This summer, several faculty members participated in CDIL’s working group, “Unlocking the Potential of Peer Feedback.” We asked them to share their thoughts on the group and their experiences developing their projects. I had a conversation with Erin Sheehy, part-time faculty member in the M.S in Leadership Program, which has been condensed and slightly edited.
Tell us about your course. What assignment did you choose to change? Why?
The timing of the Peer Feedback working group was perfect; I was in the middle of developing a new course for the MSL program at Woods titled “The Power of Strategic Storytelling.” The course explores the critical role narrative plays in shaping brand identities and driving consumer action. Key objectives include mastering storytelling principles, integrating narratives into marketing and communications strategies, applying audience research, and evaluating the ethical impact of stories.
Since this is a storytelling class, I wanted students to apply their learning through two major presentations: one at the midpoint and one for the final project. For the mid-semester assignment, students select a topic they are passionate about and use the principles from Chip and Dan Heath’s Made to Stick to deliver a compelling presentation.
Participating in the working group sparked an “Aha!” moment: if students provided peer feedback on these presentations, they wouldn’t just be applying principles to their own work—they would also learn to recognize and analyze those techniques in the work of others.
What did you decide to do for the course? How does the assignment work?
Because this was a brand-new course, adding peer feedback was a core feature I was able to build in from the ground up. Drawing on what I learned in the working group, I collaborated with Doreen Richards from CDIL to determine the best platform for post-class feedback.
We developed a dual-assignment structure in Canvas with two distinct rubrics: one for my formal grading and one specifically for peer feedback. To set the students up for success, I delivered a brief lecture on the value of constructive feedback. I used the metaphor of athletes and dancers receiving coaching to improve their craft and incorporated the “Playing Card Method”™ from LifeLabs Learning to give them a concrete framework for delivering their critiques.
The “Playing Card Method” associates card suits with actionable or non-actionable feedback. It’s a fun and clear way to help students better understand how to improve their feedback to peers.
(Image from “Playing Card Method” from LifeLabsLearning)
What was the outcome of the assignment for your students? Would you do anything differently going forward?
The results were excellent. By providing the feedback rubric ahead of time and making the peer review a requirement for their own presentation grade, I noticed students were more engaged. They weren’t just waiting for their turn to speak; they were actively identifying the elements of compelling storytelling in their classmates’ work.
Beyond storytelling, this exercise helped students practice a vital leadership skill: providing empathetic, constructive feedback. This aligns directly with our program outcome of building collaborative relationships and fostering teamwork. In the future, I plan to maintain this structure as it reinforces both the subject matter and professional development.
Do you have any advice for faculty experimenting with peer feedback?
I have three main pieces of advice.
- Be specific with your assignment. Create a detailed rubric that highlights the exact elements you want students to focus on. It removes the guesswork and leads to higher-quality feedback.
- Clearly explain and manage the tech. The Canvas “workaround” Doreen helped me with(creating a second assignment) works well, but it requires clear instructions so students understand why they see two different entries.
- Front-load the “Why” for students. A mini-lecture on how to give feedback and why it is so crucial sets the stage and provides students with a roadmap, ensuring the critiques remain constructive and professional.
