Sample Forms - Peer Review

Initial Publication Date: December 21, 2006

Students utilizing well-developed feedback forms for peer review can in effect give students a deeper understanding of how their writing affects different readers, reinforce familiarity with revising strategies, and assist students in developing a familiarity with scientific writing expectations.

Several formats exist for peer-review feedback forms. Two common styles of feedback forms include criteria grids and open-ended forms. Both forms are presented in general terms below. You can also see examples of open-ended forms for a science research paper, a science lab report, a science article, and a problem-solving exercise.

Criteria grid

A criteria grid is useful to assist students in recognizing and constructing assertion-plus-evidence arguments. Fuller responses may be obtained by leaving more space in the "Reader's Comments" column and soliciting specifics from the reviewers. The grid can be available online through a website or set up in MS Word or Excel as a table.

Examples of criteria grids can be found at the University of Hawaii at Manoa's Writing Center peer-review page .

Open-ended form

A list of open-ended questions can encourage students to provide more detailed feedback. Inform the students that the amount of space you leave for a response reflects the amount of information you are expecting.

Author __________ Reviewer __________
The goals of peer review are 1) to help improve your classmate's paper by pointing out strengths and weaknesses that may not be apparent to the author, and 2) to help improve editing skills.

Read the paper(s) assigned to you twice, once to get an overview of the paper, and a second time to provide constructive criticism for the author to use when revising his/her paper. Answer the questions below.

1) Were the basic sections (Introduction, Conclusion, Literature Cited, etc.) adequate? If not, what is missing?
2) Did the writer use subheadings well to clarify the sections of the text? Explain.
3) Was the material ordered in a way that was logical, clear, easy to follow? Explain.

4) Did the writer cite sources adequately and appropriately? Note any incorrect formatting.
5) Were all the citations in the text listed in the Literature Cited section? Note any discrepancies.

6) Were there any grammatical or spelling problems?
7) Was the writer's writing style clear? Were the paragraphs and sentences cohesive?

8) Did the writer adequately summarize and discuss the topic? Explain.
9) Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials available from the standard sources? If no, what's missing?
10) Did the writer make some contribution of thought to the paper, or merely summarize data or publications? Explain.


University of Hawaii at Manoa's Writing Program Peer Review Groups and Criteria Grids .