Transcript CLA Orientation for Writing Integration—GTA Preparation

CLA Orientation for Writing
Integration—GTA Preparation for
Grading and Responding
Sue Doe
Assistant Professor of English
Colorado State University
[email protected]
Overview of Orientation
• Introduction to context for writing integration
• A Sample Assignment
• Holistic scoring/sorting—developing criteria, applying
criteria, revising criteria—and why
• Analytic scoring—strategies and choices
• Commenting/responding to student writing
• The trouble students have with academic writing;
grading/responding as part of the instructional team
• Interventions through peer review, conferences, office
hours
• Guests Representing: 2nd year GTAs, TILT—The
Institute for Learning and Teaching, The Writing Center,
Writing@CSU
Local Writing Resources
• http://writing.colostate.edu
– Google search possible on virtually any writing topic.
Over 100K pages of writing information, most
authored at CSU.
– Writing tools available through Writing Studio-keep
track of your drafts, your biblios, your reading, etc.
Same tools available for undergrads and others
• The Writing Center and WAC
– Visit Eddy 6 (The physical writing center) or submit
papers electronically for feedback
– Request a workshop on any writing subject
gtPathways
What it is, where it came from
State Guaranteed Transfer:
gtPathways
• gtPathways Curriculum Adopted as part of the CCHE
Academic Affairs Policy I, Part L: Statewide Transfer Policy.
• Built upon concepts found in the Student Bill of Rights
(a.k.a, the King Bill), § 23-1-125 C.R.S:
 “The Commission, in consultation with each Colorado public
institution of higher education, is directed to to outline a plan
to implement a core course concept”
 “The core of courses shall consist of at least thirty credit
hours, but shall not exceed forty credit hours”
 “Individual institutions of higher education shall conform their
own core course requirements with the guidelines developed
by the Commission…”
One Policy Goal of gtPathways
Students shall have assurance of:
“A quality general education experience that
develops competencies in reading, writing,
mathematics, technology, and critical
thinking through an integrated arts and
science experience.”
Major Changes to Colorado
Colleges and Universities
Adams State College: Faculty Senate agreed to adopt gtPathways
curriculum for institutional general education curriculum
Fort Lewis College: Restructuring entire general education
curriculum to meet gtPathways requirements; modifying junior-level
writing courses to meet gtPathways requirements (I.e., 200-level).
Colorado State University: Integrating writing into general
education AHUM and SOCS courses (20% - 25% of grades in
writing assignments); adding 3 credit hours in AHUM.
University of Northern Colorado: Charting the Future; reducing
general education course offerings to 60-70 courses; restructuring
curriculum to meet gtPathways curriculum.
Memorandum of Understanding
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS
WRITING IN AUCC COURSES IN LIBERAL ARTS
Effective Fall 2007
All AUCC courses in Categories 3B, C, D and E of the core
must satisfy the following requirements regarding writing.
These must be clearly stated on the syllabus for the course.
1. Goals for writing in AUCC courses:
There are two goals for writing assignments in AUCC courses:
(1) to improve students’ comprehension of course content and,
(2) to improve students’ proficiency in writing.
Note (1): Both of these goals are best achieved when students
receive feedback on their writing assignments and have an
opportunity to make use of that feedback.
MOU continued…
2. Writing requirements:
• At least 25 percent of the course grade must be based
on written work that satisfies the following:
– At least one writing assignment must be an out-ofclass piece of written work. (2)
– In-class written work, such as on exams, must be in
the form of essays.
• Note (2): While this represents a minimum standard, to
maximize the benefits to students of more writing
multiple opportunities to write and respond to feedback
are recommended, such as:
• Several out-of-class writing assignments.
OR
• One or more rewrites of an out-of-class writing
assignment.
MOU continued
2. Writing Requirements (continued)
•
•
Expectations of written work must be clearly stated on the
syllabus. Among other things the instructor considers
appropriate, those expectations should include students
demonstrating: (3)
–
The ability to convey a theme or argument clearly and
coherently.
–
The ability to analyze critically and to synthesize the work of
others.
–
The ability to acquire and apply information from appropriate
sources, and reference sources appropriately.
–
Competence in standard written English.
Note (3): Instructors should use their own discretion in
communicating to students the relative importance of the various
expectations in their own writing assignments in terms of how they
will be graded.
MOU continued
3. Plagiarism Statement:
• More writing in AUCC courses also brings the risk of increased
incidents of plagiarism. It is strongly recommended that instructors
have a statement in their syllabus that clearly states that plagiarism
in not acceptable and is a form of academic dishonesty. An
example is:
• Plagiarism is a form of academic dishonesty. As per university
policy “Any student found responsible for having engaged in
academic dishonesty will be subject to an academic penalty and/or
University disciplinary action.”
