Constructive Criticism

I thought the essays we read about not grading were great ideas, but they could never really work. As a student, if my teacher did not give me a grade, I would be upset. Part of my drive for going to school is to do well and be competitive. I like to feel like I'm accomplishing something and moving forward. It is especially rewarding to receive a lowish grade on a first paper and then to improve throughout the semester and receive a high grade on a final paper. (No, I'm not suggesting that you should grade me this way, Dr. Rogers). My point is that grades help motivate me to want to do better. Maybe this is not true for everybody.

I have always been this way. When I did my first piano competition in third grade, I sucked. I received a horrible rating and found myself embarrassed because I realized that all the other kids could play a lot better than I could. Instead of going home and crying about it and quitting, I was motivated to practice more so I could catch up to the others. I spent an hour a day at the piano and eventually started winning the piano competitions. In this sense, receiving a "bad grade" helped to motivate me to become better. I think the same can be applied to writing.

However, giving somebody a straight grade without constructive criticism would be irresponsible. I think the point in the essays we read was largely this. Teachers need to tell students about their writing and how they can improve it so students will learn more from their teacher's "grade." Getting a C but not knowing why it was received is useless to a student who wants to improve the next time. Giving ways that students can improve, pointing out their strengths, and then giving a grade seems like a better way to evaluate student writing.