Developing doctoral students’ critical writing and reviewing skills through peer assessment - Joan Smith, Phil Wood and Hilary Burgess (University of Leicester)
This is a draft of the presentation that will be given at the HEA Social Sciences annual conference - Teaching forward: the future of the Social Sciences. For further details of the conference: http://bit.ly/1cRDx0p Bookings open until 14 May 2014 http://bit.ly/1hzCMLR or external.events@heacademy.ac.uk ABSTRACT We report in this presentation on a current project of which the aim is to develop teaching approaches that engage doctoral students in working together as a research community to develop their critical writing and peer reviewing skills. We seek to foster in students a sense of collective endeavour in developing writing and research, and to encourage the sharing of ideas, drafts, and semi-formed thoughts in an atmosphere of mutual support. The project was launched via a residential critical writing weekend for students, featuring a range of taught sessions focussing on aspects of critical writing and reviewing and featuring opportunities for students to engage in peer assessment activities. The students then formed an editorial board for an online journal for doctoral students, through which they are involved in critical writing, reviewing, providing feedback, editing and publishing a journal.
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Developing doctoral students’ critical writing and reviewing skills through peer assessment - Joan Smith, Phil Wood and Hilary Burgess (University of Leicester)
Similaire à Developing doctoral students’ critical writing and reviewing skills through peer assessment - Joan Smith, Phil Wood and Hilary Burgess (University of Leicester) (20)
Plus de The Higher Education Academy
Plus de The Higher Education Academy (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Developing doctoral students’ critical writing and reviewing skills through peer assessment - Joan Smith, Phil Wood and Hilary Burgess (University of Leicester)
- 1. Developing doctoral students’ critical writing skills through peer assessment HEA Social Sciences Conference May 2014 Joan Smith, Phil Wood, Hilary Burgess & Gareth Lewis University of Leicester School of Education
- 2. The challenge of critical writing • Challenge to pgrs • Challenge to academics who teach/supervise pgrs
- 3. EdD students • Part-time professional doctorate for full-time teachers • Research in workplace • Can be isolating: need engagement with research community • Peer assessment as a device to involve students in a research community
- 4. Aims of the project • Develop pgrs’ ability to give, receive and act upon constructive critical feedback • Induct students into the process of peer review • Foster integration into the academic world/research community • Develop researcher resilience • Foster a culture of collective responsibility, mutual support & critical friendship • Encourage students to see writing as collective endeavour
- 5. The project: ‘Writing as social practice’ (Kamler & Thomson, 2006: 5) Students are offered opportunities to work with others to: • Develop an awareness of what critical writing is • Practise and develop their own critical writing • Provide constructive critical feedback via a peer reviewing system to other students; • Become integrated into a research community in a meaningful way.
- 6. Launch event: residential critical writing weekend Before the weekend: • Pre-weekend interviews • Submission of draft papers
- 7. Workshops & sessions during the weekend Friday round table: peer feedback Saturday workshops: • Positive Criticality • Clarity and Criticality
- 8. Communication Sometimes critical reading and writing is seen as ‘deconstruction and critique’. Is this O.K.? Critique & deconstruct Critique & deconst ruct Take what is useful Synthesise work from elsewhere New insights
- 9. 1)Theory of fixed intelligence – a fixed amount of intelligence is assumed – an ‘entity theory’ of intelligence, i.e. level of intelligence cannot be changed. Students then worry that they have enough – do they look smart or dumb? Those with entity theory feel smart with easy low level successes, whilst outperforming others. Effort, difficulty, setbacks or higher performing peers call their intelligence into question. They require a diet of easy successes, challenges having a negative impact on self esteem and some very positive learning experiences will be actively avoided. 2)Theory of malleable intelligence – Intelligence can be developed through learning – an ‘incremental theory’ of intelligence. They accept different starting positions, but believe that all can improve. Makes students want to learn, and want to take real learning opportunities rather than opportunities to look smart. Challenge is very much positively accepted. Mindsets
- 10. Developing clarity and criticality workshop • Read the article. Identify what is effective and what could be improved.
- 11. Peer feedback Read your partner’s latest draft. On it mark: • Sentences or sections that are clear and effective (comment about why they are effective!) • Any redundant words/phrases s/he could usefully cut • Any jargon s/he could either re-phrase in simple language or define more clearly • Amend or identify any ungrammatical sentences • Amend or identify any sentences with multiple sub- clauses/brackets that could be re-written into shorter, clearer sentences • Identify any paragraphs with no key point/message • Identify any sections that don’t match sub-headings • Identify places where s/he is tending to list rather than develop an argument
- 12. The journal and the editorial board • Briefing session from tutors, Saturday afternoon • First meeting: roles allocated, tasks identified, key decisions made, plans made • Tutors as consultants • Sunday editorial board and presentation
- 13. References Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2006) Helping doctoral students write: pedagogies for supervision. Abingdon: Routledge