• On page 38 of the 2006 – 2007 General Catalog, plagiarism is
defined:
“Plagiarism includes the copying of language, structure, ideas, or
thoughts of another, and representing them as one’s own without
proper acknowledgement. Examples include a submission of
purchased research papers as one’s own work; paraphrasing and/or
quoting material with properly documenting the source.”
Copies of Written Competency
Guidelines of College of Liberal
Arts MOU
Simply send an email to:
[email protected]
Say: Please send Guidelines and MOU
What Matters in College Writing?
• Write for 5 minutes about
– the qualities of writing that you believe all first-year
college students should develop—essential abilities
they’ll need
– your beliefs about student writing ability right now and
what that belief is based upon
– the kinds of support students need to improve
– where, how, and when writing instruction should be
given in college contexts
• Put your name on this piece of paper as you’ll be
turning it in. Hold onto it for now.
Grading—Becoming Part of the
Instructional Team
• Support and instruction, formative
feedback vs. justification of the grade
• Consistency and fairness
• Criteria-based grading vs. norming
• Time management through Hierarchies of
Rhetorical Concern
• Holistic and Analytic Evaluation
Hierarchy of Rhetorical Concerns
Audience, Purpose, Occasion
Focus: Thesis, Reasons, Unity/Coherence
Development: Reasons, Evidence, Explanation
Style/Mechanics/Conventions: Readability, Care
and Polish, Patterns of Error
Hierarchical Concerns Detailed
Audience
• Who is the writer’s audience? Is this an academic audience? What are the
expectations?
Purpose
• Is this piece of writing intended to inform? Analyze? Explore? Summarize?
Argue?
Development
• What kinds of evidence does the audience expect? Does the context
demand clarification through examples, data, etc.?
Organization
• Is the writing organized in a coherent way?
• Do transitions guide the reader through the logic of the paper?
Style and Conventions
• What style is appropriate for the context in terms of audience and purpose?
What register or level of formality Is appropriate? (For instance, can the
writer use “I” in this context?)
• Are there locations where the writing is hard to follow or comprehension is
disrupted? If so, can I discern why?
• Are there patterns of error showing any of the Top Five DASTARDLY
SENTENCE ERRORS—1) subject–verb agreement, 2) run-on and
fragmented sentences, 3) unclear or incorrect pronoun agreement, 4) verb
tense inconsistencies, 5) weak comma use
Grading For What Matters—
Purposes of Assignments
What is the TASK being required by the assignment—to inform, to
explore, to convince, to describe, to compare, to summarize, to
persuade? Find the VERB or VERBS and you’ll know the task.
Is this
• a thesis-provided paper for which students must defend of refute?
• a problem-solution paper in which students are given a problem or
question that demands a thesis and support? Is
• a data-provided paper for which students are expected to analyze
and explain?
• a genre-provided paper, in which students are expected to follow
an organizational structure or format in an accepted form, such as a
memo, case study, lab report, or executive summary?
• write-to-learn or write-to-engage writing for which students are
expected to explore and/or develop their thinking rather than to
produce a polished paper?
• an in-class essay, reflecting comprehension of course material?
Holistic Scoring
The Assignment: POLS 101 American
Government and Politics
With Thanks to Professor Sandra Davis and
Her Students Who Generously Shared Their
Work With Us
The Assignment
POLS 101 American Government and
Politics
Your assignment is to write an essay supporting or opposing the use of the
Electoral College as a means of electing the president. Use only the
materials listed here and posted on RamCT: AMODD, ELAT, and LWV.
Essay Components:
1) Introduction and Background—introduce the issue, explain how the E.C.
works to elect the president, discuss a variety of historic challenges to the
E.C. and whether you think the process worked well or poorly in 2000.
2) State whether the E.C. should be abolished or kept and provide 3-4
reasons why.
3) Support each reason with at least one paragraph of evidence backing your
view. Use sources and distinguish these from your own views.
4) Provide a reference list.
5) Paper should be 3-4 pages but no longer than 4 pages. (Graders stop
reading if paper is over 4 pages.)
6) Students are instructed in assignment sheet: “ You should roughly cover
15-20 points per page.”
Reference List
students are instructed to NOT USE quotations
but to parenthetically cite if paraphrasing
• AMODD
– Sidlow, E. and B. Henchen. (2008). America at odds. 6th Ed.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• ELAT
– FEC National Clearinghouse on Election Administration. (2003).
