peer review essay rubric

Encourage Better Peer Feedback with Our Guide to Feedback Rubrics

Giving and receiving peer feedback is a powerful learning tool. It enhances student engagement and performance , but only if done correctly. Feedback needs to be specific, organized, and actionable to work. Students need the skills to fully understand, analyze, and critique their peers’ work. The problem is that students aren’t teachers, so they don’t have years of experience leaving in-depth, qualitative feedback. A simple “good job” comment doesn’t lead to deeper learning for either the reviewer or the student who submitted the work. Feedback rubrics encourage better peer feedback by guiding students through the evaluation process. They act as the training wheels that keep students on track as they review their classmate’s work. As a result, both students benefit: the reviewer engages more deeply with the work, and the reviewee gets a more constructive critique of their work. We’re so passionate about peer reviews that we’ve put together a 60-page guide to building a feedback rubric. We’re sharing some of the highlights below, and you can download our ebook for an even more in-depth look at feedback rubrics. ‍

What Is a Peer Feedback Rubric?

A peer feedback rubric is an assessment tool that students use to give their peers more comprehensive and constructive feedback on assignments. It consists of a series of open-ended questions that students answer as they review their peer’s work. Feedback rubrics overlap somewhat with grading rubrics, sometimes called matrix rubrics , but they are not the same. Matrix rubrics help you evaluate an assignment based on where an assignment falls on a continuum:

Matrix rubrics are useful for grading an assignment but they aren’t as useful for promoting individualized learning. Peer feedback rubrics might include scale questions, but they also employ open-ended questions that students must answer as they review their classmate’s assignment.

Writing their own answers requires original, critical thought, and promotes deeper learning. Because students learn both from receiving feedback and through the act of giving it. Here’s an example of a feedback rubric that incorporates different types of questions:

Rubrics are highly adaptable and can be used to facilitate feedback on almost any subject or assignment. Essay reviews are the most common, but your class could also use a rubric to peer review thesis statements before writing papers, to test code, or to review portfolios, videos or other artwork. ‍

Best Practices for Using a Peer Feedback Rubric

Many students aren’t familiar with the concept of peer feedback rubrics or even a structured peer-review process. So before you send them off with a classmate’s work and a rubric in hand, give them some background. Explain the purpose of feedback tools and the skills this exercise will help them develop . Consider including the class in the actual creation of the rubric. The more input they have, the better they will understand what top-notch work should look like. Introduce the concept of constructive criticism. Many students need to learn how to give feedback that is helpful without being hurtful. Talk to them about the goals of peer feedback, and show them examples of kind, specific, and actionable comments. Show them examples of great assignments and effective rubrics. If you have time, go through a mock assignment in class, and assess it together. Provide anonymity. Anonymity is another key part of a good peer-review process. Anonymity eases anxiety and promotes honesty. Studies show that students write better feedback when they know their identity will remain hidden. Anonymity also eliminates any personal bias that might arise from preexisting student relationships. ‍

Building Blocks of a Peer Feedback Rubric

Feedback rubrics consist of a series of questions that help students read, assess, and give feedback on their peers’ work. There is no one-size-fits-all formula for creating a rubric. Craft a series of questions that encourage students to assess the quality of the assignment and engage deeply with the content itself. These three types of questions are the building blocks of a feedback rubric:

Yes/No Questions

Yes/no questions are exactly what they sound like: a binary choice. The reviewer chooses between two options, with no other written follow-up. Yes/no questions are used to help gauge whether basic guidelines are being met. Stack a series of yes/no questions to create a checklist of elements students must fulfill to complete the assignment.

