News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Oct. 2
The other day, I received an e-mail from a professor at another university who had read a recent article I had written on student writing. He asked me if I could provide some advice to a committee he was serving on that was, as he put it, “looking into the problem of student writing.” He listed a number of questions that he asked me to respond to, including:
What is your perception of student writing?
Does it involve poor understanding of style, grammar, usage, and syntax?
Does it involve the lack of understanding of the form and procedures for producing research papers?
Does it involve the inability to put down coherent and clear thoughts throughout a paper?
Does it involve a lack of understanding of the concentrated thought process required to produce good writing?
Is the problem simply that they are not readers and have little grammar and writing training?
What kinds of programs do you know about that have dealt successfully with the problem?
In response, I wrote,
“I think there is a larger issue that you may have not noted in your series of questions, and that is the notion that student writing in the university is primarily prompted and evaluated by faculty. By that I mean, if all of our questions point to what students can and can’t do, we forget to focus on what faculty can and can’t do. That is, if student writing is always a response to faculty assignments and faculty evaluation, to examine student writing alone misses quite a bit of the overall problem that exists at most universities. The answer to most of your questions is, ‘Yes, many students at the college level do struggle with form and content.’“
“But I would also say that it’s important for us to understand that we get the students we get, and they come with a wide range of skills and attitudes and experiences in writing. It’s our job to help them continue to develop as writers and provide the right kinds of assignments and assessments that help them on that path.”
“I believe that most professors aren’t trained to design effective writing assignments or know what it means to evaluate their students’ writing fairly. In other words, most student writing problems identified by faculty are caused by faculty. Sloppy assignments and grading policies lead to sloppy student writing.”
“So I would say the long and short of it is that the most effective way to improve student writing is to improve faculty performance.”
I realize this sort of response may fall on deaf ears or anger professors who believe their students are not adequately prepared. Nevertheless, I find it curious that those who pose questions about “the problem of student writing” fail to consider that their students might serve as a source of knowledge about how to solve the problem.
Several years ago, in an effort to get an alternative view, I asked students enrolled in my “Teaching Writing” course, a mix of both graduates and undergraduates, to provide their perspectives on writing assignments and to make a list of rights they believed they should be granted when it came to writing assigned by their instructors.
Many of these students were eager to discuss the issue of rights in this context because they felt they had often received poorly designed assignments and had been graded unfairly. And they didn’t want to treat their future students in the same way. They wanted to be better English teachers than those they had encountered. In short, they wanted to have better relationships with their students, and they understood the power writing assignments had to promote or inhibit those relationships.
After a bit of class discussion and informal writing, I stood ready at the board to record their ideas on the board. They created a list of two dozen student writer rights, and as we reviewed and organized this list further, we discovered that this list fell into four main categories: rights related to assignments, the writing process, evaluation, and ownership.
Of these four types of student writer rights, the clear majority — one half of the overall total — were “assignment rights.” My students believed they had the right:
1. To know the writing workload for the term.
2. To assignments relevant to the course.
3. To understand how writing assignments would meet course objectives.
4. To assignments in writing.
5. To ask questions about assignments.
6. To clear explanations of assignments.
7. To evaluation criteria with assignments.
8. To models of effective response.
9. To adequate time to complete assignments.
10. To clearly outlined assignments.
11. To assignments that would not be modified by the instructor after students had already begun writing.
12. To write for real audiences.
In regards to the writing process, they wanted the right to individual conferences with their instructors on works-in-progress, the right to revise the first paper to better understand the instructor’s expectation, and the right to revise without penalty.
“Evaluation rights” included the right to clear policies on grading and late work, the right to objective evaluation, the right to evaluation not based upon the best performance in the class, the right to evaluation and response based upon each writer’s individual needs, the right to question the instructor about the grade received, the right to appeal a grade, and the right to have their work graded and returned promptly.
As for ownership, they believed that they had intellectual property rights over their work and the right to have it kept private.
Writing this long list of rights on the board, I was surprised at their sophisticated understanding of writing assignments. They knew just how dependent they were on good teachers for good writing experiences. The tone of our discussion also revealed how much resentment they felt about being subject to the whims of professors and their lack of knowledge about what students needed to succeed as writers.
Because most college students understand just how powerless they are in the classroom, it is unlikely that they will rise up and demand these rights. Nevertheless, I believe this list offers us powerful information on how we can better respond to the problem of student writing. We should take these rights seriously, try them on for size, and consider how our assignments foster or interfere with our students’ chances of success. I know it has dramatically improved the quality of my assignments and the work I get from my students.
In all of this talk about student writer rights, one might wonder if there should also be some attention paid to a writer’s responsibilities. What responsibilities could we point to that aren’t already in this list of rights? Well, those usually show up as admonitions in most assignments anyway, such as don’t plagiarize, proofread carefully, and provide support for your claims.