The pros and cons of the Electoral College System. Retrieved
March 25, 2008 from
http://uselectionatlas.com/INFORMATION/INFOMRATION/electc
ollege.procon
• LWV
– League of Women Voters of California Education Fund,
Choosing the President (1992). The Electoral College. Retrieved
March 25, 2008, from
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/case/3pt/electoral.html
Additional Advice Given Students
• You are asked to make a persuasive argument
in writing. You should try to convince a reader of
your opinion. State you position on the
proposed amendment, including the reasons for
your opinion. This is often done in one or a few
sentences that summarize the argument you will
make in the rest of the essay.
• A thesis statement 1) tells the reader whether
you oppose the proposed constitutional
amendment; 2)is a road map for the paper; it
tells readers what arguments will follow; 3)
makes a claim that others might dispute
Holistic Process
• In groups of three, do a “read-around” of
the set of three papers you now have. Sort
High, Medium, and Low.
• Before you begin reading the sample
papers, read through the Holistic Scoring
Rubric for a Thesis-Restricted Paper.
Sort, Read, and Comment
(or Stop, Drop, and Roll)
You would apply the same strategy if you had a set of
papers here. You would skim through the set of
papers. While this sounds like a time-consuming extra
step, it actually saves you time in the long run.
Here’s what you might do if you had that stack:
– Sort into three stacks—high, medium, low
– If possible, stack within categories (High + and High -) so that
you have 6 stacks
– Read with hierarchy of concerns in mind
– Provide an end comment that is forward-looking and focused
– Substantiate end comment with a few marginal comments
Minute Paper and the Muddiest
Point
• Write for one minute about the most
important strategy you learned today
• Write for one minute about some topic
from today’s session that you’re unclear
about or would like more information on
As you arrive,
Select Paper 1, 2, or 3
If your name begins with A-H, take a copy of P1
If your name begins with I-R, take a copy of P2
If your name begins with S-Z, take a copy of P3
Review of Holistic Scoring
--Calibration-Examine a holistic rubric
Distinctions between scores
Refinements
Analytic Criteria
Use a scoring tool to assist with
grading
Consider Three Approaches
1) standard rubric
2) benchmark and anchor papers
3) continuum approach
Approach #1: Standard Rubric as
Scoring Tool
Component Parts
• Assignment itself
• Dimensions/priorities/criteria
• Scale with levels of achievement. Levels
can be continuums or reflect categories
such as “proficient,” “competent,” “needs
work.” These need not be points.
• Specific commenting room/space
Standard Rubric for Summary & Response Assignment
Dimension
Excellent
Competent
Needs Work
Clarity and
accuracy of article
summary
Focus of
response
Development,
Organization &
Coherence of
Response
Readability,
Mechanics,
Source Citation
Grade:
Steps for Creating Standard Rubrics or
Scoring Sheets
• List key elements/features to assess, based on
course and assignment objectives
• Refine and simplify key elements, then consider
their relative importance or weight
• Do a common sense check to see if weighting of
criteria is meaningful. Avoid points. Percentages
are better but keep them broad. Too much
refinement can lead to “grade-grubbing.”
• Decide if you’ll give feedback on all criteria, on
certain ones, or only in an end comment
• Make clear where the overall grade appears
Approach 2:
Benchmark and Anchor Papers
Consider writing a paragraph that explains what’s necessary for a
C paper for this assignment. In other words, what MUST a
paper accomplish to be deemed “adequate”?
Then write a paragraph explaining how the B paper improves upon
the C. (The B paper does everything the C paper does but goes
further to…)
Then write a paragraph explaining how the A improves upon the B.
(The A paper does everything the B paper does but goes further
to …)
It can be useful to distribute or post this explanation
Remember: you are only assigning a grade; students earn those
grades. You do not GIVE grades. They do not GET grades.
Consider using a 24-hour moratorium and a conference plan for
grade protests.
Approach 3: The Continuum
Approach
Once you have determined the most important aspects or
criteria for grading, consider using a continuum to
describe where the student is in their application of this
criteria. This avoids the oft-times awkward approach of
assigning points with criteria-based evaluation.
Example (criteria 3) from the Washington State U “Critical
Thinking Guide”:
Identifies and considers salient perspectives and positions
important to the issue’s analysis
Scant
Substantial
----------------------------------------------------------------
Grading Criteria Listed on the
POLS 101 Assignment Sheet
1) Clarity of argument and organization
2) Quality of analysis. You need to make
your position on the issue clear. Provide
arguments that are supported by
information (i.e., evidence)
3) Quality of writing. Your ideas need to be
clearly expressed. This includes proper
spelling, grammar, expression of ideas,
and citation of sources
Do Analytic Scoring
Number off 1-3 and prepare to do ONE form
of analytic scoring
Write a description of your analytic scoring
procedure for this assignment
Show others in your group the way your
application would look or how it would be
described for students
Select best example of 1, 2, 3 and show
whole group
Discussion
• Which forms of analytic scoring do you like
best or do you like pieces of each kind?
