Teaching technical writing through student peer-evaluation

Wayne Jensen, Bruce Fischer

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Individual students in two different sections of an undergraduate civil engineering laboratory were tasked with preparing three professional-quality laboratory reports. The teaching assistant and/or instructor used established criteria-to grade the first two reports prepared by students in one section. The first two reports prepared by students in the other section were peer evaluated by assigned fellow students within the same laboratory section using identical grading criteria. The peer evaluated section had a higher class average than the teaching assistant/instructor graded section on the fist two reports. The third report prepared by students from both sections was graded by a professional educator/architect without knowledge of a student's class section. The peer evaluation students also had a higher class average on the third report, suggesting that the peer evaluation process may have positively contributed to those students' writing skills.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages95-100
Number of pages6
Volume35
No1
Specialist publicationJournal of Technical Writing and Communication
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 18 2005

Fingerprint

Technical writing
Teaching
Students
evaluation
student
assistant
instructor
grading
Civil engineering
architect
educator
engineering

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication
  • Education

Cite this

Teaching technical writing through student peer-evaluation. / Jensen, Wayne; Fischer, Bruce.

In: Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, Vol. 35, No. 1, 18.03.2005, p. 95-100.

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

@misc{4412f14ca9954ceaa315239f1b8f44ca,
title = "Teaching technical writing through student peer-evaluation",
abstract = "Individual students in two different sections of an undergraduate civil engineering laboratory were tasked with preparing three professional-quality laboratory reports. The teaching assistant and/or instructor used established criteria-to grade the first two reports prepared by students in one section. The first two reports prepared by students in the other section were peer evaluated by assigned fellow students within the same laboratory section using identical grading criteria. The peer evaluated section had a higher class average than the teaching assistant/instructor graded section on the fist two reports. The third report prepared by students from both sections was graded by a professional educator/architect without knowledge of a student's class section. The peer evaluation students also had a higher class average on the third report, suggesting that the peer evaluation process may have positively contributed to those students' writing skills.",
author = "Wayne Jensen and Bruce Fischer",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
day = "18",
doi = "10.2190/MBYG-AK7L-5CT7-54DU",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "95--100",
journal = "Journal of Technical Writing and Communication",
issn = "0047-2816",
publisher = "Baywood Publishing Co. Inc.",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Teaching technical writing through student peer-evaluation

AU - Jensen, Wayne

AU - Fischer, Bruce

PY - 2005/3/18

Y1 - 2005/3/18

N2 - Individual students in two different sections of an undergraduate civil engineering laboratory were tasked with preparing three professional-quality laboratory reports. The teaching assistant and/or instructor used established criteria-to grade the first two reports prepared by students in one section. The first two reports prepared by students in the other section were peer evaluated by assigned fellow students within the same laboratory section using identical grading criteria. The peer evaluated section had a higher class average than the teaching assistant/instructor graded section on the fist two reports. The third report prepared by students from both sections was graded by a professional educator/architect without knowledge of a student's class section. The peer evaluation students also had a higher class average on the third report, suggesting that the peer evaluation process may have positively contributed to those students' writing skills.

AB - Individual students in two different sections of an undergraduate civil engineering laboratory were tasked with preparing three professional-quality laboratory reports. The teaching assistant and/or instructor used established criteria-to grade the first two reports prepared by students in one section. The first two reports prepared by students in the other section were peer evaluated by assigned fellow students within the same laboratory section using identical grading criteria. The peer evaluated section had a higher class average than the teaching assistant/instructor graded section on the fist two reports. The third report prepared by students from both sections was graded by a professional educator/architect without knowledge of a student's class section. The peer evaluation students also had a higher class average on the third report, suggesting that the peer evaluation process may have positively contributed to those students' writing skills.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=14744301504&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=14744301504&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2190/MBYG-AK7L-5CT7-54DU

DO - 10.2190/MBYG-AK7L-5CT7-54DU

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:14744301504

VL - 35

SP - 95

EP - 100

JO - Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

JF - Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

SN - 0047-2816

ER -