I become overwhelmed and disheartened sometimes by the large volume of writing my students generate and that I must read. I’m always on the lookout for strategies to help reduce the time I spend with student papers – that is, without shortchanging students.
So far, I’ve learned a few strategies. For example, last term in English 610 (The Teaching of Composition), Professor Gallehr recommended that we become speed readers. He told us that reading quickly is a great skill for a writing teacher and one we’re all capable of developing. Professor Gallehr also advocated that we limit the comments we put on papers. I’ve tried both of these suggestions and while they do save time, I feel like I’m rushing through student papers and may miss something important.
In my study of the Visible Knowledge Project this week, I hit on another idea. Randy Bass says he shifted from written to oral midterm and final assessments. That would certainly cut down on the paperwork. But three concerns immediately spring to mind.
First, it’s not clear from the poster whether Bass teaches his students how to have worthwhile “conversations” about literature in preparation for the oral assessments. I’m guessing that class discussions help But I wonder how else Bass teaches the conversation skills he assesses. Is the midterm the first opportunity his students have to receive one-on-one feedback on their conversation skills? I’m not sure.
Second, it occurs to me that students who are already good conversationalists and who are at ease speaking will have a huge advantage on this kind of assessment. One might argue that good writers and test takers have a leg up on written exams and that this is no different. Still, I can imagine that there would be students who would clam up in an oral exam; stage fright might do them in.
Third, how much time does Bass spend on the oral assessments? He says he videotapes the conversations. He also says he dubs and compresses the tape onto a CD and puts his comments on as a Word file. Then, he has students write a brief response looking closely at two places in the oral midterm and reflecting how they might have answered questions better or differently. When you add it up, it seems likely that Bass is spending even more time than he would grading a written exam. But it’s time spent differently. I suppose that counts for something.
Despite these concerns, there’s one thing I like a lot about Bass’s oral assessment idea; his students get to have a one-on-one conversation with him. I read a study once that suggested that freshmen in a community college who spent as little as 10 minutes with a single instructor were more likely to remain enrolled than those who didn’t have that chance. We must not forget how much it means to our students when we talk with them meaningfully and individually, especially when we do so outside of the classroom. I love student conferences for this reason. And so, too, I like Bass’s idea because he’s hit on a way to ensure that every student gets that all-so-important one-on-one time. – Laura Hills
Laura,
I think that you must take a few things into consideration when requiring students to participate in oral examinations. First, you must prepare them for that line of testing through discussions and other methods. Second, for those who are able conversationalist versus those who struggle I think the two components that must be considered in the grading are: progress from the midterm to the final and the reflection piece. The second of which is something I really appreciate over a pen and paper test because you are basically giving the student a chance to rethink their answer. In this reflection piece you may learn that the student was operating from a false assumption.
When teaching literature to novice readers and writers, I don’t agree with taking out all oral examination. But I do agree to keeping it short and simple. Professor D’Andrea’s undergraduate literature classes really helped me in this matter. I began to appreciate Shakespeare and his works just by the way he taught them. Every week in the beginning of class he would have us take a short quiz just to see if we have read the works. Then he would begin the class each week with our group presentations, where we had to discuss questions about the text and present it to the class as a group. Then we had our twenty minute lecture. And he would end the class by class discussion as a whole. I believe this combination was really effective in making the class both interesting, and very informative. And I would realize that students like myself enjoyed the class so much that they would not have the urge to look back at the class clock and see how many minutes left to the end of class.