Student revision with peer and expert reviewing

Kwangsu Cho; Charles MacArthur

doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

Student revision with peer and expert reviewing

Kwangsu Cho, Charles MacArthur

Graduate School of Information

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

208 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	328-338
Number of pages	11
Journal	Learning and Instruction
Volume	20
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006
Publication status	Published - 2010 Aug

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
This study was supported by a grant to the first author from the World-Class University program (R31-2008-000-10062-0) of the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology via the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Education
Developmental and Educational Psychology

Access to Document

10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Student revision with peer and expert reviewing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{b69a3988cd3f421980ca3aa4ea625710,

title = "Student revision with peer and expert reviewing",

abstract = "In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.",

author = "Kwangsu Cho and Charles MacArthur",

note = "Funding Information: This study was supported by a grant to the first author from the World-Class University program (R31-2008-000-10062-0) of the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology via the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.",

year = "2010",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006",

language = "English",

volume = "20",

pages = "328--338",

journal = "Learning and Instruction",

issn = "0959-4752",

publisher = "Elsevier BV",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Student revision with peer and expert reviewing

AU - Cho, Kwangsu

AU - MacArthur, Charles

N1 - Funding Information: This study was supported by a grant to the first author from the World-Class University program (R31-2008-000-10062-0) of the Korean Ministry of Education, Science and Technology via the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.

PY - 2010/8

Y1 - 2010/8

N2 - In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.

AB - In a previous study we found that students receiving feedback from multiple peers improve their writing quality more than students receiving feedback from a single expert. The present study attempted to explain that finding by analyzing the feedback types provided by experts and peers, how that feedback was related to revisions, and how revisions affected quality. Participants were 28 undergraduates who received feedback from a single expert (SE), a single peer (SP), or multiple peers (MP), thus forming three groups, respectively. The MP group received more feedback of all types. Non-directive feedback predicted complex repairs that the MP group made more than both other groups. Complex repairs were associated with improved quality.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77949874569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77949874569&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

DO - 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:77949874569

VL - 20

SP - 328

EP - 338

JO - Learning and Instruction

JF - Learning and Instruction

SN - 0959-4752

IS - 4

ER -

Student revision with peer and expert reviewing

Abstract

Bibliographical note

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this