Handout Grading Written Work: A Workshop for TAs

1. Handout Grading Written Work:A Workshop for TAs Emmy Misser Manager, Writing Centre

2. The four stages of the evaluation process • Developing clear evaluation criteria • Diagnosing strengths and weaknesses • Marking and grading: summative feedback • Writing comments: formative feedback • Essential for B students to become A students • For C students to become B students • For D students to become better students • Don’t bypass or neglect any of these four stages

3. What to focus on • Is there an argument: thesis + support? • Most assignment types call for some form of argument (explicitly or implicitly) • BUT many students are more familiar with informative writing and have difficulties with this new genre • Westart with • The assignment—the writing task • The grading criteria for the course

4. O’Shea’s grade description for HI106 • A papers establish a brief historical context for a strong thesis that is developed and supported by good use of evidence • B papers may have a strong thesis and introduction but tend to be more general in their development and make less effective use of sources than A papers • C papers may be B-papers marred byunclear and awkwardwriting. The argument is there, but the support is dropped in rather than introduced and interpreted to develop the argument. Alternatively C-papers may read like a summary or review • D papers may besummary-style C-papers that are undermined by poor writing, but these problems should be substantial to push a paper over the 60 threshold, or the D-paper may simply demonstrate a lack of effort

5. General Criteria for an A • O’Shea’s course-specific criteria: • a contextualized, strong thesis, developed and supported by good use of evidence • Criteria you can use for academic writing: • Definite, well-qualified claim or proposal. Strong, developed, well-organized supporting arguments. Responds to major objections and alternatives. Key terms, ideas and connections are defined, elaborated and illustrated to avoid misinterpretations. Sentences build on each other through connecting ideas. Wording is clear, concise, and consistent. Stuart Yeh, Stanford University

6. Criteria to evaluate the characteristic features of writing and argument • The logic of the argument: Development, organization, focus and clarity • Is the claim supported by strong developed reasons and arguments that consider alternatives and objections? • The credibility of the writer: Voice • Does the writer use language to build the reader’s trust through careful consideration of issues and opposing viewpoints? • The use of standard writing conventions: • Does the use of language establish the writer’s credibility in the eyes of the reader? Stuart Yeh, Stanford University

9. Assessment • Global features show control of argument and organization • Assess these in your first quick reading • Sentence-level features show control of language • Assess these in a second more careful reading • Today we can only do rapid assessment of global features

10. Global features Thesis/argument Assignment/Academic writing task Organization: structural coherence Development/support Use of sources Assess these in your first reading Sentence-level features Cohesion Expression Sentence construction Spelling, mechanics, and grammar Assess these in your second reading Features for writing assessment

11. For rapid assessment look at The student’s intellectual grasp of the material as it reveals itself in • Rhetorical moves: • announce thatthe writer “enters a conversations about ideas” (Graff and Birkenstein) • Structure of • Introduction • Arrangement—macro structure • Paragraphs—micro structure • Syntax—micro structure • Precision of word choice

12. Rhetorical moves in introductions • Articulation of • An issue—asubject that attracts academic debate (detailed – complex) • A context for the issue—material that establishes the topic in a relevant academiccontext (historical, theoretical etc.) • A strong thesis—whatthe writer has to say on the topic

13. Criteria for a strong thesis • Does the thesis show analysis and depth of thought, or is it mainly descriptive? • Does it present an argument—is it worded as an argument? • Is it contestable? • Is it defensible—i.e., is it qualified? • Does it answer the “so what” question?

14. Overall arrangement or macro structure • We cannot do this assessment in this workshop • But when marking look at macro structure: • Organization of material • Sequence and progression of ideas • Logic and reasoning • Structural coherence

15. Paragraph Structure or micro structure • Topic Sentence: forecasts the writer's main point which should support an aspect of the thesis (may contain transition) • Elaboration: makes the main point more specific (if it’s there) • Development: gives support or evidence for the main point: facts, examples, illustrations, citations in the form of summary, paraphrase or quotation, logical inferences • Interpretation: shows the writer's view on the support used (facts don't speak for themselves) • Conclusion: states the writer's insight (what the development proves or explains) • Transition: carries the conclusion forward to the next paragraph

16. Most Paragraphs (Sub-arguments) • Will make a sub-argument that supports an aspect of the thesis • Will be focused on one idea (not on one supporting argument) • Will be about ½ to ¾ of a page long • Will be connected to the paragraph before it and the paragraph after it • Should be deleted if it is too insubstantial • Should be expanded if it is too short

17. Criteria should be • Explicit not hidden evaluation criteria • Applied fairly not idiosyncratically • Understood by the students not seen as the marker’s personal reactions • Internalized as a set of consistent criteria for self-assessment for students “to become better thinkers and writers” • Used so that you, the marker, function as a “coach not a judge with your own agenda” --Edward M. White

18. The marker’s many hats Work at two levels when marking papers: • For the student, phrase your comments so that they are constructive and formative • For yourself, make observations on strengths and weaknesses to record how you arrived at a grade; keep these notes

19. Responding to student writing • For your comments to have an impact on student learning, they must be transferableto other course contexts. • Therefore, ask yourself the following questions: • Can I find a pattern of error/issue/problem? • Which assumptions are behind the errors/issues/problems, and can I address these assumptions in my response? • Can the student learn from my response? • Do I write comments that the student can use in another paper?

