"I was taught in graduate school not
to use red ink because it bled all over the papers," says
Lynne Simpson, who as an English faculty member has ample practice
responding to papers. Some students' reactions to "bleeding"
papers have been negative, perhaps part of the reason a few discouraged
freshmen come for their first writing conference confessing, "I'm
a bad writer." Some instructors have tried different colors
of ink, such as the purple pens Simpson and Ann Stidham favor.
Some use pencil since the eraser makes editing comments easy.
Other PC professors have adopted computer technology to respond
to student drafts.
Economics professor Jody Lipford hands students printed
copies of his comments about early drafts of their major papers.
He types up a full page or more that he says, "makes it very
clear what I expect." As he reads the drafts, he first
scribbles notes to himself, placing only a few comments in the
margins, sometimes "just a question mark."
Lipford finds that students like the page of typed suggestions
to follow in revising the paper. As well as keeping a copy on
his hard drive, he requires that students hand in his comments
and their early draft with their final paper. At that point
students do not have the opportunity to revise, so Lipford just
assigns a grade.
Bryan Ganaway, historian and Neville Hall technophile, invites
students to e-mail him a draft before the due date. Senior
English major Brian Barnwell says Ganaway puts comments directly
into the paper, inserting alterations in bold, suggestions in
parentheses, and constructive criticism at the end. Barnwell
found that the process of e-mailing a rough draft for comments
allowed him to make the transition between the two different writing
styles and learn the specifics of writing in history. Ganaway
claims convenience as the main element in this approach: "It
saves paper, and I can type faster than I write, so it saves time
as well." The only real complication in using e-mail,
he says, is that "students often turn in work after the deadline,"
the reason why he usually asks for a hard copy in class for the
final draft.
Both Barnwell and Polly Spangler, a junior history and English
major, agree that Ganaway's method is beneficial. Spangler
observes that while PC students check their e-mail often, even
obsessively, they tend to forget papers lying around in professors'
bins. Spangler, who conferred frequently with Ganaway on her seminar
paper, found it helpful to be able to read and think over the
comments since "Dr. Ganaway is a fast talker."
In introductory political science courses, Jonathan Smith
finds giving electronic feedback on papers a useful way "to
improve a student's writing." He requires students to e-mail
him a copy of each paper. "My handwriting is not the best,"
he says, "and I find I can make more substantive (and legible)
comments using the 'track-changes' function in Microsoft Word."
Smith recommends his system to other faculty members despite the
fact that at times papers get "lost in the e-mail."
He has found ways to combat such problems by asking students to
bring a hard copy of the document to class to cover any mishaps
with the computers. His use of computers in grading is relatively
new and "an evolving process" just as "most professors
are constantly refining their courses (both in terms of content
and methods of evaluation) to make them more effective."
Although Smith admits that responding to
papers on the computer "can be labor intensive relative to
the old red pen," he adds, "still, I believe it helps
me give the student better feedback, which in turn improves their
performance."
A student in Smith's Elements of Political Science class,
Mandy Pittman liked his use of technology to grade both for the
ease of reading his comments and of e-mailing the paper. "All
you have to do is attach the file and go," she says, whereas
problems with producing a hard copy often arise at the last minute:
the printer runs out of ink or all the computers are taken in
HP.
Students may misunderstand
a professor's comments on a paper when the comments are short
and cryptic or when students cannot decipher the handwriting.
Using computers can alleviate these two problems.
For about a year, Peter Hobbie of
the Religion Department has used ViaVoice speaking software to
respond to papers. To train the program to recognize his voice,
he had to read aloud the first two chapters of Treasure Island.
He uses the software to keep a journal and notes on articles he
reads but also speaks his comments on first drafts in order to
hand students a written copy. At first he was not sure that
ViaVoice was as fast as typing, but now he's convinced.
Because a few glitches remain, he does proofread the final copy.
"It sometimes mixes up my and and in,"
he says.
The English Department's Justin Brent claims he would not
save time using Hobbie's software since he definitely types faster
than he talks. He offers students the option of handing in their
essays during the regular class time or e-mailing them as attachments
by midnight on the due date. He opens the attachment and follows
the steps below to comment on the paper:
* On the Tools menu, he clicks Track Changes and then Highlight
Changes, checking all three boxes in the pop-up window. The program
will record for students whatever he adds or deletes.
* To compose comments, he highlights the text, clicks on the Insert
menu, and then clicks on Comment, typing in the pop-up box.
 |
Brent still writes the same type of comments,
"the conventional criticisms" that all English professors
use: "This is plot summary. Your thesis is too vague. Where
is your topic sentence? Where is your evidence for this claim?"
But now, he says, "I often elaborate where I didn't have
time or patience before." |
Brent added a customized feature of his
own: "I have created a macro for each of the errors that
appear on our department's grading rubric. [A macro is a user-defined
command that lets one automate tasks.] Thus, when I hit F2 on
my keyboard, Microsoft Word creates a comment to note a comma
error." He is also "experimenting with a few more features,
but they're not up and running yet."
From students, Brent has heard only positive feedback. Freshman
Patrick Fediuk, for example, likes the freedom of e-mailing his
essays at a later time, and he feels that this method makes it
is easier to understand where to find the problems in his paper
because Brent can "pinpoint something exactly."
From a faculty perspective, though, Brent admits that problems
can arise "any time the plug gets pulled or the network goes
down or the software doesn't function correctly." He also
admits that staring at the computer screen for a long time tires
his eyes. Furthermore, explaining the particulars of a program
to a class is "not too stimulating for teacher or student."
Perhaps the greatest fault of technology arises from the lack
of connection that computer use sometimes entails. According
to Brent, when using technology, "you also run a higher risk
of seeming cold and impersonal. I devote a lot of creative
energy to reminding my students that I am not a computer even
if I seem attached to one."
Nevertheless, Brent feels that the benefits of his system outweigh
the negatives. Even when commenting on the hard copies that a
few students continue to hand in at class time, he says, "I'm
much better off writing my comments up online, printing them out
and then attaching them to students' essays. My hands grow less
weary, I can speak at greater length, and my comments are much
more legible." Responding to writing via the computer
seems to be working for Brent, and although he doesn't think that
technology is a good idea for everyone, "still," he
says, "I'm surprised that more haven't tried it."
While a few PC professors feel comfortable using computers to
respond to students' writing, many are more comfortable with traditional
methods. Ron Zimmerman of the Biology Department says if he used his
computer, "I couldn't lie down on the couch to grade papers."
 |
. . .many are more comfortable with traditional methods. |
| Writing Centered 06 |
|
|