"The New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) is an African Union (AU) mandated programme whose main focus is to address key social, economic, and political issues for the African continent. Within the NEPAD programme and vision is the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), which has been described as a system of self-assessment, constructive peer dialogue, persuasion, and sharing of experience among member states of the African Union. The APRM is the execution mechanism for NEPAD, whose mandate is to monitor the preformance of states in different programme areas including human rights. The mandate on human rights monitoring falls within the political governance component of the NEPAD Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance (NEPAD Declaration). The APRM has been introduced with a human rights monitoring component in a context where there already exist a number of other human rights mechanisms and institutions such as the African Commission. The proposed processes of the APRM in monitoring human rights in some ways resemble those of the African Commission while at the same time there are major differences between these mechanisms. For example, while the Africa Commission is a quasi-judicial body, which engages in legal processes, the APRM is a political process where heads of state are among the main actors. Some analysts have expressed the view that the creation of the APRM as a political process adds a vital component to the human rights monitoring in Africa which, since the creation of the African Commission, has remained purely legal and thus had limited success in ensuring human rights protection in Africa. While some have shared their doubt over the added value and role of the APRM in human rights monitoring, others have hailed it for providing a forum where heads of state will make political commitments for the protection of human rights. In this regard, the aim of this study is to analyse the role that the APRM will play in human rights monitoring in Africa. This analysis is done in relation to the work that is being done by the African Commission and the challenges that it has confonted over the years. In analysing the role of the APRM in human rights monitoring, this study unpacks the concept of peer review and analyse its practical implementation in Africa, especially in the field of human rights. This study also explores the implications on human rights protection and promotion of the co-existence of the African Commission and the APRM. ... Chapter 1 states the research questions/hypothesis, objectives of the study, relevance of study and literature review. It also looks at the scope and limitations of the study. Chapter 2 gives background information to the concept of peer review, how it is used in ensuring compliance with set standards by states and organisation. An analysis of the use of peer review by other international organisations is done. Further it gives an analysis of the APRM with a specific focus on its human rights monitoring role. Chapter 3 provides a brief background of the African Commission, its mandate and the challenges confronting it in its work. Thereafter there is an analysis of the challenges of the APRM in human rights monitoring and protection. Furthermore, the chapter critically analyses and evaluates peer review and its application in human rights monitoring in Africa. This chapter also highlights the similarities, overlaps and differences in the work and mandate of the APRM and the African Commission. Chapter 4 is the concluding chapter, which also provides recommendations for enhancing the efficiency and the co-operation of the APRM and the African Commission." -- Chapter 1. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2003. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

„Wurzeln und Flügel“ sollten Kinder bekanntlich von ihren Eltern bekommen um Bindung und Freiheit zu erfahren. Möchte man engagierte forschungsorientierte Gruppenlernprozesse gestalten spielen diese beiden Aspekte ebenfalls eine zentrale Rolle. Die Teilnehmenden solcher Prozesse erarbeiten sich gemeinsam den Zugang zu einem Themengebiet, finden sich in Gruppen zusammen, um sich gegenseitig zu unterstützen und bekommen durch die Auflösung der Seminarstruktur die Freiheit, sich intensiv mit den selbst gewählten Schwerpunkten auseinanderzusetzen. Sie teilen Erfahrungen und Erkenntnisse mit der Gesamtgruppe und profitieren von einem umfassenden Peer-Review im Prozess der Verschriftlichung der Ergebnisse. Einblicke in die Planung, die Durchführung und vor allem die umfassende Evaluation eines solchen „blended“ gestalteten Seminars der Kunstdidaktik (Fachdidaktische Kritik digitaler Arbeitsmittel im Kunstunterricht) bilden in diesem Workshop die Basis für Diskussionen, praktische Überlegungen und kleine Anwendungen.

