1. Don't assume that students will know what to look for initially. Give them clear criteria in advance.
2. If you are asking them to review for sentence-level errors, don't assume that they will be able to name or clearly identify the nature of the problems they find.
3. Don't assume that your students already understand the kind of discourse expected in your class. Take time to talk with them about the conventions of writing which you expect them to follow, clarifying for them as best you can why these conventions are necessary or the degree to which they are flexible.
4. Don't assume that a single peer review experience will immediately improve students' writing or their ability to read critically. They will get much better with practice.
5. Don't put students in groups of more than four; they won't be able to read everyone's paper and larger groups tend to lose focus and chit-chat.
6. Don't assume that groups will stay on task; some will need to be monitored and redirected. Don't assume that all "non-writing" talk is off task either. Writers will often engage in bits of casual conversation as they think, and much of this talk also contributes to the creation of trust among group members.
7. Don't overwhelm students with too many criteria, especially when your class contains less-experienced or novice writers.
8. Don't assume that because you are not lecturing during these sessions that learning isn't taking place. It is, but in a decentered way that may strike some faculty as odd or inappropriate. If you feel uncomfortable in this position, you may want to interrupt the review session occasionally to discuss with the class questions or problems they might be having with the work.
9. Don't group writers of similar skill-levels together. The weakest writers, in particular, need interaction with stronger writers in order to develop. Weaker writers can often give very good advice, so the stronger writers are not necessarily disadvantaged by being with others of less experience.
1. Provide ample time for students to complete their review. Initially, a full class period is ideal to ensure students are able to fully review their peers texts and that the class can discuss their findings sufficiently. Shorter review sessions can be easily integrated into classes throughout the semester, and as students become more comfortable with their group members, they will provide more open, honest feedback.
2. Give the groups clearly identified issues to watch for and examine.
3. If you ask students to review for grammar, punctuation and syntax, provide them with the proper terminology and rules in advance. For instance, many young writers will not know the difference between active and passive voice, so if your assignment requires them to rely more upon the active than the passive, provide them with models and instructions for converting passive to active.
4. Ask students to provide concrete explanations to support their responses and advice. This provides the author with analytical material helpful during the revision process. You can also determine the extent to which the student responder is understanding the assignment, class readings, etc.
5. Make sure that you provide students with the opportunity to identify the strengths of their peers' writing. All too often, peer review is focused on what's wrong with a paper, which is helpful, but learning to build on the strengths of the paper is often equally or even more beneficial. Young writers often aren't aware of their strengths and need to have readers explain how and why something works well in their writing.