Instructional Note: Valuing the Process: Building a Foundation for Collaborative Peer Review

References

1. Boud Davidet al.. Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning, Kogan Page 1985.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Brammer Charlotte and Mary Rees. “Peer Review from the Students’ Perspective: Invaluable or Invalid?” Composition Studies, vol.35, no.3, Fall 2007, pp.71–85.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bruffee Kenneth A. A Short Course in Writing: Composition, Collaborative Learning, and Constructive Reading,. 4th ed., Pearson Longman 2007.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Corbett LaFrance, et al. eds. Peer Pressure, Peer Power: Theory and Practice in Peer Review and Response for the Writing Classroom, Fountainhead P 2014.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Council of Writing Program Administrators.. “WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition.”, July 2014, http://wpacouncil.org/positions/outcomes.html. Accessed 20 February 2019.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Davies Martin. “Concept Mapping, Mind Mapping and Argument Mapping: What Are the Differences and Do They Matter?” Higher Education, vol.62, no.3, Sept 2011, pp.279–301.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Devet Bonnie. “Becoming a ‘Soul-Twin’: Students’ Editing of Other Students’ Drafts.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.42, no.1 2014, pp.77–82.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Elbow Peter and Pat Belanoff. Sharing and Responding, Random House 1989.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Engbers Susanna Kelly. “Here We Go ‘Round and ‘Round: A Process of Peer Evaluation.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.36, no.4 2009, pp.397–401.
   [Google Scholar]
10. “Framework for Success in Postsecondary Writing.”. Council of Writing Program Administrators, National Council of Teachers of English, and National Writing Project 2011, http://wpacouncil.org/framework.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Gere Anne Ruggles. Writing Groups: Theory, History, and Implications. 1st ed., Conference on College Composition and Communication 1987.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Getchell Kristen and Ann N. Amicucci. “Responding with the Golden Rule: A Cross-Institutional Peer Review Experiment.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.42, no.1 2014, pp.55–64.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Graff Nelson. “Approaching Authentic Peer Review.” English Journal, vol.98, no.5, May 2009, pp.81–87.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Grimm Nancy. “Improving Student’s Response to Their Peers’ Essays.” College Composition and Communication, vol.37, no.1, Feb 1986, pp.91–94.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Harris Muriel. “Afterword: A Non-Coda: Including Writing Centered Student Perspectives for Peer Review.”. Corbetet al.. 277–88.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Mumma John. “Peer-Review Assessment.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College, vol.29, no.4 2002, pp.427–28.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Nilson Linda B. “Improving Student Peer Feedback.” College Teaching, vol.51, no.1 2003, pp.34–38.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Reid E. Shelley. “Peer Review: Successful from the Start.” The Teaching Professor, vol.20, no.8 2006, pp.3.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Reid E. Shelley. “Peer Review for Peer Review’s Sake: Resituating Peer Review in Pedagogy.”. Corbet, et al.217–31.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Straub Richard. “Responding—Really Responding—to Other Students’ Writing.” The Subject Is Writing: Essays by Teachers and Students edited by Bishop Wendy. 2nd ed., Boynton/Cook Heinemann 2003, pp.162–12. Reprinted in Writing about Writing, 3rd ed., by Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs, Bedford/St. Martins, 2016, p. 915.
    [Google Scholar]