• Does the video have a beginning, a middle, and an end? Yes/No
• Did the writer correctly cite two independent research papers? Yes/No

Scale questions

Scale questions ask students to evaluate their classmate’s work by ranking it on a set scale. It’s similar to a matrix rubric, but there are no numerical values involved, just levels of mastery. Scale questions are useful for helping students understand expected learning outcomes from an assignment and for guiding them in their evaluation of the assignment’s quality. Example:

Text questions

Text questions are open-ended writing prompts that encourage reviewers to write long-form feedback about work they are reviewing.   While yes/no and scale questions help reviewers assess the quality of the assignment, text questions are essential for assessing the reviewer’s mastery over the material. Ask questions that encourage deeper analysis and complex criticism. Encourage reviewers to get specific in their answers by asking for examples, narrowing in on a specific element of the assignment, or encouraging reflection. Examples:

• What was the thesis statement of this essay? Was it persuasive, and, if not, how could it be strengthened? ‍
• How would you attempt to refute the argument presented in this essay? ‍ ‍

Prompts Should Benefit Reviewer and Reviewee

An effective peer-review experience benefits both the reviewer and the reviewee. The reviewer enhances their grasp of the course materials through thinking critically about the assignment. At the same time, the reviewee receives in-depth constructive criticism of their work. To facilitate these dual benefits, your rubric should include questions that encourage the reviewer to both engage in higher-order thinking and leave good quality feedback for the reviewee.

Prompts for higher-order thinking

Thinking analytically about the assignment helps the reviewer deepen their knowledge and understanding of the material. These questions help them write a better review, but, more importantly, they help reviewers learn during the process. Ask questions that encourage the following: Critical thinking : Require students to justify their feedback with coherent arguments.

Example: Find a section of the text where the argument could be stronger. Explain why it’s not strong enough, and propose a stronger argument. Self-reflection : Ask students to explicitly state what they have learned from the review process.

Example: What is something new you learned about this topic from reading this submission? ‍ New perspectives : Highlight different perspectives to help students think about how their peers see the world.

Example: Imagine you are a film critic. What would be your review of this film? ‍

Prompts for Effective Feedback

Effective feedback is kind, justified, specific, and constructive. Model this behavior both in class discussions around peer review and through the kind of questions you ask: Kind. Encourage reviewers to avoid stinging criticism in favor of feedback that is both encouraging and useful.

Example :   Name the aspect of your peer’s assignment that you feel is the strongest. Justified. Have reviewers explain the thinking behind their judgments.

Example: Explain your evaluation using language from the rubric. Specific and Constructive. Vague, general feedback isn’t useful. Ask questions that require the reviewer to call out specific textual examples.

Example: Find a paragraph in this essay that works well. Explain why.

Learn More About Feedback Rubrics with Our Free Guide

The success of your classroom’s peer-review process hinges on your student’s ability to give quality feedback. A well-developed peer feedback rubric will help reviewers leave responses that are more insightful, and more detailed. Once the review is complete and students have had a chance to review their feedback, give the reviewee a chance to respond to that feedback. It makes students feel heard and helps the reviewer improve their work. You may even want to create a second rubric to help students give feedback on the feedback. For more information on building great feedback rubrics, check out our free Guide to Creating Effective Feedback Rubrics . It has more tips and sample rubrics by academic subject, as well as information on converting a matrix rubric into a feedback rubric.

Join our newsletter to receive the latest updates on pedagogy and online teaching. ‍

Quick navigation

Talk to us the way you prefer, request a demo, get a quote, email sales.

• Department & Units
• Majors & Minors
• LSA Course Guide
• LSA Gateway

Knowledge base

• Administrative Applications
• Classroom Support & Training
• Computer & Desktop Support
• Equipment Loans & Reservations
• Lecture Recording
• Media Center
• Research Support & Tools
• Emergency Remote Teaching
• Website Services & Support
• Support Hours
• Walk-in Support
• Access Controls
• Student Resources
• Support LSA
• Course Guide

Search: {{$root.lsaSearchQuery.q}}, Page {{$root.page}}

Dynamic rubrics: the key to better peer review.

• News & Events
• Teaching Tip of the Week
• Search News

Innovate Newsletter

Peer review refers to the process of students reviewing and providing constructive feedback on each other's writing. Integrating peer review into writing assignments—whether they be essays or other projects with writing components—encourages students to develop a number of beneficial skills. Not only is peer review an active learning tool that empowers students to better understand their own writing process, but when successful, it can help boost student confidence in their writing and improve their communication skills. Peer review can also help students better familiarize themselves with the requirements of the assignment (Crossman and Kite, 2012), reducing their reliance on instructor feedback while improving results. 

