Journal of Writing Research earli | contact
 
journal description
aims and scope
themes
open access
editorial board
current issue
back issues
early view
special issue
most downloaded
peer review policy
abstracting/indexing
award
related websites
contact

Abstract

Eliciting formative assessment in peer review

Goldin, I.M., & Ashley, K.D. (2012).
Journal of Writing Research, 4(2), 203-237

Computer-supported peer review systems can support reviewers and authors in many different ways, including through the use of different kinds of reviewing criteria. It has become an increasingly important empirical question to determine whether reviewers are sensitive to different criteria and whether some kinds of criteria are more effective than others. In this work, we compared the differential effects of two types of rating prompts, each focused on a different set of criteria for evaluating writing: prompts that focus on domain-relevant aspects of writing composition versus prompts that focus on issues directly pertaining to the assigned problem and to the substantive issues under analysis. We found evidence that reviewers are sensitive to the differences between the two types of prompts, that reviewers distinguish among problem-specific issues but not among domain-writing ones; that both types of ratings correlate with instructor scores; and that problem-specific ratings are more likely to be helpful and informative to peer authors in that they are less redundant.

PDF | doi: 10.17239/jowr-2012.04.02.5

Export citation: EndNote | BibTeX

For readers
free subscription
alert service
full text
For authors
guide for authors
submit article
For reviewers
guide for reviewers
submit review
Repository login
home contact