Category: Teaching Writing Process Strategies

• Several organizations (including some government offices) use the file name to track document revisions – for both single-authored and collaborative projects. Here’s an example students could practice:

• • short_title_v1_2009nov11.doc (original)
  • short_title_v3_2009nov13.doc (second revision)

This system allows writers to track how many revisions a document has undergone and when the revisions were made, making it easier to revert to earlier versions or to identify the most recent version. The file name also can be expanded to include the most recent contributor’s initials:

• • short_title_v4_2009nov14_jm.doc (third revision, by author “jm”)

Computer Read Aloud, Microsoft Word Tools (Spell Check, Grammar Check, and Thesaurus), Highlighting Parallel Structures, Tracking Common Errors

• Computer Read Aloud: The computer will read the paper exactly as it’s written, helping writers examine their writing more closely. Adobe Acrobat (installed in some labs) has this capability, but students also can download a free program like CutePDF Writer. In Adobe Acrobat, choose “View” from the top menu bar and select “Read Out Loud.”

• Rhetorics as Resources: Writing: A Manual for the Digital Age (Chapters 5, 6)

Developing a Revision Plan, Examining Content, Examining Organization, Planning Dedicated Revision Time, Revising for Style, Paragraph Glossing, Cutting and Pasting, Computer Read Aloud, Color Coding

• Color Coding Example: Students could mark transitions, lexical ties, and pronouns in three different colors to illustrate how they are using coherence strategies.

• Rhetorics as Resources: The Academic Writer (Chapter 12), Writing: A Manual for the Digital Age (Chapters 5, 6), Harbrace Guide to Writing (Chapter 3)

Identifying Goals for Feedback, Framing Questions for Feedback, Point/Summarize/Reflect, Comment Tags for Situated Questions

• Targeted Feedback – Activity Contributed by Victoria Shropshire
  “I setup a discussion board in BB in which all students must post 2 versions of the introduction to the essay on which they are all currently working, and then their classmates must reply as to which version of the PRG they prefer, and why (emphasis on this latter part).  I post a series of questions to consider for those who need guidance with peer review and then let them at it!  The posts are typically insightful, and the authors really like the “free space” to try out new ideas, but it also forces students to look critically at this particular piece of writing, a skill they can always hone and use towards their own. I try to reply to everyone the first time I use such a DB, but as the semester progresses, I will read them all but only comment on a few.

  “Students are assessed on a complete/incomplete scale so the pressure of assessment is virtually removed. 10 points for the original post, and 5 points each for 2 responses to classmates for a 20 point (total) DB, which is like a quiz grade. I praise really in-depth and insightful responses and mention the need for more substance in ones that are non-committal, but the directions include a few comments about the importance and value of substantial responses, and thus far I am pleased with the result.”

• Conferencing
• Rhetorics as Resources: The Academic Writer (Chapter 12), Writing: A Manual for the Digital Age (Chapter 6)