• What approach do you think you’ll take
with grading, if you’re allowed to choose
your own method?
• What recommendations would you make
to others about analytic scoring?
Write to Engage
• What was the most helpful feedback
you’ve ever gotten on a piece of writing?
– What made it helpful?
• What was the least helpful feedback
you’ve ever gotten on a piece of writing?
– What made it less than helpful?
• What generalization(s) can we draw from
these experiences?
Responding to WTL/WTE and
Threaded Electronic Discussions (aka
Discussion Forums)
•
If being used, you have basic decisions to make/discuss with prof
about how to read and assess
–
–
–
•
Will you skim every entry and give whole-class feedback?
Will you read a random sample/scheduled group and give feedback to
sample?
Will you decide in advance how many times over semester you will
read and respond to each student?
Then generate accountability
–
–
–
–
–
–
Select good examples to show as models
Use a check mark system for recording—participation?
Observe length of responses
Provide prof with your observations to share with whole class
Discourage “texting” shortcuts in posts and for in-class writing
Expect and enforce a standard of courtesy and academic
professionalism. Contact people on first evidence of discourteous
shared writing. Be prepared for “confessions” of adolescent behavior
Managing Your Time Through a 3Part End Comment
1. Sum up the strengths of the paper
2. Identify the main problems to be worked on
3. Provide a specific suggestion for how to improve the
paper, based on the main problem(s) already identified
And Remember:
• You can’t respond to everything in a paper.
• There are real people on the receiving end.
• Comments are not principally for “justifying” a grade.
Your are providing formative feedback students can
use with the next paper, even if it’s not in this class.
• Consider using questions in your marginal comments.
Peer Review of Comments
1. Identify the major strength your partner noted in this paper. What locations
did the GTA point out to substantiate this claim of strength?
How accurate do you believe this evaluation is?
2. Identify the guidance or advice your partner noted as a central concern in
this paper. What locations did your partner identify to substantiate the
claim of “needs improvement”
How accurate do you believe this evaluation is?
3. Identify the concrete suggestion for improvement that your partner noted.
Would an undergraduate understand this advice and be able to follow it?
How accurate do you believe this advice is?
4. Characterize the tone/attitude of feedback your partner has provided. Could
it be improved and if so, how?
5. Are your partner’s comments forward-looking and formative in nature or do
the comments seem defensive, as if justifying the grade?
Reminder: You Are Managing Your Time By
Choosing Your Battles—hierarchy,
hierarchy, hierarchy!
•
•
•
•
Apply minimal marking technique
Avoid becoming your students’ copy editor as that is NOT your job and error
correction is not instructional. Remember you are part of the instructional
team, not an editor.
To instruct students on grammar issues, look for patterns of error or try to
characterize error if you feel it is impeding the student’s message. Work
with a Top 5 list of errors.
Severe cases should represent <2% of papers. For these, you will need
additional support.
– Non native speaker/writer issues: tenses, dropped articles, strings of sentences
arranged the same
– Learning Disabilities: misspellings even with spell check, omitted words,
homonyms
•
Carelessness: Consider a “return to sender” policy on first occasion or the
“R” grade. Must be approved by professor and not all will believe this is a
good idea.
Commenting Advice
• “The writing teacher’s ministry is not just to the
words but to the person who wrote the words.”
--William Zinsser
• “The best kind of commentary enhances the
writer’s feeling of dignity. The worst kind can be
dehumanizing and insulting—often to the
bewilderment of the teacher whose intentions
were kindly but whose techniques ignored the
personal dimension of writing.”
--John Bean
Common Manifestations of Early
Academic Writing
• And Then writing—chronological structure
• All About writing—everything but the
kitchen sink
• Data Dump writing—no discernable
structure, revealing a student
overwhelmed with information; patching
together of quotes
Did you see any of these in the sample
papers?
