Strengths and Weaknesses

Working in the writing center this semester the most consistent problem that I have witnessed is that students have no idea how to evaluate their own work. I have heard vent from most of you about some inconsiderate little twerp (my words) who came and asked to have his paper "checked." Of course this behavior hurts our feeling because we do not like being reduced to the human version of spell check, and, perhaps more importantly, we have been specifically instructed not to indulge these "people." However, from what I have observed I do not know if the direct approach (telling them that "editing is not really what we do here") has been all that helpful at redirecting tutoring sessions. Although I had also resolved to be tough with such succubi, I have tried instead to ignore (or at least suspect) any student's assessment of what they need to work on, and try to discern the writers strengths and weaknesses myself. When I fill out the paperwork at the end of the session, I almost always note that we talked about completely different things than what they came in asking help for, and most of these have been productive sessions.

In the OW, I find a much more insidious form of uncritical thinking than the merely narrow minded view of what it is we do as tutors. Here, students are prompted by the computer to assess their strengths and weaknesses. I am always surprised to find some very writerly concern filling up space in this hole on every ENG 1000 submission. Though I try not to be tooooooo presumptuous, I can almost instantly tell if they merely copied and pasted some tip that the GA tagged on to the prompt for this writing assignment. Reading the entry, I invariably find that whatever weakness they marked (unless it is grammatical, a.k.a. I didn't even proofread this) is the strongest part of their essay. I can't help but chuckle a little at the transformation of this fledgling teacher's carefully crafted course goal into meme, but that pleasure soon gives way to indignation. I would rather that box not be on there then have it filled with lazy plagiarisms. 



However, Inoue (and several others: Nathan, exploratory essays, Sartor Restarus) has got me thinking about engaging students in a dialogue about assessment. All of the above actors have taking steps to draw our attention to the stage that they walk upon. Assessment is as ubiquitous as the marriage plot (and every bit as bumfuddling).  From my experience, assessment is most important thing to future grad students and, even if they hate it and make jokes about letting gravity* pick the best papers, teachers still have to deal with institutional assessment metrics which what bell curves and not bright students. For, this reason alone I am skeptical of whether Elbow's grading contract would even fly in some universities, but I also thinks the problem lies more in misunderstanding expectations than anxiety about grades. Most of you have expressed some doubt as to the feasibility of Inoue methods, and it might be that the nature of the academy is that we just don't have to time to develop the skills it would take to introduce something as foreign as assessing one's own work, but I am tempt to call you guys a bunch of fraidy cats. For all of you who agree with Inoue or Elbow but really want your student to "RESPECT YOUR AUTHORITAH!" I would recommend that you get over that idea. I think that the only way that we are going to get student writing that is not going to bore us to tears is if we foster an environment of transparency and mutually acknowledged expectations. I like that Inoue student-generated rubric requires discussion, compromise, and revise. Elbow makes some good points about the hierarchical implications that are buried with consensus, but I agree with Inoue that one the most important parts of building the rubric is developing valid counterarguments before deciding on assessment model which students all help develop and understand on more than just the surface level.

Perhaps, this argument is a bit idiosyncratic to my experiences in the writing center, but I really want to help kids evaluate their own work. Inoue goes a step farther and shows us how we might show student why (theoretically and practically) we evaluate work and how we can be part of the discourse that sets the criteria for evaluating work.

*Maximize drag and not necessarily weight would be your best bet in any hypothetical lo-tech, stairway-powered, EZGrader-type situation.