A different method of teaching peer review systems.

@article{Lightfoot1998ADM,
  title={A different method of teaching peer review systems.},
  author={Jonathan Lightfoot},
  journal={The American journal of physiology},
  year={1998},
  volume={274 6 Pt 2},
  pages={
          S57-61
        }
}
  • J. Lightfoot
  • Published 1 June 1998
  • Education
  • The American journal of physiology
Students often have difficulty grasping the advantages of the various peer review systems used in scientific publishing. In the described exercise, students are assigned a current study and then write three two-page critiques of the article. The three critiques occur at different times in the semester, and thus the students have differing knowledge bases. The critiques are then assigned to other students for peer review using the double-blind, single-blind, or open review systems. After the… 
View on PubMed
directory.umm.ac.id
21 Citations
Background Citations
10

Figures and Tables from this paper

21 Citations

Citation Type

Citation Type

Teaching peer review and the process of scientific writing.
  • W. Guilford
  • Education
    Advances in physiology education
  • 2001
TLDR
This work presents a detailed method for teaching undergraduate students the full scientific publishing process, including anonymous peer review, during the process of writing a "term paper" and results in improved grades, much higher quality in the final manuscript, greater objectivity in grading, and improved understanding of the importance of peer review.
Learning Nature of Science Concepts through Online Peer Review of Student Research Reports 1
Through structured science experiments followed by online peer review of their research reports, undergraduates can experience science as a collaborative process of investigation rather than a static…
Peer Portal: Quality enhancement in thesis writing using self-managed peer review on a mass scale
TLDR
A way forward in terms of improving peer reviews is outlined: 1) development of a peer wizard system and 2) rating of received peer reviews based on the quality categories created in this study.
Teaching undergraduates the process of peer review: learning by doing.
  • P. Rangachari
  • Psychology, Education
    Advances in physiology education
  • 2010
TLDR
An active approach allowed undergraduates in Health Sciences to learn the dynamics of peer review at first hand and recognized the individual steps in the standard peer review, appreciated the complexities involved, and got a first-hand experience of some of the inherent variabilities involved.
Manuscript peer review: a helpful checklist for students and novice referees.
TLDR
These guidelines are presented in the hope that they will serve as a helpful resource for students and other novice reviewers when critiquing scientific manuscripts.
Student peer review decisions on submitted manuscripts are as stringent as faculty peer reviewers.
TLDR
Statistics revealed that graduate students are just as stringent in the peer review process as established reviewers, and faculty reviewers evaluated manuscripts equally regardless of submission type.
Journal of Information Literacy
This paper outlines a creative Wikipedia-based project developed by the University of Kansas (KU) Libraries and the KU Biology Department. Inspired by the tenets of open pedagogy, the purpose of this…
Doing peer review and receiving feedback: impact on scientific literacy and writing skills.
TLDR
In conclusion, peer review is an effective teaching/learning approach for improving undergraduate Human Physiology majors' knowledge, skills, and attitudes regarding science and scientific writing.
Referencing Science: Teaching Undergraduates to Identify, Validate, and Utilize Peer-Reviewed Online Literature
Impact Statement ABSTRACT Accessibility of online scientific literature continues to expand due to the advent of scholarly databases and search engines. Studies have shown that undergraduates favor…
ICT-supported peer interaction among learners in Bachelor's and Master's thesis courses
...
1
2
3
...

References

SHOWING 1-2 OF 2 REFERENCES
The philosophical basis of peer review and the suppression of innovation.
TLDR
The fundamental purpose of peer review in the biomedical sciences must be consistent with that of medicine itself, to cure sometimes, to relieve often, to comfort always.
The effects of blinding on the quality of peer review. A randomized trial.
TLDR
The study shows that, in the setting of blinded peer review, blinding improves the quality of reviews and that research on the effects of peer review is possible.