A validation study of students' end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor

dc.creator	Melissa M. Patchan, Davida Charney & Christian D. Schunn
dc.date	2009-03-01T00:00:00Z
dc.date.accessioned	2015-07-20T22:15:24Z
dc.date.available	2015-07-20T22:15:24Z
dc.identifier	2030-1006
dc.identifier	https://doaj.org/article/cbd6071bca534215a10e3c41cd2516cc
dc.identifier.uri	http://evidence.thinkportal.org/handle/123456789/17613
dc.description	In order to include more writing assignments in large classrooms, some instructors have been utilizing peer review. However, many instructors are hesitant to use peer review because they are uncertain of whether students are capable of providing reliable and valid ratings and comments. Previous research has shown that students are in fact capable of rating their peers papers reliably and with the same accuracy as instructors. On the other hand, relatively little research has focused on the quality of students' comments. This study is a first in-depth analysis of students' comments in comparison with a writing instructor's and a content instructor's comments. Over 1400 comment segments, which were provided by undergraduates, a writing instructor, and a content instructor, were coded for the presence of 29 different feedback features. Overall, our results support the use of peer review: students' comments seem to be fairly similar to instructors' comments. Based on the main differences between students and the two types of instructors, we draw implications for training students and instructors on providing feedback. Specifically, students should be trained to focus on content issues, while content instructors should be encouraged to provide more solutions and explanations.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	University of Antwerp
dc.relation	http://www.jowr.org/articles/vol1_2/JoWR_2009_vol1_nr2_Patchan_et_al.pdf
dc.relation	https://doaj.org/toc/2030-1006
dc.rights	CC BY-NC-ND
dc.source	Journal of Writing Research , Vol 1, Iss 2, Pp 124-152 (2009)
dc.subject	content instructor feedback
dc.subject	writing instructor feedback
dc.subject	peer feedback
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Psychology
dc.subject	BF1-990
dc.subject	Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subject	B
dc.subject	DOAJ:Psychology
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	DOAJ:Linguistics
dc.subject	DOAJ:Languages and Literatures
dc.subject	Psychology
dc.subject	BF1-990
dc.subject	Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subject	B
dc.subject	DOAJ:Psychology
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	DOAJ:Education
dc.subject	DOAJ:Social Sciences
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Psychology
dc.subject	BF1-990
dc.subject	Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subject	B
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Psychology
dc.subject	BF1-990
dc.subject	Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subject	B
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.subject	Philology. Linguistics
dc.subject	P1-1091
dc.subject	Language and Literature
dc.subject	P
dc.subject	Psychology
dc.subject	BF1-990
dc.subject	Philosophy. Psychology. Religion
dc.subject	B
dc.subject	Special aspects of education
dc.subject	LC8-6691
dc.subject	Education
dc.subject	L
dc.title	A validation study of students' end comments: Comparing comments by students, a writing instructor, and a content instructor
dc.type	article