Grading Guidelines for English-W131
The standard curriculum for English-W131 is divided into two parts, each assessed by a portfolio. The midterm portfolio will count for roughly 1/3 of the student's grade, while the final portfolio will count for roughly 2/3 of the grade. You may, at your discretion, use 10% of the semester grade to account for process work. This 10% grade may include attendance, but the grade cannot be based solely on attendance. It must be based on work that can be clearly evaluated (such as peer response work, group work, submission of drafts, or other informal work). If you choose to grade such work, describe in your syllabus how the work will be calculated.
Note the options below for calculating the final grades:
(1) Midterm Portfolio 33.3%; Final Portfolio 66.6%
(2) Midterm portfolio 30%; Final Portfolio 60%; Other Work 10%
(3) Midterm Portfolio 25%; Final Portfolio 65%; Other Work 10%
(As you can see, the final portfolio should be worth the majority of the grade in the course. The reason is the point at which the final portfolio is produced represents a point in the semester when students have had time to draft and revise their papers and to take into consideration class instruction and their reading. You will find that students will be doing their best work at this point in the semester, so it makes sense, especially in the context of a course that stresses working with a drafting and revising process, that the greatest portion of the final grade falls at a time when students are generally doing their best work.)
How Portfolios Will Be Assessed
Final portfolios should be graded following the English-W131 grading guide, which appears below. Before getting to the guide, however, first a little history.
The Writing Program at IUPUI used to ask faculty to grade by a rubric that was written by members of the Writing Coordinating Committee. However, after reviewing what we were seeing happening at portfolio readings for W131, it was decided that a new, more dynamic approach was needed. With this in mind, Susanmarie Harrington, who was the Director of Writing at the time (2003), and Scott Weeden, who was then and remains the course coordinator for W131, decided to undergo the process they read about in researcher Bob Broad's What We Really Value (Utah State Press, 2003).
In that book, Broad encourages writing program directors and other interested parties to engage in what he refers to in the book as Dynamic Criteria Mapping (DCM). Dynamic Criteria Mapping involves interested parties (faculty, for example) coming together to talk about student writing and a facilitator or set of facilitators capturing the conversations in some form (such as through extensive note taking or recording) for later analysis. This analysis should reveal what is valued in student writing by the interested parties, and their responses then can be used to create documents that articulate expectations and values. (Broad, in fact, encourages mapping these expectations and values so that faculty have a way of checking their individual decisions against the values of the program.)
We went through our own DCM process for W131, and the result was not a dynamic criteria map, but what we call our W131 grading guide (formally called "An Approach to Grading in W131," which appears below). It contains sets of reactions to portfolios, as articulated at end-of-semester portfolio readings, and organized according to what we would expect to see in final portfolios at various levels of quality. Another term for our grading guide is the "Unrubric," because we do not expect the guide to replace decisions faculty make for their students. Instead, it is intended to be a guide to these decisions, and to be a reference for them.
As indicated, "An Approach to Grading in W131," the W131 grading guide is organized around sets of descriptors expressing expected outcomes at three levels, passing, above passing, and below passing. At the three levels, a set of common headings appears which signal what the descriptors focus on (generally a range from technical features of the writing to strategies and decisions the writer is making to complete both the writing and the portfolio the writing appears in). The grading guide begins with the passing level because it represents what faculty want to see in portfolios, at minimum, when they are of passing quality. The next section or level, "Better Than Passing," represents what faculty want to see in portfolios at the above passing level, and below that, what faculty would expect to see in portfolios at the below passing level.
To use the grading guide to see where a portfolio's evaluation might fall, instructors should read the portfolio, read through the descriptors at the various levels, and decide what would be a fair grade. The guide, readers will note, is vague about individual grades because we believe this is a decision an individual instructor must make. That decision should occur after an instructor has considered what transpired in his or her section, what he or she sees in final portfolios, and after consulting the guide. Grades, then, are the result of individual instructor decisions, but they also should result from the awareness of what we value or do not value in final work, as it is expressed in the grading guide.
An Approach to Grading in W131
The following descriptions show what we value in student writing in English-W131 final portfolios in the IUPUI Writing Program. These descriptions are designed to be a guide to grading decisions in W131. They emerge from discussions between faculty about what we find true about portfolios that are "Passing" (baseline to pass the course), "Better Than Passing" (A or B work), and "Below Passing" (C-, D, or F work).