Revision Processes and Strategies
for GTA Intervention
Early, mid and late interventions
•
Early
–
–
–
•
Topic proposal (subject, topic, issue, question)
Research question + tentative thesis
Seminal source description
Mid
–
–
–
–
–
•
Annotated bibliography (text partners) or source evaluation
Summary and response to one source
Quote and paraphrase sheet for one source
Introduction review, especially if multiple sources. Use “templates”
for entering conversation
Prospectus in full sentences (one page)
Late
–
–
–
Full draft workshop on one paper
Full draft peer review on all papers
Conference—writers talk about the draft they bring and revision plan
E.B. White and Revision
Revision: literally, to re-see
Errors in Student Writing
• Students’ prose usually contains fewer mistakes than instructors
perceive. Errors are nearly always “patterned” rather than discreet
• Student have more linguistic competence than the surface features
of their prose sometimes indicate
• Errors in student writing increase in direct correspondence to
increasing difficulty of the assignment
• Errors often disappear in students’ prose as they progress through
multiple drafts
• Teachers can expect to see more serious sentence problems in first
drafts and on essay exams
• Not all errors are equal! Imagine the psychology student who does
not know specialized use of the term “affect.” (A more egregious
error than typical misspellings of affect/effect.)
• Don’t get into the habit of correcting student errors. It’s NOT helpful
and it’s a poor use of your time. Mark a paragraph at most and say,
“The problem continues” and explain what the problem, or error
pattern, is. Perhaps it’s not grammar at all but ‘academic voice”??
• Traditional procedures for marking student papers may make
matters worse
Conventions vs. Rules
• Language is fluid and evolving. Rules with language are
hardly stable.
• Consider conventions associated with use of the male
pronoun.
• Consider the Queen’s English vs. Standard English
• Consider conventions associated with source citation.
• Consider the dwindling use of the comma.
• Texting is legitimate language use. (The sky is not
falling.)
• Future language uses: classroom wikis and other
unstable texts
Error Pattern—Simple Form for
Typical Student
• Apply minimal marking to one paragraph
or at most one page of text
• Identify patterns of error or describe
problem you’re seeing
• Require turn in (again) for credit on paper
and only if errors are corrected
• Document problem and check for mastery
application on next writing turned in
Error Pattern Analysis—Mastery
Learning for Tougher Cases
• Minimal Marking in paragraph one only, identifying all errors you see
• Error pattern process works toward your gradual withdrawal of
assistance
• Start by locating ONE error pattern, correcting it, and explaining it
marginally (para 1)
• Next, locate the error and student makes corrections (para 2)
• Use check marks in margin of line with error; student locates error
and corrects (para 3)
• Student independently responsible for application in para 4
• Process can be repeated for any number of errors, one at a time
• If prolific number of errors, an error journal can be started and
maintained by studentas errors are addressed. Student turns in
periodically for your review.
Keep a Top 5 Error List
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
subject–verb agreement
run-on and fragmented sentences
unclear or incorrect pronoun agreement
verb tense inconsistencies
weak comma use
Worksheets don’t work; address these concerns in the
context of students’ own writing. If possible, have them
read aloud to see if they identify the error by
themselves. If so, then errors are careless errors, not
misunderstood principles.
Mis-use of Sources
• Summary
• Quotation
• Paraphrase
Consider use of “templates” as suggested
by They Say, I Say to instruct students
Start your own “text partner” annotated
bibliography
Your Writing
•How can helping undergraduates with their
writing help you with yours?
•E680
•Feedback on Orientation
E680
Fall Semester 2008
• E 680A1-001 (CRN 66728)
– 7:45-9 TR, Clark C-72, Aug 25-Sept 28
• E680A2-002 (CRN 66729)
– 4-5:15 TR Eddy 119, Aug 25-Sept 28
• E680A3-003 (CRN 66730)
– 12:30-1:45 TR Eddy 119, Sept 29-Nov 2
• E680A4-004 (CRN 67513)
– 11:00-12:15 TR Clark C-250, Aug 25-Sept 28
What are the questions you’ll
ask your prof?
The E680 Course Focus
• Academic writing and thinking—what students do in their writing,
what students can learn
• The graduate student as writer
• Intervening in student writing processes and getting students to your
office
• Designing and conducting peer reviews—electronically or in-class.
Peer processes for grad students
• Error Pattern Analysis and dealing with students’ mechanical errors
• Engagement Writing (threaded electronic discussions or in-class)
• The Non Native Speaker as Writer
• In-class graded writing, the essay exam
• Student source usage, citation conventions, and plagiarism
prevention
• Genres, discourse communities, professional writing in the
disciplines
• Your assignments, papers, comments, challenges
Feedback on Session
1. What “stuck” from this week’s training? What will you
use?
2. Was the training too short, too long, or about right?
3. What aspects of your GTA position are you looking
forward to?
4. What parts of your GTA position most concern you?
5. Would you seek out help from Sue on these issues?
6. Will you use the CSU writing web site? the gtPathways
web site?
7. Would you benefit from support for your writing?
8. Would you read a monthly one-page newsletter on
writing integration? If so, what sorts of topics would be
valuable?