But ask a class about their opinions on peer review, and you’re certain to hear a range of complaints. While many students see value in peer review, just as many have encountered challenges. Students may feel uncertain about their ability to provide valuable feedback, especially if they are still developing their own writing skills. They may worry about giving incorrect advice or fear hurting their peers' feelings or damaging relationships. They may hesitate to offer honest and constructive criticism, leading to vague or overly positive feedback that may not contribute to meaningful improvement. Most importantly, if they have not received proper guidance or instruction on how to provide constructive feedback, students may struggle to offer specific and helpful suggestions. 

Ideally, such guidance involves multiple steps. First, develop a dynamic rubric that closely aligns with assignment goals and your own assessment criteria. What is a dynamic rubric? One that is flexible, changes to meet assessment needs, and engages students. 

Is this likely your students’ first college-level writing assignment? Are they advanced students who have varied prior writing experience? The level of guidance and support your students need will depend heavily on how much experience they have not just with writing but with the subject matter as well. More senior students writing within their major may need less guidance than students in an undergraduate survey course, but even more advanced students can benefit from a peer review rubric.

How to Build Dynamic Peer Review Rubrics

Align rubric criteria with assessment criteria.

If you already have a grading rubric for the assignment, use that as a guide for the peer review rubric. Without guidance, many students will only focus on grammar and mechanics when reviewing their peers’ work (Feltham and Sharon, 2015), which may not even be included in your final grading criteria. Including criteria specific to the assignment’s goals will not only make your own grading criteria more transparent, but it will also encourage students to broaden their definitions of revision to include both content and form.

Provide Models of Levels of Performance 

If you’re using levels of performance in your rubric (i.e. insufficient, sufficient, excellent, etc.), provide models of what those levels look like for the specific assignment. Students often have difficulty gauging the nuances of content and development, so including those models and discussing them with the class can lead to more accurate peer critiques. 

Consider student background and experience as well. A “sufficient” score in a survey course will probably look different from a “sufficient” score in a more advanced course for upper-level majors. It may even vary by assignment–this is where the dynamic aspect of rubric-building comes in. 

You may consider providing space for open-ended questions where students can share their observations without the limitations of a scale, like “Were there any areas of the essay where you were confused, or needed more information to better understand the writer’s point?”

Use Canvas Rubrics to Streamline the Process 

If conducting peer review in Canvas, consider creating your peer review rubric in Canvas as well. This can streamline the process for students, as they will be prompted to use the rubric associated with the peer submission. This also streamlines your ability to organize and review student feedback.

Once you have a rubric, have students practice using the rubric with their own drafts. Finally, directly address known student concerns, like uncertainty about their own writing skills and fears of hurting feelings. Often, having a frank discussion helps students feel more comfortable with providing constructive feedback.

Peer Review Rubric Examples and Resources

• Examples and Supplemental Material from the Sweetland Center for Writing
• U of M Center for Academic Innovation’s Rubric Examples
• Canvas Guide: How to Create a Peer Review Assignment
• Research Paper Peer Review Rubric from the University of Hawaii

Interested in using Canvas rubrics for peer review, or have questions about building a dynamic rubric? Request a consultation with an LSA Instructional Consultant for help.

References:

Crossman, J. A., Kite, S. L. (2012). Facilitating improved writing among students through  directed peer review. Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(3), 219–229. DOI: 10.1177/1469787412452980

Feltham, M., Sharen, C. “What do you mean I Wrote a C Paper?” Writing, Revision, and Self-Regulation. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching. Vol. VIII. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1069881.pdf

Office of the CIO

News & events, help & support, getting started with technology services.

TECHNOLOGY SERVICES

G155 Angell Hall, 435 South State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109–1003 734.615.0100 [email protected] 

• Information For
• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Faculty and Staff
• Alumni and Friends
• More about LSA
• How Do I Apply?
• LSA Magazine
• Academic Advising
• Majors and Minors
• Departments and Units
• Global Studies
• LSA Opportunity Hub
• Social Media
• Update Contact Info
• Privacy Statement
• Report Feedback

• Columbia University in the City of New York
• Office of Teaching, Learning, and Innovation
• University Policies
• Columbia Online
• Academic Calendar
• Resources and Technology
• Resources and Guides

Peer Review: Intentional Design for Any Course Context

On this page:, the what and why of peer review, considerations for successful peer review design and implementation.

