Online grading is different in many ways from grading a paper by hand. It is harder to actually mark punctuation and spelling errors and marginal notes are impossible unless you spend quite a bit of time cutting and pasting. On the other hand, since everything is typed, there are no chances of misunderstanding handwritten notes or comments, and the instructor has to think carefully about what she is telling the student about his/her writing.
Are we facilitating writing in this way? I think that what I would prefer is more time with my students if we are grading this way. Although it is relatively easy for me as a grad student to only teach an hour and a half each week per class, I'm not sure if I can be an effective writing teacher in so little time. There is only so much that a student can get online.
One more concern that I have is this---what about process? We tell the students to have pre-writing, rough drafts, and final drafts when they write but because of time restrictions, I don't really provide opportunity for that. I know that at the college level, they have to learn to do the process on their own, but it still concerns me.
By the way, if anyone wants the recipe for the taco soup we had last week, I've posted it on the other side of the blog page.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I definitely agree that there are technical differences in the two. The face that you cannot write in the margins of a student's paper, or write instantly, your instinctual response to a particular error or confusing sentence is limiting. However, if ICON is good for anything it forces graders to pick out the most egregious errors to elaborate upon. At the same time it also makes it easier to ignore other issues that could be addressed with a red pen and paper. There are trade-offs, positive and negative aspects to both methods of grading, (you can't spill coffee or grease on an online submission) and I think it's important for us to focus on the positive aspects of TOPIC since it is not likely to change in the future. Whether or not it is a better system for the facilitation of student writing really remains unknown. The more data we compile from the whole experience, the closer we will come to a definitive answer.
I think your points are most valid. As an outside observer, these are questions and concerns that came to my mind as well. I guess I would be classified as an antiquated sort; I enjoy a tangible thing in front of me, with something tangible in my hand with which to comment on student essays.
However, as James pointed out, I would assume that ICON keeps you more focused as a grader and teacher. And, unfortunately (or fortunately), technology such as ICON is unlikely to disappear. But, I do think it is important that, as facilitators, we move outside of our own comfort zones to explore other methodologies.
Post a Comment