Chandler sick today - class cancelled

I'm sorry for the short notice but that is the way it goes.

I will give you feedback on your blogs over the weekend - on the set up for the analysis of the commenting papers.

If you had a conference scheduled for today - please be in touch by email so we can re-schedule.

Again - I am sorry, but you don't want to be in class with me.

For Tuesday:
Read: Gee, chapters 5-7

NO NEW BLOG POST

2.26 Teeacher comments on student writing & more on analysis

Where we've beenm where we are going. We started class with a review of where we have been and an overview of where we are going. So far, we have checked out two methods for collecting data = ethnographic participant observation, and surveys; and two methods for analyzing language data = discourse analysis (looking a connections among what language says, does and allows us to be through the use of Gee's tool), and textual analysis = which is a form of discourse of analysis, but is usually more focused on some of the textual genres you have had experience writing about for literature courses. We also noted some of the specialized "jargon" you are learning that is used by writing studies researchers.

We looked at the calendar and noted that we will be digging deeper into discourse analysis (reading more Gee), and that you will be working on a "Short analysis project". This project will require you to analyze one of the data sets we have looked at as a class. It is your chance to practice and receive feedback on your analytic process. We will set up this project next week.

I also noted that I have emailed you feedback on your research plans for your projects - and that we will be working in more detail on this project after break. If you are not clear on your plan - your question, your references, and how you will collect your data - we should talk. You should be reading your references (because that may take some time) to make sure you have the right essays for the literature review in your project.

Martin's essay. We spent the first part of class talking about Martin's essay on the rhetoric of teacher comments.

You worked in groups on the following questions:

Why does Martin say the study of teacher comments is important (where does Martin address this)What question is Martin asking about teacher comments (+ where does she set it up)?
What does the research literature say about teacher comments? (and where does Martin address this?)How does Martin connect to her review of the literature?
What are Martin’s findings (what does she add to the Conversation about commenting)?
What points does she make in her conclusions?

Most of our conversation was directed toward noticing:

• the kinds of moves Martin made in her essay
• where Martin made certain kinds of statements in her essay (in which part of which section)
• how Martin used headings

And one important purpose of this discussion was for you to think about how you would write/organize your research project. For example, we noticed that Martin used a specific focus for here discussion of the research literature of teacher comments = she organized her discussion NOT by what different researchers wrote, but by a number of categories that are characterisitic of the kinds of comments teachers write (in the subheading = teacher tendencies). This discussion connects directly to her focus on the "effecitiveness" of the differernt communication strategies (rhetorics) teachers use in their comments.

At the end of class I introduced Data Set 4 (posted to the right) = a set of 4 essays with teacher comments. The assignments usesd for these 4 different sample essays are in the blog post just previous to this one.

We looked at the blog post to next class - and then as a whole class, came up with some questions that you, as researchers, might ask about this Data set (essays with teacher comments). Your questions included:

• How do comments reflect teachers' standards for grading?
• Which comments motivate students to revise their essays (and why)? (though this question is pretty close to Martin - right?)
• How can you tell which comments are important?
• What are the differences in how the side comments and the beginning/end students work?
• What different kinds of comments do teachers write that DON'T require students to revise their work = and what is the function of those comments?

You may use one of the above questions - or one created by your group - for your post.

Groups:
Yoleiny, Rikki, Deanna
Alison, Oriana, Chris, Sharyn
Bri, Devon, Amy, Paul
Derrick, Mike, Allyson, Sarah

For next class:
We will begin class with group presentations on your set up for the analysis of Data set 4 (see Blog 11).

Blog 11: With your group - pose a new question about teacher comments. What categories + codes would you use to answer this question? What patterns do you see in our data set with respect to your new question?

For this post you will be going back to the analytic practices we used at the beginning of the term.

Codes are specific names for features, actions, interactions, "things" => anything you notice in your data.

Categories are groups of related codes.

Patterns are statements about relationships among the different features you are analyzing

For a more complete discussion, go back to the blog on analysis.

For this data set, a code might be a question, and 3 categories associated with questions might be questions about meaning and questions about organization, and questions about development. In terms of patterns, you might notice similarities or difference among questions within different categories.

Assignment sheets for Data Set 4

As a way to work with the analytic approach in Martin's essay, you will be working on essays with comments from 2 courses from our Writing Option Major, ENG 2020 and ENG 3005. Below I have listed brief descriptions of the assignments that Samples 1-4 were written for,

Samples 1 & 4: Explain a writing construct that is misunderstood.
ENG 3005

Our textbook defines constructs as “mental frameworks that people build in order to make sense of the world around them” (35). American culture contains many constructs related to writing. Writing Studies has created their own versions of these constructs. The two versions are rarely identical. Your job in this project is to bridge the gap between perceptions.

Select a construct related to writing. Some options include, but are not limited to: argument, audience, (good) writing, critical thinking, grammar, process, research, revision, rhetoric, plagiarism, literacy, voice, and style. You can choose a different term if you wish.

Write a public document (like a newspaper column or blog post) in which you explain how that construct is misinterpreted by the general public. Your essay should aim to show your reader why those misconceptions do not accurately represent the construct (at least from the perspective of Writing Studies’ scholars and teachers).