• Instructional Technologies to Support Peer Review
• Columbia University Resources
• References and Additional Resources

Cite this resource: Columbia Center for Teaching and Learning (2020). Peer Review: Intentional Design for Any Course Context. Columbia University. Retrieved [today’s date] from https://ctl.columbia.edu/resources-and-technology/resources/peer-review/

Peer review, as the name suggests, is the act of receiving feedback from a colleague or classmate. It typically happens throughout the course of a written assignment, perhaps at the halfway point, and often involves classmates commenting and providing feedback on each other’s work in any number of formats. There might be specific questions or prompts provided by the instructor, or the activity may be based on the writer’s specific concerns. 

The process of peer review can help students make purposeful and intentional choices in their own work by offering their perspective and insight to their peers. It also gives students an opportunity to see how others have responded to a similar prompt, text, or assignment, which can help their own understanding of the topic or assignment grow. In their research on the benefits of peer review, Ambrose et al. (2010) demonstrate how the peer review process has mutual benefits for “readers, writers, and instructors alike” (pp. 257). For readers, peer review can help them re-see their own work. For writers, the feedback gained in peer review can help focus the revision process. Finally, instructors also benefit because they receive work that has already undergone at least one round of feedback and revision. Research has shown that students who receive focused feedback from at least four peers have better revision than those who received instructor feedback only (Ambrose et. al, 2010, pp. 257). Thus, it is important to have clear processes and expectations for peer review, as well as multiple opportunities available throughout a course.

When planning peer review activities, it is important for instructors to consider the overall assignment learning objectives, scaffolded in-class activities, peer review expectations, and the goals of peer review for students. With the various components of the assignment in mind, designing peer review activities will be more intentional and can further support students’ success on a given assignment. 

1. Align the peer review activity with the learning objectives for the writing assignment.

What are the goals for the peer review activity, and what parts of the assignment do they align with? What questions or concepts will students address in the activity? 

Aligning peer review activities with the learning objectives of the assignment can help students strengthen their connections and understanding of assignment expectations. This alignment can also help target feedback so that students are focusing on the parts of the assignment they need to be successful. Early opportunities and activities that ask students to provide targeted feedback (e.g.: concrete suggestions and examples) allows them to practice the skills identified in the assignment learning objectives and may help them identify similar writing needs in their own work. Lastly, providing students with a guided peer review activity can help offset surface-level comments (e.g.: “This looks good!”) or an over-focus on line-by-line copyediting. 

2. Design the peer review activity by considering all elements of the writing assignment.

When will students receive peer feedback versus instructor feedback? What in-class activities will students have completed prior to peer review? 

Think about the moments of intervention throughout the assignment and how each  of these moments might build upon the next. This can help you scaffold students’ feedback throughout the assignment, as well further align class activities and learning objectives. It’s also important to consider what students will need to prepare for the peer review activity: what will you ask them to share during the activity? How much of their draft should they bring for peer review? Lastly, be clear with students about your expectations for timing: What amount of synchronous or in-class time will students have for the activity? What will the out-of-class expectations be? When deciding how much time you allot, be mindful of students’ different learning preferences and language experiences. 

3. Model your expectations for successful peer review.

What does successful peer review look like in your class? How will students know what the expectations are? 

As John Bean (2011) notes, “Unless the teacher structures the sessions and trains students in what to do, peer reviewers may offer eccentric, superficial, or otherwise unhelpful–or even bad–advice” (pp. 295). One way you might train students is to engage them in whole-class peer review using a sample paper. There is no way to know what students’ previous peer review experiences have been, so offering a whole class model can help establish expectations early on. You can also partner with your students to create clear peer review guidelines , helping students learn how to evaluate each other’s work. Additionally, you might choose to share your own experiences with peer review with your students. Reflect upon what kinds of feedback you found most and least helpful, and share that with students, and even invite them to join that reflection and discussion. This can serve as a springboard for a conversation about your class peer review expectations. 

