Self-empowerment: the ability to assess and evaluate one's on work - what a promising idea
As I was reviewing my students' first drafts, I was horrified by scribble. How do I really teach them to write better. I discovered that better meant: more concise, direct statements in plain speak. Of course I also looked for proper etiquette but didn't really know how to help them get there. Sometimes, I even re-wrote sentences. But I also found that there was more than one way to "fix" sentences, paragraphs, etc., and that there was not enough room on the page to show them their options. I got very excited when I read Asao Inoue's paper, "Community-Based Assessments." The lst year writing student could definitely benefit from learning how to assess their own writing. Inoue's system seems time-consuming. In the simplest terms; however, I would like to guide my students in developing a rubric and to use that rubric to assess and evaluate each other's work.
All of my students said they appreciated and valued the peer review process. There guidelines were simple: Use a "G" to indicate what worked and "?" if you had a question. They then had to formulate the question or explain why they were confused. Even the best writers said they benefited from this feedback.
I was not satisfied however with my written feedback on their papers and would like to find a more effective system: one that builds skills and the ability to self-assess. I am not concerned with the grading for their papers because I gave them all the same score which was based on the completion of the assignment and not the quality of the writing.
Elbow's enhancement to Inoue's approach by using multiple rubrics is more complicated and time-consuming then Inoue's method. I agree with his position that the "corporate" rubric is more about convention than value and what is valued may not be shared by all. I don't see instituting multiple rubrics but will look for ways to accommodate differences. I like the idea of creating groups with different rubrics that reflect similar values.
I also like Elbow's ideas on grading contracts. I've already noticed that the final grade does not necessarily reflect the quality of the student's writing. The grades reflects a composite of several requirements: completing assignments on time, the ability to repeat essential information that I think is valuable, participating in class, etc. These behaviors are also important to their success. There are problems even with just grading them on the quality of their writing. To do this, I would want to have an assessment of where they started and base the grade on how much they have improved.
As I was reviewing my students' first drafts, I was horrified by scribble. How do I really teach them to write better. I discovered that better meant: more concise, direct statements in plain speak. Of course I also looked for proper etiquette but didn't really know how to help them get there. Sometimes, I even re-wrote sentences. But I also found that there was more than one way to "fix" sentences, paragraphs, etc., and that there was not enough room on the page to show them their options. I got very excited when I read Asao Inoue's paper, "Community-Based Assessments." The lst year writing student could definitely benefit from learning how to assess their own writing. Inoue's system seems time-consuming. In the simplest terms; however, I would like to guide my students in developing a rubric and to use that rubric to assess and evaluate each other's work.
All of my students said they appreciated and valued the peer review process. There guidelines were simple: Use a "G" to indicate what worked and "?" if you had a question. They then had to formulate the question or explain why they were confused. Even the best writers said they benefited from this feedback.
I was not satisfied however with my written feedback on their papers and would like to find a more effective system: one that builds skills and the ability to self-assess. I am not concerned with the grading for their papers because I gave them all the same score which was based on the completion of the assignment and not the quality of the writing.
Elbow's enhancement to Inoue's approach by using multiple rubrics is more complicated and time-consuming then Inoue's method. I agree with his position that the "corporate" rubric is more about convention than value and what is valued may not be shared by all. I don't see instituting multiple rubrics but will look for ways to accommodate differences. I like the idea of creating groups with different rubrics that reflect similar values.
I also like Elbow's ideas on grading contracts. I've already noticed that the final grade does not necessarily reflect the quality of the student's writing. The grades reflects a composite of several requirements: completing assignments on time, the ability to repeat essential information that I think is valuable, participating in class, etc. These behaviors are also important to their success. There are problems even with just grading them on the quality of their writing. To do this, I would want to have an assessment of where they started and base the grade on how much they have improved.
No comments:
Post a Comment