"You've provided the meat of the essay but not the serving platter" is the comment I wrote in the margin of a student paper just now, but I wonder whether he'll understand the problem: diving right into some excellent paragraphs without leading up to them with an effective introduction or tying them up neatly with a conclusion. So I went back and explained it another way, knowing that metaphors can be misunderstood.
So, apparently, can prompts. After reading two consecutive papers that veered widely off course in similar ways, I had to go back and read the prompt again to make sure it said what I thought it said. But no, I was right: the students misunderstood what the question was asking for and so produced competent in-class essays that did not actually answer the question. I had warned about this, of course; we had spent several class periods looking at sample essay questions, circling key words, and writing thesis statements that responded to the questions, but when it came time to write the actual essay in class, several students responded not to the question written on the prompt but to a question we had discussed previously. Either they didn't read very carefully or they didn't think I'd notice.
And, as expected with in-class timed essays, several papers start off really well but then thin out toward the end with underdeveloped paragraphs showing evidence of haste. Writing half of a great essay will earn half of a great grade, which may be distressing, but students will be relieved to find out that I'm offering them an opportunity to revise these in-class essays to earn up to ten additional points. Some will be content and won't bother revising; some will hope to earn a few points by correcting the spelling and punctuation errors while ignoring large glaring holes in structure or content; but a few will diligently revise and submit a nicely polished essay.
I just hope they don't forget the serving platter this time because it gets messy when the meat falls on the floor.
No comments:
Post a Comment