- About
- Events
- Support
- Project Archive
- Amundsen Fellowship Program
- Disrupting Colonialism through Teaching Program
- Exploring Well-being in Learning Environments Program
- Inquiring into Your Multilingual Classroom Projects
- New Ways of Teaching, New Ways of Learning
- Teaching and Learning Development Grant Program
- Scholarship of Teaching + Learning Projects
- Programs
- SoTL 101: Introduction to SoTL and Teaching + Learning Inquiry
- SoTL 102: Formulating an Inquiry Project
- SoTL Thoughts
- Coffee + Conversation
- Tools for Inquiry: Conducting Inquiry Using CES
- Amundsen Fellowship Program
- Decolonial Teaching + Learning Seminar Series
- Decolonizing and Indigenizing Curricula
- Disrupting Colonialism through Teaching Program
- Exploring Well-being in Learning Environments: An Integrated Seminar Series + Grants Program
- Inquiring into Your Multilingual Classroom: An Integrated Seminar Series + Grants Program
- New Ways of Teaching, New Ways of Learning: Supporting Learning in Online Environments
- Teaching and Learning Development Grant Program
- Conferences
- 2026 SoTL Symposium Conference [October 22-24, 2026]
- B.C. Academic Integrity Day [October 23, 2026]
- Digital Learning Forum [Deadline: October 27, 2026]
- 2026 ISSOTL Conference [October 28-31, 2026]
- OnlineEd 2026 Conference [November 4, 2026]
- 2026 STLHE Virtual Conference [November 13, 2026]
- Cfp: International Journal for Students as Partners [Deadline: November 15, 2026]
- Call for chapters - Making up time: Towards a pedagogy of living and resisting the economization of time [Deadline: November 30, 2026]
- For Research Personnel
- News + Stories
Evaluating the Use of Anonymous Peer Review of Drafts in a W Course
Grant program: Teaching and Learning Development Grant (TLDG)
Project team: Jillian Scott McIntosh, Department of Philosophy
Support provided: Development of proposal, RA to organize data collection and analysis
Timeframe: January 2007 to January 2008
Description: Use of the anonymous peer review feature of Turnitin.com in a first-year course. The goal was to make students more reflective about their own writing by giving them the opportunity to provide feedback to others and to receive feedback from others. Data collection focused on the quality of the peer reviews and the relationship of this on next drafts produced by both reviewers and reviewees.
Questions: Is there a correlation between (a) how students perceive the quality of peer review and the grade they receive on their revised draft?; (b) how a student perceives the quality of peer review and the degree of improvement between initial and revised drafts?; and (c) the perceived quality of a peer review by the student who receives it and the grade received by the student who wrote the peer review? Is there improvement in quality between first and second peer reviews?
Knowledge sharing: Presentation to members of the Institute for the Study of Teaching and Learning in the Disciplines (including those involved in W courses).