4. Identify a clear assessment plan for peer review activities, and share that with students.

Will you assess students’ participation and contributions? If so, what will that look like? If you assess peer review, how will you help students develop those skills? (See item 3 above.)

If you decide to assess students’ peer review participation, be sure to have clear conversations about these expectations with students. You might refer to established peer review guidelines (discussed above). If you have a rubric for the assignment, you might also consider if peer review is a part of that rubric. Or, you might encourage students to use the assignment rubric as a peer review activity and assess students’ engagement with the rubric. Lastly, peer review activities present a great opportunity for a low-stakes assessment in the classroom, which are known to reduce student anxiety and increase students’ confidence in their work ( Lang, 2013 ).

5. Determine the platform or tool that will help facilitate peer review.

What platform(s) or tool(s) will best help facilitate the peer review activity? What level of instruction or preparation will students need prior to engaging in the activity?

While sharing hard-copies of drafts is a common practice for in-person class meetings,  there are a number of different ways students can engage in online peer review. After determining the appropriate activity based on the learning objectives and students’ needs, choosing the right tool or platform can ensure that students are able to achieve the goals of the activity. Read on to learn about platform or tool considerations.

Back to Top

Instructional Technologies to Support Peer Review 

Zoom Breakout Rooms, Google Docs, and CourseWorks (Canvas) can be used to help facilitate peer review. Find the platform or tool that will work best for your course context. Need assistance? Contact the CTL at [email protected] . 

Zoom Breakout Rooms

Zoom breakout rooms can be used during synchronous class sessions to simulate the small group discussions that may take place during in-class peer review. You can pre-assign students in peer review pairs or groups, or you can assign students randomly in the moment. With pre-assignments, you will want to consider if students will remain in the same peer review groups throughout the semester or if you’ll switch groups up across assignments. Additionally, will students be asked to read each other’s work ahead of the breakout room activity? If so, be sure to provide explicit expectations about what students should address and do in preparation for and during the peer review activity. 

See Zoom Help Center “ Enabling breakout rooms ;” “ Manage breakout rooms ;” and “ Pre-assign participants to breakout rooms .”

Google Docs 

Google Docs are a great tool for synchronous and asynchronous peer review. They are also particularly useful if you are planning to assess students’ peer review participation. Google Docs can be a valuable peer review facilitation tool, regardless of classroom format; whether in-person or online, synchronous or asynchronous, they can be used to help students foster their feedback skills. 

For synchronous class sessions or face-to-face classes , you might pair the Google Doc with small group peer review, either in-class or via Zoom breakout rooms. Students could be working in the same collaborative writing space while also talking with each other about their work and comments they are making. As the instructor, you can see students’ comments and feedback in real time, even if you do not join the breakout room discussions. 

Asynchronously, or for work done outside of a face-to-face course , you might ask students to share their work with each other and leave comments and feedback throughout the document. Students can respond to questions and comments left on the document, and the reviewers will be notified, prompting a dialogue. Additionally, there is a chat function within Google Docs , so two or more students, if working in the document at the same time, could ask questions and talk via chat. You may even consider pairing an asynchronous peer review activity with a brief in-class activity between pairs/groups.  

Creating and Sharing a Google Doc: Settings and Permissions Considerations: When using Google Docs, there are some important considerations related to sharing settings and access. The image below includes some of these steps and considerations; for more about sharing within LionMail, see CUIT’s LionMail (Google) Drive help page . 

Accessible Graphic (PDF)

CourseWorks (Canvas)

You can use CourseWorks to facilitate peer review activities through a number of tools. Two of the most common ones include the Peer Review Function and the Discussions Tool . 

Peer Review Function: As its name suggests, the peer review function in CourseWorks allows the instructor to assign student work to others for review. This function is particularly useful in large classes (50+) as it helps manage the logistics of assigning peer review groups. It is also useful if you want to assign specific papers or work to specific students, or if you want the option for anonymous peer review comments. Any assignment you create in CourseWorks can be assigned to peer review; once selected, you can manually assign students work to peer review, or CourseWorks can randomly allocate the papers.

For more detailed information on assigning Peer Review in CourseWorks visit the Canvas help documentation .  

