Examining the Effectiveness of Peer Review in Improving Students’ Writing Performance: A Systematic Literature Review
Abstract
Writing is a complex academic skill that requires not only linguistic proficiency but also higher-order cognitive abilities such as organization, coherence, and critical thinking. Peer review, in which students provide feedback on each other’s writing, has been widely promoted as a strategy to enhance writing performance. This systematic literature review examines empirical studies published between 2020 and 2025 to evaluate the effectiveness of peer review in improving students’ writing across diverse educational contexts. A total of 25 studies were included, encompassing secondary, undergraduate, and postgraduate learners in EFL, ESL, and first-language writing settings. Findings indicate that peer review positively impacts higher-order writing skills, including content development, organization, coherence, and revision practices, while improvements in grammar and mechanics were more variable. Structured implementation, such as the use of rubrics, peer review training, and guided feedback, was associated with more consistent improvements. Students generally reported positive perceptions, citing increased engagement, motivation, and awareness of writing quality, although challenges such as feedback reliability and cultural hesitancy in critique were noted. Overall, the review highlights that peer review is an effective pedagogical tool when appropriately scaffolded and integrated with teacher guidance. Implications suggest that educators should employ structured peer review practices to foster collaboration, reflection, and critical engagement with writing. Future research should investigate longitudinal outcomes, optimal peer review configurations, and strategies to enhance feedback quality.
Keywords
Download Options
Introduction
Writing is widely recognized as one of the most complex language skills to master, particularly for students in academic contexts. It requires not only linguistic knowledge such as grammar and vocabulary, but also higher-order cognitive skills including organization, coherence, and critical thinking (Rumapea et al., 2025; Sinaga et al., 2025). As a result, many students struggle to produce effective written texts, and improving writing performance remains a major concern for educators across disciplines and educational levels (Hyland, 2003; Richards & Renandya, 2002; Girsang et al., 2025).
Traditional approaches to teaching writing have often emphasized teacher-centered feedback, where instructors are the primary source of evaluation and correction. While teacher feedback is valuable, it can be time-consuming, limited in scope, and may not always lead to meaningful revisions by students (Ferris, 2003; Simanjuntak et al., 2025; Herman et al., 2025). These limitations have spurred interest in alternative, learner-centered strategies that promote autonomy and active engagement in the writing process.
One instructional approach that has gained considerable attention is peer review. Peer review refers to a process in which students evaluate and provide feedback on each other’s written work based on specific criteria or guidelines (Liu & Hansen, 2002). Grounded in social constructivist theory, peer review emphasizes learning as a collaborative process where knowledge is constructed through interaction and dialogue among learners (Vygotsky, 1978). Furthermore, from the perspective of discourse community theory, peer review can be seen as a socialization process through which students begin to internalize the conventions, norms, and expectations of academic writing genres, thereby facilitating their entry into scholarly discourse communities (Bizzell, 1992; Bartholomae, 1986).
Previous research suggests that peer review can offer several pedagogical benefits. By reviewing peers’ work, students may develop greater awareness of writing conventions, improve their critical reading skills, and reflect more deeply on their own writing (Falchikov, 2001). Additionally, receiving feedback from peers may help students identify weaknesses in their writing that they might overlook when relying solely on teacher feedback (Nicol, Thomson, & Breslin, 2014).
Despite these potential advantages, the effectiveness of peer review in improving students’ writing performance has been debated. Some studies report positive outcomes, such as improved text quality, increased motivation, and enhanced revision practices (Min, 2006; Cho & MacArthur, 2010; Herman et al., 2024). However, other studies highlight challenges, including students’ lack of confidence in providing feedback, variability in feedback quality, and cultural factors that influence peer interaction (Nelson & Carson, 1998; Hu, 2005).
Furthermore, existing research on peer review spans diverse educational contexts, learner populations, and implementation methods. Differences in training, feedback modes (oral or written), group size, and assessment criteria may lead to inconsistent findings across studies. As a result, it becomes difficult for educators and researchers to draw clear conclusions about the overall effectiveness of peer review as a writing instructional strategy.
Given the growing body of research and the mixed findings reported in the literature, a systematic literature review is necessary to synthesize existing evidence in a comprehensive and structured manner. A systematic review allows for the identification of research trends, methodological patterns, and gaps in the literature, providing a clearer understanding of how and under what conditions peer review contributes to students’ writing performance (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006).
