Context

By the end of the course, Navickas wants students to be more skilled and reflective writers. At the beginning of the semester, the students set goals and created a plan to achieve them based on information in the course syllabus (Table 1). They assessed their writing throughout the semester to develop their knowledge of how writing works. The self- and peer- assessments allowed students to critically evaluate and articulate the quality of their writing and give good feedback to others. The assessments in this course focus on providing students with feedback to track their progress and growth and valuing their consistent effort at completing regular small writing tasks (e.g., homework and in-class writing activities). 

Students come into First-Year Writing Seminars (FWS) with diverse writing skills. As a result, they may find writing to be relatively easy or extremely challenging. The labor-based grading contract rewards students for their effort (labor) and progress throughout the semester, rather than the quality of the final writing product. This method encourages all students to improve, regardless of their proficiency at the start of the class. More importantly, an A-grade is accessible to all students if they complete the assignments and thoughtfully participate in classroom activities. 

Assessments

Homework and classroom activities are scaffolded to break down the work of major writing assignments, preparing students to complete the course assignments independently. The classroom activities also emphasize group work and peer review. Each assessment component was weighted equally (Table 1). Students earned a B-grade if they completed all the required work (85% of the total grade) and earned an A-grade by deepening their practice on three additional assignments¹. For example, students could lead a class discussion or recommend and summarize a relevant article for a future class. 

Navickas used the labor-based rubric (Table 2) to evaluate the draft papers and final essays. This rubric emphasizes students' effort (labor) and whether their work meets the specified writing learning objectives.

All the other assignments were graded on a complete/incomplete basis (Table 1). A "complete" assignment was submitted on time and met the learning objectives. However, students could revise their work in most cases if they did not achieve the learning objectives. These rubrics served as a guideline for both the instructor and the students. