SWoRD [scaffolded writing and rewriting in the disciplines], a web-based application developed by Cho and Schunn. It has students respond to writing by rating it and giving comments in three areas: prose flow, logic, and insight. Cho, Schunn and a number of others have studied the differences between student and instructor comments. They have also run validation studies trying to determine how many student reviews are needed to be as valid as instructor comments. Their conclusion is five to six.
Cho, Kwangsu, Schunn, Christian D., and Wilson, Roy W. (2006). Validity and reliability of scaffolded peer assessment of writing from instructor and student perspectives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98.4: 891-901.
Studied peer-generated writing grades of 708 students across 16 courses and 4 universities using a particular approach to scaffolding – SWoRD [scaffolded writing and rewriting in the disciplines]. This study includes the peer review scoring rubric that has students score others’ papers on three dimensions: prose flow, logic, and insight. They find that five to six students’ comments about papers are at least as valid as an instructor’s comments.
A list of publications on the SWoRD tool can be found at:
http://www.lrdc.pitt.edu/schunn/sword/publications.html
A pedagogical introduction to using SWoRD in writing classes (including some assignments from psychology, history, physics, and English education:
Data Database 