"Get it off my stack": Teachers' tools for grading papers

Assessing Writing

Volumn 19, Issue , 2014, Pages 36-50

  Baker, Nicki Litherland ^a  

^a BALL STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Activity theory; Paper grading; Teacher feedback; Teacher workload; Writing assessment; Writing productivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84891632429     PISSN: 10752935     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.asw.2013.11.005     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Batt T.A. The rhetoric of the end comment. Rhetoric Review 2005, 24(2):207-223.
2. Bazerman C., Russell D.R. Writing selves/writing societies 2003, 1-6. retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/books/selves_societies/.
3. Blakeslee A., Fleischer C. Becoming a writing researcher 2010, Routledge, New York.
4. Boice R. The neglected third factor in writing: Productivity. College Composition and Communication 1985, 36(4):472-480.
5. Boice R. Writing blocks and tacit knowledge. The Journal of Higher Education 1993, 64(1):19-54.
6. Boice R. Writerly rules for teachers. The Journal of Higher Education 1995, 66(1):32-60.
7. Boice R., Jones F. Why academicians don't write. The Journal of Higher Education 1984, 55(5):567-582.
8. Brannon L., Knoblauch C.H. On students' right to their own texts: A model of teacher response. College Composition and Communication 1982, 33(2):157-166.
9. Broad B. Pulling your hair out: Crises of standardization in communal writing assessment. Research in the Teaching of English 2000, 35(2):213-260.
10. Clark B.R. Small worlds, different worlds: The uniqueness and troubles of American academic professions. Daedalus 1997, 126(4):21-42.
11. Creswell J.W. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches 2009, SAGE, Los Angeles.
12. Davydov V.V. The content and unsolved problems of activity theory. Perspectives on activity theory 1999, 39-52. Cambridge University Press, New York. Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, R.L. Punamäki (Eds.).
13. DeCarlo L.T. A model of rater behavior in essay grading based on Signal Detection Theory. Journal of Educational Measurement 2005, 42(1):53-76.
14. DelleBovi B.M. Literacy instruction: From assignment to assessment. Assessing Writing 2012, 17:271-292.
15. Dobler J.M., Amoriell W.J. Comments on writing: features that affect student performance. Journal of Reading 1988, 32(3):214-223.
16. Easthope C., Easthope G. Intensification, extension and complexity of teachers' workload. British Journal of Sociology of Education 2000, 21(1):43-58.
17. Engeström Y. Activity theory and individual and social transformation. Perspectives on activity theory 1999, 19-38. Cambridge University Press, New York. Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, R.L. Punamäki (Eds.).
18. Engeström Y., Miettinen R. Introduction. Perspectives on activity theory 1999, 1-16. Cambridge University Press, New York. Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, R.L. Punamäki (Eds.).
19. Fleckenstein K. Reclaiming the mind: Eco-cognitive research in writing studies. Writing studies research in practice: Methods and methodologies 2012, 86-97. Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, IL. L. Nickoson, M.P. Sheridan (Eds.).
20. More ways to handle the paper load: On paper and online 2005, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL. J.N. Golub (Ed.).
21. Harvey G. Repetitive strain: The injuries of responding to student writing. ADE Bulletin 2003, 134-135:43-48.
22. Haswell R. The complexities of responding to student writing; or, looking for shortcuts via the road of excess. Across the Disciplines 2006, 3. retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/haswell2006.cfm.
23. Huot B. Toward a new discourse of assessment for the college writing classroom. College English 2002, 65(2):163-180.
24. International Society for Cultural and Activity Research About ISCAR 2013, retrieved from http://www.iscar.org/en/about.
25. Murphy S. A sociocultural perspective on teacher response: Is there a student in the room?. Assessing Writing 2000, 7(1):79-90.
26. Nagelhout E., Blalock G. Spaces for the activity of writing instruction. Classroom spaces and writing instruction 2004, 133-151. Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ. E. Nagelhout, C. Rutz (Eds.).
27. NCTE Statement on class size and teacher workload: College 1987, retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/classsizecollege.
28. NCTE Statement on class size and teacher workload: Secondary 1990, retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/positions/classsize.
29. Phelps L.W. Cyrano's nose: Variations on the theme of response. Assessing Writing 2000, 7(1):91-110.
30. Ritter K. Ladies who don't know us correct our papers: Postwar lay reader programs and twenty-first century contingent labor in first-year writing. College Composition and Communication 2012, 63(3):387-419.
31. Rutz C. Marvelous cartographers. Classroom spaces and writing instruction 2004, 117-132. Hampton Press, Cresskill, NJ. E. Nagelhout, C. Rutz (Eds.).
32. Rutz C. Recovering the conversation: a response to "Responding to student writing" via "Across the drafts". College Composition and Communication 2006, 58(2):257-262.
33. Rutz C., Lauer-Glebov J. Assessment and innovation: One darn thing leads to another. Assessing Writing 2005, 10(2):80-99.
34. Smith S. The genre of the end comment: Conventions in teacher responses to student writing. College Composition and Communication 1997, 48(2):249-268.
35. Sommers N. Responding to student writing. College Composition and Communication 1982, 33(2):148-156.
36. Sommers N. Across the drafts. College Composition and Communication 2006, 58(2):248-257.
37. Spinuzzi C. Losing by expanding: Corralling the runaway object. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 2011, 25(4):449-486.
38. Stewart J.L., Baker N.L., Chaney S.E., Hashimov E., Imafuji E.L., McNely B., Romano L. A qualitative metasynthesis of activity theory in SIGDOC Proceedings 2001-2011. Proceedings from SIGDOC '12: Proceedings of the 30th annual conference on design of communication 2012, ACM, New York.
39. Straub R. The concept of control in teacher response: Defining the varieties of "directive" and "facilitative" commentary. College Composition and Communication 1996, 47(2):223-251.
40. Tedlock B. Ethnography and ethnographic representation. Strategies of qualitative inquiry 2003, 165-213. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. 2nd ed. N.K. Denzin, Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.).
41. White E.M. Post-structural literary criticism and the response to student writing. College Composition and Communication 1984, 35(2):186-195.
42. White E.M. Teaching and assessing writing 1994, Calendar Islands Publishers, Porland, ME. 2nd ed.
43. White E.M. Assigning, responding, evaluating: A writing teacher's guide 2007, Bedford/St. Martin's, Boston/NY. 4th ed.
44. Williams L.F. Toward a realistic teacher workload. The English Journal 1980, 69(5):9-11.