1 / 12

Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback in a College-level Writing Course

Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback in a College-level Writing Course. Major Research Paper – M.A in Applied Linguistics – York U. Jessica King. Why did I do this project?. Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback.

dixie
Download Presentation

Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback in a College-level Writing Course

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback in a College-level Writing Course Major Research Paper – M.A in Applied Linguistics – York U. Jessica King

  2. Why did I do this project?

  3. Teacher Perceptions of Rubrics and Feedback • Do the teachers find these rubrics useful? If so, in what ways are they useful? • What are the functions of the rubrics for the teachers?

  4. Theoretical Background and Relevant Research • The mature writing process: Knowledge transforming vs. knowledge telling. (Scardamalia & Bereiter 1987) • The teacher’s role in student revision • Students DO read feedback - Formative vs. evaluative feedback • Varied feedback works best * • Debate still exists about grammar correction • Assessment • The internal criteria of teachers – experienced vs. less experienced • Rubrics can be a source of feedback *

  5. Theoretical Background and Relevant Research Hayes et al’s (1987) Process model of revision

  6. Methodology Participants: • N = 8 • 4 contract, 4 full-time status • All had taught new COMM 1007 for at least one semester • 3 different departments: CSHS, GEA, HOSP

  7. Methodology Interview structure: • Introduction • Teacher feedback • Teacher perception of rubrics

  8. Methodology Study Limitations: • No analysis of actual feedback given on student texts – only had teachers’ description of their practice • But focus of interview was not on “best practices” • Different teacher schedules in summer • But all teachers had taught COMM 1007 before • Smaller classes in summer • Result: sample of students (N=5) not representative of actual student experience

  9. Results

  10. Results 5. Time on 1st draft: (Mean =19.1 mins; range = 10-37 mins). One teacher did not give feedback on 1st draft 5. Time on 2nd draft: (Mean = 20.3 mins; range 10-40 mins) 7. & 8. All use rubrics and explain* them 9. All said that rubrics assisted them 12. (N = 5) teachers found standards were appropriate for students in general Standards appropriate for NNES students? No clear pattern of response 13. (N=5) teachers felt that there were NNES problems not addressed in rubric 14. All teachers had made modifications ( N=2 minor; N=2 medium; N=4 major)

  11. Results Dominant Themes: • Student and teacher interpretation of rubric language – clarity of feedback and objectivity in grading • Accessibility of language for students • Teacher interpretation of language • Discrepancies between teachers’ general impressions and rubric scores

  12. Discussion and Conclusion • Concentrate feedback on first drafts (formative feedback) • Consider varied feedback (mix of oral, written, rubric use) • Promote student understanding • Explain rubrics as early as possible – cognitive modeling • Portfolio assessments • Promote teacher understanding • Teacher training • Explanation of rubrics in COMM 1007 binder • Promote mutual understanding – review wording of grammar/mechanics and style sections

More Related