Group items tagged

The article written by ERIC (The Educational Resources Information Center) which I must assume is a part of George Washington Univ. Washington DC. Graduate School of Education and Human Development is a broken down "checklist" of sorts. It addresses six different concerns with grading student's writing. One such concern is one I think we all might have asked ourselves at one point in time, "Why do professors need to construct effective writing assignments?"(3). The answer given to the question was interesting in that it pushed hard for effective peer reviews. While some peer review is helpful the article did address the fact that most students are unaware of how to give effective peer review. The basics of the article concerning peer review are that professors need to help students learn by example and explanation. I thought it interesting as well that the article addressed how professors can avoid giving a grade that they will have to defend after the fact, a problem for professors who grade writing without a series of rewriting stages. The solution offered is, that's right, stages of rewrites with the professor holding off giving a grade for as long as possible. One important idea brought up in the article is that "…the writing assignment should include necessary information about audience and purpose, the two pillars of writing."(3) I often wonder how we focus on the first and not the second. As the article states one of the pillars of writing is purpose, yet we seem to habitually focus on the audience and not give student's a purpose for their writing.

I found this guide quite interesting since it broke down several areas of a composition course suggesting what could be down in each instant of the classroom curriculum. > I focused more so on peer groups and peer revision. (starting at pg. 12) The article mentions that students could bring in multiple copies of their paper so the entire class can read it (in groups and/or individually) and further discuss it in its entirety together. > I really enjoyed this idea especially since I've practiced it in some of my classes here at Chico. However, the only drawback would be of course the expenses and extent of resources the student/teacher/school has. However, this practice could help with distinct revision instead of quickly overlooking an assignment (peer revision is sometimes not taken seriously by students for them to care enough) on the projector slide and/or taking home a fellow peer's paper home to "revise." Also in revising as a group rather than pairs helps students actually gain different perspectives and open doors to their own knowledge received and practiced within the exercise. Along with such a revision process... can come about peer discussions. Sometimes, teachers forget to put into practice discussions following peer reviews. This allows students to further understand where the comments are coming from and how they can take away information to their advantage in revising the assignment.

This webpage is presented on the Texas A&M University website. It is all about low-stakes writing, and how it helps the students develop their ideas and write more freely. It beings with a description of low-stakes writing, and the ways in which a teacher would have this type of writing in their class (including how to grade, types of assignments, etc). The web page stresses the importance of feedback on the students' writing, and also says that the feedback can come from a number of sources, not just the teacher. It suggests responses from peers, the writing center, or the student themselves.