I thought Elbow’s contract idea, though controversial and obviously provocative, at its base a mere calling to do what it is that we already tell our students. Emphasizing that there is no way that one can pass the class if they do not come and do not do the work is essentially suggesting that attendance and complete work are the key to passing. I’m not sure I would go so far as the suggested contract to agree on a “B” in a writing class merely for showing up and turning in a piece of writing, but it does look like an interesting place to start. Maybe attendance and complete work is a “C”, but peer review, conferences, drafts, and revisions of your writing are what earn you the “B” or the “A”. More work, not just good work. Because it is more work to get a B or an A, even if you are a good writer.
As much this model would strive to help move us and our students away from the obsession with grades, and “put more energy into figuring out which activities most reliably produce learning and less energy into figuring out a numerical grade for a piece of writing,” students are motivated by grades-- and not necessarily because of any selfish, obsession with a letter on a page. These students are here on scholarship, and accepting awards with GPA requirements. Until we are teaching writing in a situation where assessment is no longer on a point value system, but rather holistically examining how much a student has learned over the course of a semester, we can never remove ourselves from the grade point system or our students’ need for “good grades.”
I feel that we can’t go about using this model, or even “fixing” this problem of how to instate a more holistic system until the problems that Elbow finds for this model are addressed first. Until students are not put under so much pressure to preform (get an “A”), until the students who feel alienated from writing are being taught strong, useful writing tools before they get to college, we can’t pull one of the only stable things they have (reliance/understanding of grading) out from under them. And, that being the case, what is it that we should be telling them instead of “come to class, do the work, and you will pass”?
I’m not sure what, exactly, is making me hesitant to jump in bed with Inoue’s Community Based Assessment. I am always encouraging my students to question my assessments, the assessments of their peers, and even assessments they get in other classes, however, the idea of them creating their own rubric/assessment pokes me in the wrong way. I wonder how much student’s can assess themselves at the level we are teaching since, obviously, college is a time when a lot of alternative thinking about themselves magically and systematically occurs. Can they assess themselves as soon as they walk in the door? Do they feel comfortable doing so?
ReplyDeleteI know, as a once college freshmen, I had no idea what my professors were looking for when it came to my writing (or math or sciences for that matter), and I didn’t know what to look for myself. I relied on professors to tell me what the standard was. Even though Inoue has student input, it sounds like, when it gets down to it, Inoue is the one who guides the discussion and writes the final rubric.
I agree with the sorrow of grade-motivated students, but that seems a bigger issue than can simply be addressed in a freshman comp class. However, I do make it clear to my students at all times how I am grading them, and that students who show improvement in their writing, no matter at what level, are liable to get grades that reflect that. In a subjective field I don’t see how helpful it is to reward students for the things they were doing right or wonderfully when they came in the door, but how much their writing improves, no matter from what stage.
Also, I’m sorry, I have no idea how to create my own posting here, so I am piggybacking off of yours. Sorry! If I learn how to solve that before class starts I’ll fix it, else I’ll just hang this here, like an awkward hat on a hook meant for keys.
Megan: I agree that students being motivated by grades isn't all negative. I like the idea of an A-C contract to start. There are a lot of things about contracts to like, but I keep thinking about students I've had like the one Jonah described on Tuesday. Students who do all the work diligently but simply can't write at the college level. Under contract grading, that student would pass with a B, and I would be riddled with guilt thinking of all the problems that B would cause him/her in later English classes.
ReplyDeleteBeth! I agree! Don't we have some kind of accountability to our students to prepare them for their future experiences/expectations with writing?
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, what about the students who we just cannot give enough time to get them to the same "B" range as everyone else.
Is there a case for a student-by-student grading model? Is a "B" for one student different than for another?