Students who are able to do this quickly and accurately are perceived as brighter and are rewarded with higher grades and more positive feedback. Students who have difficulty in perceiving the answer the teacher is seeking may well be viewed as less competent and are less tolerated. In far too many classrooms, teachers do not require students to think deeply or move beyond the basic knowledge and comprehension level. As knowledge in the world continues to explode at exponential levels, this is no longer practical.
Indeed, the university criteria for Comm-B and Writing-Intensive courses mandate that instructors build the revision process into their courses—and for good reason.
Research has consistently shown that the best, most experienced writers regularly revise their writing in substantive ways. Why spend time teaching students how to revise their writing?
Students can experiment and take chances with low-stakes writing early on in a revision process and engage more comfortably in high-stakes writing when a paper is due. Students practice their academic and professional planning skills. You can evaluate how well students understand course concepts by watching how they teach each other during revision activities.
You might better leverage your time by receiving quality work that actually takes less time to evaluate. Why do students resist revision? It is surely true that some students choose not to revise because it is demanding work. But there may be other reasons as well.
Some students may not meet our expectations for revision because they understand the term very differently than we do. I go over and change words around.
It is looking at something and saying, no that has to go, or no, that is not right. Instructors of Comm-B and WI courses, no doubt, have the latter definitions in mind. Students may be willing to revise and may comprehend the kinds of revision that their instructors have in mind, but still make only superficial corrections to their drafts because they lack specific strategies to help them successfully undertake more fundamental revisions.
With these possible explanations in mind, we offer the following suggestions—based on our own experiences and our conversations with instructors across the campus—for encouraging and teaching students to revise: Write your definition in your syllabus and discuss it in class with students.
One definition we particularly like: Model for students what you have in mind by sharing a before-and-after example of a revised paper; some instructors give examples from previous students, others share examples of revisions undertaken by famous authors.
Consider sharing a piece of your own drafts and revised writing. Address the common belief that good writing comes naturally and does not need to be revised. Focus your comments on the revisions that will be most beneficial. Faced with lots of commentary on a draft, some students miss the big points or are simply too overwhelmed to engage in revision at all.
In your conferences or in written comments, set priorities. Try to make sure your marginal comments reflect those priorities. Avoid abstract terms when giving feedback. Pass out your criteria or grading rubric before the assignment is due and ask students to use the criteria to evaluate a sample essay.
Have students spend time generating their own criteria for the assignment. Provide your students with specific strategies and models.
You can also help students begin to revise by being concrete about how to revise and showing them step-by-step what revision looks like. Often such explanations are more easily and efficiently conveyed in one-on-one conferences.
Practice reverse outlining in class—a strategy particularly useful for organizational revision. A detailed explanation of reverse outlining can be found in this sourcebook. Lead a whole-class workshop of a model paper.
Pass out a sample that is very successful, needs revision, or exhibits a particular quality you want to discuss. Give students time to write marginal or endnotes and then discuss it as a class.
Motivate students to revise. Acknowledge how difficult—even discouraging—the revision process can be.A successful writing-across-the-curriculum program therefore demands some conceptual blockbusting. One of the best blockbusters we have discovered is the microtheme--an essay so short that it can be typed on a single five-by-eight inch note card (Work, ).
The rubrics for the AP History Document-Based Question (DBQ) and Long Essay Question (LEQ) have been modified for the –18 school year, using feedback received from AP teachers and Readers and in tandem with recently announced changes to the Course and.
"Mastering Short Response Writing" is an interesting book directed mostly at teachers but I think quite useful for parents. Alan Sitomer, a California Teacher of the Year, has developed a method of teaching students to write effective, concise, and pithy iridis-photo-restoration.coms: 9.
Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be both scientific and factual, but are incompatible with the scientific method.
Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to .
Standards Aligned System. The Standards Aligned System (SAS), developed by the Pennsylvania Department of Education, is a comprehensive, researched-based resource to improve student achievement.
The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty.