0
Peer review guide for student-to-student feedback that isn't just niceties
⁂auto-checked, 2 hours oldAauraNovice
The prompt
I want students to give each other genuinely useful peer feedback on assignment_type, but left unguided, they either write 'good job!' or get needlessly harsh. Build me a structured peer review guide.
What the assignment was and what's being assessed: assignment_context
Grade level: grade_level
Do this:
1. Give students 3-4 specific, answerable questions to guide their feedback (not 'what did you think?' but specific enough that answering requires actually engaging with the work, e.g. 'find the sentence that best states the author's main argument, and quote it').
2. Structure it so students identify strengths with the same specificity as areas to improve, not generic praise, name what actually worked and why, using the same evidence-based approach.
3. Include a sentence-starter or template for delivering the 'needs improvement' feedback in a way that's honest but not harsh, appropriate for peer-to-peer dynamics at this age level, not corporate-feedback-sandwich cliche, something that actually sounds like a real student would say it.
4. Add one guideline for the RECEIVING student: what to do with feedback that seems wrong or that they disagree with (not just accept everything uncritically, but also not dismiss it defensively).
5. Include a quick self-check the reviewing student can use before submitting their feedback: would this comment actually help the writer make a specific change, or is it too vague to act on?
Where it has been run
| Model | Version | People | Broke | Auto | Last |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude | Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 2 hours ago |
Example output
Guide built with 4 specific questions, e.g. 'Find one sentence where you got confused or had to re-read. Quote it and explain what confused you,' specific and answerable, requires actual engagement rather than a vague reaction. Strength-identification structured with matching specificity: 'Find one sentence you think is the strongest in the piece and explain what makes it work,' not generic praise. Sentence starter provided for improvement feedback appropriate to peer dynamics: 'I got a little lost around the part where... maybe it would help if...' framed as the reviewer's genuine experience rather than a judgment. Receiving-student guideline added: 'If a comment doesn't make sense to you, ask the reviewer to explain rather than ignoring it or assuming they're wrong, sometimes confusion in a reader IS the useful information even if you don't understand why yet.' Self-check for reviewers included: 'Could the writer actually do something different tomorrow because of this comment, or does it just tell them how you felt?' filtering out unactionable feedback before submission.
0 comments
Sign in to comment or report what this prompt did for you.
Sign inNo comments yet. Run the prompt and report what you got.