The passing descriptions are more detailed because this is the level student work must reach to pass the course. At the "Better Than Passing" and "Below Passing" levels, the assumption is that after a faculty member reviews the passing descriptions, he or she will consider the merits of a portfolio given the additional information of these latter two lists.
As stated above, this document is designed to be a guide to grading. Individual faculty will determine a portfolio's grade based on what has occured in his or her section, with this guide used as a reminder what we value generally in portfolios at the various levels.
A Passing Portfolio Demonstrates:
Text Engagement through Writing
* The writer is able to read critically by engaging with ideas and texts, questioning some ideas he or she reads, adding to or enhancing others, and indicating why the questioning or enhancing is a good idea.
* The writer uses summary, synthesis and analysis appropriately when engaging sources in his or her text.
* The writer comprehends the purposes of summarizing, paraphrasing, and responding to sources.
* The writer also comprehends the difference between summarizing, paraphrasing, and responding to sources.
* The writer attempts to create or represent a conversation on the topic he or she is writing about through the use of outside sources.
* The writer has some awareness of the value of attributive tags in creating or representing a conversation of his or her topic (i.e., language that signals or references the source of information). Sources are used accurately, ethically, and appropriately. No plagiarism.
* The writer uses examples to engage his or her topic appropriately and sufficiently.
Developmental and Organizational Strategies
* The writer uses questions and prewriting activities to generate drafts.
* Essay introductions lead readers into the essay and introduce the essay's topic.
* In thesis-based essays, thesis statements appear early, forecasting content, and asserting a debatable position.
* The writer also recognizes the value of using a variety of organizational patterns that promote his or her purpose, the interests of the audience, and the communication of the thesis or theme.
* Paragraph topic sentences are used to relate to an essay's main idea (its thesis or theme).
* Supporting details in paragraphs expand ideas expressed in topic sentences, giving fuller meaning to an essay's theme or thesis.
* The writer demonstrates understanding that strategies of coherence (transitional phrasing and the thoughtful repetition, restatement, or "echoing" of words and phrases) help move a reader forward through an essay.
* Essays conclude in an appropriate and even meaningful way. Reflective writing demonstrates the intent to develop an active writing process.
Moving Beyond Familiar Thinking
* The writer attempts to move beyond familiar thinking by actively engaging with outside ideas from texts, classmates, and the instructor.
* The writer develops reasonable questions, responses, and assertions in the process of challenging his or her own thinking or the thinking of others.
* The writer attempts original ideas in his or her papers while keeping readers' needs in mind.
Revision
* The writer responds to feedback from peers and instructor by implementing changes in a text.
* The writer challenges his or her previous ideas by posing new questions.
* The writer revises aspects of his or her paper as ideas are challenged.
* The writer approaches his or her revision strategy as an extension of the composing process that helped him or her produce previous drafts.
Final Product
* The papers follow instructions and guidelines.
* It is apparent that papers address interesting questions.
* The papers show focus.
* Drafts may have grammar and usage errors, but they do not interfere with the clarity of ideas.
* Evidence of revision appears.
* The writer can write thoughtfully about his or her process of composing and drafting a paper in writer's statements.
* The writer can assert claims in the retrospective about how well course goals have been achieved as if the writer is a lawyer making a case for the audience.
* Analysis in the retrospective also identifies areas of improvement and opportunities for continued growth (the writer can be critical of his or her own writing).
* Each paper has as a title that summarizes what the essay is about.
* MLA documentation style is used appropriately with few errors.
A Better than Passing Portfolio Demonstrates:
Text Engagement through Writing
*A creative identification with the reading is evident in the writing.
*The writer uses attributive tags and transitional phrasing to create an interesting, if not compelling, conversation with the sources.
*Because of how the writer uses examples, the essays of the portfolio prove more interesting to read.
*The examples the writer uses show a deeper engagement with the topic.
Developmental and Organizational Strategies
* Drafts of the portfolio are compelling to read because the writer grapples with complexity from draft to draft.
* Drafts of the portfolio become stronger as one reads them.
* It is apparent the writer has thought carefully about how to organize the papers found in the portfolio; the writing stays on track.
* Textual features like transitional phrasing and the thoughtful repetition, restatement, or "echoing" of words and phrases help to create topical coherence in the essay, leading to compelling reading.
