Peer Review of Term Papers in Graduate Psychology Courses
Author:
- 1 February 1993
- journal article
- review article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Teaching of Psychology
- Vol. 20 (1) , 28-32
Abstract
I describe and evaluate an exercise in which graduate students provide blind reviews of each other's term papers. Besides helping students with their own papers, the exercise seems to help them learn to give constructive, substantive feedback to colleagues. Student ratings of the educational value of peer review are high, but a hoped-for effect of increasing interest in publishing papers has not emerged. A study of reviews from three courses suggested that students' reviews show higher interrater reliability than do professional peer reviews of journal manuscripts. Implications of this finding are discussed in relation to some of the explanations offered in the literature for the low reliability of professional peer reviews.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- The reliability of peer review for manuscript and grant submissions: A cross-disciplinary investigationBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- Referee agreement in contextBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- Peer review: Explicit criteria and training can helpBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- What should be done improve reviewing?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- Reliability, fairness, objectivity and other inappropriate goals in peer reviewBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- Peer review: An unflattering pictureBehavioral and Brain Sciences, 1991
- Questioning and Peer Collaboration as Techniques for Thinking and Writing about PersonalityTeaching of Psychology, 1986
- How to Improve the Quality of Student Writing: The Colleague SwapTeaching of Psychology, 1982
- Tilting at the paper mills of academe.American Psychologist, 1981
- Situationism in psychology: An analysis and a critique.Psychological Review, 1973