Sample 2: Process narrative.
ENG 2020
The criteria for the assignment are pasted in at the top of the paper.

Sample 3: Analysis of a Dicourse Community

ENG 3005

Description of the assignment: Choose a LITERACY Discourse community that you hope to enter for your career or for your personal goals as a writer. Collect and analyze data on that community. Then write an essay where you characterize the assumptions, values, patterns for communication, writing practices, and writing products of your discourse community. Finally, use this characterization to describe what it takes to become a successful member of this Discourse community.

What your essay should include:

1. clear statement of the features that define your group as a Discourse community
2. an in-depth characterization of your Discourse community
3. presentation of evidence (specific examples from your data) that illustrate the characteristic features of your Discourse community
4. concluding discussion of what it will take for individuals to become a member of this Discourse community

Questions about Martin

Why does Martin say the study of teacher comments is important (where does Martin address this)

What question is Martin asking about teacher comments (+ where does she set it up)?

What does the research literature say about teacher comments? (and where does Martin address this?)

How does Martin connect to her review of the literature?

What are Martin’s findings (what does she add to the Conversation about commenting)?

What points does she make in her conclusions?

2.21 Surveys

As an exercise to get some experience writing/designing surveys, you analyzed the Writing Option pre-post survey for Writing Majors. This survey is (in theory) completed by all students when they BEGIN the writing option major (at the beginning of 2020=> the first course they should tak), and when they complete the Writing Option Major (at the end of 4817). Its purpose is to give the Department an understanding of:

• what students know, feel, and can do with respect to our student learning outcomes when they enter the program
• what students know, feel, and can do with respect to our student learning outcomes when they complete the program

We started our discussion of the Writing Option Major survey by organizing which SLOs were covered by which questions (see below).

Student Learning Outcome #1: students will produce essays through a series of drafts that include exploratory writing or talk, as well as revisions that include addition, deletion, substitution and rearrangement.

1,5,7, 12,14,15,16

 

Student Learning Outcome #2: students will identify central ideas/themes of a text through class discussion and writing.

2,4,6,7,8,11, 17

Student Learning Outcome #3: students will use two or more methodologies from English Studies to develop original research or creative products.

2,4,6,7,9,15

 

Student Learning Outcome #4: students will demonstrate ability to give a compelling oral presentation.

6,7,8,10,13, 18

Student Learning Outcome #5: students will connect ideas from classroom assignments to contemporary issues in class discussion and presentations.

2,3, 8,9, 19

 

This distribution seems to indicate that the SLOs are generally covered = but you had lots to say about the survey's effectiveness in terms of its repetitiveness, languge choices, and the scale for responding to the quesitons (strongly agree ->strongly disagree).  In particular, you noted that

 

• language in questions 4,6, 12, 13, and 14 is confusing
• questions 15, 11, 4, 13, and 9 cover the 5 learning outcomes - and the rest of the questions feel confusing because they repeat them in ways that make students wonder if they are missing something
• students want to reply from a "coherent" self - soquestions 1,5,12, and 14 are all about revision, and the wording is VERY similar - and this is confusing because some answers might be conflicting
• the "emotional " component of 2, 8, & 10 seems out of place = maybe save the "feeling" questions for 16-19 (have all the emotional questions in one place)
• different answering options would allow for more accurate information (maybe yes, no, I don't know)
• put the survey in plain English
• additional areas that should have questions= questions about using technology and collaborating with other writers

So I am still taking all this in, but it occurs to me that to do a good job revising this survey, we will need a "panel" of students. Anyone interested? We can talk about this in class.

For next class:

Read: Rhetoric of Teacher Comments on Student Writing Robin Martin

Blog 10: Reflect on what our discussion of the Writing Option major survey suggests about: 1) the way language works (think about Gee); 2) what kinds of information you can collect with surveys; and 3) what challenges researchers face when desigining quantitative instruments (things that are reduced to numbers => like surveys, "objective" tests and so on).

Thanks for your great participation today.  You provided clear concise feedback that we should be able to use.  Good analytic skills!

2.19 Surveys

We started class today with a discussion of Michaela Cullington's Texting and Writing . Our talk focused on her research questions and findings, how her essay was "built" and on a critical examination of how Cullington's assumptions and methods set her up to find what she found.

Focus and organization: Cullington's research question was about how or whether texting was influencing the way high school students write, with a particular focus on the influence of "slang" and the use of acronyms. We noticed that she set up her question in her introduction and that as part of her set up she introduced the fact that there were two "sides" on the question=> that texting is making student writing "worse" and that it is making it "better". This short overview of her study concluded with her findings, which were that texting is not really having much of an effect on how students write.

After her brief introduction, Cullington presented literature review sections for describing "concerns" and a "reply to concerns" about texting.

In the concerns section, she cited researchers and teachers as concerned about grammar, the ability to write "standard English", using short, "sloppy", orundeveloped sentences and improper word choice .

