過去關於同儕互評的研究較多是在高年級實施，對於低年級學生，尤其是國小一、二年級學生是否具備執行同儕互評的能力大多持保留態度。於本研究中，設計一系列同儕互評活動於桃園縣某國小二年級學生中，並採取「準實驗設計」中的實驗組與控制組實驗模式，於兩個班級中進行實驗活動；透過小組模式，讓學生之間彼此以口語述說的方式評論對方的作品，並針對作品給予建議，獲得建議的受評者則需要依照建議的內容，進行修改作品的動作。經過一個學期共五次實驗活動後，分析學生的表現，發現學生在給予同儕建議時，較常使用讚美與提醒的建議類型，而隨著對於活動熟悉度的增加，學生使用系統建議庫的鷹架建議的情況越來越少，較多學生是自行建立評語。此外，學生在修改文章時，也會隨著活動的導入時間越長後，修改的文章內容逐漸從僅針對同儕建議提及的部分進行修改，到除了修改建議提及的部分，也會對整體架構進行修改，使文章整體更為完善、完整。而學生透過訪談、問卷等測驗也顯示學生覺得活動對於寫作是有幫助的，且會希望可以持續進行同儕互評的活動。 The main purpose of this study was to improve primary school second grade students' writing skills, through peer discussion activities within a web-based learning environment, by taking a "quasi-experimental design" in the experimental group and the control group experimental mode, we conducted experimental activities in two classes. Through the separation model, three to four people as one group, it allowed students to discuss with one another and to give comments on their stories, students should modify his/her own stories by following the comments that they gained from their peers. After five times of experimental activities, we analyzed students’ performance and found that the students like to use the type of praise or remind comments when they give their peer suggestions. The more familiar with the experimental activities, the fewer scaffolding recommendations would be used by students. Instead, most of them would like to put comments on their own. Furthermore, the more they get involved in this experimental activities, the more holistically they would modify theirs' stories, not just the part that has been pointed out. Based on retrograde analysis of the interviews and questionnaires, it showed that peer discussion activities could act as motivations to keep on modifying their works and help to improve their writing skills.
