Group items tagged

Rachel Peckam's "The Elephants Evaluate: Some Notes on the Problem of Grades in Graduate Creative Writing Programs" while a bit on the long side she captured me with her form. In a big way it reminded me of a much more intense version of our observation paper. She went through several examples of her students and all had issues with grading she commented on. She also throughout some back ground I was unaware of such as the origin of grading in America. If figures grades would come from Yale in 1783 but the idea she brought up that perhaps grading and morality have a certain relationship. We do place a certain importance on grades that Peckam points out. Even she obsesses over her grades while trying to help her students not worry about their grades. This idea of grading creative writing hits home for me since my goal is to teach creative writing one day. How do we judge creative writing using a grading system? How can we give a point total for the imagination? It's a tough problem and Peckam does a great job of giving real world examples and weighing the difficult question clearly. I just had to include a quote from her, "It seems my soludon for grading is like chemotherapy. It's working, but it's killing us in the process." (96) She has a lot of meat in this article and I really like the idea of looking at how we treat creative writing in our education system.

Make sure to relate this back to what we're doing--mentoring undergrads in academic (not creative) writing.

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.

This study of second and fourth grade students examines student attitudes toward writing. The study suggests that the culture of high-stake testing has placed teachers in a bind that forces them to teach writing aggressively, which takes the fun out writing. The younger the students are, the authors claim, the more positive their attitude toward writing is. The older they are, the more likely they are to come face to face with these higher stake environments and the more negative their attitudes will become.The study actually has fourth grade students meet with and tutor the second grade students in writing in order to measure the positive or negative affect of tutoring on writing attitudes. I was especially drawn to the passage that said, "Some self-efficacy researchers have suggested that teachers should pay as much attention to students' perceptions of competence as to actual competence, for the perceptions may more accurately predict students' motivation and future academic choices." (182).

This isn't a scholarly source but it is actually kind of interesting. A grad student that will be teaching freshman comp is asking for advice on how to structure and teach the class. A lot of the questions he has are similar to the things that we've been discussing in class, like how to make the work relevant, how to get the students interested. The comments and suggestions people left had a lot to do with the importance of grading rubrics, teachers leaving comments on the students' papers, etc. Also, suggestions highlight being clear to your students with regards to expectations and then explaining reasons for the grades they get. I think this is a good webpage to look at just to see how other people are thinking about freshmen comp and teaching in general. It's interesting to see other people's perspectives.

This source details the author's experience of teaching a course called 'Experimental Writing' to college seniors. Using several chapters from the book Free Play by Steven Nachmanovitch, the instructor introduces the topic of play as an important element of the course. Having read the book myself I think that it is a worthy read, and it has influenced my approach to academic projects by widening my perception of my action as not just reactionary study toward a grade, but play within a field offered by the instructor where success and failure are accepted as process and there is no fixed upper limit to achievement. In other words the writing is can be thought of as a kind of 'funktionslust' a pleasure of doing, not simply an action toward an objective. To create motivation within students requires that they let go of the dire seriousness that school is associated with; school is something to be completed out of necessity not something that can offer individuals new insight to themselves, or the aspects of themselves that have been suppressed by conformity and fear. The author does not entirely endorse the use of Nachmanovitch's text in 'traditional writing classes' because the text discourages many of the elements that are at hand in the traditional approach to teaching (like writing for a letter grade). I chose to be an English major because I felt the most freedom of expression within my English classes; I was offered a choice of what topics to engage with. But increasingly specific expectations from teachers handcuffed my raw creativity. Even so, I think that an increased degree of freedom within writing classes would boost student enthusiasm. The question then is how do we increase the freedom of expression for students of basic writing, where there are necessary modes of measure for the articulation of the chosen subjects (other than simply allowing them to choose their subjects)? To what degree does the rubric shape student identity by for

Patrick Hartwell discusses the value of teaching formal grammar by reviewing its history as a fundamental building block to the development of good writing. By determining a set of definitions for grammar Hartwell shows that the process of absorbing correct grammar usage occurs within native speakers naturally by exposure to the language; even young children are able to use complex grammatical structures with skill. Yet when sorted through the scientific lens and broken down into categories and labels the study of grammar cannot explain how learning the component rules of language will prove valuable to overall writing ability. Instead Hartwell suggests and I agree that "one learns to control the language of print by manipulating language in meaningful contexts, not by learning about language in isolation, as by the study of formal grammar" (125). Language, Hartwell says is "verbal clay, to be molded and probed, shaped and reshaped, and, above all, enjoyed" (125). So language is play dough; it is supposed to be fun; it should not be something you do because you have to, but because you want to; you do it because you like to do it; it is about process not product. What can tutors/teachers do that can encourage students to view writing not as a means to an end, but as a valuable tool of expression, a concrete manifestation of focused energy that is representative of an individual's attempt to express? This need to express is at work on us all of the time; our survival depends on it. That is not an exaggeration; a closed mouth does not get fed. By funneling our thoughts into words, even if the result is an approximation of the truth of our energetic pursuits, there is still a result. Words do work on people because people feel. Maybe some of the frustration that freshman feel is a result of the heaviness of the rulebook; certain grammar rules affect student grades, certain constraints are imposed by the teachers rubric and the teacher as well a