20. Formative or constructive feedback • When the writer fails to anticipate the academic reader’s questions and expectations, act as the typical academic reader’smouthpiece • Use what you know about the genre of academic writing to guide you in your response • Your comments and questions should gently guide the student in the right direction • Questions are the best tool to get the student to write for the reader

21. Responding to introductions • Expect each introduction to be different • But • Look for common features (Both et al. and Swales) • Look for text cues that create reader motivation • Common ground • Disruption • Resolution

22. For problems with argument and support • When you come across a thesis that isn’t a debatable position (it may be a statement of topic or fact), encourage the student to take a position by saying “So what?” • For an unsupported generalization try, “Says who?” or “Why should I agree with this?” • For quotations, data, etc. that are treated as though they speak for themselves ask, “What is the significance of this?” or “Why is this significant?”

23. For problems with coherence • When ideas are not tied together: • make a V sign where the line of thought breaks down and write “Gap”, • or write “How do you get from this idea to the next?”. • The writer will usually understand that a connection has to be made • 9 times out of 10 that connection is analytical

24. Problems with paragraph structure and development • When paragraphs are too long/disorganized: • “Paragraph too long: on more than one topic”, • When paragraphs are thin: • “Underdeveloped paragraph, expand or delete”, • When paragraphs don’t follow a logical sequence, try: • “Why is this paragraph here?” • When paragraphs are not connected to the thesis: • “impose topic sentence, or connect paragraph to thesis”

25. Grammar problems • Rule of thumb: correct only what you know • BUT try to learn to identify the following which cause confusion and/or ambiguity : • Comma splice or Run-on sentence • Subject-verb agreement error • Pronoun agreement or reference error • Error in verb form or inconsistent shift in tense • Dangling modifiers and misplaced modifiers Use this website to learn:http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/style-and-editing/hit-parade-of-errors

26. Works Cited • White, Edward M. Teaching and Assessing Writing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1994. • Yeh, Stuart S. “Empowering Education: Teaching Argumentative Writing to Cultural Minority Middle-School Students”. Research in the teaching of English 33.1 (1998):49-83.

27. Laurier Writing Centre • What we offer: • One-on-one writing consultations with trained tutors • Writing workshops at the undergraduate and graduate level • Handouts, online writing resources, and resource library • Writing support for faculty and TAs • Visit the Writing Centre: • Location: DAWB 1-102 • Appointments: ext. 2220 or learningservices@wlu.ca • Regular hours: daily 9 a.m. – 4 p.m. • Drop-in hours: Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday 4–8 p.m. and Sunday 1–5 p.m. • Website:www.wlu.ca/writing

28. Grant Proposal Workshops 2010 • Writing the SSHRC, OGS, and NSERC Proposal for Psychology: Friday, September 17th, 2:30-4:00 pmWriting the SSHRC and OGS Proposal for Social Work: Tuesday, September 21st, 12:00-1:30 pm, Room 108, Social Work CampusWriting the SSHRC, OGS, and NSERC Proposal for Geography: Thursday, September 23rd, 12:30-2:00 pm, BR 110, UW CampusWriting the SSHRC and OGS Proposal for English: Friday, September 24, 12-1:30 p.m. Writing the SSHRC and OGS Proposal for Arts and Humanities (all levels), Monday, Sept. 20th, 10:30 am-12:00 pm & Wednesday, September 22nd, 7:00-9:30 pmWriting the NSERC and OGS Proposal for Math and Sciences (all levels), Wednesday, Sept. 22nd, 10:30 am-12:00 pm • See www.wlu.ca/writing for details

29. Undergraduate Workshops: Fall Term • Essay Writing 101 • Engaging with Arguments: Summary & Critique • The Thesis Statement • Using Sources in Academic Papers • The ‘A’ Paper • Essay-Style Exam Questions • All workshops are held on Tuesdays from 5:30-7:00 p.m. • See www.wlu.ca/writing/workshops for details

30. Undergraduate Workshops: Winter Term • Essay Writing 101 • Common Grammar Errors • Mastering Sentence Writing • Strong Thesis Statements & Argumentative Paragraphs • Effective Introductions & Conclusions • Essay-Style Exam Questions • All workshops are held on Tuesdays from 5:30-7:00 p.m. • See www.wlu.ca/writing/workshops for details