Findings
My findings uncovered many eye-opening results. Overall, I determined that peer feedback in the writing process is appropriate for those who concurrently have the skills necessary to write successfully. If a student does not have the grade-appropriate writing skills, then they will not be able to provide appropriate and accurate feedback.
Titles, Indents, and Spaces
Students overall were successful in their ability to edit errors in students’ titles, indenting, and spacing. 25% of students did not have any error to fix. 40% of students were able to make full corrections of errors, and 30% of students left 1-2 errors uncorrected or had 1-2 over-corrections. Upon further investigating individual student essays, this was the area where the least number of corrections needed to be made. I believe that this is attributed to the fact that students are familiar with the appropriate ways of creating a title, indenting, and spacing their essays, as they have done this exact process several times before. I would also say that this is also why students were able to provide appropriate feedback in this area.
Content
My findings showed that students were very successful in terms of content. 95% of students were able to accurately underline each component of the essay - stating the opinion, the first reason, the second reason, and the restating of the conclusion. Two students did not use a concluding restatement of their opinion, where one “editor” was able to pinpoint the error and the other left it without noticing that it was missing.
(show charts)
Spelling
The area where I found the most inconsistencies in student feedback was in spelling. I had requested students to underline or circle the words that didn’t “look right.” The reason why I said “look right” was because I didn’t want students to feel worried about circling words if they weren’t completely sure about the spelling. I said that the “writer” would then look up the spelling of the word on their iPads. With this, 45% of “editors” made 1-2 over-corrections of spelling or missed an incorrectly spelled word altogether. 10% of “editors” left out words or overcorrected 3-5 times, and 10% did this 6 or more times. This told me that having students edit each others’ work in terms of spelling is not successful if a student is not strong in their personal spelling skills.
Grammar
To define grammar in this context, I am looking specifically at two areas: 1. punctuation and 2. sentence structure. Five students (25%) had zero errors in their essay in terms of grammar. With this, the “editors” did not have anything to fix and did not attempt to overcorrect. 20% of students were able to fully correct the errors in the essay. 30% of students left 1-2 grammar related errors.
Titles, Indents, and Spaces
Students overall were successful in their ability to edit errors in students’ titles, indenting, and spacing. 25% of students did not have any error to fix. 40% of students were able to make full corrections of errors, and 30% of students left 1-2 errors uncorrected or had 1-2 over-corrections. Upon further investigating individual student essays, this was the area where the least number of corrections needed to be made. I believe that this is attributed to the fact that students are familiar with the appropriate ways of creating a title, indenting, and spacing their essays, as they have done this exact process several times before. I would also say that this is also why students were able to provide appropriate feedback in this area.
Content
My findings showed that students were very successful in terms of content. 95% of students were able to accurately underline each component of the essay - stating the opinion, the first reason, the second reason, and the restating of the conclusion. Two students did not use a concluding restatement of their opinion, where one “editor” was able to pinpoint the error and the other left it without noticing that it was missing.
(show charts)
Spelling
The area where I found the most inconsistencies in student feedback was in spelling. I had requested students to underline or circle the words that didn’t “look right.” The reason why I said “look right” was because I didn’t want students to feel worried about circling words if they weren’t completely sure about the spelling. I said that the “writer” would then look up the spelling of the word on their iPads. With this, 45% of “editors” made 1-2 over-corrections of spelling or missed an incorrectly spelled word altogether. 10% of “editors” left out words or overcorrected 3-5 times, and 10% did this 6 or more times. This told me that having students edit each others’ work in terms of spelling is not successful if a student is not strong in their personal spelling skills.
Grammar
To define grammar in this context, I am looking specifically at two areas: 1. punctuation and 2. sentence structure. Five students (25%) had zero errors in their essay in terms of grammar. With this, the “editors” did not have anything to fix and did not attempt to overcorrect. 20% of students were able to fully correct the errors in the essay. 30% of students left 1-2 grammar related errors.
Overall Analysis of Data
This showed me that when students did not have errors or only had a couple minor errors to fix, the “editor” was more accurate and able to correct. However, the students who need the most support and feedback are the ones who have more errors in their writing. To me, this appears to be a drawback to the peer feedback writing process. If a student does not have the skills necessary to properly use grammar and spelling, then they will not be able to give appropriate and useful feedback to a peer. In the reverse situation, the student who does not have those skills will also not receive appropriate and useful feedback from a peer because they will have too many errors to catch.