Cicero claimed the orator learns by precept and practice—precept first, then practice. In W and C courses, instruction is precept—what we tell students to guide them in producing that final artifact, whether a paper, a poster, or a speech. Most often, instruction comes in the form of exercises; examination or analysis of models; or discussion, reading, or lecture about writing or speaking. Practice can take two forms: (1) a finished performance measured in minutes or number of words and included in the final grade determination; and (2) the opportunity to get comments on drafts of finished products that can in turn be used to revise and improve them before they are graded. My concern in this post is the latter—what we call formative feedback.
The kind of feedback that is given with a grade (summative feedback) is important, and I trust that W and C course instructors provide it. Comments on finished work help students understand their grades and in some cases inspire them to apply what they learned to future projects. Unfortunately, that does not always happen, and it has to do with the complex nature of transfer of learning as much as with a recalcitrant attitude. But that’s another post.
The fact is, W and C courses require formative feedback, and I want to explain why.
The first reason formative feedback is required is that it sets students up for success. The higher the stakes on an assignment, and the more complex it is, the more students need feedback along the way to perform well. Sometimes, I’ve heard the comment that providing formative feedback is coddling the writer and that in the real world they’ll have to compose without it. The fact is, in the real world, writers do get formative feedback, and, again, the higher the stakes, the more they get. Some students may need a bit more hand-holding than others, but the more they go through the compose-review-revise cycle, the less they will need. Still, in many instances, they can and will get feedback that can be used to revise, from a co-author, a colleague, an editor, or a reviewer.
The second reason, often overlooked, is that W and C courses provide the opportunity to model mature composing practices. Mature composers, whether of papers or speeches, frequently seek out feedback and use it to revise. Students, however, often have the notion that mature writers don’t need to revise, much less receive feedback. They may not trust feedback, especially if they have experiences with peers who have not been prepared to give it. (For help preparing students to provide each other with good quality formative feedback, see Peer Review Workshop video; and Peer Response. Also see Formative Feedback on Oral Presentations.) Readers who point out infelicities of style, inaccuracies, lapses in logic, false assumptions, or other problems give the writer the chance to look at the text in a new light— to “re-see” or “re-vision” it. Seeing work from a new perspective is a mark of critical thought., something we want students to apply to the composing process.
Once students have received good formative feedback, they’re primed to understand what it’s like to craft a communication, how a piece requires reflection and revision to be high quality. That brings us to the final reason formative feedback is required, namely, students gain not just from receiving feedback but also from the act of talking about it and reflecting on it. Much of learning to compose consists of learning to talk about the product-in-process with others, thinking about it as an artifact to be molded rather than as an assignment to be filled. A reader or listener gives composers a sense of an audience, the feeling that they are addressing someone and have a voice and something to say.
To supplement the formative feedback you assign, don’t forget that your students can be encouraged to get more feedback by scheduling a consultation with the University Writing Center.