{"id":8043,"date":"2011-11-01t07:00:42","date_gmt":"2011-11-01t13:00:42","guid":{"rendered":"\/\/www.imrbdigital.com\/?p=8043"},"modified":"2011-11-01t07:31:05","modified_gmt":"2011-11-01t13:31:05","slug":"a-conversation-on-student-and-faculty-expectations-for-writing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"\/\/www.imrbdigital.com\/2011\/11\/a-conversation-on-student-and-faculty-expectations-for-writing\/","title":{"rendered":"a conversation on student and faculty expectations for writing"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/a>this is a guest post by katherine fusco, assistant director at the vanderbilt writing studio<\/a> and lecturer in english.<\/em><\/p>\n on september 27th, the cft and the writing studio co-hosted an event centered on what faculty and students think about writing. when i work with student writers at the writing studio, i sometimes find myself beating back the idea that faculty expectations for writing are \u201conly subjective\u201d or based on \u201cweird pet peeves.\u201d going into the cft event, i was curious to hear a bit more about how students interpreted assignments and written feedback from faculty, as well as what faculty intend to communicate to their students about academic writing.<\/p>\n topics for conversation addressed issues including peer review (students reviewing each other\u2019s writing), the grading of writing, responsibility for teaching or knowing grammar, and other sometimes contentious topics.\u00a0 workshop participants found consensus on a few issues, including the value of peer review<\/strong>, with the caveat that peer review sessions need careful planning on the part of the faculty member. one student also clarified that she found it helpful to read her peers\u2019 work and receive feedback from her classmates. she explained that it was important for her to know what a reader thought about her writing because she didn\u2019t have that perspective on her own work.<\/p>\n other topics were more contentious. faculty opinion was split on whether \u201cgood writing\u201d was something that could, or even should, be objectively measured<\/strong>. one professor explained that he used writing from within the class to set the bar high, rather than setting a minimum l <\/em>evel of achievement that, once passed, meant that all student writing was more or less fine. other professors indicated that for technical writing, the setting of an objective standard is crucial for communication in industry. yet another faculty member protested that he couldn\u2019t even be sure that his reading of student work was always internally consistent and that attempting to set objective standards for writing is a dubious project.<\/p>\n