peer response for privateers elbow and belanoff s sharing and responding n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 14

Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 131 Views
  • Uploaded on

Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding. Jeff Paschke-Johannes ID 601 – TPrep October 25, 2007. My Sorry Attempts at Peer-Response. “It’s a problem of motivation…” Early attempts effectively focused on editing, not revising

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding' - tegan


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
peer response for privateers elbow and belanoff s sharing and responding

Peer Response for Privateers: Elbow and Belanoff’s Sharing and Responding

Jeff Paschke-Johannes

ID 601 – TPrep

October 25, 2007

slide2

My Sorry Attempts at Peer-Response

  • “It’s a problem of motivation…”
  • Early attempts effectively focused on editing, not
  • revising
  • Provided vague, short prompts to get students
  • started
  • Maybe I did it because it was expected and filled a
  • class session
  • “Blind leading the blind”
  • Desired more substantial peer-response from students, but how to get
  • there?
  • Even after developing thorough critique sheets for students to follow,
  • leading them to comments on higher order concerns, uncritical comments,
  • lack of participation, and advice that could actually be detrimental to
  • student writing persisted.
slide3

My Sorry Attempts at Peer-Response

  • Doing “Peer Review” not “Peer Response”
  • A Problem of Philosophy
  • Considered peers’ role to give advice and evaluation, such as the teacher might give; students get suggestions that they can implement in changing their drafts
  • Administered peer-response groups late in composition process, when students have “finished” product that will be submitted in a day or two for a grade
slide4

Sharing and Responding

  • By Peter Elbow and Patricia Belanoff in A Community
  • of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing. NY:
  • McGraw-Hill, 1989, 1995. SR-1-SR-60.
  • Students need an audience, not evaluators or advice givers (SR-5), to
  • feel “presence of interested readers” (SR-6)
    • “What we need most as writers is not evaluation of the quality of our writing or advice
    • about how to fix it, but an accurate account of what goes on inside readers’ heads as
    • they read our words” (SR-31).
    • Because…
    • “We speak because we are trying to communicate.” Likewise, we write for, “a reply, not
    • an evaluation” (SR-18).
    • Evaluation and Judgment can be hard to receive before we know how well our readers
    • understand our composition, before we know what to expect of our readers
    • “We benefit most from feedback on early drafts, but it doesn’t make sense to evaluate
    • an early draft” (SR-20).
    • Varied forms of response help clarify whether the writer’s point is coming across and
    • helps peers develop a clear understanding of the composition, which is vital if useful
    • suggestions about the composition are going to be offered.
slide5

Sharing and Responding

  • 11 Peer Responses
  • Written to students
  • Focuses on ways peers can effectively respond to
  • each other as good readers, giving fellow writers a
  • vision of what their readers might expect and ideas
  • on how to revise and develop based on that
  • perspective.
  • Responses are scaffolded, some working better for
  • early stages in writing and some for later stages of
  • writing, recognizing that different kinds of responses
  • are needed depending on the development of the
  • composition.
  • Likewise, responses allow for scaffolding for peer readers as well,
  • acknowledging that they may not yet be ready to respond in more refined and
  • technical ways.
slide6

Sharing: No Response

  • (2) Pointing & Center of Gravity
  • (3) Summary & Sayback
  • (4) The Almost Said
  • (5) Reply
  • (6) Voice
  • (7) The Readers Mind (A Movie)
  • (8) Metaphorical Descriptions
  • (9) Believing & Doubting
  • (10) Skeleton & Descriptive Outline
  • (11) Criterion-Based Feedback

(9)

(4)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(5)

(7)

(8)

(6)

(9)

(11)

(10)

sharing and responding
Sharing and Responding
  • Pointing &
  • Center of
  • Gravity
  • Pointing – ident-
  • ify striking words
  • or phrases
  • Center of Gravity – identify particularly powerful moments in the text
  • Allows writer to see areas of development to enhance readers’ experience or to see new directions in which the composition could go.
  • Useful in early & late stages of writing
  • Sharing: No Response
  • Student reads work out loud to peers
  • Peers do not respond but only listen attentively
  • Student gains from actually having to think of her work as communicating to others
  • Useful in early & late stages of writing

Map

sharing and responding1
Sharing and Responding
  • 4) The Almost Said
      • Writer asks peers
      • questions about what
      • is implied but not
      • stated and what peers
      • would like to hear more
      • about
      • Helps writer with development of
      • composition by finding details
      • that may be missing or
      • determining whether subtle
      • details are working as intended
      • Useful in middle to late stages