Still, I believe that when my students developed this list of rights, they were also asking for the right to know what their responsibilities were. They were asking for a kind of liberation, to be free to understand what is necessary and possible. They wanted to have better writing relationships with their professors, honorable relationships characterized by clear expectations, a fair reading, and respect for the complicated and time-consuming work of the individual writer.
Make that “deaf ears”
Cacambo, at 5:45 pm EDT on October 2, 2006
Most of the “rights” that you list above are generally the assumptions of most writing instructors that I’ve met. If these guidelines aren’t already being followed, then that’s a problem. But maybe they just need to be spelled out more clearly on the syllabus or course policies?
My only gripe would be with the notion that students should have the “right” to question or appeal a grade. On what possible basis would a student appeal a grade that’s been consciously assigned by an instructor? Is there much of a chance that they’re going to point out something that a writing instructor missed? I’d imagine that most instructors are pretty competent readers the first time around. This isn’t a math problem or an objective measurement—it’s a subjective evaluation, and that evaluation has already been made. Are they hoping to just catch the instructor in a better mood? That hardly seems a “right.”
If there’s a question of bias or unfair treatment based on some personal issue, most schools and departments have a mechanism for appealing to a department chair or dean. But if it’s just a matter of a student believing that they deserve a better grade, I’m not sure there’s any grounds for appeal.
I’d say that at most, they have a right to “a thorough explanation of the grade received.”
Jack Trades, at 9:05 pm EDT on October 2, 2006
Item #8 in the list of rights contains the root of the conundrum: Faculty expectations are based on an understanding and familiarity with their subject area that students by definition don’t have the experience to match. An explicit model of an appropriate response seems like an excellent way to address many of the student concerns in the list.
Chris Strauber, Reference Librarian, at 10:20 pm EDT on October 2, 2006
Students interviewing for jobs believed they had the right:• 1. To know the workload for the company so they could chose another if it was too much.• 2. To jobs that only use what they learned in college.• 3. To understand how this job meets their needs.• 4. To assignments in writing (don’t tell me what to do!).• 5. To whine. • 6. To only work with clients who know exactly what they want. • 7. To evaluation criteria for raises irregardless of market conditions. • 8. To other people’s work to copy from.• 9. To adequate time to complete assignments. No rush jobs!• 10. To clearly outlined assignments requiring no judgments on their part.• 11. To a job where project requirements never change once work has started. Who are customers to change their needs?
Actually Laurence Musgrove makes many fine and valid points for beginning college writing courses. But, sometimes it is interesting to turn things about a bit. In upper level courses there is some value to vague (open ended) assignments.
Mike, math prof, at 6:20 am EDT on October 3, 2006
I started off as a writing center director (where I heard about and saw a lot of poorly conceived and poorly written assignments)so everything in this article resonated with me. I went on, though, to became first a writing program director and then an academic dean, and in both capacities I’ve had the privilege of working with faculty on creating effective writing assignments. The good news is that the truths of this article are not that hard a sell:if you put faculty members in a position to make the connection (and this is not that hard either), they quickly catch on to the relationship between muddled papers and muddled assignments, clearer assignments and better student writing. Once faculty see THIS, they’re more or less hooked, and at least in my experience, eager and able to write better assignments. Better assignments inevitably lead to questions of response and evaluation, course goals, audiences, formats, etc. Faculty development is key to improving student learning, and fortunately faculty — at least the faculty I know — are terrific students.
Elizabeth Ciner, Associate Dean of the College at Carleton college, at 11:45 am EDT on October 3, 2006
An actual “appeal” process might do some good for everyone. Unfortunately, many (but not all) schools are incapable of administering it.
First of all, it is entirely possible that an instructor made an error when grading. An appeal procedure could easily force instructors to remedy such errors. I don’t think anyone would have any objection to ordering the procedure. Moreover, to the extent feasible, information about the change of grade should be disclosed. (To comply with the FERPA, the underlying paper could probably be disclosed, with the name of the student redacted. This would allow 3d parties to see if the department is capitulating based on department politics.)
Secondly, some professors have illegal grading schemes which can only be remedied by recourse to higher authority. For example, refusing to award “As” to first year students is probably illegal. A transparent appeal procedure generally eliminates these problems.
Third, requiring professors to generate a record of their courses ensures that everyone in the class has an equal opportunity to learn. Some instructors are in the habit of teaching their favorites differently, thereby prejudicing those that are not their favorites. Requiring documentation of what is taught to who will at least ensure that college courses don’t become an exercise in favoritism.
In my experience, the more open the process, the less burdensome it is for administrations. While students like to whine about low grades, they hate doing it when their written work is subject to public review. (Indeed, on IHE, despite students whining about political biases resulting in lower grades, not one student has posted a paper (with the offending grade and comments) which they received a politically-motivated low grade on because, quite frankly, they probably understand that the quality of their work is low.)
As to standards of review of instructors, it is likely sufficient for review boards to defer on close questions to the instructor. However, it is not sufficient for review boards to defer to the instructor on vague assertions regarding the nature of their subject.
