Several years ago, I was given the responsibility of teaching English Language Learners (ELLs) in a sheltered learning environment. Most of the students in the class were Spanish-speaking and had difficulty understanding rules, classroom procedures, and even how to complete assignments. To effectively communicate with my students, I decided to learn Spanish. Even if it was on a basic level, I was convinced that speaking Spanish would increase my ability to convey necessary information regarding learning expectations. What began as a way to connect with students evolved into a full-fledged commitment to learning the language. Eventually, the journey became frustrating and discouraging for various reasons, one of them being my inability to write coherently in my target language.

Writing in Spanish is an obstacle that continues to challenge me. When communicating through written expression, I struggle to articulate my thoughts due to limited vocabulary, which can be very restricting. Though a novice writer, I have often felt the need to master writing mechanics quickly to make progress that is swift and significant. However, the progress that I have made has been anything but swift, reminding me of why staying the course is a prerequisite for results. My personal struggles with writing in a second language prompted me to consider the plight of my students. If I was having difficulty writing, surely they had challenges and needed support to become literate in this area. I resolved that it was necessary to take a closer look at my current pedagogical practices and ponder how I could affect change. I was convinced that a pedagogy specific to their writing needs would allow teachers to utilize an extensive and targeted approach that could yield results. This perspective lead me to explore the possibilities of peer review to determine if this strategy could be a long-term solution.

When introduced to the concept of peer review, my students had difficulty. Some had never learned a formal writing process or been shown how to support their peers in this way. Additionally, many of my students have interrupted learning, meaning that they lack a foundation in writing that is necessary to build upon. This is why peer review training has been imperative for them. The training has been classroom-based and consists of a proper introduction to the concept of peer review, the components of the process, and an explanation of what each peer review activity entails.

Since feedback is the primary component of the the peer review process, teaching ELLs how to provide quality feedback is an essential part of their training. Modeling expectations sets students up to successfully engage in peer review by reinforcing what has been explained. When training ELLs to review the writing of their peers, I found that limiting the number of steps as well as simplifying tasks prevents them from being intimidated by the process. I chose to train them to provide feedback in three specific areas to get them started. They are as follows:

  • Strengths: Though peer review is a strategy being used to help ELLs to improve their writing, the truth is that they still have strengths that can be acknowledged. Doing so can be encouraging and helpful, especially for students embarking on a writing journey that could be quite daunting. Sharing examples of possible strengths can guide them as they identify positive aspects of the essay. Some examples of strengths that students can mention during the peer review process include clarity of ideas, knowledge of the topic, and essay readability.

  • Areas of Weakness: Unfortunately, students do not always know how to communicate areas of weakness with kindness and respect. For this reason, modeling how to address weaknesses is essential. Most classrooms have students of mixed learning abilities, so a range of student output reflecting different stages of growth is to be expected. Explaining the importance of sharing concerns in a respectful way sets the tone for a positive and meaningful writing experience. This helps to foster a community where students feel safe with their classmates as they make strides to become better writers.

  • Writing Mechanics: The rules of writing differ depending on the language, which is why mechanics matters. Identifying grammatical errors in an essay may require some practice before they can do so comfortably. These errors include incorrect subject/verb agreement, sentence fragments, and lack of punctuation. Linguistic errors could also be prevalent in the essay of an ELL, meaning constant use of L1 terminology. Providing examples of grammar and linguistic errors can impart insight that can be advantageous when seeking to identify necessary changes. Training in the area of writing mechanics prevents student feedback that is generic and fails to address the fact that there are many mistakes that must be corrected.

Training my students to engage in peer review activities has helped me to facilitate writing instruction in a more purposeful way. Now that I have implemented this practice, I am excited to see how it affects writing outcomes over an extended period of time. I am also eager to see where the path of peer review will lead. Will a 3-step process be sufficient to train students to review the writing of their peers or are more steps required? Should the duration of the training vary or have a set time frame? These are questions that I am enthusiastic to unravel to find solutions. Truthfully, I am convinced that peer review training will make a positive impact, but time will reveal the extent.