* Reflective writing shows the writer can thoughtfully assess his or her writing and his or her writing process.
* Reflective writing shows the writer has a sense of comfort with the writing process.
Moving Beyond Familiar Thinking
* The writer shows that intellectual complexity is an important priority.
* The writer obviously takes risks.
* The writer expresses truly creative ideas and insights.
* The writer creatively adapts to the assignments.
Revision
* The writer moves beyond his or her initial conceptions while revising. In the process, subject matter changes are apparent between drafts.
* The writer thoughtfully responds to peer and instructor response.
* Work with the language leads to writing that is both engaging and clear. (In fact, it may be so good that you don't notice it.)
Final Product
* The writer shows a good sense of style through stylistic devices like repetition, use of metaphor, and use of sentence variety.
* As a result of the work with style and stylistic devices, a voice is apparent that is sincere, confident, and best of all, enthusiastic.
* The writer appears to have fun with the language.
* The writer obviously makes a personal investment in the writing (the texts read as if the writer "owns" or feels quite comfortable discussing the topics).
* A clear thesis (or theme, if relevant to the type of essay) appears and the details support an insightful point of view.
* Paper titles are catchy.
* MLA documentation style is used well.
A Below Passing Portfolio Demonstrates:
Text Engagement through Writing
* Few examples may be used to back up ideas.
* If sources are used, the writer misses the point or misinterprets the sources.
* Sources are used in bits and pieces scattered all over the essay rather than used cohesively.
* There is little to no interaction (or conversation) with the sources.
* Few citations appear, which suggests that the writer fails to understand that sources need documentation and credit.
Developmental and Organizational Strategies
* The writing lacks purpose, suggesting the writer is struggling with how to express his or her ideas.
* There is weak organizational structure.
* Little to no audience awareness appears in the essays and where appropriate, the reflective writing. (The audience may decide that an essay is boring to read because little compels a reader to move on.)
* Weak transitions appear between the major parts of essays.
* Reflective writing offers no analysis of the writer's own process.
Moving Beyond Familiar Thinking
* The writing in the portfolio shows that no risk taking is occurring.
* Essays depend too much on binary thinking.
* The writer fails to grapple with the complexities of issues.
Revision
* Revision is superficial, because based on a literal reading of what the instructor wants rather than a thoughtful analysis of how an essay may better appeal to an audience.
* Because little time has been put into revising, the essays are less polished: it is obvious that additional drafts are needed.
Final Product
* Papers are written as if book reports for the teacher rather than essays for a larger audience.
* The writer struggles to complete assignment goals.
* A reader may come away from the essay thinking, "I expected more."
* The essays are not reader friendly; little to no audience awareness appears.
* Essays may follow what an assignment asks, but offer an audience few insights.
* Problems with grammar and usage interfere with clarity.
* Failure to document appropriately using MLA style.
* Portfolios are incomplete: retrospective essays are short their required length or are undeveloped; revised papers are short their required lengths; writer's statements are barely developed; parts of the portfolio are missing; late work on papers was not submitted by the late work due date for the semester.
More on Using the W131 Grading Guide
We have a common practice of end-of-semester portfolio readings, where faculty bring anonymous samples of student work to share with their colleagues, discuss what we see happening in the student work, assess how these results reflect what is happening in the course, and consider productive changes to benefit students and faculty. An important feature of these readings is they also allow us to test our grading decisions with one another and to affirm where student writing should be at the end of W131. As we do so, we are able to make sure that the student experience in the course is both positive and productive, and to be sure that response to student writing is consistent with articulated program values.
A midterm version of the W131 grading guide can be found in the "Goals, Guidelines, Grading, and Policies" folder in the Faculty Resources site on Oncourse.
Students Continuing in English-W131 After Failing the Midterm
Note: It is possible to pass the course after an F on a midterm, especially given the common grading schemes mentioned above. A student will have to make a concerted effort, but a section of the course should not be set up so that students are failing the course at midterm. However, a student with a failing grade on the midterm portfolio because it is so late no other grade is possible still must complete this portfolio to continue with the later assignments in the course even if they fall behind on these later assignments. Completing the course in satisfactory manner in this situation may be very difficult, but students have the right to try.
On to the The Midterm Portfolio
Back to the Table of Contents page
|