Larry, at 2:00 pm EDT on October 3, 2006
Larry (or anyone else): Can you provide an example of an “error” that a writing instructor might make in evaluating the quality of a student’s writing? And please explain the quantitative method that a student might use to spot this error and bring it to the instructor’s attention. Would it be something along the lines of: “Look, Professor Trades, this isn’t actually an awkward sentence—my MSWord grammar check says that it’s fine.” Or would it be something like, “Actually, my argument is very clear and concise—you just didn’t get it.” What are the chances that that’s so?
My point, again, is that, unlike a math problem, there is no “correct answer” to the assignment in a writing class that can be objectively determined (other than mechanical problems, about which I can’t imagine any disagreement). There’s only a qualitative assessment of whether or not the student has written a clear and cogent essay—and the instructor is the one charged with making that assessment. On what grounds, other than personal bias, can that assessment be “appealed"?
I’m pretty sure that there’s no legal requirement that an instructor give “A"s in any course, so whether it’s an official policy or just a personal preference, I don’t see much basis for appeal on those grounds either. So how do you argue entitlement to a better opinion of your work?
Jack Trades, at 6:10 am EDT on October 4, 2006
Jack,
At a minimum, a mathematical error is an “error” that can be corrected on appeal. (I will set aside the philosophical question of whether math is objective.”) For instance, if a professor were to grade take off one point for each spelling error, and there were five spelling errors, but the professor took off eight points, a student could show his erroneous math.
Secondly, if a professor is supposed to be teaching about “writing clearly” or according to certain rules, a professor that declares some usage to be incorrect, yet claims that say, Strunk and White, is the “authority” would have made an error if the student’s work conformed to S&W. If the professor can’t cite what authority he relies upon and he simply says “it just popped out at me,” or something else, then the professor has some real problems.
Third, in general, most rules about “awkwardness” can be articulated. For instance, the use of the passive voice can easily be identified, and students can be told to not use it, and harshly punished for using it. Ironically, lawyers will often be in the position of writing in the passive voice when distinguishing arguments that are countervailing.
Larry, at 12:35 pm EDT on October 4, 2006
It seems to me that the greatest difficulty for the student in writing papers is the perceived randomness of grades. Even students who read a lot may not be familiar with the style expected in a given area of expertise, or with how much detail the instructor expects them to put into fleshing out the argument. Fiction reading does not translate well into philosophy papers, except perhaps in the superficials of grammar and spelling. The suggested models are really the crux of the issue, as Chris Strauber points out; faculty know what a good history paper or piece of literary analysis looks like, whereas students may have never before had occasion to encounter these modes.
Lisa, at 7:40 pm EDT on October 4, 2006
I have doubts about habitually showing a specific model for an assignment. I feel it can lead students to imitate that assignment rather than finding their own response.
Doesn’t simply reading examples of good writing (as opposed to examples of certain assignments) accomplish similar goals?
Leslie, at 6:55 pm EDT on October 8, 2006
Leslie,
I think that models of good writing in that area would serve the same purpose. In fact, that was what I assumed the author meant — models of what a history paper should look like, or of how a lab report ought to be structured. Not a sample of “A good report on East Monrovia” or whatever the assignment at hand might be.
Lisa, at 5:50 am EDT on October 9, 2006
The problem that plagues writing is the subjectivity of the grading. Try this experiment — have 10 english professors grade the exact same paper without conversing with each other. You will surely see 10 different sets of comments, with some intersection, to be sure, but mostly different. You will see a spread of grades that probably ranges from A+ to C- (thats what we got when we did this with some of my high school teachers). How is this fair to the student?
Kevin, Undergraduate, at 1:45 pm EDT on October 12, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The ideal candidate will have experience in the teaching of composition and rhetoric and a variety of literature courses. see job
Appalachian State University is a member institution of the sixteen-campus University of North Carolina System. Located in ... see job
Position Title: Faculty, College Prep Reading (2117701) Position ID: 2117701 Salary: Based on educational experience FLSA: ... see job
[ Position Number: FY 07-8 ] Reports to Chairperson of English & Communications Department Scope: The applicant’s primary ... see job
Position Title: Adjunct Faculty, Speech — 2 positions available (2842402) Position ID: 2842402 Salary: $37.50-$37.50 FLSA: ... see job
St. Lawrence University invites applications for a one year visiting position in early modern literature with an emphasis on ... see job
Earned Ph.D in English by August 2007 with a specialization in Twentieth Century Literature and Film. Desired literary ... see job
Appalachian State University is a member institution of the sixteen-campus University of North Carolina System. Located in ... see job
A tenure-track position to teach TESOL and TESOL methods courses within a Linguistics Studies Program. Ph.D. in TESOL or ... see job
The Department of English at Northern Illinois University seeks a colleague at the level of assistant professor with ... see job
Advertisement
Middle of the afternoon and not one comment? Dear ears indeed!
Cacambo, at 3:35 pm EDT on October 2, 2006