This weeks reading brought me back to our very first class. We went around in a circle and voiced something we were looking to learn in this course. I said that I wanted to learn how to correct or grade student papers when there are so many mistakes you don't know where to start or where to place priority. Funny how our last reading answered my question; I should have known Christensen would have the answer!
So, to answer past me: do like Christensen and don't grade papers, but rather look for strengths and give sensitive and encouraging feedback. I always love the vignettes about Christensen's students, but I really really love the one in chapter six, about Nathan and the way he progressed from writing one or two reserved sentences to writing a more vulnerable and personal paragraph. Thats amazing, and Nathan's second go at the assignment made me smile. His love of football was palpable in that small piece and that is good writing, even if he had spelling and capitalization mistakes.
I love the way Christensen handles Nathan's writing––giving feedback that pertains to the story being told and then later paying attention to the writing conventions that need to be addressed. Honestly, I don't think I have ever written something, with no correction, that had perfect grammer. I am constantly mixing up the em dash and the comma and at times I have certainly capitalized a word that was perfectly okay with a lowercase letter. This is not even to mention spelling. With this in mind, it would only make sense to address conventions after I have gave feedback on content. After all, I am much more comfortable with content than conventions.
At the end of the day, I understood Nathan's writing. Sure, I noticed the misspelled words and the choppy sentences, but these things didn't get in the way of his message. I still felt smelting when I read his piece. I suppose that is the goal: to engage students in meaningful writing and to watch the way they utilize language––to foster a relationship between the student and the act of writing. The truth is, all students will have a different relationship with writing, one that progresses well beyond their days in your classroom. Some students may write for newspapers, and some may hardly write at all, but they may leave your classroom with a confidence in themselves and what they have to say, and this is important for all people.
I also liked the way Christensen touched on Ebonics/AAVE and their role in students writing. This brought to back to our class a few weeks ago about ELL students and the writing process. It is really just about being understood, and writing in a fashion that suites you and your needs. The student is the subject, the student determines the rigor, not testing platforms.
Turner and Hicks also offered a message that encouraged teachers to not judge but "coach" student in writing. I think this is great because it really further defines your role as teacher: a judge is distant, all knowing, and accusatory, but a coach is encouraging, caring, and forgiving. As mentioned above, I am not the knower of all grammar rules so I should not be the judge. Instead, I strive to be the coach, working with students, figuring things out, exploring new ideas, and holding space for the personal narratives that mean so much to students, peer, and teachers.
I really liked how you talked about the relationship between student and teacher as a coaching rather than from a place of judgement. I think that Christensen as usual got it perfectly right by saying it that way. Our job as teachers is not entirely free of evaluation because we have a job to do. Complete lack of judgement is something only their friends have the luxury of doing and teachers serve a different purpose than just being friendly. We have to critique but without being critical and it's a fine line. Another way I think to describe this relationship is being an ally. It's when we meet them as equals that they begin to really listen to us. If we try to put ourselves in a place of superiority, we lose their attention and belief, but walking by their side will earn us respect and appreciation.
ReplyDeleteMaddy,
ReplyDeleteI am in awe of your description of the relationship Christensen has with Nathan. I did not give much thought about this part. Thank you for sharing your perspective. I smile when you say you should have known about how to grade the students. The funny thing is that I have never really grade my students for years because when I do grade rigorously, I faced two crises. One crisis is that there is a group of students who work very hard, but did not meet the rigorous expectation. Another group of students who never work hard, but did meet the rigorous expectation. I saw that it was unfair, so I stopped giving a rigorous grading system. I give them credits based on their efforts and their real skills.
Maddsters,
ReplyDeleteI love how you connected it back all the way to our first class together! I honestly do not remember what I said, but I remember that you said that. I'm so glad your question was finally answered!
I love that you said sensitive and encouraging feedback. That, to me, is a very interesting and great way of putting it. We do need to be sensitive to our students, as to not discourage them from wanting to write ever again. We need to be constructive, but like you said, sensitive. We need to guide, motive, and push them, al while being sure that they get all the help they need. There's a lot more to reviewing a student's work than simply reading to grade, and it's great that this is how we ended the course! :)