In the reply to concerns, researchers pointed out how texting motivates students to do more writing, invites more creativity (is in fact a new language), teaches writers to write for different audiences, sharpens diplomatic skills, and demands that writers summarize and express themselves concisely.

This literature review was drawn to our attention by the use of headings, as were the Methods and Findings sections. In the Methods section we noted that Cullington's overall approach was to:

• survey students on 4 points: how often they text, how long they have been texting, what abbreviations they used, and whether they notice themselves using textspeak in their formal writing.
• talk to teachers (see essay for questions)
• look at student writing for influeces of textspeak

In the findings section, Cullington discussed the fact that students know the difference between writing for school and texting - and do not use textspeak in their formal writing - and that she found no instances of textspeak in student papers. Her closing statement is that "ultimately, experts and the students themselves see no influences.. ."

Critique
We noticed that when Cullington reviewed the literature (what other researchers have written) about texting and wrirting - there were two, different definitions of "writing" implied by the discussions of concerns and replies to concerns. The "concerns" researchers were primarily defining writing in terms of formal features = grammar, "standard English" and word choice; they also saw language as "transparent" => as if meanings were clearly there and a reader could "see" meaning in writing as clearly as if looking through a window.

The response to concerns researchers saw writing more in terms of the definition of language provided by Gee= writing as meaning making (where meanings are not "there" but created through interpretations of both writers and readers, and those interprestations are influenced by past experiences). This definition of writing was more about writring as "saying, doing, and being" than about wriring as "standard English." Cullington did not point out which definition of "writing" she would use in her essay => though she applied the "concerns" (standard English" definition).

This failure to see writing as language (in the ways Gee defined it) set up the kinds of questions Cullington asked. Because she saw writing as about form, and meanings as "transparent". she asked mostly about writing forms - abreviations etc - rather than about the kinds of writing practices identitifed by the "reply to concerns" researchers.

Differences between surveys and interviews:
We used our discussion of Cullington to talk about differences between surveys and interviews. Surveys ask for short, clear replies to clearly defined questions. They assume that meanings are (or can be) clear, and that the choices offered by the survey question will cover all that is important that the research participant has to say.

Interviews are more open. They assume that language is complex and interactive, and that the research subject may have multiple, conflicting things to say in response to the researcher's questions. Interviews also allow space for research subjects to say things the interviewer has not anticipated. In surveys, this is not always possible.

Creating an effective research survey.
In our review of Cullington's survey, we noticed that her conclusions reflected the kinds of questions she asked. If she had asked questions that grew out of an assumption that writing was about "saying, doing, and being" rather than about "standard English" => she may have been presented with very different kinds of information. When I asked you about how you used "texting" (and your phones) to write => you pointed out MANY ways that "texting" contributed to your writing that were simply not possible for Cullington to find out through the questions she asked.

With this in mind - I asked you to look at the Student Learning outcomes for the Writing Option program - and to consider the survey our program uses to evaluate the effectiveness of how well we teach to those outcomes.

Audience and purpose: The survey I handed out in class is given to students when they enter the Writing Option Major, and to students who have completed the Writing Option Major. It was designed to assess (evaluate) what students know, what they do, and how they feel with respect to the 5 learning outcomes for the Writing Option Major (see the last blog post).

Groups:
Allyson, Deanna, Yoleiny
Sharyn, Chris, Alison
Paul, Devon, Brianna, Amy
Mike, Oriana, Rikki, (and Sarah if you are able to get in touch)

For Thursday:
Blog 9: With your group (one post per group) do the following:
1. Identify which questions assess which learning outcomes (some questions may apply to more than one learning outcome) (For this task - you should list each of the 19 questions under one or more of the 5 learning outcomes).
2. Evaluate the effectiveness of each question in terms of what it allows students to communicate about the knowledge, feelings, and practices they might have with respect to each learning outcome. (for this task, you should produce some comments that account for WHAT information each question provides with respect to the learning outcome it is listed under, and some observations about how well it provides that information)
3. Note (make a list of) any information about the 5 learning outcomes that the Department might need = but that will NOT be gathered through these questions.

Additional questions:
What definition(s) of "writing" and "learning" is assumed by this survey?
Are those definitions a good match for the definitions assumed by the student learning outcomes? Are they a good match for the way the students taking the survey will define writing and learning?
How might you change this survey so that it could provide a more accurate reflection of what students learn in this program? List your suggestions.

As we discussed in class, Dr. Sutton and I cannot assume that our students (you) use language or draw from the same assumptions in the same ways we do. Your input on this excercise will help use develop better tools (surveys) to assess our program. Thank you!

Student Learning Outcomes for Writing Option Major

Student Learning Outcome #1: students will produce essays through a series of drafts that include exploratory writing or talk, as well as revisions that include addition, deletion, substitution and rearrangement.

Student Learning Outcome #2: students will identify central ideas/themes of a text through class discussion and writing.

Student Learning Outcome #3: students will use two or more methodologies from English Studies to develop original research or creative products.

Student Learning Outcome #4: students will demonstrate ability to give a compelling oral presentation.

Student Learning Outcome #5: students will connect ideas from classroom assignments to contemporary issues in class discussion and presentations.