Changes to peer review, if I was the teacher...

Peer review is a vital step in the process of writing a paper. First of all, it is important that one reads one’s own paper to make sure that the organization flows, grammar is correct, etc. Yet, after one writes his or her own paper and then edits it, one often does not catch errors. This is because one knows what he or she wants to say and therefore reads it the way he or she wants it to say and often not the way it actually appears on the paper. Thus, it is helpful to get the opinion of at least one other person who has never seen the paper before and can see the minor mistakes that the writer does not catch. In addition, the peer reviewer makes sure that the point the author is trying to make is actually coming across. Another positive about peer review is that while you are reading another peer’s paper, you can get ideas for organization, language, and strategy.
However, there are some changes that can be made to peer review, to make it even more beneficial to the writer and the reviewer. One change is that the groups for peer review should change for every session of peer review. I think that this will be very beneficial because it’s one thing to get the opinion of another person or two; but, if you are having those same people read your paper every peer review, then your writing will probably not be improving that much. Thus, by having a different group for every peer review session, one will have different opinions and ideas every time. Thus, by interacting with different people one will constantly be introduced to new ideas. Some of these new ideas can help and strengthen one’s paper and allow one to become a better writer and critical thinker. One will become an improved critical thinker through this change because when one is reading the work of different authors every time, one will be introduced to different writing styles.
Another change that should be made is to peer review is to have every person in the group to have a different color when they are editing the paper. This would help the process of peer review because it is difficult to tell which changes should be made, who suggested them, etc. When there are two or more people reviewing a single paper, one reviewer may say to make a certain change. But, a second review may say that what you had was fine. Thus, confusion comes into play because one does not know which person made which comments, not only at a certain spot of conflict, but throughout the paper. In addition, using different colors will just be fun!
With these two changes in mind, I would also design peer review session in class differently. As the teacher, I would have different areas set up throughout the room for the different groups to sit. This is because sometimes the groups are too close together. For example, when one group finishes before another group, it becomes distracting to the group who is not done yet. After the groups are in their spots, I would have them either share their concerns about their paper either by saying them to the group, or by writing them on their paper. Next, I would have every person in the group read the other members papers because the more reviewers, the better. Finally, at the end of peer review, I would have the class write down one thing that they learned, either by a correction that someone made to his or her own paper, or something that they saw when they read another person’s paper. These are the changes that I would make to peer review, if I was the teacher.