Peer Review is an invaluable tool for scaffolding assignments and introducing peer-to-peer learning opportunities, as we’ve discussed previously. This can be challenging to implement if the students are working on different types of projects, such as with multimodal assignments. How can students receive the benefits of peer review, such as mutual accountability, mentorship, and fostering collegiality if they are producing work that is drastically different from each other?
To break this down, let’s first look at what a multimodal assignment could look like in order to develop a framework for peer review. Since multimodal assignment projects can utilize a variety of mediums (examples include: blog posts, video essays, podcasts, infographics, photo essays, papers, creative writing) it is vital to have a clearly defined objective for students to demonstrate their understanding. A clear prompt or set of objectives will help students decide on their medium and develop how the use of that medium will tie into the learning objectives for the assignment. Having a clear objective for students to reach for will help students in the peer review process be able to assess the relative success of the projects of their peers and help shape feedback. The Sweetland Writing Center has a fantastic resource for teaching multimodal composition with many examples and tips for designing the assignment.
Beyond the assignment design, the peer review process will look slightly different for a multimodal assignment than it would for an assignment where everyone is creating similar works. One effective strategy is providing students with a series of questions that they can use to hone their critiques. Asking questions such as, “What makes this project effective?” or “How does the project utilize pathos, ethos, and logos to communicate its message?” can help guide students to effective critiques. If students were provided with a rubric along with the assignment prompt, reintroducing it during the peer review process can provide clarity as well. A short discussion about the goals and framework of the peer review process with students before they begin can help avoid unhelpful feedback and ensure student buy-in.
Additionally, since the students in the peer review groups may be creating projects using vastly different mediums, they may need assistance seeing past those differences in style to provide substantive technical feedback. One way to accomplish this is to group students into peer groups based on their choice of medium, since these students will have a better understanding of the technical aspects of the medium. If this is not possible, one solution is to provide students with examples of successful work in that medium that they can compare to their peer’s work.
Another issue with multimodal peer review is that often the projects are too long for students to listen or watch completely during the review process. One solution to this issue is to ask students to bring a short clip or selection from their project for peers to review. Examples for this would include sections students are unsure of the effectiveness of, sections that include controversial or charged content, or sections that summarize the key parts of the argument. When students use selections instead of an entire project, this can ensure that all participants receive review during the allotted time and reduce the overall workload of the review process. It can also help students focus their peers to receive feedback they feel they need.
Peer review can be an incredibly productive process for student success, especially when students are stretching their creativity into different mediums beyond text. This leads to better outcomes and creates partnerships amongst students outside of group work. If you are interested in learning more about this topic, as well as discovering how peer review can be implemented in your course, complete this consultation request form and we will schedule a time to work with you.