Therefore, this systematic literature review aims to examine the effectiveness of peer review in improving students’ writing performance. By analyzing empirical studies published in relevant academic contexts, this review seeks to provide insights for educators, curriculum designers, and future researchers regarding the pedagogical and cultural value of peer review in writing instruction.
Conclusion
This systematic literature review examined empirical studies published between 2020 and 2025 on the effectiveness of peer review in improving students’ writing performance. The findings indicate that peer review is generally effective in enhancing higher-order writing skills, such as content development, organization, coherence, and revision practices. Structured implementation, including clear guidelines, rubrics, and training, was consistently associated with more positive outcomes, highlighting the importance of scaffolding and support in peer review activities.
In addition to improving writing performance, peer review was found to foster students’ metacognitive skills, including self-assessment, critical thinking, and reflective learning. Students generally perceived peer review positively, reporting increased engagement, motivation, and awareness of writing quality. However, challenges such as concerns about feedback accuracy, reluctance to critique peers, and cultural factors were identified, emphasizing the need for carefully designed peer review processes and supportive classroom environments.
Overall, the review confirms that peer review is a valuable pedagogical strategy for writing instruction across diverse educational contexts, particularly when integrated with teacher guidance. Educators are encouraged to adopt structured peer review practices that promote collaboration, reflection, and constructive feedback. Future research should explore longitudinal effects, optimal implementation strategies, and methods to enhance feedback reliability to further maximize the potential of peer review in fostering not only improved writing performance but also more collaborative and critical academic cultures.
References
- Bruffee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the “conversation of mankind.” College English, 46(7), 635–652.
- Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response on ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241.
- Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1–19.
- Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328–338.
- Falchikov, N. (2001). Learning together: Peer tutoring in higher education. RoutledgeFalmer.
- Ferris, D. R. (2003). Response to student writing: Implications for second language students. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Girsang, S. E. E., Tumanggor, E. A. P., Metboki, Y., Herryani, H., Herman, H., Syathroh, I. L., Fitriadi, A., & Saputra, N. (2025). Empowering students’ ability in writing descriptive texts through Point Illustration Explanation (PIE) strategy: A case on teaching strategy. Studies in Media and Communication, 13(1), 366–377. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v13i1.7466
- Herman, H., Siallagan, H., Fatmawati, E., Sherly, S., Ngongo, M., Lubis, H. T., & Syathroh, I. L. (2025). Exploring the emerging domain of research on media for teaching learning process: A case on improving reading comprehension skills. Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 14(4), 354–366.
- Herman, H., Shaumiwaty, S., Sipayung, R. W., Solissa, E. M., Fatmawati, E., Girsang, S. E. E., & Saputra, N. (2024). A Systemic Functional Linguistic approach to improve students’ ability in writing English text. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(4), 1822–1830.
- Hu, G. (2005). Using peer review with Chinese ESL student writers. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 321–342.
- Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
- Liu, J., & Hansen, J. G. (2002). Peer response in second language writing classrooms. University of Michigan Press.
- Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18(1), 30–43.
- Min, H.-T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141.
- Nelson, G. L., & Carson, J. G. (1998). ESL students’ perceptions of effectiveness in peer response groups. Journal of Second Language Writing, 7(2), 113–131.
- Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102–122.
- Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43(5), 591–614.
- Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Blackwell Publishing.
- Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. Cambridge University Press.
- Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT Journal, 59(1), 23–30.
- Rumapea, E. L. B., Kapoh, R. J., Novianti, C., Yuniarsih, Y., Harita, I. P. S., Herman, H., & Saputra, N. (2025). Investigating the use of comic strips media on developing students' narrative writing skills: A case study in language teaching. *Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 17*(2), 2526–2536. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i2.7345
- Simanjuntak, V. H. M., Sari, I., Kamengko, D. F., Syathroh, I. L., Manurung, E., Herman, H., & Thao, N. V. (2025). Investigating the use of contextual teaching and learning on students’ writing recount text: A case on teaching method. Indonesian EFL Journal, 11(2), 323–332.
- Sinaga, A. W., Herman, H., & Situmeang, S. A. (2025). The effect of storyboard on students’ ability in writing narrative text at the tenth grade of SMA Swasta Kampus Nommensen Pematangsiantar. EDUCTUM: Journal Research, 4(5), 135–141.
- Tsui, A. B. M., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
- Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200.