"As we get ready to web publish for the first time, how much should I help a student "fix" his paper prior to publishing? Should I let those last few errors go? Those 10% that they are unable to repair on their own?"
Source: Email on the TESL-L listserv.

When I was a 5th grade writing teacher, I remember the day I posted my students' writing on a bulletin board in the teacher's lounge. You see, aside from my classroom walls, there were few place to post their work where it would be made known to others. A paraprofessional, well-respected grandmother walked up, squinted at their work, and made a remark about the students' spelling and grammar. I told her I'd share the complaint with the students so that they would know...it was important that their audience know the remarks being made, both positive and constructive.

I always look back to that moment as the time I decided that students should be able to publish their mistakes, as well as their "good work." Unfortunately, back then in that town, this was not an accepted point of view. And, unfortunately, that point of view remains among some teachers. Recently, in a local environment, I expressed my disappointment--with the practice of a teacher who was blogging with her students. The teacher was said to be "editing" student work BEFORE the children could put it in the classroom blog. This reminded me of the incident with my own students, and I immediately searched out how to best address this. I found quotes in Lucy Calkin's book on teaching students to write. Then, I noticed this thread in the TESL-L list...I subscribe to it even though I no longer keep up too much with TESL literature (how much has it changed? Not much...frightening!).

The email shared this response via the list (name removed):

Why not allow students to keep amending their published texts after they've been uploaded to the website? I expect that in many cases this approach will kill two birds with one stone: it will enhance the published texts while at the same time giving learners more practice in self-editing. In fact, there's a potential third bird: helpful indications for the teacher as to whether the inability to correct the remaining 10% is due to language or editing shortcomings. That is, whether the students thought the mistakes were correct English, or whether they were too preoccupied with other things to spot them.

I find this to be an excellent suggestion, especially when we consider the changeability of blogs. What do you think?

Posted by Miguel Guhlin at | +Del.icio.us |
Categories: MGuhlin.net