In the past few months, as I’ve read about curriculum and instruction, I’ve had some “eureka” moments. I’ve had some of my own small paradigm shifts in the way I view teaching and curriculum, and I’ve looked at my past practices in new ways. These readings brought out another one.
Rose writes that writing is judged by the presence of error, and Mutrick writes that that absence of error doesn’t guarantee good writing—a couple of the writing samples from Bartholomae’s show that. Countless essays and papers and other writings being graded, and it never really occurred to me that what I was doing was focusing on what students did wrong to judge their writing. That’s not to say I ignored what they did right—I tried to give at least two positive comments for every correction or suggestion—but that still doesn’t mask the fact that I was marking errors.
Too often I assumed the errors came from lack of attention to detail, apathy, or not trying. While sometimes that was the case, after reading Shaughnessy’s thoughts on error, I realize there’s another way I can look at it. I can see their errors as attempts to write more complex sentences or vivid detail. Trying to improve their writing and experiment and move out of their comfort zones.
Shaughnessy suggests viewing errors as those efforts to branch out and do more. That errors can show me what I need to do and teach rather than what the student has failed to do. I never really looked at it that way.
You could say it’s semantics. But I think that Shaughnessy’s way of looking at error is inherently more positive and helpful to the student—and me in deciding how to guide that student in his or her writing. Basic writers often face enough frustration in their writing. I’ve always felt in my heart that constant grading and corrections don’t necessarily help them increase their comfort levels, but the reality in the system in which we work is that work must eventually be judged and graded.
Maybe looking at the nature of error and changing the way I view it will make that process easier—and more enriching—for all involved.
NOTE:
I do think, practically and realistically speaking, that there needs to be some kind of judgment when looking at the errors students are making. As a teacher who knows them and their abilities, I think there’s a difference in a student who is not trying to improve his or her writing and therefore makes basic mistakes and one whose mistakes come from that desire to try to improve their writing and write in new and complex ways. Not as easy task, that’s for sure. But there does need to be some level of accountability for students . . . I find the errors and help them discover how to correct and improve them, but they need to make the effort to follow through and do so.
Interestingly, I find myself as the teacher in two full classes of reluctant learners. I say learners as opposed to writers and readers because I ask them to even freewrite and they just stare and do nothing. I'm not sure how this wall was build, or how even six weeks into the semester it is still withstanding my requests, but there it stands, me on one side, the students on the other. I have always tried to find the purpose behind errors in writing and development, but this semester is proving to be a challenge. There is some kind of disconnect. Once the wall to education is built, it certainly is difficult to penetrate!
ReplyDeleteJess: First, it's really cool to hear you mention this "aha!" moment regarding student error. I have to say, this concept is a bit blurry for me, as I have yet to step into the classroom with the goal of teaching writing in mind. Thank you for sharing!
ReplyDeleteTeacher Girl: I'm wondering if you could find a way to trick your students into writing. I know it sounds kind of awful, but since "literacy" can also be defined in terms of cultural literacy, visual literacy, etc. perhaps you can substitute freewriting exercises with free...thinking? I'm not trying to be a hippie here--what I mean is, what if a student has to draw what they want to say/what they interpret from a reading, etc. What if they had to describe, to a group (orally) a particular topic. What if they had to use different media to make connections: film, commercials, cartoons, etc.? I don't mean that they don't have to write...but maybe offer them various ways to map-out their own thinking process? I'm stuck, now, between the school of thought that allows for students to come up with their own talking points and prompting them. It sounds a lot like what Annette spoke about before--that structures help some times for some students in some situations, etc. Honestly this is just a suggestion! I kind of don't know what I'm talking about :-D
where can i purchase the "don't make me get out my red pen" shirt?
ReplyDelete