Chapter Seven Best Practices

I agree with the author when he stated that "revising is a way to learn about the craft of writing" (141). Unfortunately, students feel revision is merely correcting the editing marks and submitting a clean copy. However, revision is the most complex step in the writing process. It requires the author to effectively communicate with the audience by developing and clarifying the information. The author must decide if the quality being presented is coherent. If not, one must rewrite the content. Hopefully, the focus on revision will carry over to the next assignment. How does one teach students to evaluate their own papers? How can a teacher keep students from repeating the same mistakes on future assignments?

"Teachers who write" should establish high expectations for students during the revision phase of the writing process. To me, editing should include whole group lessons, paired student activities, and teacher conferences. Editing should not be exclusively centered on grammar and mechanics. The content of the paper should be critically examined and read by several different individuals. Feedback is crucial if the author is to correct any lapses in writing. On page 142 the author stated that "secondary school levels generally do little substantive revising." The proficient writer will see the purpose of revising as he/she writes; however, struggling writers only seem to make minor changes. The author gives many scenarios and ideas for enabling all students to demonstrate proficiency in this area. However, each one requires the teacher to model "think alouds" extensively. The teacher must provide opportunities for the students to observe how begin the revision process. By utilizing rubrics, students also get the opportunity to see how their paper will be assessed. Again, the teacher must explain the components to the students before they begin to evaluate their own papers.

I liked how the chapter primarily focused on the clarity and comprehensibility of student papers. On page 146 the peer revising activity proved to be a worthwhile approach. The students focused on the paper until there was a problem with content. The teacher instructed the editor to ask the author for clarification first. Then the editor and author discussed how to properly correct the paper. I liked the teamwork approach. Students often respond better to a peer offering constructive criticism. The teacher would have to carefully demonstrate how to approach the individual.

I would often take old papers and retype certain sections. I would place the paper on the overhead and have the students "talk through" the content problems. Many students are especially sensitive concerning their writing. I tried to make my students see revision as a way to improve. Personal attacks on writing are not allowed (although I had to deal with this one time).

The sample instructional examples provided me with new ideas for approaching writing. On pages 155-160, the teacher showed a variety of steps in order to achieve success with persuasive writing. As a former tenth grade teacher, I found this type of paper very difficult to teach to struggling writers. It was difficult to teach the students to expand their thoughts. Often, I would receive papers like the sample on page 157. Attempting to teach a counterargument became frustrating for some. My students could not predict their "opposition." Therefore, I liked the evaluation strategy described on page 155. His rubric was very simplistic; it's easy for the students to rate their partner. At the bottom of 156 it stated how the teacher did the think aloud and highlighted the position, reasons, and refutations. As he highlighted each section of the paper, he analyzed whether each portion was effectively written. I thought how effective it would be if the students highlighted their own papers. Visually, students could see if there was enough supporting evidence. As a result, the students knew specifically what to revise.

I feel one reason this eighth teacher was successful was due to the type of topics the teacher selected. Our RE5130 class has discussed how writing must be authentic. The teacher selected the topic of smoking in a public facility. Any type of contraversial topic will spark an opinion at this age. If students see the assignment is meaningful, they will spend more time revising their content to ensure they are understood correctly. The teacher was also successful because he had the assistance of his team partners. Writing across the curriculum is a necesssity. It is not the sole responsibility of the English teacher. Therefore, his partners could reinforce the techiques he introduced.

I also agree that students will benefit more by evaluating papers from another class. One teacher in our department assigns a number to each student. All papers are typed and the number is placed in the corner instead of the name. This anonymity helps the students focus on the assignment. Many students do not feel comfortable critiquing their peers.

Students can learn to revise if the teacher makes this part of the writing routine. Whether it is in the form of a workshop or with a partner, students must be given explicit instructions before they begin. Otherwise, this step becomes meaningless. The teacher must remember this essential step will improve the overall quality of the writing. Lastly, it can help promote the publication stage which is oftentimes forgotten.