Transcript Keepin’ it Real: How to Write Effective Comments for Peer

Keepin’ it Real: How to Write
Effective Comments for Peer
Reviews
A Presentation by Erin Trauth, Angela Tartaglia, Richard Ellman, Melissa Jones, and Andrea Dennin
for the University of South Florida FYC Program
Why is it important to provide
effective comments during peer
review?
To start, peer review has many benefits, including:
- The ability to get feedback on your writing before the instructor sees it
- The ability to see your own strengths and weaknesses after reading and
responding to another paper
- A greater sense of audience – it is not just your instructor reading your
work!
- The chance to learn new information from your peers about the subject
you may also be writing on
- Feedback, feedback, feedback!
The essence of the peer review is your comments – without strong,
specific comments, the peer review can often be useless!
Something to consider…
In a national survey of 560 otherwise successful teachers of writing and
715 of their students, Sarah W. Freedman (1985, The Role of Response in
Acquisition of Written Language, Berkeley: California UP) found that
many teachers grieved over the use of peer review groups because they
had difficulty getting students to respond effectively to one another's
writing. Vague comments such as the one at the beginning of this
lesson proliferate.
The students, too, complained about the writing responses, saying that
their peers rarely offered substantial help with their writing. The result
is that such vague comments rarely translate into effective revisions,
and this is unfortunate because when students receive concrete
suggestions for revisions, they do revise with the suggestions in mind
(Nina D. Ziv, 1983, "Peer Groups in the Composition Classroom: A Case
Study," Conference on College Composition and Communication,
Detroit, March 17-19).
Think About It:
Imagine you have spent hours on a project for this class,
and you are counting on getting a good grade on the
final draft. While working on a draft, you see that you
have some problems in your writing, but you are not
quite sure how to fix them. Who is your first resource?
Your peers!
Now, imagine you are anticipating getting some really
great, specific feedback from your peer reviewer. You
go to class, switch papers, wait eagerly for your peer to
help edit your work, and alas, you get your paper back.
What did he write?
“I liked it.”
“It was really good.”
“I didn’t like your thesis.”
Does this feedback help you fix your writing problems?
Probably not.
It is not specific enough.
As a peer reviewer, you can't just say, "I liked it," or
"I didn't like it." Instead, you want to give the
writer information that will really help to improve
what the writer has written.
What is important to remember is that while you
should not be harsh or personal, you should be
honest. Saying something works when it really
does not will not help anyone.
There are, in general, three types
of peer review comments:
- Vague Comments
- General, but Useful Comments
- Specific, Directive Comments
Specific,
Directive
Comment
Most
Effective
Least
Effective
General, but
Useful
Comment
Vague Comment
In order to make effective comments on a peer review, you
want to make SPECIFIC, DIRECTIVE comments.
Vague Comments:
Comments that are full of generalities, providing little or no
specific direction for revision and/or comments that simply
praise or disagree with the writing
Example:
“Try to revise the whole second page” or “I liked it” or “I do
not really like this part”
Think about it: what do comments like this really tell a
person about their paper that will help them REVISE?
Nothing.
General, but Useful Comments
Comments that are too general but may provide some direction for
revision
Note that this
comment offers a
suggestion for
improvement
Note that this
comment points to
a specific place in
the paper (the
introduction)
Example: “I don’t like your introduction. Maybe describe the topic of
public writing better.”
A general, but useful comment is slightly better than a vague comment
because it narrows what works (or does not work) to a specific area of
the paper, as well as offering a specific suggestion. We can take this a
step further, however, by providing a specific, directive comment.
A Specific, Directive Comment
Comments that not only point out a specific problem area of the
paper, but also offer the writer a reason why the change is needed
and a specific direction for revision.
Note that this comment tells the writer
why the change is needed
Note that this comment points out a specific
spot for improvement (the introduction) and
states what exactly is wrong with it
Example: “I do not think the introduction fully describes the topic of
public writing in a way all readers will understand, which is
necessary if you are going to fully analyze the topic in the next few
paragraphs . Maybe you could use a quote that really defines public
writing from a source, or you could expand on your first two
sentences (which I have underlined in your paper).”
Note that this comment offers two suggestions
for improvement, and that the peer reviewer
underlined the sentences that the writer could
work on
Pop Quiz!
In the following pairs, determine which of the two
choices is the most effective comment:
A.
“This is disorganized!”
B.
"This section discusses both animal-rearing
conditions and experimental methods, but the two
are mixed together, making it difficult to focus on
your points. Could you separate each into its own
paragraph?”
A.
B.
A.
B.
“How are these references relevant?”
“The background and references given in
paragraph 2 don't seem directly relevant to your
thesis. I think we need references that give facts on
the dangers of public writing specifically rather
than references that explain the extensive history
of blogging and its positive effects.”
“Your thesis is unclear.”
“I am having trouble understanding your thesis.
The thesis needs to be clear so that the reader is
sure of the position you are going to take in the
rest of the paper. Could you state specifically the
stance this paper will take on gun control?”
Now, let’s look at a few comments taken from real
peer reviews and analyze their effectiveness.
Activity adopted from Gloria A.
Neubert and Sally J. McNelis,
Peer Response: Teaching
Specific Revision Suggestions,
The English Journal, 1990.
In order to be an effective peer
reviewer, remember to:
 Read the writer’s essay carefully – just skimming the paper is not




enough to really help the writer.
Be positive. Point out strengths as well as weaknesses, and be
sensitive in how you phrase your criticism (“Could you clarify
this section?” rather than “Your organization is a mess.”)
Be honest. Don’t say something works when it doesn’t. You’re not
helping the writer if you avoid mentioning a problem.
Be specific. Rather than simply saying a paragraph is “confusing,”
for example, try to point to a specific phrase that confuses you
and, if possible, explain why that phrase is problematic.
Focus on one or two major areas for revision – it is not your job to
completely edit the paper, but instead to focus on major flaws
and offer suggestions