Discussions Tool: The Discussions tool allows students to easily share their work with each other. They can post their work as an attachment to a discussion post, (e.g. Word document, PDF) or by sharing a Google Doc link in the post itself. Because of its availability to the entire class, the Discussions tool is particularly useful when you want the whole class to see peers’ work, or if the number of viewers does not matter. If you would like to limit the view to only a number of select students, you can also assign a Discussion to a group of students and only those in that particular group will see the posts. 

No matter the use of the Discussions tool, whether through the whole-class or for select groups, it’s important to provide clear instructions that articulate the peer review goals and activity, as well as your expectations, for students. For instructions on how to create Discussion posts, visit the Canvas help documentation.

Columbia Resources

CTL Knowledge Base  CTL Office Hours and Support

Writing Centers provide various services to support students and their writing. They are a great resource for students’ to get additional feedback and support throughout the writing process, whether at the initial brainstorming stage or as students work to implement peer or instructor feedback. 

Barnard Writing Center Columbia Writing Center  Columbia School of Social Work Writing Center  Teachers College Graduate Writing Center

References 

Ambrose, S.A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M.C., & Norman, M.K. (2010). What is reader response/peer review and how can we use it? In S.A. Ambrose et al. How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching (pp. 257-9). Jossey-Bass.   

Bean, J. C. (2011). Have students conduct peer reviews of drafts. Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom, 2nd Edition (pp. 295-302). Jossey-Bass. 

Lang, J.M. (2013). Cheating lessons: Learning from academic dishonesty . Harvard University  Press.

Science Education Resource Center (SERC) at Carleton College. (n.d.). Guidelines for students – peer review . Pedagogy in Action: the SERC Portal for Educators. 

Additional Resources 

Salahub, J. (1994-2020). Peer review . The WAC Clearinghouse. Colorado State University. 

University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching (CRLT). (n.d.). Feedback on student writing . CRLT. 

CTL resources and technology for you.

• Overview of all CTL Resources and Technology

This website uses cookies to identify users, improve the user experience and requires cookies to work. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's use of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice .

Peer Review Rubric

• Available Topics
• Top Documents
• Recently Updated
• Internal KB

Peer Feedback Rubric

(Source: UW-Madison BioCore ) Another way you will work in groups or pairs is through peer review, an opportunity for you to give and receive peer feedback on your papers before you turn them in to be graded by your TA. Writing is a form of communication; a peer can tell you whether or not your paper makes sense. It is to your advantage to take your responsibility to review a peer’s paper seriously . We find that the review process benefits the reviewer and the author because it gives you practice evaluating a paper by applying the same criteria your TA will use to evaluate your paper.

Note that you do not need to wait for us to assign a formal review to take advantage of the peer-review process. You can always get together with other students and act as reviewers for each other’s papers, even when it is not required as part of an assignment!

Peer review is a skill that takes practice. Use the following criteria when you are learning how to peer review. To help you become a more skilled peer reviewer, we will ask you to hand in your peer review comments to be evaluated by your TA. Your TA will use these same criteria to evaluate your peer review.

• Antiracist Writing Pedagogy
• Best Practices
• Links for Teaching Writing
• January 2024
• Nifty Assignments

Peer Review & Rubric(s)

• Seminar Guidelines
• Syllabus Ideas
• Easton Paper

INTD 105 Writing Seminar Resources

Guidelines for peer reviewing/editing.

Getting students to give each other helpful reviews of essays is hard. Too often, students concentrate on mechanical errors and ignore substantive issues of how effective an argument is; students are very reluctant to sound critical of each other's work. The following sets of guidelines from INTD 105 instructors may give other instructors some ideas about how to guide students into a peer review and how to structure it for maximum impact.

A  peer editing worksheet  contributed by Maria Lima.

Sample Grading Rubric(s)

Figuring out what to look for when grading writing, not to mention applying a standard consistently, can be hard. Rubrics are one popular solution to this dilemma. Here is a rubric for INTD 105 instructors to consider, to follow as much or as little as you wish. We welcome other examples of rubrics instructors have developed; send them to either of the co-coordinators for posting here.

