Portfolio Grading in GNED 102

1. Portfolio Grading in GNED 102 Matthew Fike Department of English Winthrop University Fall 2006

2. Point of View • I have taught 4 sections of GNED 102 over a two-year period. • I have also taught the other courses in Winthrop’s writing sequence: WRIT 101 and CRTW 201. • As an English professor, I believe that GNED 102 is a writing course, not merely “a course involving a significant amount of writing.”

3. Context • GNED 102 is nestled in between WRIT 101 and CRTW 201. • WRIT 101: Moves from exposition to argumentation. • CRTW 201: Stresses argumentation with explicit reference (esp. at the prewriting stage) to the elements of critical thinking and the standards of good writing.

4. Question at Issue • Given GNED 102’s position in the curriculum, what is the nature of the writing that students should do in the course, and what is the best way to get them to do it successfully?

5. Major Assumption • Type of writing: Argumentation according to the classical argument: • Introduction • Background • Arguments • Objections • Replies (concession and rebuttal) • Conclusion

6. Further Assumptions • Winthrop students, if they already knew how to write argumentative papers about the Self in connection with anthology pieces, would not need to take GNED 102. • Not knowing how to do that sort of writing, they cannot do an argumentative paper right on the first try. • Therefore, assigning rubric-based grades to first drafts of papers is punitive: students are in GNED 102 to learn what they need to know, not to be punished for not knowing it right from the start.

7. Final Assumption • It follows that we need an approach to grading that involves more than assigning a rubric-based grade to the first draft of a paper.

8. Position • On the basis of those assumptions, I want to develop two points in this presentation: • First, there must be a significant process component in the course: students must have multiple chances to get a paper right. • Second, an excellent way to implement a process component is to use a portfolio system.

9. Key Concepts • Such a system emphasizes process writing and prewriting: • There is a heavy emphasis on prewriting, the writing one does before writing a first draft. • Invention (idea generation) takes place at the prewriting stage. • The instructor responds to students’ work at various stages. • Conferences are an integral part of that responding process. • Point: Students are allowed more than one try to get a paper right (process).

10. Background: My Use of Portfolios • I have not yet used portfolio grading in GNED 102, but I am going to implement it next semester. • However, I have used the portfolio system in ENGL 305, currently use it in CRTW 201 (Critical Reading, Thinking, Writing), and used it successfully in first-year writing courses at another institution.

11. Footnote • Stages of my ENGL 305/Shakespeare writing assignment: • Paper proposal • Analysis paper • Annotated bibliography • Outline including research • Full researched draft • Final researched draft • Cover letter • The portfolio contains all of these items, but I only grade the cover letter and the final researched draft. • Instead of grading just the final 25 papers, I instead grade 175 assignments over the course of the semester. • Point: A process/portfolio system takes some juice to implement.

12. Information: Grading in CRTW • Process: 55% • Portfolio: 45% • Students must achieve 70% on each component—process and portfolio—in order to avoid retaking the class because of a grade below C.

13. Amplification • Students may not blow off the process assignments, submit a brilliant portfolio, and pass the class with a C or better. • No amount of excellent prewriting will enable them to get a C or better if the portfolio is insufficient.

14. Objection • If the final portfolio is in good shape, who cares whether students did the process assignments? • Response: Even excellent writers can improve their ability if they engage with the writing process. A portfolio system’s process component encourages the whole spectrum of student writers—developmental to advanced.

15. Information: Requirements • 10 - Two exercises (5@):  2 pages minimum • 15 - Three short essays (5@):  4 pages minimum • 10 - Two revisions (5@) •   5 - Research paper:  8 pages minimum •   5 - Group presentation in class (analysis of Fukuyama chapter) • 10 - Two conferences (5@) • 45 - Portfolio (cover letter, 5; revision of one short essay, 10; revision of research paper, 20; final examination, 10)

16. In Other Words • This system involves 10 process assignments: • 2 exercises • 3 paper drafts • 2 paper rewrites • 1 draft of the research paper • 2 conferences

17. Plus a Final Portfolio • Final Portfolio: • Cover letter • Revision of one short essay • Revision of the research paper • Final examination (by the end of the semester, students should be able to produce a rubric-quality response on a first try)

18. Process 2 exercises 3 paper drafts 2 paper rewrites 1 draft of the research paper 2 conferences Portfolio Cover letter Revision of one short essay Revision of research paper Final examination The Combined Requirements

19. Summary • 12 pieces of writing • 2 conferences • In other words, the system averages one contact point per student per week.

