[no subject]

[Dan Lupo <dlupo -at- VNET -dot- IBM -dot- COM>]

I would like to offer a comment on the following excerpt:

EXCERPT======================================================

This method works well. However, I've also tried doing in-class
reviews, where the class goes over two or three papers and critiques
them. As you might expect, I've run into problems:

1. My students (I'm typically teaching 2nd year community
   college students) don't have the skills to critique.

2. Students are terrified to be "mean" because they know their
   turn is coming. I try to make sure positive as well as negative
   things are pointed out, but they're still shy about speaking up.

END==========================================================
Students
Students ARE terrified about critiquing others' drafts.  To help them
overcome their reticence, I offer my students a critiria sheet, which
gives them class-sanctioned categories for offering criticism.  They are
no longer forced to give personal impressions as critiques--which can
get them in trouble with their peers and probably doesn't provide much help.

Rather, with a criteria sheet, they
have a common language for talking about the rhetorical issues in their
drafts, issues we have discussed, defined, exemplified in samples,
etc.  Also, I use Linda Flower's strategy for peer feedback: I ask
students to identify what rhetorical issue they are commenting about; to
say WHY they think the draft either succeeds or fails in terms of that
issue; and to offer specific, concrete advice for improving the draft's
weaknesses.I have had good success with both of these approaches.

Dan Lupo