User:Mebluedude/Peer review

Pedagogical Tool:

This isn’t an experiment on sharing research findings but rather to share insights from a pedagogical point of view. The experiment consisted of 21 students belonging to different countries and it went on a weekly basis. Each week it consisted of another lesson that the students would be introduced to. It then goes on the explain the benefits and the limitations of peer review in terms of a pedagogical point of view and how it has affected the students.

”The study revealed that L1 was used in providing meanings of difficult vocabulary and negotiating certain grammar points. They also found some pairs who were reluctant to use L1s in their tasks even when they were allowed to. This may reflect the learners’ attitudes toward their language learning (Kormos, 2012).”

“They reported that their participants used “feedback in L1 focused more on content and organization [while] feedback in L2 focused more on form” (p. 36).”

“Oral feedback. Overall, these L2 students felt that they were able to convey the oral feedback easily and with confidence because they received more explanations from their peers.”

“Written feedback. In contrast to the use of L1 in oral feedback, not every student preferred to use their L1s when providing written feedback on their peers’ drafts.”

“Teachers need to provide different peer response activities to students. By asking students to work in small groups, they could scaffold both oral and written feedback for their peers. Based on the insights of this investigation, it could be said that the use of L1s in peer response helps students provide and negotiate feedback beyond the sentence level. This means that teachers could encourage students to use their L1s where the English language becomes a barrier in providing both oral and written feedback.”


 * As an example of how peer review can be conducted in a classroom. An experiment was given birth to in a way to see what form of peer review is more effective. This took place “insert where and who conducted the experiment”. The two methods presented were verbal feedback and written feedback. It was taken over a course of 6 weeks “explain what each week was about.” At the end of it,

Scholarly:

The article itself analyzes an emotional story about racial differences between both parties and how each of them has been treated in life. The article then goes in-depth on how to react to writing like this and how to write the exact same story in multiple points of view.

''“Once these students learned the dance steps, the overt and hidden expectations associated with academic identity and writing, their tutoring felt punitive. Suddenly, diversity gave way to some sense of apolitical standing; staff members somehow saw themselves as being outside of race, class, and ethnicity, as if to suggest that writing, and tutoring for that matter, functions as an attachment to be added from the outside and not a product of the lived experience.”''

''“In thinking about these two experiences as one running narrative, we ask you to consider the elements of the work done in the writing center that reflect a counseling perspective, components of the job that call for a set of skills and standpoints that may exist outside of our field’s training. “''

Clients often come to these services either of their own volition or because they have been directed to do so by those in power due to a perceived deficiency, a sense that students need to be “fixed.”

Working with people, particularly in this capacity, requires an understanding of the emotional input and output of writing center work and an ability to negotiate the inevitable friction or hostility that may manifest itself during one’s hours on the clock.

''The purpose of our writing, therefore, is to continue building off of this connection so as to support writing center staff members as they engage with the complexity of identity, with regard to the students who enter the center and with their own. To do so would be to act in a culturally competent manner, an aspect of writing center work that has yet to be explored in great depth, a concept that asks consultants to immediately consider both themselves and their students as cultural beings and how this affects the dynamics of their interactions.''

Beyond the obvious notion that students work from various academic levels and such levels are often byproducts of racial, economic, ethnic, and/or social markers, what transpires during sessions often deviates from the institution’s preferred script, delving into issues of identity and the politics attached to such lives

Professional:

The article talks about the differences between peer review and peer seminar. The purpose of a peer seminar is to discuss your your findings. The seminar follows a specific pattern as listed within the method paragraph. Additionally, within the hybrid section it explains the purpose and what can happen during each phase of the seminar. Within the conclusion portion it states that the peer seminar should be considered as a practice in pedagogy.

.

Look at formats

In Dubois’ view, ‘listener orientation’ is a consequence of the real time and face-to-face situation and it includes: (i) acknowledging the chairman's introduction, (ii) calling the audience to attention (‘Ladies and Gentlemen’) or addressing the projectionist (iii) informing listeners that questions can be answered at the end, and (iv) signalling that the presentation is over in the termination (silence or ‘Thank you’).

More specifically, three general properties of peer seminars were identified: (i) their informal, unofficial nature, (ii) their hybrid nature, and (iii) their pre-introductions.

Peer seminars are usually isolated events which do not belong to any official professional meeting like a conference or a workshop. Three consequences arise from this fact. First, there is no scientific or organiser committee performing the gatekeeping function; i.e. the abstract is not ‘filtered’ but simply submitted to the academic host, who then attaches it to the announcement of the seminar sent to the university community. That may be the reason why, when asked, the four speakers agreed that when they presented research in seminars they were perfectly aware of the less weighty and official nature of a seminar. Second, seminar speakers do not have the same time pressure as conference speakers do. The duration of the four seminars (75, 70, 85, and 55 min) illustrates this flexibility in terms of time. Third, seminar speakers can be interrupted by any attendant and a short dialogue or aside can be established at any time during the talk, as in the example below:

Changes I Made
All I did was add what peer review is and how it is used in classrooms. Along with some of the benefits and drawbacks that it can present among students. Another thing I added was peer seminar as it can be beneficial to students.

Article body
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work (peers). It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia, scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e.g., medical peer review. It can also be used as a teaching tool to help students improve writing assignments.

Henry Oldenburg (1619–1677) was a German-born British philosopher who is seen as the 'father' of modern scientific peer review.

Professional
Professional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. In academia, peer review is used to inform decisions related to faculty advancement and tenure.

A prototype professional peer review process was recommended in the Ethics of the Physician written by Ishāq ibn ʻAlī al-Ruhāwī (854–931). He stated that a visiting physician had to make duplicate notes of a patient's condition on every visit. When the patient was cured or had died, the notes of the physician were examined by a local medical council of other physicians, who would decide whether the treatment had met the required standards of medical care.

