Year: 2007
Type: article
Abstract: Homework is frequently viewed as a necessary evil—one of the least exciting parts of teaching, but absolutely essential if students are to learn the material. There are many reasons for this attitude. Reusing the same assignments year after year invites cheating (Gehringer 2004) and devising challenging new work is time consuming. Grading is drudgery for faculty or teaching assistants, especially if the class is large. Finally, since each student is given the same assignment, their efforts are largely redundant. Everyone answers the same questions or solves the same problems with negligible long-term benefits. By contrast, assignments such as essays, design projects, or research reports should present an opportunity for individual expression, but evaluation of these kinds of projects must respond personally to each student's work to be effective. In such cases instructors and TAs rarely have enough time to give sufficient feedback. Peer review offers a solution to some of these problems and promises important advantages for students, whether they are acting as assessors or assessees. As assessors, students spend time reviewing, summarizing, diagnosing misconceived knowledge, and considering deviations from the ideal (Van Lehn et al. 1995). As assessees, students write for an audience where they have the burden of making themselves understood, rather than depending on an expert grader to decipher their intentions. Their peers are likely to give them more feedback than they would receive from an overworked TA or instructor. Many studies of peer
Institution: Nova Southeastern University
Language: English
Subfield: Education
Field: Social Sciences
Domain: Social Sciences
SDG: Quality education
Open Access status: green
Funder: Nova Southeastern University
OpenAlex ID: W2486535301