From write and learn to crash and burn

It looks like a pretty good idea in theory, but in practice? The jury is still out.

In a sophomore-level literature course that fulfills the Writing Proficiency requirement, one of the goals is to help students learn to write as a process involving a series of steps. In a straight writing course, I would devote plenty of class time to focused peer review and also offer my own comments on student drafts, but in a literature course, I can't devote quite so many class periods to peer review.

So for the past few semesters I've offered a compromise: for each of the first two papers, I devote a full class period to focused peer review and also require students to submit drafts for my comments. For the third and fourth papers, on the other hand, I schedule no in-class peer review, nor do I require submission of drafts, although I do offer to read and comment on drafts if students want my feedback. "By this point in the semester," I tell the class, "You should know what kind of help you need on your writing, and you should know where to find that help--by setting up informal peer-review sessions outside of class or by seeking individualized instruction from me or from the Writing Center."

Does it work? Sort of. A few students still send me drafts, and a few visit the Writing Center. I don't have any way to track whether they do any informal peer review outside class, but I certainly haven't seen any massive epidemic of wretched papers. Most students produce papers very similar in quality to their earlier work, and a few improve.

I'm a little concerned, though, about the exceptions. Every time I offer this compromise, a handful of students crash and burn--the ones most in need of help with their writing. If their earlier papers hover on the edge of coherence, their later papers (lacking peer review) fall over the edge into chaos. Students who early in the semester benefit from feedback on their drafts now fail to submit drafts for comments (because it's not required!) and also don't visit the Writing Center or show any other signs of seeking help. Theoretically, students who know the benefits of getting help and know the sources of help will be motivated to get help, but perhaps the theory is flawed.

One thing this system does really well is distinguish between students willing to seek help on their writing and those who will seek help only when it is required. What can I do with the second group: abandon them to their fate or find another way to motivate them? The jury's still out on that question.