Question: An online ASL teacher asks: "I am curious on your
thoughts about having students do peer review feedback assignments for ASL 2.
Is peer review too much to expect at that level or does it seem appropriate?
Response:
I think that too often ASL 1 and ASL 2 students doing "peer review" ends up
being a case of "the blind leading the blind."*
On the positive side,
I have seen some programs that required advanced (cough) ASL students (ASL 3 or 4?)
to visit the ASL 1 and / or ASL 2 classes and function as peer tutors once a
week for an hour or so during "practice time." The teacher was always
around and available for questions. Thus it became a form of a lab and was
reasonably effective.
"Advanced" students
doing peer tutoring isn't ideal but is more defensible than peer tutoring done
by classmates.
"Advanced students" signing with "beginner students" (with a
highly skilled signer available and nearby) is
generally a good thing. Beginner students should not be providing
subjective non-highly-supervised feedback to other beginners.
Note: subjective feedback is not the same as objective feedback.
Subjective feedback involves giving an opinion. Objective feedback --
based on clear criteria -- is more factual, straightforward, and less open to
interpretation.
If we were to help "peer feedback" become "objective" (based on clear evidence) it
would be better.
For example, it would be somewhat objective to use this sort of peer review:
---------------------------------------
Instructions:
Watch the sample video of the assignment [HERE]
Watch the video of you classmate [HERE]
Compare the two videos and
identify specific time codes where the student's signing diverges from that of
the sample video in any significant and meaningful way and state what parameter or parameters
(handshape, location, palm orientation, movement, or non-manual markers such as
facial expression, eyebrow position, mouth shape, head-tilts, torso shifts,
etc.)
need to be fixed and why.
---------------------------------------
Using a comparison approach with an accurate reference sample helps to avoid
relying on students trying to use their own [limited and often erroneous]
"knowledge" to review the other student.
Students may not know the right or wrong way to sign something but they can
often pinpoint when two signs are being done differently. Students can
then learn to describe those differences. Such descriptions can serve as
peer feedback.
Using an accurate sample for
comparison means that the peer reviewer is using their brain and eyes to look
for differences between two signed examples and identify those differences. This
helps us take peer review out of the realm of "subjective" and move it more into
the realm of objective.
Notes:
Also see: "Peer Grading"
*(Note to my Blind and/or Deaf-Blind friends: Please forgive the attempt at the pun -- I'll try harder next time to resist. I'll still fail but perhaps someday I'll get it right.)
Notes: