Berridge, E. (2009). Peer Interaction

¶ … Berridge, E. (2009). Peer Interaction and Writing Development in a Social Studies High

School classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, CA.

What are the research questions? What is the hypothesis being tested?

According to Berridge (2009), "The process of peer review is not documented in a manner that translates to application for professional collaboration and student implementation. The process itself involves students actively critiquing the written work of others, and reflecting on their own work. The purpose of this paper is to examine the writing process, explore in detail the "peer" part of the process I call peer review, and understand the role of a cooperative learning environment as a key element for this process to work in building students' critical writing and thinking skills. This paper also explores effective teaching strategies using peer review in a social studies high school classroom. Theories and practices are identified from the research literature (p. 9).

One research question was addressed:

1. What is the effect of using peer review as a strategy in increasing clarity in content through building the writing process in a social studies high school classroom?

Literature Review

What general field of knowledge does this study investigate? Examples could include: Research on Teacher Effectiveness, Research on Self-Reflective Learning, Research on Gender Differences in Mathematics Performance, etc.

According to Berridge (2009), this is research on peer interaction and writing development. It is also about cooperative learning environments.

List three key points from the study's literature review that help the reader understand what is already known about the subject, and the purpose of this study in light of other studies.

Cite at least one study used by the author for each of the three points you list.

Three key points from the literature review in this article are:

1) Students have learned to hate writing and revising because in the traditional method of teaching writing, messing up is considered a form of failure, according to Stemper (as cited in Berridge, 2009). Being confused and messy in one's work with writing is a normal part of the process; it is not a sign that the author is wrong.

2) Writing is communication, and that without an audience communication cannot occur, according to Kennedy-Kalafatis and Carleton (as cited in Berridge, 2009). The purpose of writing is lost without peer interaction.

3) Teaching writing as a process is not nearly as easy as it may seem, according to Voss, (as cited in Berridge, 2009). Training in the teaching of the process of writing shows teachers can be persuaded that they are not really teaching writing, and can learn process pedagogy.

Research Design:

Describe the research design (experimental, correlational, descriptive, etc.).

This is a descriptive or qualitative case study of one teacher, Sylvia Jones.

Describe the method(s) of data collection.

The interview took place in an informal setting, sitting at students' desks in a classroom. According to the author, "The interview was more of a discussion around the questions rather than a formal question and answer format. While discussion occurred around the questions, both the interviewer and interviewee wrote notes that were all kept by the researcher and used in summarizing the session" (Berridge, 2009, p. 28).

Describe the method(s) of data analysis.

Interview notes were gathered and grouped under each of the 5 questions.

Findings:

Briefly describe the outcomes of the research. (Summarize the study's results in general terms; you do not have to supply large amounts of statistical data from the study.)

The researcher found that:

Teaching writing as a process takes more "time" than current educational trends seem to allow, which presents a quandary for teachers who value many of the ideas around teaching writing through the writing process.

Using students to teach students was an important idea that Sylvia emphasized repeatedly. This highlights the practical benefits for students and cooperative learning.

Limitations:

What are the limitations of this research?

One world history classroom was used for two sections of 10th grade students. Each section was 90 minutes in length and took place in a comprehensive public high school.

Can the outcome(s) be generalized or transferred to groups outside of this study?

There is only one case. Therefore, generalizations cannot be drawn.

Implications for Practice:

Discuss ways in which you can incorporate findings from this study into your own professional practice.

I can develop a cooperative learning environment is in order to support thoughtful engagement in teaching. Using writing as an educational tool will help me complement content, interaction, cooperation and understanding. I can use good writing as good practice. I need to remember that snap decisions based on personalities lack analysis and evaluation and should not be made. In order to be a good educator I must teach the ability to teach someone that decisions should not be made without analysis and evaluation and continuing engagement of students is necessary for success.

Research Analysis -- Part 2

I. Behind the Scenes

Grade Level/Subject - 7th grade/Language Arts

Objective - to use peer review strategies in which students can share their creative work with peers for constructive feedback and then use this feedback to revise and improve their work.

Materials -- One page response to independent reading.

II. Setting the Stage

For the writing process, revision is as important as drafting, but students often feel they cannot let go of their original words. By keeping an audience in mind and participating in focused peer review interactions, students can offer productive feedback, accept constructive criticism, and master revision.

III. Dress Rehearsal

1. Introduce the concept of peer editing to students and define the term for example students work with someone their own age-usually someone in the same class-to help improve, revise, and edit a piece of student writing. Brainstorm the pros and cons of peer editing and record students' thoughts about the editing and revising process on chart paper.

2. Tell students that they will learn how to peer edit more effectively. Explain that they will look at some samples of student writing.

3. Explain that there are three steps to peer editing:

Step 1: Compliments

Step 2: Suggestions

Step 3: Corrections

4. Pass out copies of the sample student work and divide the class into small groups of three to four students each. Ask students to fold a blank sheet of paper into thirds and label the first column compliments, the second column suggestions, and the third column corrections. Have students work with their group to peer edit the writing sample. They should follow the three steps starting with compliments, then suggestions, and finally corrections. When students are finished, bring the class back together and have the groups share their compliments, suggestions, and corrections.