One of my classes has students from disciplines all across the U. Quite a bit of the in-class work is peer reviewing - always an interesting dynamic to watch.
I'm used to being evaluated often (and harshly) because of my design school background, but I think that in a more academic setting, people are not used to it (they've always been A students and "good at school" else they wouldn't be here) and they are amazingly defensive.
As a reviewer, I get lots of responses like "oh, but the way I did it is the way it's done in MY field" even if I am suggesting something non-discipline-related, like better use of white space on the page. As a reviewee, I hear "I like your work, but my discipline is totally different than yours and I would never approach this assignment the way you have, so I don't really have anything to say about your work." Um, thanks?
Then, in conversations with the students I grade for, there is a lot of defensive explaining of "but I meant this..." with no realization that if you didn't WRITE it, the reader has no hope of getting that meaning. I like the way we did reviews in my creative writing class: the writer has to sit there and be totally quiet while the rest of the class critiques the work as if he/she were not even there.
In my field, which is supposed to thrive on intelligent questioning and the free exchange of ideas and critiques, people ask for peer review, and then they get pissed off when you actually suggest how they could improve their work. I have met very few people who are open to critiques with the possibility that someone else might have something useful or perceptive to say about their work.
Faculty, too, say they want open and informed disagreement in class - but they really just want you to confirm their own ideologies in your own words.
Funny, isn't it? - the place that should have the most dissent or critique just isn't producing it.
Posted by otto0114 at November 6, 2005 10:44 AM