A challenge in teaching scientific communication: academic experience does not improve undergraduates’ ability to assess their or their peers’ writing

Abstract

Introducing undergraduates to the peer-review process helps them understand how scientific evidence is evaluated and communicated. In a large biology course, technical writing was taught through mock peer-review. Students learned to critique original research through a multistep framework, calibrating their assessment skills with class standards. We hypothesized students’ assessment of their own and their peers’ writing becomes more accurate as they gain academic experience, and that novice students are more overconfident in their writing abilities. Counter to many instructors’ assumptions, our results indicated that regardless of level of academic experience, students’ self-assessed grades were higher than peer-assessed grades (p < 0.01). Both self- and peer-assessed grades were significantly higher than the instructor’s grade (p < 0.01). Overall, the peer-review exercise was positively viewed by students. Most students found the peer-review process beneficial, and 88% reported taking it seriously, despite knowing they would receive instructor’s feedback at the final stage of the writing exercise. Ultimately, the peer-review process provides an effective way to teach technical writing to undergraduates, but instructors should not assume that returning students with greater academic experience are better judges of their own performance. This study illustrates that all students are equally challenged to accurately assess the quality of their own work.