Responding to writing
Contributors: Paul Quigley, Kyle Stedman, Erin Trauth, Melinda Hollis, Jim Miller, Crystal Crawford, Adam Pridemore, Richard Ellman, Megan McIntyre, Andrea Dennin, Daniel Purificato, Mark Dekle
Please link to your homepages, J. M.. Is it possible to include some visuals to make this page appealing? I wonder if you could add some advice that instructors would find especially insightful... perhaps you could recommend students keep any journal of errors... perhaps you want to recommend ENG 21 practice... do you want to provide some links that they can go to to provide additional information? in other words, the following is very good but I guess it seems somewhat prosaic... I do not mean to diminish or effort because I think this is a good job... I just want to encourage you to take it to the next level
(Friendly technical note: if you use Firefox or Safari, you'll notice that when editing Sharepoint wikis or blogs, you can't use bold, italics, or even insert paragraph breaks without some basic html code knowledge. Read about the issue here. So, to help keep this page from looking like a blob of text, it's recommended that you use Internet Explorer when editing it. Another option for Firefox users is to install the add-on, "IE Tab," which allows you to use Firefox to masquerade as IE for certain tabs, allowing you to use all of IE's editing wizardry without switching over to another browser.)
[Structure brainstorming: we can continue to add more sections or add additional sentences/paragraphs to existing sections, but what then? We should also feel free, if inspired to do some bigger "chunking," I think. I.e., if a number of areas seem to fit together, create a heading for them and lump them together!]
Comment Clarity
Effective feedback to students on their writing needs to be clearly understood, so a clear and complete description of the various comments used by the instructor (awk, cs, ww, etc.) is essential. Simply defining/explaining these terms isn't enough; you've got to demonstrate to the students what these comments mean and how they should be interpreted. The textbooks provide some of this information; however, classroom instruction that includes examples is also needed. If one chooses to use symbols (check marks) or commentary notes (WDTM?) not explained in the textbook, it it necessary for the instructor to not only provide classroom instruction about the marks but should also make available and refer to often the a list of marks tailored to instructors personal techniques.
Comment Repetition
Feedback should be repetitive in a sense (meaning repeat marginal comments in a cumulative endnote, as well as on the paper's corresponding rubric), so the student has the chance to notice patterns of error in their own writing. For example, if there is mention of a lack of focus in the end note, it should be pointed out specifically in the paper so that the student can see exactly where to begin a focus of revising the issue. It is not enough to simply say "lack of focus" once in an end note when the instructor has not made distinct note of where this first becomes an issue, nor is it enough to write such a comment somewhere on the paper and then not at least repeat it once in an endnote. Some students look for the endnote, while others read more through the marginal comments. Instructors, when striving to be consistent, ought to be able to cater to both in their feedback.
Student-Specific Feedback
Feedback needs to be specific to each student. Some general comments and markups are okay (and necessary), but in order to better engage the student and hopefully elicit their willingness to revise, comments need to address at least some aspects of that student's particular paper and their individual form of expression. When commenting on papers, it helps to look at the progress individual students have made, and also mistakes they are making consistently. If possible, it might help to create a short lesson on any subject multiple students are having trouble with. If this lesson involves student response, chances of success may improve.
Coaching, Not Punishing
Feedback should focus on coaching the students to become better writers, not on justifying instructor's grades or "punishing" them for their mistakes. This is true for both instructor's written comments and the various rubrics used in grading. Instructors should try to remember that their intended tone may not be interpreted in the intended way by students quickly perusing comments--and perhaps the shorter the comment, the more likely it is to be misunderstood!
Students greatly appreciate feedback which values their thoughts and efforts as writers. As such, feedback which addresses "global" concerns such as the student's purpose for writing, combined with comments which express genuine interest in the individual student's efforts as both a thinker and a writer, are generally far more effective at motivating the student to put effort into improvement and revision than those comments which highlight only the errors or faults in the writing. No matter how clearly the "errors" are described, a student who has lost motivation for improvement will scarcely be benefited.
Responding in a Timely Mannner
There are a variety of devices an insturcter may utilize to maximize time spent on grading which in turn helps both the student (they get papers back quickly) and the instructer (by easing their work load and enabling them to focus on other priorities at the same time). One such device is a grading rubric specific to the assignment. This allows the instuctor to focus on the goals of the paper and not become "hung up" on small errors. It is also helpful in explaining a paper's goals and expectations to the student. Just as instructors have clear dates as to when a student's paper is due, so too should the student have a clear deadline ( from the instructor) as to when they will receive their paper and it's feedback.
