I liked the Sommer's article in Practice in Context. I will probably use some of the same principles in my own class next semester. I like the idea of making students reflect on their drafts before they turn them in. Metacognition definitely aids in the learning process. Plus, I think it causes students to have more ownership over their work. Instead of just getting feedback from the teacher, they get feedback from themselves. While it would be nice to think that they would do this on their own. They probably won't. Students are reluctant to do work they are not required to. Hell, I am reluctant to do work I am not required to do some times. Requring reflection, will help students to understand the how and why of their writing. The understanding of that can really help them become better writers.
I also like the idea of early, middle, and late grading. Grade grades are too final to put on drafts. If a student recieves an A on a draft, they are not likely to go back and change anything. If they recieve a "late" grade, however, they are less likely to react this way. Late suggets that the draft is good, but not complete. Likewise, if a student recieves an F on a draft, they will probably get discouraged and think everything they have written down is worthless. If they get an "early," mark, they won't get so depressed, at least I don't think so. Early doesn't sound nearly as bad as "F." It is a good system of grading, overall.
I do not think I will tape record my comments to students. I don't think it is a bad idea, but I don't think that written comments are ineffective. I just don't see the point of the tapes. Written comments are nice!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I wouldn’t tape record my comments either. Mostly because it makes me uncomfortable! I understand the instructor had forty to sixty students or something, but if expediency is the issue, I think it’s just as easy to type out a response. Typing is fast, you can save it, and you make revisions to the response if needed. And I don’t own a tape recorder. I’m not sure many people do now. But, every teacher is different. I suppose we just have to discover what works best for each of us.
Reflections for drafts and final papers are great. Prompts for the reflections are helpful as well. Activities like this have made me more aware of my writing practices, and have given me the chance to direct specific questions to the reader/instructor. I’ve always liked that.
Melanie and mentioned that her officemate uses the E/M/L (Early/Middle/Late) system, and it seems that something like this would be a helpful way to rate drafts. As you mentioned, numerical grades just seem too final. I’m all for grades on final drafts, though! I like portfolios and such, but—as a first-time teacher—I think some numerical grades throughout the semester would benefit me and the students.
I cringed when I read some of the negative comments in the Connors-Lunsford article—
“Do over, and pick one subject for development. This is just silly.”
Ouch. Generally, I think most of us try to frame criticism with niceties, even in our daily lives. But I imagine large teaching loads and frustration can make anyone have spurts of insensitivity. Many of the examples of negative comments seemed unnecessarily harsh, but I still found myself wondering about the context. Were there handwritten papers, obvious plagiarism, or serious lateness? I’m sure these situations must be irritating-- maybe even disheartening. I don’t want to vilify the teachers, which is easy to do when we read the “mean” examples. Still, it is important to recognize other people’s mistakes in order to be more aware of the weight of our words.
regarding connors and lunsford:
i found most fascinating the table they provided on pages 451-2. how cool! and their final conclusion, which was so refreshing: "in general, teachers seem determined to respond to what their students are saying as well as to how they say it, which is interesting news to those critics of contemporary teaching who claim that writing teachers are obsessed only with errors" (456).
we've spent so much time demonizing methods of teaching writing and writing teachers everywhere . . . it's refreshing to see empirical data that suggests there are (many) teachers thinking and evaluating not only rhetorically but holistically.
on page 460, they mention a teacher who uses a "contract form for revision, which was a sort of a written proposal of the changes the student would make in a draft, and a promise from the teacher--signed and dated--of what grade would be given the paper if the changes were successfully carried out." this to me is a fascinating idea, but i'm not sure i'd employ it in my classroom because it seems to feed that already weighty issue of the final letter grade. also there's that singularity of revision issue inherent to this practice: like there's only one way to revise, and the teacher knows that way. but an interesting method nonethelss. i think my students would actually love something like this--they seem so eager to complete tasks if they know for certain what sort of evaluation the action will result in.
In response to the EML system, I'll use it for drafts, but I'll make sure to explain that "late" does NOT mean "A," simply that there is comparatively little left to do with the draft (and I would make explicit revision comments on all papers, no matter what grade they've recieved).
The tape recorder just seemed to be superfluous. I couldn't see any value in it.
I wrote in a huge question mark next to the contract section in the book. I would be too afraid that I'll have asspiring lawers in my class and find some loophole in the contract. It also seems antithetical to the creative process. I mean, we could train monkeys to edit a paper in the exact way we assign.
Post a Comment