Developing doctoral students’ critical writing skills through peer assessment

HEA Social Sciences Conference May 2014Joan Smith, Phil Wood, Hilary Burgess & Gareth

LewisUniversity of Leicester School of Education

The challenge of critical writing

• Challenge to pgrs• Challenge to academics who teach/supervise

pgrs

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

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

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.

Launch event: residential critical writing weekend

Before the weekend:• Pre-weekend interviews• Submission of draft papers

Workshops & sessions during the weekend

Friday round table: peer feedbackSaturday workshops:• Positive Criticality• Clarity and Criticality

Communication

Sometimes critical reading and writing is seen as ‘deconstruction and critique’. Is this O.K.?

Critique & deconstruct

Critique &

deconstruct

Take what is useful

Synthesise work from elsewhere

New insights

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

Developing clarity and criticality workshop

• Read the article. Identify what is effective and what could be improved.

Peer feedbackRead 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

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

References

Kamler, B. & Thomson, P. (2006) Helping doctoral students write: pedagogies for supervision. Abingdon: Routledge