The authors discussed to common occurrence of teachers "bending over backwards" for their NNS (Non Native Speaking) students, especially when evaluating surface errors. The study in this article seemed well orchestrated. It presented a variety of English teachers with six compositions: two from native English speakers, two from Danish speakers, and two from speakers of Thai. These students however were not real and the "student profile" assigned to each composition was constantly rotated. The results found that NES (Native English Speakers) were judged more harshly because "they should know better". The northern European, the Danish, students were pretty neutral. The Asian, the Thai, students were given the most leniency. I found this article interesting because it gives insight to the impact that teachers' grading has on the development of ESL students' writing proficiency.

In this article, the author interviews a several instructors and examines the different types of assessment based on the information from the instructors and students. The general purpose assessment can have many benefits such as improve students' self-confidence and expressive abilities, check the language style and composing process, and so on. The specific purpose assessment limits individual's development and pushes students focusing on the written text rather than exploring ideas from multiple media. Assessment is also very important for students and instructors because it is closely related to the grades students will get. If the assessment is not appropriate, writing practices and activities will not attract students' attention. Also, this article agrees that general purpose assessment can be more helpful for students; my question is that whether general purpose writing is helpful for students to improve writing.

This video is a very entertaining whiteboard animation of a talk given at RSA (described on their website, http://www.thersa.org, as "an enlightenment organisation committed to finding innovative practical solutions to today's social challenges") by author Dan Pink (for more, see http://www.danpink.com/about). The question he poses, is "what motivates us?" The common belief that people will work harder for a bigger reward is found to be true only when the work involves simple, mechanical skills. When the work requires even rudimentary cognitive skills, a surprising reversal occurs: the larger the reward, the poorer the performance. Pink states that engagement requires three factors: autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Though his presentation is addressed to the business world, I think that he's really addressing fundamental aspects of human nature that can be applied in education as well. For example, his claim that crappy products are the result when profit is separated from purpose, can be applied to education as well, when grades are separated from meaningful learning.

Great video and surpassingly simple. We do better work, when we are doing work towards something that interests us and that we are voluntarily invested in. That's not to say that we are invested in it voluntarily from the beginning, but that as we invest ourselves the reward is more personally gratifying. We are made happy by getting better at a task and mastering that task, we are made happy by engaging in abstract cognitive ideas that interest us. Money can not buy happiness, it can only buy a lack of cognitive effort.

This article focuses on the differences in preparation for students of different ethnicities that are enrolled public school, private school, or are home schooled. The article mainly focuses on public schooling and how different students with certain precursors (grades, ethnicities, number of years in a subject) will likely fair in a college class. I would have liked the article to discuss the differences among several high school curriculums but sadly it was not that in depth.

In this TED talk video Dave Eggers is talking enthusiastically about free tutoring centers where students receive one-on-one attention from either more experienced peers or teachers who volunteer to go to these centers at least two hours a week. He backs up the need of having individual help by research data (I would be interested to see the primary research) which say that 35-40 hours a year one-on-one attention students can get one grade level higher. The first center was opened to offer help in English and writing. Although there was an issue of trust at first to visit the center, with time and some advertising the center got packed with students. They even published their own writing in a form of a book, which is inspiring as it honors their work, hardship, creativity and thoughts. Now they have 1400 students in the center and they want to grow nationwide. Also, they have a website (http://www.onceuponaschool.org/) where there is somebody to show guidance to those who are interested in starting their own learning center in their town (for their public school students). To me, this is a great idea to inspire students and keep their motivation going in a particular subject. I wonder if they have done research and found out students of what achievement tend to go there, is it possible that those who are already into writing, science, languages, etc, are the ones visiting these centers. I also wonder if the volunteers who are there to help receive any kind training about certain methodology or ground rules.

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.

This is a .pdf file of a sort of slide show on classroom environment. It looks pretty cheesy when you first open it, but I went all the way through and found some good points. A lot of the content would work best with younger grades, but I think that it is totally applicable to high school levels, too. It focuses on creating a warm, welcoming environment that students WANT to be in. They suggest making changes in decoration, layout, movement, temperature, etc.

Noting that most existing studies on bi-literacy have focused on learners whose L1 and L2 share the same script (the roman alphabet), the authors of this study examine the acquisition of Hebrew literacy by children who are already literate in Russian. This longitudinal study compared the reading success of 1st grade students of three groups: bilingual (Russian and Hebrew) who were literate in Russian, bilingual (not literate in either language), and monolingual (illiterate). The study found that that the students from the first group, those who were literate in Russian when they started school in Israel, performed better on a number of reading tasks in Hebrew than the students who started school without literacy in any language (including those who were bilingual but illiterate). From this, the authors conclude that bilingualism does not significantly enhance literacy acquisition but that being already literate in another language, even one with serious structural differences and that uses a different writing system, does aid the acquisition of literacy in the second language.