'Shit-Plus' 'AWK' 'Frag' 'Huh?' Part 2 of 2

[KenThoMen]

Kenisha/CCNY/McBeth:

I agree with Wynne that a longitudinal study of these students until graduation to find out how their views on teacher response to their writing shifts over time may be worht looking into.

[StacePrints25]

As someone who works as a digital (internet) advertiser, I truly appreciate the use of YouTube to convey the research. They demonstrate a student-centric teaching focus because not only is the research about how students "evaluate" teacher evaluations, but they are utilizing a medium that their students probably use on a daily basis. I think this group was successful at making this research accessible to both students and educators on many levels.

Cool work!

~Stace

[Briankuchta]

Second, what types of comments are these students talking about? Are these comments based in grammar, structure, or content? There is great disparity in the ability of a reader to understand written comments based on this differentiation.

[Briankuchta]

This also falls into the idea of whose concept of what is written is correct - the writer or the reader. As Barthes suggests in "The Rustle of Language", the reader and writer can have very different interpretations of the intention behind text. This would be true even for comments made by a teacher on a paper. Therefore, unless the students have clarified every comment with the teacher, how can they be sure they have truly understood the teacher's intentions?

[Briankuchta]

First, in the section in which the students commented on the teacher's comments, many of the students stated that they usually understood the teacher's comments overall. How can they be sure? We have been studying the concept of written commentary on the part of the teacher and how these comments are often vague and/or misinterpreted by the student. So, I question how these students knew that they understood the teacher's comments.

[Briankuchta]

My name is Brian, and I am in the Language and Literacy program at City College in NYC.

First of all, I want to congratulate you on your excellent work in this video study.

After watching this video, several questions have come to mind that you may be able to answer or that you may want to consider in further exploring the topics discussed in this video.

[wynneellen]

Great work presenting this study. It would be great to follow these students in a longitudinal study to graduation, and find out how their reactions shift as they grow as writers.

How did you conduct your analysis of student papers? Did your group read them all at once at categorize the comments, or collect them over time?

I felt like the students you interviewed were keenly aware of tricky dynamics between instructor and student in writing courses. Do you think teachers are equally aware?

[laurenmvb27]

I was wondering about any feedback from instructors in Fresno State's first year writing program? Have they viewed these videos? What was their response? Were they surprised? Resistant? I would love to hear more about that.

[mab8181]

We have not yet unveiled this video to the other teachers of first year writing. We plan to do so at our TA orientation in the Fall. So no feedback yet!

[omarjames10452]

I'm one of Mark McBeth's CCNY language and literacy students. Very thought provoking. Some things I'm left wondering:

1- What compelled you to do the video?

2-How long did it take to craft this piece?

3- How'd you figure out the stats?

4-What criteria was used in picking the interviewees?

5-Have any of the prof's of these interviewees seen the vid and how do you think it will change their techniques?

6-Has the process of making this vid changed:

-you?

-the interviewees?