3) Summary & Sayback

  • Summary – Peers summarize what the text says
  • Sayback – Peers describe they think the writer is getting at
  • Helps writer see whether main idea is coming across or helps writer establish what he or she is really trying to say
  • Useful in early & late stages. Sayback particularly useful in early stages when writers ideas may still be vague

Map

sharing and responding2
Sharing and Responding
  • 6) Voice
      • Peers help assess tone and
      • language of the work – feelings
      • and attitudes expressed,
      • trustworthiness, vividness,
      • uniqueness
      • and
      • individuality
      • Thinking in
      • terms of voice
      • allows peers to describe writing
      • with less need for technical
      • language
      • Useful in early or late stages,
      • depending on what aspect of voice
      • is examined

5) Reply

  • Readers respond with their thoughts about the topic and/or the writer’s view (discussion of content, not composition)
  • Discussion can generate problems with topic/view, reveal counterarguments that need to be made, or provide ideas that writer hadn’t considered
  • Useful in early to middle stages

Map

sharing and responding3
Sharing and Responding

7) The Reader’s Mind

(A Movie)

  • Peers describe what they are thinking while they listen to or read the composition,
  • their progression as a
  • reader.
  • Writer might stop
  • peers in the middle of
  • the text or ask for “I” statements about readers feelings
  • Useful in later stages, when writer is fairly confident about composition and is
  • looking for effect on
  • the reader
  • 8) Metaphorical Description
  • Peers build metaphors for the
  • writer’s composition
  • Such indirect description can
  • help writer see
  • composition in new
  • ways
  • ● Useful at any stage, but may be more useful in later stages when writer needs new vision

Map

sharing and responding4
Sharing and Responding
  • 9) Believing &
  • Doubting
  • Believing – Writer asks
  • peers to pose as though they
  • believe everything in the
  • composition and to provide additional ideas/development that will
  • enhance and improve arguments
  • Doubting – Writer asks peers to pose as though they doubt everything
  • in the composition and to propose what problems exist in the argument
  • and what opposing views must be responded to or counterargued.
  • Helps writer get opposing feedback from readers about the
  • persuasiveness or argumentation in the composition
  • Useful in middle to late stages, when arguments need to be fine tuned.

Map

sharing and responding5
Sharing and Responding

10) Skeketon

& Descriptive

Outline

  • Skeleton Feedback –
  • Peers identify how
  • the composition is
  • outlined – main points, subpoints, evidence, assumptions, etc.
  • Descriptive Outline – Peers break up the composition into “says” and “does” statements: “says” statements summarize sections of the composition; “does” statements describes each sections purpose for the whole composition (rhetorical effect, function for the rest of the piece, etc)
  • Useful in later stages
  • 11) Criterion-Based Feedback
  • Peers respond to specific
  • criteria or standards for the
  • paper, whether generated by
  • the writer or by outside
  • demands (i.e. grading –
  • thesis/focus, organization,
  • development, etc.)
  • Calls for specifics from peers,
  • references to
  • passages & words
  • Useful in later
  • stages, esp. when
  • preparing for
  • grade.

Map

sharing and responding6
Sharing and Responding

Implementing Peer Response

  • Model the peer-response process
  • Use it throughout the writing process
  • Allow students to make decisions about what kind of questions to ask and response to ask for
  • Consider students’ development as readers as well as writers and adjust peer response activity accordingly
  • Apply all techniques of any small group work – consider group dynamics and construction; give clear instructions before students disperse into groups; establish a clear and demonstrable outcome; limit time allowed so that students must stay on task to finish; circulate, ask questions, check progress, and make suggestions
  • Make yourself a resource that students can use during peer response
a bibliography
A Bibliography

Elbow, Peter and Patricia Belanoff. Sharing and Responding. A Community of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing. 2nd ed. NY: McGraw-Hill, 1995. SR-1-SR-60.

Elbow, Peter and Patricia Belanoff. Sharing and Responding. A Community of Writers: A Workshop Course in Writing. 2nd ed. NY: McGraw-Hill, 1995. SR-1-SR-60.

Grimm, Nancy. “Improving Students’ Responses to their Peers’ Essays.” College Composition and Communication. 37.1 (Feb. 1986): 91-94.

Graner, Michael H. “Revision Workshops: An Alternative to Peer Editing Groups.” The English Journal. 76.3 (Mar. 1987): 40-45.

Hansen, Jette G. and Jun Liu. “Guiding Principles for Effective Peer Response.” ELT Journal. 59.1 (Jan. 2005): 31-38.