Learning through collaborative writing and refereeing: mimicking the professional journal review process in an undergraduate biomedical sciences course

Abstract

Introduction: Traditional methods of assessment such as examination tend to reinforce lower cognitive levels of learning including knowledge and comprehension. A key challenge in effective undergraduate education is how to better develop higher cognitive levels of learning including analysis, synthesis and evaluation that are critical aspects of professional competency for biomedical scientists. Method: The professional journal review process brings together many of the highest levels of cognitive ability: collaborative analysis and synthesis during writing, and evaluation and feedback during the review process. Here, we present our experience of mimicking the professional journal review process as the continuous assessment component during a semester-long biomedical sciences course at The University of Hong Kong. Findings: Students worked in collaborative groups to author a review article in an area of their interest related to the course content. The instructor acted as the editor – sending initial submission back to individual students to act as referees for blind peer evaluation and feedback. The students then responded to the feedback to submit a final version of the review. The instructor assessed the final review (with a focus on analysis and synthesis cognitive levels) and also assessed the student referee reports (with a focus on evaluation cognitive level). Conclusion: We summarise our experience of this approach to develop student learning through collaborative writing, including both instructor and student evaluation of advantages and pitfalls of this approach.