Peer Response Groups in Action

Karen Spear

I chose this work because, similar to portfolios, I've read plenty of theory on them, but have longed to learn more about their practical role in a classroom. In other words, I've been asking myself the question, "Yes, they sound great, but how does one truly get them to work?" This work, although painfully repetitive at times, shed some light onto my inquiry.

Firstly, I enjoyed the discussion based on journal-response to literature. In addition to believing in "graded discussions," the idea presented was to read a certain genre, and meanwhile to have students write short free-write responses to certain moments in the book that moved them. This would take place in their journal, and later referenced as a "resource pool" on possible topics in which to write about regarding the book as a whole. After a series of peer response groups, homework assignments would include reading and composing a one-page critique of another's work.

However, perhaps the most applicable, pragmatic suggestions I found involved beginning with the reading of personal narratives such as EB White's "Once More to The Lake," Langston Hughes' "Salvation," and JP Sartre's autobiography, The Words. These memory pieces recalling a life experience of a writer is useful to students to see a model and to analyze it for effective and not-effective moments. Students journal response to these readings, such as, "what does it make you think of? What ca you relate to this," etc.

Following this free-writing experience would be the drafting step. This would happen in class: have kids close their eyes, focus on a memory, bring it to life as if it was happening now, and rewrite it as it was, actually, happening now. After 15-20 minutes of writing, it should be read aloud to a response group of 4-6 students. Listen and respond: what works? What doesn't? What else does it need? Next, a deadline dictates a first draft due (400-600 words), in which it's a very similar response structure: simply read and verbal responses are given. This read around group certainly does create this sense of "group commitment," and of course students must be coached in various ways regarding: 1. how to respond thoughtfully 2. how to take responses thoughtfully (I'm thinking about creating scenarios: what's the worst way to respond? The best?) Remember, we're evaluating writing, not the writer.

For homework, kids are to revise the piece and bring in a clean draft for round robin reviews. What happens? Kids revise focusing on content and organization, and then a group of students individually read it, upon which they write a half page critique of it using the rubric created. 15 minutes is allocated toward reading piece, critiquing it, and passing it to the next person. Remember, clip critiques on the BACK of each piece. Finally, writer uses critiques, revises, brings in enough drafts for entire group. S/he reads it while other read along and later share thoughts on it.

How do we grade it? Process and product. I'm thinking that each student must include every step in process to get full credit. I really like this framework and find it to be sensible and practical, and think with a few modifications at times, it can be applied in my classroom for a variety of assignments, as the frequency and variety are the strengths of this structure, I believe.

Finally, there were a few pieces that questioned the "research paper," challenging the the conventions that have defined it for years. I like this, as we have a structure that is pathetically based in tradition. Kids write meaningless, dull papers on issues they neither know or care anything about, which seems self-defeating. How can this be changed?

Suggestions were certainly to encourage students to think that research is done not to report data, but to answer questions, solve problems, and quench curiosity. How is this achieved? The idea of prefacing the research paper with a tangible study of research that is interesting and a topic of the class' choice sounds very appealing to me. Let's go out in the real world and interview people about certain issues. What are some things we'd like to learn more about? "What do people think about?" Trying to, and successfully revealing a study on people can make for exciting study. It's real, and students realize the process of research a little bit more. Talking about problems, how to interview, questions to ask, how to synthesize it all, how to make sense of it?this is all exciting stuff that researchers do! I had a lot of fun doing this for my master's thesis, and why wouldn't students as well? We'll see?