Peer review can be a valuable learning activity, but the built-in tools in Canvas work best when the process is kept simple and structured. Moreover, the peer review process works best when instructors refrain from using automatic settings and instead manually set up each peer review assignment. Indeed, over-reliance on the automatic assign feature is the source of most peer feedback issues. This guide outlines a reliable approach that minimizes common issues and supports meaningful student feedback.
Key Recommendation
For the most consistent results, assign peer reviews manually after the assignment due date has passed.
While Canvas offers automatic assignment, it depends on all students submitting on time. In practice, late or missing submissions often lead to incomplete or uneven peer review assignments. Manual assignment allows you to work from the actual set of submissions and avoids these issues. By taking the manual approach, you will be able to control variables much more easily and avoid having to fix problems associated with the automation's functionality, saving you precious time.
This approach in a nutshell:
- Assign peer reviews manually after the due date
- Use a short, student-friendly rubric
- Require brief, focused feedback
- Set clear expectations for late submissions
Why The Manual Approach Works Best
Manually assigning peer reviews after the due date helps you do the following:
- Ensure all assigned reviews are based on completed submissions
- Distribute reviews evenly across students
- Reduce the need for reassignments and troubleshooting
- Provide a clearer and more predictable process for students
Keep in mind that while manual assignment requires some setup time, it typically reduces follow-up work later.
Recommended Workflow
1. Post Clear Deadlines
- Submission Due Date: This is the due date for the assignment and the deadline for students to be included in peer review. Set the due date in the assignment's settings in Canvas or via the "Assign To" feature, which you can find in the three dots (more) button on items listed in Canvas modules or in the assignments area of the course.
- Peer Review Due Date: In writing on the assignment page, you will specify the later date for completing reviews. Since there is no cutoff date programmed for peer reviews, you will have to enforce this manually regardless of how you use the peer review tool.
You will need to communicate this workflow to students via your syllabus, announcements, and instructions on the assignment page for full coverage.
Only submissions turned in by the due date are guaranteed to receive peer review.
2. Wait Until the Due Date Passes
Do not assign peer reviews until you have all the possible submissions. This is better than assuming students will submit on time and then dealing with giving them additional attempts.
- Review which students have submitted
- Confirm you have a complete pool of work for review
3. Manually Assign Peer Reviews
With the due date passed and a confirmed majority of participants having submitted their work, you can manually assign the peer reviews based on your instructional goals. Again, this manual process saves you from having to perform fixes, which are usually manual maneuvers performed under stress.
- Assign each student the appropriate number of peers (e.g., 1–2 reviews each)
- Ensure each submission receives at least one review
4. Use a Lean, Student-Centered Rubric
In Canvas LMS, any rubric attached to an assignment is used by both the instructor and students during peer review. This means it is not practical to create a detailed, instructor-only grading rubric for these assignments.
Instead, design a single, streamlined rubric that works for both purposes. This approach reduces student workload during peer review while still giving you a structured framework for grading.
A lean rubric should:
- Include 3–5 criteria maximum
- Use clear, student-friendly language
- Focus on the most important elements of the assignment
- Limit scoring levels (e.g., “Meets expectations” / “Needs improvement”)
- See the example simplified rubric below!
Sample Rubric: Scientific Writing (Article Abstract)
Assignment Context:
Students write a 150–250 word abstract summarizing a scientific article or study.
| Criteria | Meets Expectations (2 pts) | Needs Improvement (1 pt) |
|---|---|---|
| Clarity of Purpose | Clearly states the purpose or main research question | Purpose or research question is unclear or missing |
| Summary of Key Points | Accurately summarizes main methods, findings, or conclusions | Important details are missing, unclear, or inaccurate |
| Organization and Flow | Ideas are logically organized and easy to follow | Difficult to follow or lacks clear organization |
| Conciseness and Style | Writing is concise, clear, and appropriate for an academic audience | Writing is wordy, unclear, or informal |
Optional Guidance for Students (add to rubric description):
- Look for a clear statement of the study’s purpose
- Check whether the main findings are included
- Notice if the writing is easy to follow and appropriately concise
5. Provide Simple Feedback Guidelines
To keep the task manageable and effective, ask students to:
- Complete the rubric
- Provide two short comments:
- One strength (what is working well)
- One suggestion for improvement (a specific, actionable change)
You may also provide sentence starters such as:
- “One thing you did well is…”
- “One way to improve this would be…”
This structure helps students give clearer and more useful feedback without increasing workload.
Handling Late Submissions
Late submissions are a common challenge in peer review. The following practices help maintain consistency:
- Students who submit after the due date may:
- Not receive peer reviews, or
- Be assigned reviews manually at your discretion
- You may still ask late students to complete peer reviews if appropriate
Setting this expectation early helps reduce confusion and ensures fairness for students who submit on time. Be sure to provide your peer review guidelines and rules in your syllabus and on any relevant Canvas page or assignment.
Grading Recommendations
1. To encourage participation and reduce pressure:
- Grade peer review based on completion, not accuracy
- Keep the activity low-stakes
This supports honest engagement and improves the overall quality of feedback.
2. Do not include "peer review completed" as a rubric criterion for a peer review assignment, since this will cause confusion for students. If you wish to grade peer reviews, consider making an additional assignment in your weekly module exclusively for peer review completion. This will, of course, require you to check the peer review results and put the grades in a different assignment. Keep in mind that peer reviews are by default not graded in Canvas, so you must create the alternative assignment to award points.