{"id":32222,"date":"2019-09-16t08:05:28","date_gmt":"2019-09-16t13:05:28","guid":{"rendered":"\/\/www.imrbdigital.com\/?p=32222"},"modified":"2019-09-13t10:06:45","modified_gmt":"2019-09-13t15:06:45","slug":"teaching-innovations-at-vanderbilt-lisa-fazio-and-peerceptiv","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.imrbdigital.com\/2019\/09\/teaching-innovations-at-vanderbilt-lisa-fazio-and-peerceptiv\/","title":{"rendered":"teaching innovations at vanderbilt: lisa fazio and peerceptiv"},"content":{"rendered":"
by faith rovenolt, cft undergraduate intern<\/em><\/h5>\n

as a student, i have complicated feelings about peer review. it can be incredibly helpful, but only if it\u2019s implemented well and if all students involved put real time and effort into giving useful feedback. that\u2019s why i think dr. lisa fazio<\/a>\u2019s use of peerceptiv<\/a> could be useful to many classrooms across vanderbilt\u2019s campus. fazio, an assistant professor of psychology and human development, has used this online, anonymous peer review organizer for five years in her various courses (psy-pc 1117:\u00a0fyws – make it stick, 1250:\u00a0developmental psychology, & 3650:\u00a0advanced topical seminar – cognition in the real world).<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
lisa fazio<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

fazio uses peerceptiv as a place for students to submit their draft and then review each other\u2019s submissions. peerceptiv handles both the process of assigning reviewers and recording their feedback. all feedback is anonymous, and takes the form of both quantitative ratings and written thoughts on the work, from strengths to suggestions for improvement. students then get three grades for the draft: one for having done it, another for the quality of writing submitted, and a third for the quality of reviews given. both of the latter two are judged by the program. quality of writing is based on the reviews received and quality of reviews on consistency with other reviews for the same work. the system takes into account things like whether a reviewer consistently gives only bad or only good reviews, dinging their peer review grade and weighing their input on others\u2019 drafts accordingly. students can see all of the feedback they receive as well as the helpfulness of their own reviews.<\/p>\n

unsurprisingly, students can be distrustful of putting their grades in the software\u2019s binary hands. it helps that peerceptiv was developed using a significant body of research on student peer review, but fazio also assures her students that she checks through the system\u2019s results. eventually, the students come to value the process\u2014and the system\u2014as the peer reviews help them improve their draft before submitting the final, which is graded by dr. fazio and is worth more than the draft grade.<\/p>\n

fazio thinks this tool could be used in any course with an assignment where feedback before a final version is useful. additionally, peerceptiv easily scales up to large classes. things to keep in mind, though:<\/p>\n