by Christopher Pfeifer
I was a little intimidated when selected to be a WIP TA. I thought, “I’m not a fast reader, and writing is not always easy for me like it seems for some others, so how am I supposed to help university students improve their writing?” As I write this, however, I realize my confidence in grading writing grows through WIP training and seeing weekly low-stakes assignments. It is not just my confidence in grading writing that it is improving; I notice growth in my writing, as well as my thought processes and understanding that writing is nuanced rather than correct or incorrect.
My apprehensions when grading seem to be common for people of my experience level: consistent evaluation of all student submissions, grading large quantities of assignments, and, notably, understanding how much of the writing to critique. The first two concerns have ironed out with practice, and I am sure I will continue to find ways to increase my speed and consistency. I still, however, struggle to know when I have given too much for the student(s) to consider. Until coming to UGA, I rarely received WIP-like feedback—intentional ratios of positive comments versus areas for improvement—and I think that can hinder me from defaulting to this new way of responding to student assignments. I have had to change the way I think about writing and reading in order to implement these ideas.
The entire semester and the WIP process have revealed that when we write, it is often more challenging to accept a bad grade for poor writing than for subpar content. It is not profound to note that writing is personal, but it is new territory for me to understand how my feedback can impact a student’s confidence. Achieving a balance of providing substantive feedback over the course of many assignments in a short turnaround is not easy, but I find it is manageable the more I consider how I genuinely want the students to succeed and become better writers and thinkers.
It is not profound to note that writing is personal, but it is new territory for me to understand how my feedback can impact a student’s confidence.
This realization is, perhaps, where I have noticed the most significant difference in my understanding of helping students: academic reading and writing not only improve each other, they improve one’s overall processes of comprehension and thought. By helping students with their writing and through clearly communicating more than what needs improvement, but why and how it can be improved, I can impact their overall academic careers.
I have been in the WIP program for less than half of a semester, yet my perceptions and philosophies of engaging students’ writing have already changed. While I am not done learning about this process, my next challenge already seems evident: not dismissing a paper as merely acceptable because, while it satisfies assignment requirements, it does so in a way that does not excite me as a reader or writer. Part of this is apparent to me as I recognize that many of my students will not go on to graduate school; nevertheless, I still want them to be able to write competently and confidently. Some of this is doubtless selfish, as I want the future employers of my students to think about the capable writers that UGA’s School of Music produces. But my goals now extend beyond satisfying my assistantship responsibilities, meeting deadlines, and enhancing my CV. Now I see the same value in teaching writing as I do in teaching music itself: the rewards are much more than the tangible benefits. Seeing improvement in student writing is sometimes its own reward.
