How Do We Address Surface Conventions in Teaching Writing So That Students Do Not Suffer from the Negative Perceptions Created by Errors?
by Liane Robertson and Mike Gregorich
Current scholarship suggests the following:
- First, we must take care in presenting feedback. Writers who are conditioned to believe they have deficiencies in their writing become less powerful writers, less willing to take risks in their writing or challenge the status quo. “Convincing writers of their enduring inadequacies can silence them” (Briggs, 56).
- Students need to be aware of the impact of negative perceptions and how the errors they might make can cause issue with readers. Students should also be made aware that audience perceptions should be put into perspective, however, as research shows not only students but teachers, professionals, even writers of grammar handbooks make the same types of errors (Connors, 403).
- Engaging students in discussion about how errors can cause negative perceptions of the writer helps students better understand audience. A discussion that puts into perspective the different opinions held by readers and writers of varying backgrounds, lifestages and values, and how those readers and writers are influenced in many different ways by mass media and culture can make addressing errors less oppressive to student writers(Hillocks, 731).
- The role of surface conventions should be kept in perspective, by teaching conventional patterns as students develop their writing, with a goal of reducing the frequency and commonality of errors.
- Communication between student and teacher should start with commenting on errors that students continuously make
Teachers can enhance this approach by practicing:
- Benign Neglect- The process of getting to know what students do know regarding surface errors.
- Selectivity- The process of commenting on one or two continuous errors at a time on a paper rather than every error in the paper.
- Teachers can provide strategies to help students remember conventional patterns, rather than simply trying to advise them of errors as they occur. These memory strategies should also be housed within positive, understanding and charitable comments to ensure students aren’t discouraged by errors (Briggs, 58).
- Word choice in teacher feedback on surface errors is critical in preventing discouragement or feelings of blame. Use of words that connote community, growth and flexibility and which privilege development, personal empowerment and voice are recommended. Simply inserting “I” in the use of first person comments takes much of the onus off the student (Briggs, 56).
- In assessing student writing, basic writing teachers are often faced with what Lois Matz Rosen describes as the “Error Hunt.” This chase for student errors regarding surface conventions and grammar can limit the effectiveness of a basic writing teacher’s method of being constructive and practically teaching the rules and proper conventions about errors.
What are best practices when providing feedback to avoid mixed commentary?
- Run workshops for common errors in class, but teachers should also be sure to address errors in papers without mixing commentary about content and grammar.
- As suggested by Jan Madraso, use marks to indicate (by line) where and how many errors students have made, in order to:
- reinforce student learning without commentary solely focused on either grammar or content
- allow teachers to comment on content without overwhelming students about surface conventions
- Employ a Proofreading Journal, which works in conjunction with marking errors by line in helping students work toward learning to eliminate the errors they make repeatedly.
Sample Proofreading Journal
| Error Found by Teacher | Student’s Solution | Student’s “What to Look For” |
|---|
| Confusing “who” and “whom” | “Who” is subjective and “whom” is objective | Use of who/whom |
| Comma connecting two sentences | Use semicolon or use comma with conjunction | Commas |
| | | |
| | | |
A final word on approach.
- In keeping with the notion that less marking of surface errors is more positive for students, the actual process of communication between teacher and student regarding error should be considered with caution. As Richard H. Haswell notes in paraphrasing C.H. Knoblach and Lil Brannon, “Positive results of teacher intervention through written commentary simply have not yet been found” (Haswell 600).
- In trying to help students with errors, teachers should first, develop an approach to grammar and surface conventions that separates them from content in writing. Then, teachers are more prepared to isolate error, bring the error into perspective for the student, and challenge the student to find the proper usage for that error.
Resources for more information on feedback are listed on the references page.
BestPractices-ProvidingFeedback
