Comments on: On the education end of things http://karenrayne.com/2008/11/17/on-the-education-end-of-things/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:28:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: The Eclectic Cleric http://karenrayne.com/2008/11/17/on-the-education-end-of-things/comment-page-1/#comment-3913 The Eclectic Cleric Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:15:59 +0000 http://karenrayne.com/?p=480#comment-3913 I don't know whether we are talking about the same problem or not, but back in the days when I was teaching undergrads I never had much of a problem putting a "grade" on any given assignment . After you've seen 30 (or 50 or 200!) attempts to complete the same assignment, it is fairly easy to sit down at the kitchen table and after just a few minutes assign each paper to it's appropriate pile: A) Truly outstanding work I wish I'd done myself; B) promising and basically competent work perhaps missing just a few important nuances and which, with a little extra study and some solid revision, might easily move into the first category; C) Assignments with one or two (or sometimes more) significant flaws, often accompanied by sloppy organization, poor spelling and grammar, and generally shoddy thinking; D) Assignments which just aren't up to the standards of college coursework, even when accounting for the fact that not all colleges are created equal.... But to get back to my point, the students effectively "graded" their papers for me, by showing me on the spot what they were capable of, and how well they had understood both the material and the assignment. The challenge for me was figuring out how to offer written feedback to their work, BEYOND the Grade (as it were) that might actually be pedagogically useful rather than merely a justification of the letter I have inscribed on their paper (and thence their "permanent academic record:). The "B" papers were actually the most challenging to mark, since the temptation was to edit them extensively; the "A" papers were typically works of beauty in their own right, while the "C" and "D" papers were often beyond cheap grace and quick redemption, and merited instead a referral to the undergraduate writers clinic. Time was a factor too. I generally didn't have an hour or two to devote to each paper; even 15 or 20 minutes per paper was kinda pushing it. So triaging the papers into their respective categories BEFORE I actually began to mark them not only allowed me to give the most time to those students I thought would benefit from it most (and who frankly IMHO Deserved it most because of the effort they had put it), but it also made certain that I read each paper at least twice, and thus helped me to avoid missing things in a quick first reading which really justified giving the paper a better grade than at first I had thought. Anyway, for what it's worth Karen I never did work this all out to my satisfaction, which is why I am back doing the honest and God-fearing work of parish ministry again. I've enjoyed reading your postings here, and I'm sure we'll meet up sometime I don’t know whether we are talking about the same problem or not, but back in the days when I was teaching undergrads I never had much of a problem putting a “grade” on any given assignment . After you’ve seen 30 (or 50 or 200!) attempts to complete the same assignment, it is fairly easy to sit down at the kitchen table and after just a few minutes assign each paper to it’s appropriate pile: A) Truly outstanding work I wish I’d done myself; B) promising and basically competent work perhaps missing just a few important nuances and which, with a little extra study and some solid revision, might easily move into the first category; C) Assignments with one or two (or sometimes more) significant flaws, often accompanied by sloppy organization, poor spelling and grammar, and generally shoddy thinking; D) Assignments which just aren’t up to the standards of college coursework, even when accounting for the fact that not all colleges are created equal….

But to get back to my point, the students effectively “graded” their papers for me, by showing me on the spot what they were capable of, and how well they had understood both the material and the assignment. The challenge for me was figuring out how to offer written feedback to their work, BEYOND the Grade (as it were) that might actually be pedagogically useful rather than merely a justification of the letter I have inscribed on their paper (and thence their “permanent academic record:). The “B” papers were actually the most challenging to mark, since the temptation was to edit them extensively; the “A” papers were typically works of beauty in their own right, while the “C” and “D” papers were often beyond cheap grace and quick redemption, and merited instead a referral to the undergraduate writers clinic.

Time was a factor too. I generally didn’t have an hour or two to devote to each paper; even 15 or 20 minutes per paper was kinda pushing it. So triaging the papers into their respective categories BEFORE I actually began to mark them not only allowed me to give the most time to those students I thought would benefit from it most (and who frankly IMHO Deserved it most because of the effort they had put it), but it also made certain that I read each paper at least twice, and thus helped me to avoid missing things in a quick first reading which really justified giving the paper a better grade than at first I had thought.

Anyway, for what it’s worth Karen I never did work this all out to my satisfaction, which is why I am back doing the honest and God-fearing work of parish ministry again. I’ve enjoyed reading your postings here, and I’m sure we’ll meet up sometime

]]>