Writing research articles in English is a common requirement in doctoral studies in the natural sciences; however, learning to write the research article genre is challenging, particularly in a foreign language (L2). A potential resource for learning the RA genre is giving and receiving peer review. L2 writers at the undergraduate level have been found to benefit from PR, but less  is known about the learning of L2 writers at the graduate level who are writing for specialized discourse communities. The aim of this dissertation is to describe how a group of L2 doctoral students in the natural sciences used online peer review in a research writing course. Inductive analysis was used to categorize the kinds of review comments that 11 course participants gave and received. In another study, three students’ revised texts were analyzed in detail to see how they used peer comments. To explore  students’ perceptions of using the PR activity, pre and post course interviews were inductively analyzed.  Findings were interpreted using Vygotskian constructs of learning in order to see where mediation likely occurs.  The combined studies suggest that reviewers adopted roles that influenced what they noticed, analyzed and languaged. As a group, they focused on the lexical and syntactic precision of peers’ texts, as well as the organization, cohesion, voice, stance and research knowledge. Writers used the intent of the review comments approximately 40 percent of the time, but this usage reflected only a small portion of the writers’ revision activities that occurred in response to review.  Other activities included composing, re-writing, investigating, interviewing outsiders, and re-ordering the texts.  Writers found precision and organizational comments most useful. Findings from these combined studies indicate that peer review can be a potentially powerful tool for doctoral students to familiarize themselves with discipline-specific research articles.

published_or_final_version / abstract / Education / Master / Master of Education

Thesis (M.A.)--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Humanities, International Relations, 2013 / The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) was established on 9 March 2003 by the NEPAD Heads of State and Government Implementation Committee (HSGIC) as an innovative instrument to improve governance in Africa. The APRM is a voluntary mechanism which enables African leaders to periodically monitor and review each other’s governance performance thus promoting peer-dialogue and peer-learning. The rationale behind the establishment of the APRM is the realization that socio-economic development and good governance are inextricably linked. Furthermore, for NEPAD to achieve its goal of placing African countries on a path of sustainable growth and development, it is imperative to ensure that an environment of good political and economic governance is created. In 2013, the APRM will mark ten years since its inception. This significant milestone provides scholars interested in governance and development issues on the continent with an opportunity to assess the gains (successes) which have been registered and the weaknesses regarding the implementation of this innovative African initiative. It is against this backdrop that this study undertakes to perform a retrospective analysis of the APRM since its inception in 2003. The study identifies as assesses the achievements and challenges of the APRM over the decade (2003-2013) as well as provides recommendations aimed at overcoming the challenges, strengthening the Mechanism as well as positioning it to effectively and efficiently carry out its mandate. The study establishes that there exists a positive correlation between good governance and development. The study further illustrates that the APRM has achieved much in its relatively short time of existence. Lessons have been learnt. However, as is the case with any new initiative, the Mechanism has experienced some teething problems (challenges) that ought to be addressed if the APRM is to effectively deliver on its mandate and improve the quality of governance across African countries. In essence, the APRM have proven itself to be a tool that holds immense potential for improving governance on the African continent.