It is a good idea to build a list of critical responses to specific aspects of the rubric used to grade assignments. In this way, a model response can be created to save time when responding to a large number of students. A model response can be created before a grading session, or it can be created by "collecting" common critical phrases during a grading session. Using a model response saves time by eliminating the repetitive task of typing common critical phrases. Of course, this method works best when responding electronically. Reducing repetitive tasks allows the instructor to focus on providing good feedback for students to use in the revision process.
Rubrics for Rubber Stamps
Rubrics can provide great opportunities to invite students into the composition discourse by breaking down and repeating some of the language for them so that they can use it when providing feedback for their peers in workshop. An extremely detailed rubric that includes a breakdown of the meanings of "transitional devices," "point of view," or "conhesive paragraphs" with all of their inclusive meanings in terms of the instructor's expectation can provide students with the vocabularly that the instructor herself uses in conference. Further, rubrics can help to save a little ink later, as the instructor can simply write the specifics of the end-note next to spots on the detailed rubric (when applicable), and then students can also better pinpoint revisions according to some written expectations. A rubric should also reflect the values that are important to us as a program. Our current FYC rubric places an emphasis on style, language, and grammar despite our stated affinity to teaching grammar within the program.
Class Feedback
As we as teachers read through the numerous student papers of our multiple classes that we teach, normally, certain trends will emerge for a class, especially of grammatical errors, and also of structural concerns. And, although the focus of the above comments on how to comment on student writing all focus on the individual, at times, a group approach can be beneficial as well. By making note of trends of errors that emerge for the class, the instructor can then tailor the lesson plan for the class period that he or she returns the paper in order to focus on certain, specific errors. This can be beneficial for the students because they get to see that they are not the only ones making the errors. Also, it gives us a chance to clarify and teach the grammar issues that will most help the students. Also, the day essays are about the be handed back, the students are eager for feedback, and willing to listen. And, even more importantly, by going over in general in class times what is being written on the student's drafts, and also what is being discussed in student conferences, we are providing feedback to the student three times over, hopefully cementing it into their minds. It is especially helpful for the students to hear an instructor's general comments when those comments focus on higher order concerns.
In-Class "Norming" Sessions
Students stand to benefit from several in-class "norming" sessions, in which the instructor establishes his or her criteria for an A paper, a B paper, et cetera. The instructor can solicit responses from students who have written (for example) an A or a B paper, and request those papers sent via email. In class, the instructor can display the paper (with student name *removed*, of course), and select strong (or weak, for "counter-examples") passages for random students to read aloud to the class. After reviewing several passages, ask the students "what was effective about this paragraph?", or "was this paragraph effective for you?" Students (from personal experience) have tended to respond "this was a good paragraph!"... a kind, but, ultimately ineffective, appraisal. Be prepared for such comments with the immediately rebuttal of "why?" Ask students to be specific about the strengths and/or weaknesses of a given piece of writing. The instructor may ask the general question "why?" or he or she may decide to give "guided" suggestions to students: "was the opening effective?" "what did you make of the specific details offered by the writer" "what of the writer's word choice and style" et cetera.
From experience, students have seemed to enjoy and benefit from this exercise. They are often eager to know our "secrets" for grading, and the norming session also a "behind the scenes" look at exactly how we evaluate, even as it invited them to participate in the act of evaluation. In addition, students are often more able to offer keen insight into the flaws of other writers, observing errors that they would perhaps never catch while reading their own work. Beyond these obvious benefits, reviewing and critiquing a sample paper also provides an excellent point of entry to a new project, allowing the students to conceptualize the project in a way that may be impossible while merely reading the directions provided on the collegewriting website.
It is easy for instructors on the college level to assume that all students receive the same education coming into the program, but this is not the case. College classrooms will see all levels of writers. While it is important not to lessen expectations for students that do not meet program requirements, teachers must be willing to look for recurring errors and teach to them. If a students is making a mistake consistently, it might be best to take the student aside, and show them examples from their works.
It might be beneficial to the students to allow more revisions early in the semester. This way, they receive more chances to align their works to the instructor's expectations.
Extending the peer review to online posting can aid in our responses to student writing. By getting students to read each other’s papers and look at them critically, dissecting why they don’t understand something, filling out a questionnaire of what works and what doesn’t online-posted so everyone can read the individual comments- then talking about it in class, we can clear up misunderstandings. We look over the comments posted and talk about it in a class discussion, analyzing the peer review and paper. Students can then see the positive elements in the review so they know how to respond to student writing, improving their own writing along the way. When they “tear a paper apart” they can write a better paper because they have the “what not to do” in mind. By doing this they can further understand our comments and see where we come back in regards to our feedback. It will take out the guesswork and confusion on their end.