. While this is sort of going against the speaker’s model, I like this better, as the outside of my target contains the widest margin to hit - the broad concepts of “what are we doing in the class.”

Then, a tougher ring to hit, the “How can I prove what I see / how I interpret the literature” ring, students are now applying skills to the task, and trying to work with the literature using evidence - that’s a tougher skill to hit, so the scope is narrowed.

Lastly comes the middle of the target, the “bullseye” of what I want them to be able to do. A bullseye is tough to achieve, and takes skill, and is not something that many are capable of without practice, and I find that to be true with regard to literature analysis as well. My “Why,” then, is “Why does it matter?” This is the key to a thesis statement, and a key to understanding literature as well, and if students are able to answer that question ( not only the classic “Reader Response Critical Literary Theory” method of asking why something can be related to one’s own experiences, but also, and in my opinion more importantly,  to larger society, or literature, or cross-cultural understanding)  it seems as if they’re now capable of more high-level thinking. And, as a bonus, I can stop writing “Why does this matter” or “Why should I care” or “be more specific!” on their thesis statements!

The final part, the “why does it matter?” part, is also what I believe, and that informs my teaching significantly. I try and communicate this to students through a couple of different ways, but the most significant is through literature analysis. We have discussions about what the author is trying to show us or reveal to us through the literature, and that lends itself to discussions about whether they think that is relevant to themselves, or of equal importance, to contemporary society. Shifting the scope of students’ views of the world from squarely on themselves (which is enhanced by the messages received through modern social media, as well as the popular art / media they generally consume) outward to the world and others’ experiences is an important step to make in creating the future’s citizens and thinkers, and that is something that I’m always trying to do. It’s also useful when talking about thesis statements in writing, because the “why does this matter” portion of a thesis is sometimes the hardest portion for them to write, and that can be reflected in those kinds of outward-gazing conversations.

As far as conveying such views to my colleagues, I’d say that I generally do so through conversation. For the parents, though, I’m not really sure if any parent has asked me my philosophy through conversation, conferences, or otherwise, which I haven’t really considered until now. It’s kind of concerning, to be honest, that the level of discourse regarding their child’s education is relegated to the standard “What’s his/her grade and are they respectful in class?” formula in our district. I can do more to convey it through initiating said conversation in the appropriate forums, through syllabi posted to my personal webpage / schoology page, and other such things, but it still feels more passive than it deserves to be.

Norms Process -- Notes - TED talk by Brene Brown

Courage, Shame, Vulnerability, Empathy, Forgiveness

"Vulnerability is not weakness; that thought is profoundly dangerous."
-- pure courage - emotional risk, purity, earnestness; the most accurate measure of courage.

"Vulnerability is the birthplace of innovation, creativity, and change."
The most important opportunity, function, and role of a critic is to defend / be in the defense of the new. An informed audience with knowledge of what's come before has an opportunity to help refine and promote those chances and risks that innovators need to take to move their areas of life, art, etc. forward.

Lock and load - a good motto for a researcher?

Shame researcher that had the breakdown - I think we need to really see the TED talk in which it happened.
Talking of shame - All-importance is necessary in some roles and jobs -

TED is a failure conference - few are there that haven't failed time and again - important for students to know, since they watch so many of them now.

Shame is the force that works against accomplishment - since our personalities and identities are tied to the fear of it, it's probably one of the bigger hurdles of modern students -

Shame for women is brought about by conflicting expectations of what they're supposed to be - supposed to never let anyone "see you sweat" or know your struggles.

Men are more accomplishment-oriented - our first response is to take action, or reference what we've already done. It's a sort of defense mechanism against feeling personal shame.

18-word statement, sentence, rule for our community of learners

Vulnerability is having the courage to take a risk, and is the "birthplace of innovation, creativity, and change." Cara, Keisha, Kathy, Nichole, Kalin, Melinda, and Dusty

Empathy is the end-all to shame.

Forginess is learned through shame.

Acceptance - that you have faced shame.

While I'm working on assignments, I'm finding that I can get work done fairly quickly, as I have had limited time to work on them, since naptime has been shortening for my daughter Elise. So, it's satisfying to be able to check off assignments when they're done.

I've been reaffirming to myself that I am, however, not a great multitasker, which I guess I already knew. I need to devote myself completely to the task at hand; otherwise, I find that I've got 7-8 different programs running, burning a cd, clicking on this and that with wondrous abandon.

As far as questions go, I'm wondering what I should do for my CIQ Matrixes for the next 6 weeks, as I'm taking paternity leave. Also, I'm not sure if the assignments tab is working for me yet, as the papers going through the St. Mary's offices are moving at a beurocratic pace.

I'm wondering whether my research question is what I want to pursue. I know I'm interested in the outcomes, but I'd also like to do some literature-based analysis; I sometimes wonder if I could somehow work two research questions in there (though I know that's not a feasible option).


Regarding the TED talk by Brown -

I think that encouraging students to take risks is a huge component to modern education. One of my esteemed colleagues mentioned that this generation, or an upcoming one, will have their whole lives potentially documented digitally. That sort of leads to a homogenezation of self - people are conforming more to what they could see of themselves online according to someone else's vision of self. So, to get students to take those risks in stepping outside of the norms of academia, especially with regard to things they're not well-versed in, one must encourage them to be vulnerable, take chances, and innovate through taking chances.  Without being personally vulnerable, individuals won't create new things, and won't drive their areas forward.

Action Research Question

In what ways can both peer editing and feedback regarding students' writing benefit students' critical reading and writing skills, as well as foster a supportive learning community,  in the secondary English classroom?