20. Grade Estimation Sheet • http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/Courses/CRTW%20201/CRTW%20201%20Grade%20Estimation%20Sheet.htm

21. Paper Comment Sheet for CRTW 201 • http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/Courses/CRTW%20201/CRTW%20201%20Comment%20Sheet.htm

22. Paper Comment Sheet for GNED 102 • Paper grading sheet: http://faculty.winthrop.edu/fikem/Courses/GNED%20102/GNED%20102%20Comment%20Sheet.doc

23. How To Use the Paper Comment Sheet • BE POSITIVE: Encourage students to build on what is already good in their papers. • Therefore, in CRTW, I check mark only the things that achieve a satisfactory rating. I leave the rest blank and write comments in the right margin and in the space at the end. But I stress that getting a check mark indicates minimum competence, not perfection. The paper component may still need more work.

24. Rubrics • My syllabus has a rubric for each type of process assignment.

25. Information: Grading • Process papers require the following elements for a 5/5:  minimum page length, a focused topic, a paragraph on assumptions, multiple paragraphs on objections and replies, and MLA format (parenthetical citation, works cited list).  These elements do not have to be perfect, but they must be present in your papers.  Your use of MLA format after Paper One, though, must be perfect.  I will deduct 1 point for each missing element (or for botched citations or entries).  Remember:  This is not freshman year; expository papers will not cut it.  Note well:  Revisions must reflect substantive, higher-order rethinking of your argument, not merely superficial correction.  I will deduct points from papers that have not been carefully rethought and reworked:  revisions must be substantively different from first drafts in order to receive full credit.

26. Another View • 4 pages minimum • A focused topic • A paragraph on assumptions • A multiple paragraphs on objections and replies • And MLA format (parenthetical citation, works cited list) 

27. Information: Grading • The syllabus says that I will subtract 1 point out of 5 for each feature that is missing. • In actual practice, I have been deducting .5 point or nothing at all. (You cannot be tougher than the syllabus allows, but if you are more lenient students will be grateful.)

28. Information: Grading • Conferences require that you bring two copies of the paper that you want to discuss and that you ask questions, make comments, float solutions, etc.  If you do these things, you will receive 5/5.  If you omit any of them, you will receive 4/5.  There will be no credit for missed conferences.  If I let you make up a conference (and that is a big "if"), you will not receive credit.  Be sure when you sign up that you are actually free at the specified time, mark it down on your calendar, and be sure to show up on time.  Conferences should last approximately 15 minutes.

29. Another View • A student brings 2 copies of the paper (the original graded draft and a photocopy). • S/he has a list of questions/suggestions/ comments to discuss with me. • If they do both of these things, they receive 5/5. If there is an omission, they receive 4/5. A missed conference equals 0/5.

30. Information: Grading Rubric • Portfolio grading:  A description of letter grades for writing assignments can be found at http://www.winthrop.edu/english/rubric.htm.  Incorrect use of MLA format after the submission of Paper One will cost you points.  This is your third semester of using it, so it is high time that you got straight on it.  Follow the models in your handbook.

31. CRTW 201 At least 6,000 words of graded writing. At least 4 graded essays, including a 6-10 page research paper. GNED 102 At least 55% of the course must be based on writing. At least 4 papers. At least 20%, on oral communication. 201 vs. 102 Requirements

32. Process: 30% Each first or second draft is worth 5 points. Example: Paper One—10 points First draft: 5 Second draft: 5 GRADING BASED ON THE PRESENCE, NOT THE QUALITY, OF SPECIFIED COMPONENTS Portfolio: 30% 5%: Cover Letter 10%: Best 1 of the first 3 papers 15%: Paper 4 RUBRIC-BASED GRADING Portfolio Grading in GNED 102 with a 60% Writing Requirement

33. Overall Requirements • 30% - process • 30% - portfolio (rubric-based grading) • 20% - oral communication • 10% - quizzes • 10% - final examination (rubric-based grading)

34. What Is a Cover Letter? • A self-analytical cover letter requires students to think about their semester’s work in GNED 102. • Things they should comment on in the letter: • Their writing process • Their strengths and weaknesses as writers • Their development as writers over the course of the semester • Why they selected a particular paper for the portfolio • Questions they want you to answer • What has meant the most to them in the course and why (readings?)

35. Footnote • In ENGL 305, the cover letter is receives process credit based on length.

36. Question • Do students turn in their previous drafts with my comment sheets when they submit their portfolios? • Yes, they use a paper clip to hold together the most recent draft (on top) followed by earlier drafts and comments sheets. • I review my earlier comments to help me see whether there has been substantial improvement.

