Editing & Revising with Peers

As a writer and, as a teacher, I value collaboration with peers. I know that my writing is made more clear, more interesting, and more precise when I rely on a trusted "critical friend" to offer constructive feedback. And so, when the Commonwealth's writing standards included peer revising as well as adult conferring, the inclusion of critical friends in the Writing Process made sense. Beginning in Grade 2, Writing Standard 5 includes this important progression of peer revision and peer editing. [Refer to the Writing Standards ("Code W") by grade level beginning on page 26 of the 2011 Frameworks.]From my experience, elementary students must be taught explicitly how to do this. They need good models of what peer conferring looks like. As a proponent of the Daily Five, I found the 10 Steps to Independence model to be an ideal teaching method for introducing peer editing and revising to my students.Students at the elementary level need some structure for learning how to be a helpful peer editor or revisor; and to this end, I was fortunate to get an offer for some coaching from our former Literacy Coach, Patricia Sweeney.  Pat provided a structure for the students: 2 compliments and a suggestion. Here were the guidelines:

• The author reads the piece from beginning to end without interruption
• The revisor/editor offers 2 compliments. Personal references ("I like...") were excluded; more constructive/objective language included ("When you wrote..., your writing was... (very clear, powerful, descriptive, etc.").
• No "buts" - one of my 3rd and 4th graders favorites, because what 9-year old can resist telling another to get their "but" out of writing. (When you wrote ...., your description was very clear, BUT...)
• The revisor/editor can offer 1 suggestion (so not to overwhelm the author all at once), jotting on a stick-on note. (You might want to .... or Your writing might be more powerful if ...). The author can agree or disagree with the suggestion, but listens and takes it "under advisement".

This structure provided the students with two things: a language framework for offering constructive feedback and an opportunity to apply grade-level writing skills as the "student" become the "teacher".These peer-led conferences always took place prior to conferring with an adult and prior to producing a final version of the writing.  Peers did not assess another student's writing, but offered constructive criticism for the purpose of helping the author improve upon the writing.Exactly what my adult peer editor and revisor does for me.  

Teacher as Learner

I have long gotten past being the "sage on the stage". If educational gurus hadn't already convinced me that students learn best from peers and self-exploration - constructing the meaning of something themselves from experience - anecdotal evidence from the classroom would have.This week I arranged with our school's Literacy specialist/coach, Pat Sweeney, to have her model peer writing conferences.  Knowing how much language we need to build into any speech-based activity with English Language Learners, help in supporting my students is always welcome.Pat started by engaging my students in thinking about why an author may want to ask a peer  for advice. First Pat laid down the ground rules for the author (read your work and listen to peer input), the peer group (listen and then offer 1 compliment and 1 suggestion).  The rule of compliments (always start the sentence with "you or your") and suggestions ("I think.....") was next.Then kids then looked over and clarified a list of compliments and suggestions that Pat had placed on anchor charts. Having previewed some independently written narratives my students were working on, Pat selected two students to be the first to try out peer conferences in a whole group.I was pleasantly surprised at the level of constructive criticism my students had. They offered compliments and useful suggestions about the plot of a story, the beginnings, the endings, descriptive languages. Pat wrote down up to 3 suggestions for each author - fitting them on a 3x3 stick-on note - and then instructed the author to keep the note with their original work so when they later conference with me, we can both see which suggestions were incorporated into their pieces. Self accountability - brilliant!Several days later, when Pat led our peer conferences a second time, she gradually released the conversation to the students. And the students were much more willing to sit in the author's chair or offer suggestions and compliments. As we continue this process, my hope is that students will move eventually to arranging with a smaller peer group of 2-3 students or even with a critical friend.As for me, I've learned that I have a habit of offering a compliment but linking to the suggestion with the conjunction "but" - which negates the power of the compliment. I'm also going to need to do some work to remember beginning compliments with "you" and not "I think". I also was delighted to see the authors who had been through the peer conference check in with me ("Do you think I should rewrite this or just write this part on my draft?") -- how many times have teachers given students a writing suggestion and then notice it never makes its way in to the final copy?Having a valuable critical friend for my own teaching is not a luxury, it is a necessity. We learn from each other - just as the students do.