the id, the ego, & the single misfiring brain cell

This morning, I gave my freshmen the assignment for their final paper. I told them, “This is the same assignment your peers in other classes are being given, but your assignment is much harder. Because you are writing for me.”

Their response was kinda odd...they smiled knowingly and nodded. It's almost like they take a perverse sort of pride in the knowledge that I'm not easy to please.

Oh...I tweak the assignments bit. I'm now a “seasoned instructor,” so I get a bit more freedom than our fresh meat gets. And thus, I have been experimenting this semester with “no minimum word count” papers, even with my freshmen. This could conceivably be tricky since we must meet minimum requirements to maintain institutional certification, but in practice, my “no minimum word count” assignments are not a problem. The little tykes are usually trimming words to get their papers under my maximum limit.

Heh heh.

I'm not kidding. I give them assignments wherein they must provide certain information. For example, with a summary of a professional essay, they must provide the essay's context, make an argument for who the target audience is, tell me the author's main point, then explain how she supported it. I allow no broad statements or even words with broad or general intent.* All information must be specific, and they must do this in 400 words or less.

* Like “affect”--affect how? If you don't know, then you can't even say for sure that X affected Y, can you? (Yes, I'm that picky.)

It's much harder than you imagine. The writing I'm getting is so much better than the hogwash students usually submit wherein it's clear that their only real intent is to meet a minimum word count. And? They're learning a skill too many composition classes actually counteract: truly editing their own work. They're figuring out which words and phrases are just deadwood. They're rewriting sentences completely to hone them to essential ideas.

So...for my students' final paper in composition class, they must first submit three questions they'd like to research for their final paper. I will choose one of them (or send them back to the drawing board), and once I've selected it, they are married to it. This means they will have lots of ground they must cover—and cover well—within my word limit. I grade them on the clarity, entertainment, and persuasiveness of their argument. If they hand in word fluff junk, they'll fail because they didn't research and they didn't think; it will have nothing to do with any word count shortcoming.

This is part of my ongoing effort to refocus students on what really matters in writing: Having something worth saying and saying it well.

Speaking of which...a colleague handed me a paper today one of her seniors wrote and asked me what grade I'd give it. She said to take it with me and read through it when I have a moment. At some point in the conversation, she told me she tells her seniors they don't all make As in her class.

What a coincidence, neither do mine.

The paper begins:

The First World War was one of the worst calamities in history, with the forces involved sending millions of men to war and not having many of them return home. Instigated by the assassination of the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the Allies and the Central Powers fought desperately against each other for four long years from 1914 to 1918. The result was the victory of the Allies and the dismantling of the German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and Russian empires. From these grave times of war, many people were inspired in various forms of literature, especially poetry.

Keep in mind that this is the work of a senior in college—not high school. Do you see the problem yet? Right. This cadet has written beautifully about nothing.  What will be the point of this paper? I can save you the suspense: It “talks about” a WWII poem, of course, but it has no point--not even a dull one.

It uses “research” from the Poetry Foundation and “Poetry by Heart,” and the BBC, by which I mean that there's no research at all. This student looked up what other people said about this poem and plunked it into the paper in quotes—without even bothering to frame the quotes, which is another thing my freshmen would get beat for—and called it good.

It goes from that gripping first paragraph into easily found (and apparently irrelevant) biographical information about the poem's author, then spends two pages rephrasing the poem. I saw this coming when I read this:

When the poem is broken down line by line, Rosenberg's voice and meaning are slowly unraveled, and the feelings that he embedded in his poem are felt as the reader goes through the poem.

Ain't nothing like using 5 words when 30 will do, but that's only the beginning. I abhor the self-consciousness of that sentence. It's not about the poem so much as it is about the student's laborious reading of the poem, as well as her self-congratulation on finding his “feelings”--whatever they are.

And seriously...how much voice can a passive voice voice if a passive voice could pass voice, anyway?

OK...one last comment, then I'll move on: If you had a pay a dollar a word to say any of that, how much would you spend? (Not a dime, because she didn't say a damn thing.)

This pathetic excuse for a paper goes on like this for six pages. It's a wonder, really, that more teachers don't walk into crowded classrooms with loaded Uzis.

Don't worry. I don't own an Uzi.

Here's what I wrote back to my colleague:

I'll preface this with what we always say when someone asks our opinion on papers: I don't know what you teach and what you're looking for, but if she were in my class....

Intro: The entire first paragraph states the obvious. It's just blather, start to finish. The student's job is to tell me something I don't know, not deliver a Wikipedia summary of stuff any six-grader with half a brain would know.

Second paragraph: Rosenberg's bio. Why is she telling us this? More pointless blather.

Third paragraph, more BS about Rosenberg. Who gives a shit about this? I'm on the second page and I don't know why she's telling us anything.

Fourth paragraph: There is some bone-crushingly obvious shit in here. "There are various meanings Rosenberg has embedded in his poem." Tell me more, Einstein. The only observation she seems to have here is "The title's mention of trenches starts it on a somber note" (my paraphrase).

Oh good god. I'm on page three and...this student did no actual research here at all. She looked up a couple of items online about stuff someone else wrote about this famous poem. She doesn't seem to understand what "droll" means, either. Then she wastes two (?) pages telling us what happens in the poem and telling us it's "somber" and about British and German soldiers in WWII trenches. No shit, Sherlock.

This was written by a senior? I don't even know what her point is. There's no research here, no original thought, and no useful context outside of the short bit about poppies (and I wouldn't call that good research). The rest is a waste of ink and frankly, an insult to your intelligence.

I'd give this paper a D or an F outright. It's an embarrassment.

You're probably wondering what my colleague gave this student.

Wait for it....She gave it a B.

She seemed worried she'd been too harsh.

d