Within the broad framework of the writing seminar with its conferences and workshops, the Freshman English Program allows instructors a great deal of flexibility. Instructors in the Tri-Campus have developed grading and commenting styles reflective of their individual approaches yet consistent with the larger culture of UConn’s writing program.

One of the crucial differences between the Freshman English classes and an ordinary literature course is that Freshman English classes are not content-based. These classes emphasize the instruction and acquisition of writing practices as well as the habits of reflection and inquiry that promote this development. Thus grades are generally based on students’ competent use of class readings in order to develop original ideas presented in appropriate academic modes of discourse.

Although grading is inherently a subjective activity that occurs in some degree of isolation, there are naturally some points of convergence when instructors consider how to evaluate the writing skills exhibited in a student paper. Instructors tend to privilege global issues like the development of the student’s ideas, the student’s degree of engagement with class texts, and the successful adoption of an academic style over local issues of grammar, diction, and syntax. Ultimately, the paper’s quality is measured by the overall competence it exhibits in all these categories.

Commenting

As students are initiated into the academy with its more demanding writing expectations, it is important that grades are accompanied by clarifying comments from the instructor. Without these comments, grades reduce a piece of writing to a nominal performance, a hoop to jump through, and the writing is not fully realized as a learning tool. Good comments reinforce grades, identifying criteria in a practical light and suggesting how the paper as a whole relates to its parts and to the academy.

The most helpful comments identify both strengths and trouble spots in the writing, and remark on those areas by relating them to the larger project of the paper. These comments should be constructive and honest, but never denigrating or hostile. Instructors should keep in mind that students already feel themselves to be at a disadvantage because of their lack of expertise in the university. When comments are simplistically positive, they undercut learning by sending the message that the student has performed some mysterious and indescribable miracle which is easily duplicated due to the student’s apparently innate but unconscious brilliance. When comments are overly negative in tone and focus, they likewise undercut the learning project by overwhelming the student with a sense of failure and confusion, and at the same time concealing or denying possible paths the student might follow to success.

Comments are a way of modeling the kind of dialogue students can begin to have with themselves when revising their papers. Students need to know why some things work and others don’t, and it isn’t reasonable to expect students to become more articulate and develop their ideas more thoroughly when the comments they receive from instructors may be inarticulate and underdeveloped. The most helpful positive comments move beyond “excellent” or “nice” to specific comments like: “this insight is great here because it clearly articulates the relationship of this paragraph to the previous one.” The most helpful critical comments reach beyond the very vague comments of “vague,” “elaborate,” or “awkward” to observations and questions that engage the student in learning to identify what weak points are and how one recognizes them. Examples of such comments might be: “Did you intend to suggest X here, or rather were you pointing to something about Y?” “This observation seems very general. How does it relate to the evidence you’ve given from the text?” “You’ve got an interesting idea that A causes B, but it’s not clear why you think so.” “Try reading this part aloud and see where you can streamline it.”

Finally, perhaps the ideal grading and commenting situation happens when instructors sit down with students one-on-one. Whenever possible, holding these individual conferences is a good idea because they reduce the possibilities for misunderstanding and get instructors and students together in conversation over a piece of writing.

In sum, grading is not simply an end, a closed verdict declaring the worth of a piece of student writing. Grading is a message to the student about the relationship of his or her writing to the broader discourse of the university, and a tool for expanding the student’s understanding of the writer-reader dynamic.