Nesta tese descrevemos uma atividade didática implementada em disciplina de Comunicação Científica ministrada em Curso de Bacharelado em Química da Universidade de São Paulo que permitiu aos alunos conhecer a dinâmica do processo de peer review (PPR) a partir da participação no processo em si. O PPR foi estruturado em três fases: na primeira fase os alunos leram um artigo científico sobre biodiesel e escreveram um texto argumentativo com base nas vantagens e desvantagens concernentes à temática nele abordada; na segunda fase forneceram feedback sobre a produção textual de colegas; e na terceira fase reelaboraram o texto original a partir do feedback recebido. Ou seja, os alunos desempenharam o papel de avaliador e de avaliado e nenhum deles havia participado anteriormente de um PPR. Este estudo investigou a habilidade dos alunos na realização de ações inerentes ao PPR e as suas concepções sobre o processo, assim como a contribuição dele resultante na produção dos textos argumentativos. Adotamos a Análise de Conteúdo na investigação dos dados referentes às concepções dos alunos sobre o PPR e às suas habilidades na realização de ações inerentes ao processo. O Modelo de Argumento de Toulmin e o Modelo de Análise de Argumentação Aplicável a Processos de Resolução de Questões Sociocientíficas foram empregados na investigação sobre a qualidade dos argumentos existentes nos textos argumentativos iniciais e finais. Os resultados obtidos apontam habilidade satisfatória dos alunos no fornecimento de feedback de natureza construtiva aos colegas, porém indicam também habilidade restrita com relação à associação direta de julgamentos negativos existentes no feedback a propostas de alterações no texto avaliado. Do ponto de vista estrutural, os textos finais continham argumentos mais elaborados do que os textos iniciais. Os argumentos se baseiam em evidências que garantem a confiabilidade das informações apresentadas e foram construídos a partir de uma visão multifacetada sobre a temática biodiesel. As percepções dos alunos sobre a atividade didática indicam que a experiência vivenciada foi positiva e que favoreceu o entendimento sobre a referida temática e sobre a dinâmica do PPR, assim como o desenvolvimento do pensamento crítico e da habilidade de argumentação. O presente trabalho poderá subsidiar o direcionamento de futuras pesquisas na área de Educação em Química, relacionadas ao desenvolvimento de propostas didáticas pautadas no PPR. / In this thesis, we describe a didactic activity implemented in the Scientific Communication subject taught in the B.Sc. degree in Chemistry at the University of São Paulo that enabled students to learn about the dynamics of the peer review process (PRP) by taking part in the process itself. The PRP was structured in three phases: in the first phase, students read a scientific article about biodiesel and wrote an argumentative text based on the advantages and disadvantages concerning the issue addressed in it; in the second phase, they provided feedback on their classmates\' text production; and in the third phase, they rewrote the original text based on the feedback given. In other words, the students played the role of evaluator and the person being evaluated and none of them had previously taken part in a PRP. This study investigated the ability of students to perform actions inherent to the PRP and their concepts regarding the process, as well as their contribution resulting from the production of argumentative texts. We adopted the Content Analysis when investigating data on students\' concepts of the PRP and their skills in performing actions found in the process. The Toulmin Pattern Argument (TAP) and The Argumentation Model of Analysis Applicable to Processes of Resolution of Socio-Scientific Issues were used to research the quality of arguments found in the initial and final argumentative texts. The results show satisfactory ability of students in providing constructive feedback to their classmates, but also indicate a restricted ability regarding the direct association of negative judgments found in the feedback to propose changes in the evaluated text. From a structural point of view, the final texts included more elaborate arguments than the initial texts. The arguments are based on evidence that ensures the reliability of the information presented and were constructed from a multifaceted view on the topic of biodiesel. The students\' perceptions about the didactic activity show that the experience was positive and that it helped to understand the topic and the PRP dynamics, as well as the development of critical thinking and reasoning skills. This work could support the direction of future research in Chemistry Education related to the development of educational proposals based on PRP.

This study explores learners’ online peer review practices during a four-week second language writing project. The project was developed at the college level, in a multi-section upper-level Spanish writing course. Using theories relevant to second language acquisition and second language writing the goals of the study were multiple: (1) to identify the types of comments students used and explore peer review in terms of the givers’ and receivers’ roles, (2) to examine students’ attitudes and self-perceptions about peer review, and (3) to develop an understanding of how students’ attitudes and self-perceptions may influence their feedback-giving procedures. The three goals were addressed using different methods of inquiry, and the findings obtained in the first phase guided the analysis that took place during the second phase. In the quantitative phase, the analyses of data sources (e.g., feedback comments given and received and students’ written drafts) show that giving feedback is a better predictor of final performance than receiving feedback. This principle of learning by reviewing is most evident when students offer feedback that identifies problems, gives a justification, or explains positive elements in the peers’ text. The qualitative phase builds on the quantitative results: it zooms in to the role of the feedback giver to further explore participants’ attitudes and perceptions towards peer review. The analyses of data sources (e.g., pre-study questionnaire, participants’ interviews and peer review simulation activity, and the teacher-researcher reflective journal) show that students do self-position themselves into a specific feedback-giving role. Moreover, the study also confirms that students’ perceptions regarding their attitudes and the comments they give to peers accurately corroborate their actual peer review performance. By combining both methods of inquiry, quantitative and qualitative methods, this study further examines the specific procedures that two case study students follow when offering feedback to a peer. In particular, the procedures for offering problem identification, suggestion, and explanation of the praise comments are analyzed in detail. The results are further interpreted through the lenses of the feedback-giving roles assumed by each of the case study students. Based on the overall findings, the study suggests broadening the notion of feedback: from a unilateral perspective in which comments are addressed from feedback givers to receivers, to a multilateral perspective in which the comments offered are meant to benefit both feedback givers and feedback receivers. The study ends with pedagogical implications for second language learning, implications for the field of second language acquisition, and perspectives for future research.

