Mike+Horn+Chronicles

Mike has done one round of peer editing with sensory paper. High interest papers have more success Used Chrissy and Ellen's peer editing sheet---went well, students were more on-task

CS: Used a new checklist, contents made by peers were not always made. Is Mike seeing that? She is finding edits harder on GoogleDocs than on hard copies. MH asks students to copy to Word instead. Students would choose to do comments online, but they are missing a lot.

JZ: Students need practice revising. Take smaller chunks. Have students hand in just one change on old and new drafts.

CS: Should students sign off on changes or have students hand it back to the reviewer KM: Ask students to rationale why they ignored a peer's suggestion MS: Kids this age want to get it done.

MH: Would like to try Jack's idea of taking writing line by line.

The second piece of writing that Mike is using in his research is a dialogue piece.

The answers that Mike is looking for in the peer editing sheets aren't there yet, but he is encouraged and has made a concerted effort to slow down and take some more class time, as well as aligned them with the learning targets.

He will solicit comments from students on how peer editing can be improved.

Mike Horn**
 * How Can We Improve the Peer-Editing Process?
 * Monday, Dec. 14th**


 * I. Review Conversation Paper Unit**


 * II. Edit Paper use Checkmark (I get it/good) ! (Great Sentence) ? (I have a question/Something seems wrong)**


 * III. Discuss Problems with Paper in relation to targets**


 * IV. View Peer-Edited Copy**


 * V. Student Response to Peer-editing.**


 * VI. Group Response to peer-editing.**