Some solutions:
- Allow students to select works for grading after revising.
- In order to hold students accountable for all assignments, directly state "Some writing will be selected at random"--so students do not 'check out' on assignments.
- Make daily classwork effort a 0/1 assessment grade.
- To expedite the grading process, print a mini rubric in the footnotes of assessments; check off boxes that fulfill criteria or address common problems of practice.
Other interesting ideas:
- Model what good peer feedback looks/sounds like, using direct instruction and think-alouds.
- Students should have a separate assessment grade for final products vs. rough drafts--so lack of significant revisions counts against them. (Process Grade vs. Product Grade)
- Have students share Google docs with peers for feedback.
- Have tiered prompts for students to prompt differentiation. (For example: Is Macbeth a tragic hero? vs. Is Macbeth a sympathetic character?)
- To prevent plagiarism, give direct instruction on embedding quotes and paraphrasing.
I think a key idea mentioned here is MODELING what peer revision should look like... do a think-aloud as you provide revision suggestions to an anonymous student paper on a Google doc, have the class collaborate to provide suggestions as you enter them on a Google doc, then send them off to provide suggestions to each other on Google docs. Oh yes, and Google docs is a great tool!
ReplyDelete