Scientific reasoning and writing skills are ubiquitous processes in science and therefore common goals of science curricula, particularly in higher education. Providing the individualized feedback necessary for the development of these skills is often costly in terms of faculty time, particularly in large science courses common at research universities. Past educational research literature suggests that the use of peer review may accelerate students' scientific reasoning skills without a concurrent demand on faculty time per student. Peer review contains many elements of effective pedagogy such as peer-peer collaboration, repeated practice at evaluation and critical thinking, formative feedback, multiple contrasting examples, and extensive writing. All of these pedagogies may contribute to improvement in students' scientific reasoning. The effect of peer review on scientific reasoning was assessed using three major data sources: student performance on written lab reports, student performance on an objective Scientific Reasoning Test (Lawson, 1978) and student perceptions of the process of peer review in scientific community as well as the classroom. In addition, the need to measure student performance across multiple science classes resulted in the development of a Universal Rubric for Laboratory Reports. The reliability of this instrument and its effect on the grading consistency of graduate teaching assistants were also tested. Further, application of the Universal Rubric to student laboratory reports across multiple biology classes revealed that the Rubric is further useful as a programmatic assessment tool. The Rubric highlighted curricular gaps and strengths as well as measuring student achievement over time. / This study demonstrated that even university freshman were effective and consistent peer reviewers and produced feedback that resulted in meaningful improvement in their science writing. Use of peer review accelerated the development of students' scientific reasoning abilities as measured both by laboratory reports (n = 142) and by the Scientific Reasoning Test (n = 389 biology majors) and this effect was stronger than the impact of several years of university coursework. The structure of the peer review process and the structure of the assignments used to generate the science laboratory reports had notable influence on student performance however. Improvements in laboratory reports were greatest when the peer review process emphasized the generation of concrete and evaluative written feedback and when assignments explicitly incorporated the rubric criteria. The rubric was found to be reliable in the hands of graduate student teaching assistants (using generalizability analysis, g = 0.85) regardless of biological course content (three biology courses, total n = 142 student papers). Reliability increased as the number of criteria incorporated into the assignment increased. Consistent use of Universal Rubric criteria in undergraduate courses taught by graduate teaching assistants produced laboratory report scores with reliability values similar to those reported for other published rubrics and well above the reliabilities reported for professional peer review. / Lastly, students were overwhelmingly positive about peer review (83% average positive response, n = 1,026) reporting that it improved their writing, editing, researching and critical thinking skills. Interestingly, students reported that the act of giving feedback was equally useful to receiving feedback. Students connected the use of peer review in the classroom to its role in the scientific community and characterized peer review as a valuable skill they wished to acquire in their development as scientists. Peer review is thus an effective pedagogical strategy for improving student scientific reasoning skills. Specific recommendations for classroom implementation and use of the Universal Rubric are provided. Use of laboratory reports for assessing student scientific reasoning and application of the Universal Rubric across multiple courses, especially for programmatic assessment, is also recommended.

In my thesis, I set out to study academic peer reviews in the hope of clarifying the experts’ views on what qualities and qualifications are desirable when appointing or promoting scholars within History of Science. I also investigate whether or not these views change over the years, as I have studied opinions written between 1980 and 2010. I use a qualitative method of analysis, in which I study what words in the peer reviews are used to describe certain values, and how these words relate to the historical and political background of History of Science in Sweden. My research indicates that academic experts are starting to adapt their opinions to the change in educational politics that has taken place during the second half of the 20th century. The Swedish system of academic peer review is also showing signs of possible decline in certain areas. However, the change in what qualities and qualifications are highly esteemed by the experts has, in many ways, been slow and many values remain the same throughout the studied years.

This study examines the ways in which frequency and reflexivity affect student engagement with the peer feedback process. I study the peer e-feedback sessions conducted via My Reviewers in a pilot model of Composition 2 at a large research university in the southeast in order to determine if an increased focus on the peer feedback activity might enhance the effectiveness of the process. Through textual analysis and survey results, I determine that an increased focus on electronic peer feedback along with an increase in frequency and reflexivity helps to minimize some common criticisms of the peer feedback process. In this pilot model, the instructor plays an increased role in the peer feedback process and students are also asked to create a detailed revision plan. These elements of the process help to address the criticism that students have difficulty addressing the validity of peer feedback and minimizes the likelihood that students will incorporate incorrect feedback into their revision plans (Ferris; Stanley). Additionally, students in this study demonstrate an increased understanding of the purpose of the feedback process through an increase in revision-oriented comments as they gain more experience with the activity.