Professional peer review is common in the field of health care, where it is usually called clinical peer review. Further, since peer review activity is commonly segmented by clinical discipline, there is also physician peer review, nursing peer review, dentistry peer review, etc. Many other professional fields have some level of peer review process: accounting, law, engineering (e.g., software peer review, technical peer review), aviation, and even forest fire management.

Peer review is used in education to achieve certain learning objectives, particularly as a tool to reach higher order processes in the affective and cognitive domains as defined by Bloom's taxonomy. This may take a variety of forms, including closely mimicking the scholarly peer review processes used in science and medicine.

Government policy
The European Union has been using peer review in the "Open Method of Co-ordination" of policies in the fields of active labour market policy since 1999. In 2004, a program of peer reviews started in social inclusion. Each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a "host country" lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant European-level NGOs. These usually meet over two days and include visits to local sites where the policy can be seen in operation. The meeting is preceded by the compilation of an expert report on which participating "peer countries" submit comments. The results are published on the web.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews, uses peer review, referred to as "peer learning", to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies.

The State of California is the only U.S. state to mandate scientific peer review. In 1997, the Governor of California signed into law Senate Bill 1320 (Sher), Chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any CalEPA Board, Department, or Office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. This requirement is incorporated into the California Health and Safety Code Section 57004.

Medical
Medical peer review may be distinguished in four classifications:


 * 1) Clinical peer review is a procedure for assessing a patient's involvement with experiences of care. It is a piece of progressing proficient practice assessment and centered proficient practice assessment—significant supporters of supplier credentialing and privileging.
 * 2) Peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses.
 * 3) Scientific peer review of journal articles.
 * 4) A secondary round of peer review for the clinical value of articles concurrently published in medical journals.

Additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the American Medical Association to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to the process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. The clinical network believes it to be the most ideal method of guaranteeing that distributed exploration is dependable and that any clinical medicines that it advocates are protected and viable for individuals. Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term.

Technical
In engineering, technical peer review is a type of engineering review. Technical peer reviews are a well defined review process for finding and fixing defects, conducted by a team of peers with assigned roles. Technical peer reviews are carried out by peers representing areas of life cycle affected by material being reviewed (usually limited to 6 or fewer people). Technical peer reviews are held within development phases, between milestone reviews, on completed products or completed portions of products.

Pedagogical tool
Peer review, or student peer assessment, is widely used in secondary and post-secondary education as part of the writing process. This collaborative learning tool involves groups of students reviewing each other's work and providing feedback and suggestions for revision. While widely used in English and composition classrooms, peer review has gained popularity in other disciplines which require writing as part of the curriculum. These other disciplines include those in the social and natural sciences. Peer review in classrooms helps students become more invested in their work, and the classroom environment at large. Understanding how their work is read by a diverse readership before it is graded by the teacher may also help students clarify ideas, and understand how to persuasively reach different audience members via their writing. It also gives students professional experience that they might draw on later when asked to review the work of a colleague prior to publication. The process can also bolster the confidence of students on both sides of the process. It's been found that students are more positive than negative when reviewing their classmates' writing. The positive findings from the study could help students not get discouraged but rather feel determined after receiving peer review.

Critics of peer review in classrooms say that it can be ineffective due to students' lack of practice giving constructive criticism, or lack of expertise in the writing craft at large. Teachers using peer review as an assignment can lead to rushed-through feedback by peers, using incorrect praise or criticism, thus not allowing the writer or the editor to get much out of the activity. As a response to these concerns, instructors may provide examples, model peer review with the class, or focus on specific areas of feedback during the peer review process. Instructors may also experiment with in-class peer review vs. peer review as homework, or peer review using technologies afforded by learning management systems online. Students that are older can give better feedback to their peers, getting more out of peer review, but it's still a method used in classrooms to help students young and old learn how to revise. With evolving and changing technology, peer review will develop as well. New tools could help alter the process of peer review.

Results of Peer Review in a Classroom setting:
Peer review is the method by which editors and writers work together in hopes of helping the author establish and further flesh out and develop their own writing.

As stated before peer review can be used in the classroom to provide different results that occur among students to further improve their own writing. There was an experiment conducted on 21 students from other countries that carried on for six weeks. The purpose of the experiment was to explore the benefits and the limits of peer review. It was also used as a way to determine if verbal and written feedback was beneficial for the students.

As research shows the preferred method was verbal communication. Students in both groups labeled L1 and L2 liked verbal communication as it was easier to convey their thoughts and concerns much easier than using written feedback as a way to peer review.

In a different classroom setting, it was stated by one of the students that peer review wasn't helpful as the student viewed herself as inferior to giving out any suggestions and has never asked other writers for help.

Peer review can be used in a classroom setting, although it can impact the student's opinion of themselves as well as others. Sometimes students feel a personal connection to the work they have produced which can make them feel reluctant to recieve or give out criticism as it can make them feel bad. Rather than critiquing each other's work, peer review should be used in a way to build a connection between author and editor as it can help develop their identity as writers as well as the interactions they have with others because writing can be a reflection of who we are.

Peer Seminar:
Peer seminar is a method that involves a speaker that presents ideas to an audience that also acts as a "contest". To further elaborate, there are multiple speakers that are called out one at a time and given an amount of time to present the topic that they have researched. Each speaker may or may not talk about the same topic but each speaker has something to gain or lose which can foster a competitive atmosphere. This approach allows speakers to present in a more personal tone while trying to appeal to the audience while explaining their topic.

Peer seminars may be somewhat similar to what conference speakers do, however, there is more time to present their points, and speakers can be interrupted by audience members to provide questions and feedback upon the topic or how well the speaker did in presenting their topic.