Most teachers have tried peer review and been disappointed. Students swap papers, write great job at the top, and hand them back. Nothing improves, and everyone has wasted twenty minutes.

The reason is usually a lack of structure. Students do not know what to look for, and they are wary of criticizing friends. A clear workflow addresses both problems by giving reviewers specific tasks.

Holes is a good text for peer review because students share a common reference. Everyone knows the story, so reviewers can check whether evidence is accurate and whether the claim makes sense. That shared knowledge makes their feedback more valuable.

Done well, peer review also reduces the number of basic problems you have to comment on. If classmates catch missing evidence or weak claims, your feedback can focus on deeper issues. That is a real time savings.

The Workflow, Step by Step

Keep the process short and focused. Twenty to thirty minutes is enough if the tasks are clear. Assign each reviewer one job at a time rather than asking for a general opinion.

• Round one: the reviewer highlights the claim and checks that it is arguable
• Round two: the reviewer underlines each piece of evidence and marks any that seem unclear or inaccurate
• Round three: the reviewer circles one sentence of explanation and writes a question about it
• Round four: the reviewer writes one strength and one suggestion at the bottom
• Final step: the author writes a short note describing what they will revise

Train Students Before You Start

Model the process with an anonymous sample essay on Holes. Read it aloud, and show how you would handle each round. Students learn what useful feedback sounds like before they try it themselves.

Give them a few sentence starters for comments, such as "I understood your point when you..." or "I wanted more evidence about..." These starters keep feedback specific and kind. They also make it easier for shy students to participate.

Decide What You Grade

You can give a small completion grade for participation and grade the final essay only. Some teachers also grade the quality of the review, using a simple rubric. Either way, make clear that peer feedback matters.

Avoid grading students on how their peers scored them. That opens the door to friendship conflicts and unfairness. Keep the review a learning tool, not an evaluation.

Combine Peer Review With Teacher Feedback

Peer review works best as the first layer. After revisions, your feedback can address the deeper issues that classmates cannot see. Some teachers add a rubric-based check from GraideMind at the draft stage so students receive an additional round of guidance before the final submission.

Watch how students use the feedback. If they ignore it, adjust the process, perhaps by requiring a revision note. When they see that feedback leads to a better essay, they begin to trust the routine.