Reviewing Reviews: Using Multistage Peer Reviews to Provide Feedback and Improve Student Learning

A fundamental skill in engineering practice is providing and receiving feedback. However, this is not always explicitly incorporated in curriculums. In this study, 'metareview' tasks were incorporated into four courses within civil and environmental engineering. While the core stages of the meta-review process were consistent (peer review–review of feedback – reflection and correction), variations included different cohorts, discipline areas, assignment types, feedback types and marking structures. The process was evaluated using the feedback itself, student perceptions via surveys and teacher reflections. Thematic analysis of the feedback using generative AI identified key overall themes. Feedback most appreciated by peers was that which was specific, actionable, constructive and had a professional or supportive tone. The influence of expertise of those providing feedback showed higher technical engagement and critique from those more familiar with the topics, and more structural and presentation/audience based suggestions from those less familiar. However, both provided useful constructive feedback, and differences in assigned grades were not significant. Post activity evaluation showed significant improvements in assignment grades, with positive student perceptions. While facilitation of the second layer of the review process was challenging, our findings show that 'meta-review' type tasks can help support students in learning what effective feedback is.