CBW Home (new window)
Basic Writing @ CompFAQs
Feedback and Basic Writing
Generation 1.5 Students
Teaching Basic Writing
Assess & Respond
Basic Writing and Service-Learning
Teaching Reading in Basic Writing
ELL Student Writing
Trends Shown in the CBW Survey of Basic Writing Programs
Basic Writing Resources
Best Practices Home
BW Teacher Reading List
BW Grad Syllabi Home
- Benign Neglect
- Benign Neglect is a process of abandoning the “error hunt” that Lois Matz Rosen suggests. The process entails the proposed idea that teachers initially relinquish the opportunity to comment on error and, instead, allow students to internalize the process of proofreading and demonstrate what they “do know before the teacher begins to identify and work on areas of weakness” (Rosen 67). This process aids student proofreading and places more ultimate responsibility on the student.
- commenting on error
- Commenting on error simply involves the teacher making written responses to highlight errors like fragments, misplaced modifiers, and comma splices. These common errors can be pointed out by the teacher, and appropriate modifications and tips can be given to avoid these errors.
- Editor, RightWriter, Correct Grammar, and Grammatik
- Timothy J. Beals argues that teaching grammar in isolation is unproductive and not useful. Thus, the use of Editor, RightWriter, Correct Grammar, and Grammatik are misleading in their proposed usefulness. Teachers should, instead, emphasize that these devices and programs cannot replicate what a teacher can do with students. Teacher then can emphasize the importance of communication between student and teacher regarding the correction of error.
- improvising with student texts
- Judith M. Newman favors a dialogue between teacher and student through the use of the computer and the practice of inserting questions and reactions “exactly where they occur as we are reading” (Newman 113). Newman’s approach allows teachers to use the computer as a substitute for the word processor which Newman originally suggests using.
- inserting questions and reactions
- Judith M. Newman suggests a dialogue between teacher and student that uses the computer or word processor to point out errors “exactly where they occur as we are reading” (Newman 113). This allows teachers to write in questions and responses to student error as they are occurring in the paper. Thus, teachers can work with students in a way that is closer to the student’s actual text.
- mixing commentary
- Jan Madraso argues that “the lack of commentary on the surface errors helps avoid overloading students with feedback (Madraso 39).” Madraso is referring to her process of minimal marking of errors in student papers, but emphasizes that too much commentary can confuse students. Thus, teachers should attempt to avoid mixing commentary related to content with commentary related to surface errors.
- Selectivity is a part played by the teacher in which the error-correction phase focuses on only repeated errors that a student makes in a paper. Lois Matz Rosen argues that “Students are more likely to grow as writers when the teacher’s primary purpose in reading student papers is to respond to content” (Rosen 67). This reserved process is beneficial for students because it reduces mixed commentary on error and content. It is favored over pointing out every error.
- Jan Madraso argues the importance of students knowing about their errors before they attempt to find them. This sets the groundwork for students to more easily identify their errors and use technology to supplement their learning. As Madraso writes, in referring to the SEARCH as a proofreading tool, students must know which of their own errors can be detected by using SEARCH; even more important, they must know how to identify and correct those errors” (Madraso 40).