37. Question • How do I grade a portfolio? • Answers: • Quickly. • According to the rubric. • Holistically (“concerned with wholes rather than analysis or dissection into parts”—American Heritage Dictionary): • I get an impression of the full paper and put a grade on it. • This presupposes that I have internalized the rubric. • I do not write many comments or mark all errors. • It is very possible to do this without a comment sheet. • Possible compromise: An abbreviated comment sheet or a checklist.

38. Objection • How do I justify not putting lots of comments on final papers? • Response: I look at multiple drafts earlier in the semester, and I meet with each student at least twice. Long commentary belongs earlier in the semester when it will help students improve, not at the end when they will ignore it if they even bother to pick up their papers. (The Department of English stores students’ work when the semester is over.)

39. Implications of Portfolio Grading • The instructor becomes more like a coach or a healer than like a disciplinarian. • Early failure does not mean that the student will fail the course. • Students emphasize improvement over writing to get a grade. • Papers in the portfolio are probably third to fifth drafts: students learn that good writing requires a lengthy process of prewriting, writing, conferencing, and revision. • And a major portion of the evaluation is for the level the student has achieved by the end of the semester.

40. Consequence • If you nurse students along with process assignments and then reward them at the portfolio stage, you will avoid comments like these on course evaluations: • He’s impossible! • We never knew what he wanted! • He’s unfair! • We have to agree with his point of view! • I would not recommend this class! • Change the professor!

41. Consequence: Better Course Evaluations • “The biggest weakness I have is procrastinating. … Thankfully…the overall product required steps throughout the semester. Honestly, had the project not been structured as such, I would have done appallingly on this paper. Having pieces due at various times throughout the semester allowed me time to pick a more specific topic, refine my thesis, meet with Dr. Fike, and generally organize my thoughts and argument. The time required also allowed me to find more applicable sources and learn how to better locate sources for any research paper.” --ENGL 305 Student, Cover Letter

42. Another Comment • “I like the portfolio method because it allowed me to see my writing as a whole, and I can ‘see’ the progress.” --ENGL 305 Student, Cover Letter

43. Comments from CRTW 201 Midterm Assessment • “I am very satisfied with the process assignments and portfolio components. It is easier for me to learn when I am given a chance to improve my work than when I am more worried about the grades I will receive for my papers.” • “I think the grading is fair. I like the division between process assignments and portfolio. I like having a 5/5-based grade instead of rubric-based, because it gives me time to fully understand the assignment/correct mistakes.”

44. More from CRTW • “I like how we get the chance to revise our papers because it helps us understand what we did wrong and how to fix it. Though it is a lot of work it seems to help my writing process and my critical thinking methods.”

45. Still More from CRTW • “I love your grading system because I am given the opportunity to improve my writing without failing the class first. Your grading system makes me want to try and work harder than I normally would. Most writing profs. only tell me my writing is wrong, but do not explain why or give me the chance to get better. This class has changed my opinion of writing because I actually like to write now. Before, I could have cared less.”

46. Various Further Consequences • You will have a greater amount of work to do throughout the semester and during finals’ week. • But you won’t have to choose between giving bad grades for bad papers and giving inflated grades for bad papers. Instead, you will nurse students along with process points until their work is good enough to deserve a rubric-based evaluation, which will balance out the process grades. • Fewer students will drop out. • Those who stay will focus more on writing well and less on getting high grades. • The lessons of WRIT 101 will be reinforced. • Students will discover how much better they can write if they engage in the writing process. “Winthrop students are smarter than they think they are” (Melford Wilson, August 2000). • Students’ learning will increase significantly. • The enhanced learning that results means that students will be better prepared for CRTW 201.

47. Coda • If you’re mystified about CRTW 201, this slide show on portfolio grading provides a window into what we do in that class. • I have organized it according to the elements of critical thinking in the text we use in that class: Gerald Nosich’s Learning To Think Things Through, 2nd ed.

48. The Elements of Reasoning • Purpose • Question at Issue • Assumptions • Implications and Consequences • Information • Concepts • Conclusions, Interpretations • Point of View • Context • [Alternatives]

49. The Elements Purpose Question at Issue Information Conclusions Concepts Assumptions Implications and consequences Point of view Context Alternatives The Classical Argument Thesis Question in intro par. Background The conclusion Arguments THIS IS NEW The conclusion Objections/replies Background Objections How Do the Elements Relate to the Classical Argument?

50. The Point Is… • Getting students to practice the classical argument in GNED 102, then, is excellent preparation for CRTW 201. • And a great way to get them to practice the classical argument is to build in a process/portfolio approach.