Engaging in a collaborative space: exploring the substance and impact of peer review conversations

Abstract

Peer review offers benefits to post-secondary students and their instructors. In recent years, some instructors have shifted to virtual means of student peer review; however, face-to-face peer review is still a viable option. This mixed-methods study explored the substance of peer review conversations, as well as their impact on students’ academic writing, in a graduate-level research design course. Discourse analyses revealed that all peer review conversations displayed high levels of engagement. Results demonstrated that all students provided substantive comments to their peers, regardless of their scores on pre-draft papers. Peers consistently used mitigating and empathetic language with one another, which may have afforded students a better conduit for sharing constructive feedback. Final analyses of post-drafts revealed that students made revisions that aligned directly with peer feedback, which collectively resulted in higher post-draft scores. Conclusions underline that face-to-face peer review can support students academically and emotionally and encourage them to improve their writing.