I personally agree with Emig to an extent. The text states that the process appoach emphasizes error correction. I believe that this could be a negative thing because students may get so immune to seeing abbreviations like "FRAG" and "RO" on their papers, that they may slowly lose confidence in their writing abilities. While, some may argue that making abbreviated notations throughout a student's paper is helpful and beneficial in the student's learning abilities, I disagree. When I was in GWRIT my freshman year at JMU, I had a professor who met with each student individually for a half hour in his office to go over a paper that had been turned in. In this way, the teacher and student essentially graded the paper together, rather than having the professor mark all over it. This is more beneficial to the student because he or she can revise the paper directly, rather than indirectly reading red pen marks. In this way, both the student and the teacher have the opportunity to note areas for improvement in the paper, but also go over strengths that the paper has.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
The Process Approach (p.53-56)
Emig states that "there is little evidence that the persistant pointing out of specific errors in student themes leads to the elimination of these errors, yet teachers expend much of their energy in this futile and unrewarding exercise." Do you agree or disagree with Williams? Why or why not?