Perceived Helpfulness of Peer Editing Activities: First-Year Students' Views and Writing Performance Outcomes

Abstract

The perceived value of peer editing to students is unclear. To investigate, first-year students ( N = 35) completed a writing attitudes scale and first writing assignment in September 2012. The expected writing requirements were explained and handouts provided, as well as subsequent instructor feedback and grades. A second writing assignment was completed in October with peer editing taking place before the due date. Perceived helpfulness of giving and receiving peer feedback was evaluated. This was repeated in November for a third writing assignment. Rating means for both assignments indicated that students viewed editing a peer's paper as more helpful in improving their own writing than receiving a peer's feedback. For the first assignment, acting as peer editor was negatively correlated with the assignment grades, but not for the second assignment. With repeated assignments of similar format, perhaps a single peer editing experience is sufficient for building students' understanding of expectations and confidence.