Today’s readings about peer reviews brought up some good points.
Despite the fact that the word is now a pejorative, students need to recognize the value of criticism – I’m assuming that all of us already do. It’s something difficult to confront, this idea of an audience; after all, it didn’t exist back in high school. Yet when we reach college, our papers are expected to be seen by more eyes than just those of the teacher. For some, this is a terrifying prospect. I’ve known a few writers who have written pages upon pages of work, yet you wouldn’t know it because not a soul has seen this supposed writing. There’s nothing wrong with personal, introspective writing, but if your writing is personal due to fear of criticism, you might as well start practicing alchemy; it’s a little more productive.
The Practice in Context article was very informative with its classroom example of going over the “ground rules” of criticism. It established which comments were productive, which comments were hurtful, and gave examples of comments that are essentially meaningless like “nice.” From my own experience, I’ve been in classes that have had a real “culture of nice,” meaning that everyone was sweet and peachy-keen to one another, but absolutely nothing productive was said or done. We need to find ways around this (and the articles gave some great examples), because this seems to be the trap that students most often fall into. It may be tough for some to comprehend, but writing in college advances the writing discourse from a student-teacher relationship to a student-audience relationship. And in college, the audience is no longer imaginary; it’s a downright inescapable force of nature.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Going off what Bob said, I, too, have had many experiences of peer review in which there was very little reviewing actually going on. I do think it's great when students can become enthusiastic about their peers writing ("that's a great line," or "these transitions really help the flow of this paper."). But I think that students should be encouraged to explain why they like something about a piece of writing. That, in itself, will help them with their own writing, and also point out to the author of the piece a strength of their writing. But what's the point in doing peer review, or workshops, if students are not going to give feedback on how to improve the writing? I have found that there is a tactful way to say anything, and if the piece of writing is in dire need of revision, then there is plenty to talk about. One thing that one of my professors did for our poetry workshop class was lay out the ground rules for criticism right from the get-go, on the syllabus, in fact. He gave a list of things we should consider in poems, and also a list of things we should not do. I think in my own classroom, whether it is a composition class or a creative writing workshop class, I would like to do something similar, so that my students are fully aware that they are responsible for participating in peer review, but that there is always an encouraging way to make suggestions. The exercise that Peggy
...sorry, I accidentally hit publish...
continuing with what I was saying, the exercise that Peggy M. Woods did with her students, in which they discussed comments that they like to hear, are afraid to hear, have heard before, do not understand, etc. seemed really beneficial to me, and that's another thing that I might try in my classroom. We have been discussing a lot of different ways in which we can get a feel for our students' awareness of their own writing, or what they know about writing, and I think that's really important. Also, with the exercise mentioned above, it's something that we, as teachers, can learn about our own evaluation methods. I can't tell you how many times a teacher has written "fine" or "nice" on a piece of writing, and it never really helps. Even if they write "beautifully done," I am stuck. I know my piece of writing is not ready to be sent out for publication, so I want the feedback. Students, as much as teachers, need to know how to be clear and encouraging in their responses, so that they can be of help to the writer.
Peer review provides an opportunity for students that may have been rarely provided prior to their first year as undergrads. In my own high school experience, which I regard highly, having who I felt was an excellent senior English teacher, we did very little workshopping. It was not until I went to my college that my first-year comp. teacher really emphasized the need and value of workshops. However, even in this experience, my classmates would often provide little criticism, often making a check mark here or there, and providing a sort of slap on the back, “Good job,” kind of assessment. I too was guilty of this sometimes. It’s much easier. It also diffuses any potential tension due to poor critiques of another’s writing.
There were times, though, that students would actually become engaged in others’ writing, and provide substantive, productive criticism of others’ work. This was most often the case when others had a deep interest, or at least, interest, in what they had read. One way to build off of this might be to group students together by similar topics. In this way, students who have been dealing with similar subject matter can look deeply into a paper to find its highlights and flaws.
At the same time, though, students who have written on different topics might be asked to workshop together one class period. This could be done so that students can look a subject they may know little about, but still provide an objective view of the material at hand.
It is difficult to look someone in the eye, after having read a piece they have presumably spent a great deal of time on, and tell them that either it is bad, or at least, that I don’t understand what they have written. This was especially the case as an undergrad. In my MFA workshops, constructive criticism is about the most important component of the courses. The class would not be a workshop without it. However, even here, while I do provide constructive criticism, and am fully aware of its importance, I always feel a little bit uneasy about telling someone that their story did little for me, or that it was confusing, or that they need to work on these areas, ect. (If only other people felt so uncomfortable about giving me criticism!)
One of the best, non-offensive ways to constructively critique is to first acknowledge the parts of the piece in question that are good. Encouraging what I like often eases the blow for discouraging what I did not like. Often, the ability to tie the two together is key. For example, “You did A well, and maybe there could be more of A, rather than all this B.”
One problem that may be encountered with first-year students is that they are not used to this kind of academic setting (as mentioned here at the beginning). As a result, they may take criticism personally, and in turn, be discouraged from writing. However, it could too serve as sort of a cold water effect - being thrown in, with a stinging sensation at first, but one that they will get used to quickly, hopefully.
I am left wondering to what degree I should incorporate peer review into my classroom. I feel that I’d want it with every major paper. Additionally, though, I think peer review would be valuable at all levels of assignments. Starting out with smaller assignments, and forcing students to engage one another may get them in a proper mindset to more deeply critique mid-term and final papers. It will also get students used to one another, so that, as we talked about it class, they have had a good chance to feel each another out; they will see where the others are coming from.
As with every case, it seems that these workshops should be tailored to suit specific classrooms, too. If one particular class is great with peer review workshops, then there is no doubt in my mind that I would incorporate it every step of the way. However, another group may have more difficulty fully adapting to this classroom style. As a result, I would probably scale back, as we mentioned with other kinds of classroom instruction, and approach it in a more cautious manner, so that students are able to feel somewhat comfortable. So, again this is one of those cases where we can study theory after theory, but until we are actually let into the classroom, will have little understanding of what actually is going to work with our class.
I wonder if permitting one of the papers for the class to be a creative piece, even if it is non-fiction, might propel students to use a more critical eye of the others’ writing. What I mean is that students may be too intimidated, or even uninterested in an academic piece of writing. Allowing it to be a story, poem, or something else that is typically considered part of the creative genres, may give students a chance to really engage a piece of writing and then comment on what they have taken away from this piece.
Jamie,
I think giving the option of a creative assignment is a good idea, but I wouldn't require it of everyone. In other words: have a creative response (poem, story, etc.) be one option of other, more "academic," options. I suggest this because some students expect and even prefer the traditional method of writing analytically.
Also, I just want to say that the activity Woods shares on page 189-90 of Practice in Context is pure gold. Gold I tell you! I also want to acknowledge Pam on her follow-up write-past-your-conclusion assignment she handed out last class. I'm going to try that in my own writing, as well as in class with my students.
Post a Comment