Essay On Compare And Contrast Smith And Swain

The Analytic Writing Continuum that Smith and Swain write about seems like an innovative and a valuable rubric. Grading papers takes a very long time to complete and this invention seems to work. Although the first chapter only covers the basis of this rubric, it seems efficient and versatile, as it covers a wide variety of writing, such as argumentative writing and narratives. I looked more into the AWC in chapter two and my first impression is that it resembles an AP rubric, that uses a 1-9 scale, instead of a 1-6 scale. However, the AWC seems to be more detailed in terms of what each constitutes a certain score. Even though the language is easy to understand and provides a “common language”, as Smith and Swain explain, the differences between each score is still a little ambiguous in my

opinion. Many times, I received an AP rubric back, and my teacher placed a circle in between two scores because she couldn’t decide on which one to give me.

I feel as though the same type of problem can occur with the AWC. Looking at the difference between a score of 6 and a score of 5 in terms of content, the differences I see are explained using adjectives. A score of 6 is “exceptionally well shaped”, while a score of 5 is simply “well shaped”.They do mention that there are supporting materials in the AWC system, so I hope that there are explanations that come with the rubric to explain the differences more clearly. If not, the rubric still requires the teacher’s personal preferences/ views for the piece of writing that they are using. Also, there are around 4 subcategories under each aspect of a specific score, so what if a student fully supports a theme (6), but the writing is generally clear (4)? If this occurs, do educators average all of the scores at the end? That would be exhausting. In addition, even though my opinions might change when I become a teacher or when I further delve into the AWC, I don’t think that it’s a good idea to separate the author/ student from his/her

work. This reminds me of when writing was required on standardized tests and the teachers would tell us that the individuals grading our work do not know who we are. This is fair because it’s a standard test. They want everyone to be treated objectively and fairly. However, I believe that it should be different in the classroom. A teacher should be able to know who writes each piece because writing is an individual process. To provide sufficient feedback, teachers need to know who they are addressing. For example, if students were told to provide more specific details when writing, the teacher should be able to track their progress. Each student has a specific style and voice that comes out through their writing. It is important to value each student’s individuality, not just treating them all as one big pile of students. I believe that teachers can and do grade fairly, even when they know the student’s name.
I am interested in this book and hopefully my questions and concerns will be addressed in later chapters. I am glad that the NWC worked on creating a rubric that seems to work for most teachers (at least the ones that were included in the book). I also like that it is general enough to include a majority of the types of writing, but also specific as to what is required to attain a specific score.