FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W48278324> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W48278324 startingPage "49" @default.
• W48278324 abstract "I'm glad you could put my journal entry to good use! It's great that you hold to philosophy that [student] writing can carry over from semester to semester [and] does not disappear after its due date. - Jennifer Schloss [. . . We] need to think more about how we value student writing, how we represent student writers and their texts in our own discourse, and how we support work students do intellectuals. - (Harris et al. 6) Introduction: Making Good Use of Student Writing Anyone who has taught college writing very long knows drill: You run into a colleague at end of semester and stop to chat about how things are going. Those papers are killing me! he or she laments. If someone could devise a way to grade those things more painlessly, it would be a boon to humanity.'' As longtime teachers of composition, we've heard this plaint a thousand times in innumerable guises, but at its core lies a pervasive theme: Faculty members do not consider student writing they have commissioned to be genuine reading. They do not view it a source of potentially useful information, much less consider it, to echo Harris et al., important intellectual work. Since it is mere apprentice work - at best - and since they must grade and rank it, they feel compelled to vet it skeptically, judging it with respect to how closely it approximates kind of discourse they themselves produce other academics, and they grumble about how much time and effort it takes. Yet we seldom hear colleagues bemoan their lot when they are in midst of time-consuming research that involves scholarly journals and books. Reading such professional materials requires effort and is undoubtedly work, perhaps even hard work, but of student papers appears to be a chore. This jaundiced view of student academic discourse would seem to be rooted in traditional approach to pedagogy sometimes called the deficit model: a view of student writing that sees it site error exercises its full reign (Miller, Fault Lines 395) and teachers hasten to stamp it out.1 Another impediment to viewing student writing worthwhile is inverted authority dynamic that has traditionally dominated classroom writing (Podis and Podis 19). In this scenario, typical real world rhetorical situation - where writer of a piece has greater authority on subject matter than reader - is turned upside-down, instructor-reader exercises authority over text. Thus student writing is infrequently read a source of information and insight. In their classic expose of hidden structure of English studies, Comley and Scholes2 go so far to describe student writing having dubious status of pseudononliterature (98), and they decry tendency of faculty to dismiss it (101). Noting that all writing, including that written by professional scholars, moves through stages from to earnest (101), they question view that writing of students is all practice while that of professionals is all earnest. In a more recent essay entitled Re- Valuing Student Writing, Horner, focusing specifically on first-year composition, refers to traditional conceptions of student work notwriting. Characterizing analysis of Susan Miller in Textual CarnivaL·, he notes that student writing has generally been meant for instructor evaluation of students' ability to produce writing that conforms to dominant expectations (11). is [...] a 'bastard' discourse peculiar to academy (1 1). Other scholars (e.g., Zamel) have observed that dramatic distinction typically drawn between professional writing and student writing is exaggerated and artificially sustained. Lad Tobin, in his memorably tided essay, How Many Writing Teachers Does It Take to Read a Student Essay, observes that student essays, which too often is seen a teacher's most tedious obligation, can be both delightful and instructive, and he views students as writers worth reading (29). …" @default.
• W48278324 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W48278324 creator A5054124896 @default.
• W48278324 creator A5085943739 @default.
• W48278324 date "2012-07-01" @default.
• W48278324 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W48278324 title "The Value of Student Writing as Reading" @default.
• W48278324 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W48278324 type Work @default.
• W48278324 sameAs 48278324 @default.
• W48278324 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W48278324 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W48278324 hasAuthorship W48278324A5054124896 @default.
• W48278324 hasAuthorship W48278324A5085943739 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C119857082 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C2776291640 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C2780422510 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C29595303 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C33566652 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W48278324 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C119857082 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C136764020 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C138885662 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C144024400 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C145420912 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C15744967 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C17744445 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C19417346 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C199539241 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C2776291640 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C2780422510 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C29595303 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C33566652 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C41008148 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C41895202 @default.
• W48278324 hasConceptScore W48278324C554936623 @default.
• W48278324 hasIssue "62" @default.
• W48278324 hasLocation W482783241 @default.
• W48278324 hasOpenAccess W48278324 @default.
• W48278324 hasPrimaryLocation W482783241 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W152795105 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W1722344787 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W1965246095 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W1974726092 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2012385051 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2029741046 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2042616695 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2122740236 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2205825325 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W221731675 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2271637409 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W247132047 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2610902333 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2620968706 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W309722707 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W73553265 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2533373090 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2621442706 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2624529910 @default.
• W48278324 hasRelatedWork W2991840837 @default.
• W48278324 isParatext "false" @default.
• W48278324 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W48278324 magId "48278324" @default.
• W48278324 workType "article" @default.