April 35, 2004 Peer Response and the Writing Process There is no such thing as an entirely unique writing style. All writing is a selective assimilation of styles and techniques experienced through reading. We develop a sense of “good writing” through a process of natural selection that occurs on a subconscious level every time we read something. When we read something that works, our mind stores it as an example of “good writing”; when we read something awkward or that we don’t like, our mind stores it as an example of something to avoid.
The more we read, the more opportunities we get to go through this process of amassing knowledge. By consciously scrutinizing writing as we read, we can further accelerate and deepen the learning process. Great writers must also be great readers. I have come to understand this over past semester in English 110. I have personally found peer response sessions to be the most helpful activity of this course; these sessions have improved my writing through both my peers’ responses to my papers and my analysis of theirs.
The primary purpose of peer response is to give and receive feedback, which has obvious benefits for the student on the receiving end. In a peer response session, students exchange papers and respond to the other person’s writing. Sometimes they address specific questions posed by the writer, sometimes they comment on the paper in general. The most common misconception about peer response is that it is a peer evaluator’s role to proofread. This is not true. It is nice if they are willing to do so, but an effective peer response session focuses on issues such as structure, content, thesis, topic sentences, transitions and, if necessary, grammar. Many people have great ideas but have not presented them in a logical or appealing fashion.
127 our experts are availableright now
One of my strengths is being able to structure a paper logically and effectively, so I spent a lot of time helping my partners with the organization of their papers. I also helped them with topic sentences and transitions. I did not, however, correct spelling. That’s what spell check is for! No matter how strong or talented a writer a is, he or she can always benefit from peer response. A writer’s closeness to their writing may prevent them from seeing it as a whole. A second set of eyes provide an unbiased opinion and a broader perspective. They can pick out problems that the writer can’t discern merely because it is his own work.
For example, they can indicate where he hasn’t made his ideas clear enough, which is a mistake most writers cannot identify in their own work because, after all, they knew what they were thinking when they wrote it. For me, peer evaluators were most helpful in letting me know where my thoughts needed to be clarified and where examples were needed. I often forget that the audience can’t read my mind and underestimate the amount of support needed in an essay.
On one of my papers, Amy, my peer evaluator, wrote the words “give examples” and “need proof” all throughout the margins. I complied with her suggestions in most cases, but there were a few instances where I just didn’t think it was necessary. After turning the paper in though, I had doubts. I thought, “Maybe I should have listened to Amy. She could have been right.” Sure enough, when I got my paper back, Professor Sims had written “Evidence of this?” where I had ignored Amy’s advice and “Good Examples” where I had taken it. The popular retail aphorism, “The customer is always right,” seems to apply.
By reading other people’s papers and reflecting on how their strengths and weaknesses, I came to a better understanding of what I was saying and a more objective view of my own writing style. I have found that peer response is beneficial to the student on the giving end as well. When working with Amy, I gave a lot of thought to the structure of her paper. As I explained to her a more practical way of organizing her ideas, I reflected back on my own paper and asked myself, “Am I practicing what I’m preaching?” I realized that a few of my paragraphs did not follow this “natural order” that I had been ranting about all period, and I quickly rectified the problem.
In one classroom activity that helped us prepare for the fourth major assignment, the proposal paper, we examined “B” papers of past years and determined which features to emulate and which problems to avoid. From the list we compiled, we got a clear idea of what made a good proposal paper. This is essentially what we are doing every time we evaluate a classmates paper.
My reliance on my peers as a part of the writing process has greatly increased over the past semester. At my high school, we never did peer response. Many of my classmates would ask me to read their papers, which I did, but I never gave them mine because I didn’t feel there was anything I could learn from them. However, in this class after the first peer response session, I began to realize how much I could gain from this practice.
As early as my first paper, I commented in the Self- evaluation, “It would have been better if I had a chance to discuss (my literacy narrative) with several of my classmates.” Though my writing style has not changed dramatically in the past few months, I feel that in my peers I have discovered an invaluable resource that has and will create many new possibilities for me. Besides improving my consciousness of my own writing habits, the peer response experience has lead me to consider pursuing peer tutoring in the future. The exchange of knowledge, particularly on this level, is beneficial to all parties involved.