Developed by Maria Lima , submitted January 2019, updated June 2021.

Peer Review

Main navigation.

Peer review can be an invaluable addition to instructor comments on drafts and to instructor-student conferences. Peer review helps students by giving them occasion to assess closely work-in-progres, engages students more fully with  the rubric , and provides examples of others’ work.

Planning Peer Review

When planning a peer review session for your class, consider these suggestions:

• Peer review is most effective when it is fully introduced and supported in the class. Thus, before starting peer review, model a peer review session by, for example, projecting a sample essay on the board and talking as a class about how to effectively offer comments on it.
• Call it peer review not peer editing, as editing implies fixing minor errors and this word may prevent students from really engaging with each other's papers.
• Specify and delimit the tasks: if you've been talking in class about introductions and use of secondary sources, then have peer reviewers focus on these.
• Encourage students to frame their feedback in terms of  the rubric you use  so that they can engage together with the expectations embodied in the rubric. However, it is not recommended that students rate each other using rubrics both because scoring drafts is not in the spirit of formative feedback and because asking students’ to judge each other writings puts them in an uncomfortable, potentially unsupportive relation to each other.
• Consider having student-writers introduce their paper to their partner and say something about the questions or concerns they have.
• Consider the benefits and drawbacks of having students offer oral vs. written comments on each other’s essay—ideally, a combination of both is best. If students only receive written comments on their essay, they might not understand how to prioritize the feedback or how to make sense of the comments. If students only receive oral comments, you—as the instructor—have no way to gauge the quality of the feedback.
• Groups of three work well because each writer can receive feedback from two reviewers.
• Schedule in-class peer review with enough time for students to make revisions to their essays before the final essay deadline. Giving students just a day or two to implement changes can discourage students from making time-consuming and substantive changes to their essays even if these changes might improve them.

Essay Rubric

About this printout

This rubric delineates specific expectations about an essay assignment to students and provides a means of assessing completed student essays.

Teaching with this printout

More ideas to try.

Grading rubrics can be of great benefit to both you and your students. For you, a rubric saves time and decreases subjectivity. Specific criteria are explicitly stated, facilitating the grading process and increasing your objectivity. For students, the use of grading rubrics helps them to meet or exceed expectations, to view the grading process as being “fair,” and to set goals for future learning. In order to help your students meet or exceed expectations of the assignment, be sure to discuss the rubric with your students when you assign an essay. It is helpful to show them examples of written pieces that meet and do not meet the expectations. As an added benefit, because the criteria are explicitly stated, the use of the rubric decreases the likelihood that students will argue about the grade they receive. The explicitness of the expectations helps students know exactly why they lost points on the assignment and aids them in setting goals for future improvement.

• Routinely have students score peers’ essays using the rubric as the assessment tool. This increases their level of awareness of the traits that distinguish successful essays from those that fail to meet the criteria. Have peer editors use the Reviewer’s Comments section to add any praise, constructive criticism, or questions.
• Alter some expectations or add additional traits on the rubric as needed. Students’ needs may necessitate making more rigorous criteria for advanced learners or less stringent guidelines for younger or special needs students. Furthermore, the content area for which the essay is written may require some alterations to the rubric. In social studies, for example, an essay about geographical landforms and their effect on the culture of a region might necessitate additional criteria about the use of specific terminology.
• After you and your students have used the rubric, have them work in groups to make suggested alterations to the rubric to more precisely match their needs or the parameters of a particular writing assignment.
• Print this resource

Explore Resources by Grade

• Kindergarten K

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library, teaching students to evaluate each other, why use peer review.

Peer assessment, or review, can improve overall learning by helping students become better readers, writers, and collaborators. A well-designed peer review program also develops students’ evaluation and assessment skills. The following are a few techniques that instructors have used to implement peer review.

