The article The Concept of Control in teacher response: Defining the varieties of “Directive” and “Facilitative” Commentary by Richard Straub was a very insightful. All of the titles that are brought up to show the difference among readers and reading styles such as “Detached critic” and “interested reader” were very insightful and really put a meaning to the different attitudes one can have while reading essays.
Straub really lays out for the reader how teachers “should not “appropriate” student texts by overlooking their purposes for writing and emphasizing our purposes for commenting. Instead of being “directive,” we should be “facilitative” providing feedback and support but not dictating the path of revision. This really struck a chor with me because it’s exactly what I’ve been thinking about while thinking about myself as an English 30 mentor.
I found it really interesting how Straub says we should get students to look at writing as a “social action” and get them to think about their writing processes. This was important to read, and one of the main ideas that have been on my mind as I try to develop my own English 130 course.
I recently after having read this article helped a student in my English 30 workshop with a reader’s response paper of an article she read for class. On the draft of the paper her professor wrote that the paper needed “clarity, depth, analysis.” The student was confused. She understood that her paper need those three things, but she didn’t know where. This would potentially cause the student to look at her paper, and figure it out. Since this was one of the final drafts I did point out some grammatical errors, but as far as content goes I posed questions, I used phrases like “consider this…” so that the student could see that it was a suggestion and not so much a demand. Along with my help, we found her main points and saw where the paper lacked Clarity.
Questions that I pose for my peers to blog about:
-What does your commentary look like when looking at students’ papers?
-What key terms or phrase do you use when giving feedback?
-Do you have any personal stories as an editor or as someone who has received helpful r poor feedback.
-What do we consider as supportive/ facilitative feedback?
-How can we incorporate this into building our syllabus? Should we have guidelines for peer-reviewing? Or is that just another way that we will be “controlling” students’ writing?