Grading, Authenticity, and WAC

With this blog I will maintain focus. I’ve read over my previous writings this semester (and a previous one) and found that I often choose an idea, then proceed to splatter a stream of consciousness rant about it for paragraph or two, sometimes four. Not this time. I will be the anti-me. I will work towards my set objective. I’ve sat down and thought about what I was going to write on and off for several hours. Peter Elbow must surely despise this.

For some reason, I am staring at a blank page. I’m gazing at the series of quotes I wanted to elaborate on, but my mental analyses of them are all running together. Perhaps, I will attempt to mix some structure with chaos. If the final result is unreadable or unsatisfactory, you will not have read this sentence.

Quote 1: from Grading Student Papers
“Another very visible pedagogical feature of the current-traditional approach lies in how teachers grade student papers: They edit them as though they are preparing manuscripts for publication, even though students never have the opportunity to correct mistakes, then assign a grade at the end of the paper followed by a written comment justifying the grade” (45).

Commentary:
Tisk, tisk tisk. This drove me mad when I was a high school student. I think it would drive me mad now. Punishment, it seems, is encoded into our psyche. I am not convinced that it is the ultimate deterrent though (I WILL maintain focus here). Suppose a student is assigned a paper in which he/she is supposed to debate an issue. They hand the paper in, and plan to receive it back in a day or so. They spent an enormous amount of energy developing their argument and have done a massive amount of research. They are able to provide beautiful metaphors and rely heavily on pathos that comes across as both thought provoking and genuine. In fact, the paper is brilliant. It is perhaps the greatest paper developed by a middle school student to have come across the desk of Mr. Bean. But when the student receives it back, the page is filled with red slashes. Even the C+ at the top is carved in red. Does this student deserve to be punished with a C+ when the student next row over has provided a lackluster argument but was grammatically perfect? It seems almost laughable, but who in their right mind would consider this anything by a preventative punishment. Real speech is messy, and like Williams states elsewhere in the book almost void of analysis by auditory means (structurally) (*). I’ve noticed that some professors at PSU actually have given students a chance to redo their paper if it a grammatical atrocity. I like this idea. A lawyer would never win in court if his argument were horrendous. But, a few slips of grammatical accuracy will not affect the outcome of the trial (in most cases).

Quote 2: from The Allure of Authenticity
“[The New English movement] allow students to use their own powers, to make discoveries, to take alternative paths. It does not suggest that the world can best be examined by a set of rules. It does not utilize Errors Approach. It constantly messes around with reality, and looks for strategies and tactics that work… The program gives the student first, freedom, to find his voice and let his subjects find him; and second, discipline, to learn more professional craft to supplement his already considerable language skills” (61).

Commentary:
Yes

Quote 3: from WAC at the Middle and High School Levels
“They do writing that is focused in ways that help them master content. In the process of writing about the subject matter of a course, students learn more about it and simultaneously gain familiarity with the language and writing conventions of the discipline” (70).

Commentary:
I deeply agree with WAC. I would even go as far to consider it essential. I can state for myself that I have forgotten much about courses I’ve taken in college that reply on memorization and circle the correct option “skills”. Why the hell is multiple guess even an option? Even societies like Mensa have adopted this format for intelligence measurement on their tests. It doesn’t guarantee you will get a better score, but it DOES give you a 25% chance each question. Mathematically, it does not favor the student, but it does leave a window open for inaccuracy (I wonder how many Mensa certified “geniuses” are actually better guessers or lucky chaps). Even an exercise as simple as vocabulary does not necessarily deserve to have a multiple-choice option. Teachers can provide an exam that allows students to put practical use to words (ala a written paragraph or two that makes use of the weekly words).




*I cannot find the direct quote since the time I’ve read it over a week ago.