Planning for peer review

• Identify where you can incorporate peer review exercises into your course.
• For peer review on written assignments, design guidelines that specify clearly defined tasks for the reviewer. Consider what feedback students can competently provide.
• Determine whether peer review activities will be conducted as in-class or out-of-class assignments (or as a combination of both).
• Plan for in-class peer reviews to last at least one class session. More time will be needed for longer papers and papers written in foreign languages.
• Model appropriate constructive criticism and descriptive feedback through the comments you provide on papers and in class.
• Explain the reasons for peer review, the benefits it provides, and how it supports course learning outcomes.
• Set clear expectations: determine whether students will receive grades on their contributions to peer review sessions. If grades are given, be clear about what you are assessing, what criteria will be used for grading, and how the peer review score will be incorporated into their overall course grade.

Before the first peer review session

• Give students a sample paper to review and comment on in class using the peer review guidelines. Ask students to share feedback and help them rephrase their comments to make them more specific and constructive, as needed.
• Consider using the sample paper exercise to teach students how to think about, respond to, and use comments by peer reviewers to improve their writing.
• Ask for input from students on the peer review worksheet or co-create a rubric in class.
• Prevent overly harsh peer criticism by instructing students to provide feedback as if they were speaking to the writer or presenter directly.
• Consider how you will assign students to groups. Do you want them to work together for the entire semester, or change for different assignments? Do you want peer reviewers to remain anonymous? How many reviews will each assignment receive?

During and after peer review sessions

• Give clear directions and time limits for in-class peer review sessions and set defined deadlines for out-of-class peer review assignments.
• Listen to group discussions and provide guidance and input when necessary.
• Consider requiring students to write a plan for revision indicating the changes they intend to make on the paper and explaining why they have chosen to acknowledge or disregard specific comments and suggestions. For exams and presentations, have students write about how they would approach the task next time based on the peer comments.
• Ask students to submit the peer feedback they received with their final papers. Make clear whether or not you will be taking this feedback into account when grading the paper, or when assigning a participation grade to the student reviewer.
• Consider having students assess the quality of the feedback they received.
• Discuss the process in class, addressing problems that were encountered and what was learned.

Examples of peer review activities

• After collection, redistribute papers randomly along with a grading rubric. After students have evaluated the papers ask them to exchange with a neighbor, evaluate the new paper, and then compare notes.
• After completing an exam, have students compare and discuss answers with a partner. You may offer them the opportunity to submit a new answer, dividing points between the two.
• In a small class, ask students to bring one copy of their paper with their name on it and one or two copies without a name. Collect the “name” copy and redistribute the others for peer review. Provide feedback on all student papers. Collect the peer reviews and return papers to their authors.
• For group presentations, require the class to evaluate the group’s performance using a predetermined marking scheme.
• When working on group projects, have students evaluate each group member’s contribution to the project on a scale of 1-10. Require students to provide rationale for how and why they awarded points.

Peer review technologies

Best used for providing feedback (formative assessment), PeerMark is a peer review program that encourages students to evaluate each other’s work. Students comment on assigned papers and answer scaled and free-form questions designed by the instructor. PeerMark does not allow you to assign point values or assign and export grades.

Contact the Center for a consultation on using these peer assessment tools.

Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing.  Learning and Instruction , 20 (4), 328-338.

Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective.  Learning and Instruction , 20 (4), 344-348.

The Teaching Center. (2009). Planning and guiding in-class peer review.  Washington University in St. Louis.  Retrieved from  http://teachingcenter.wustl.edu/resources/writing-assignments-feedback/planning-and-guiding-in-class-peer-review/ .

Wasson, B., & Vold, V. (2012). Leveraging new media skills in a peer feedback tool.  Internet and Higher Education , 15 (4), 1-10.

Xie, Y., Ke, F., & Sharma, P. (2008). The effect of peer feedback for blogging on college students’ reflective learning processes.  Internet and Higher Education , 11 (1), 18-25.

van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions.  Learning and Instruction , 20 (4), 270-279.

• help_outline help

iRubric: Peer Review: Classification Essay rubric

You're signed out

Sign in to ask questions, follow content, and engage with the Community

• Canvas Instructor
• Instructor Guide

How do I use peer review assignments in a course?

• Subscribe to RSS Feed
• Printer Friendly Page
• Report Inappropriate Content

in Instructor Guide

Note: You can only embed guides in Canvas courses. Embedding on other sites is not supported.

Community Help

View our top guides and resources:.

To participate in the Instructurer Community, you need to sign up or log in: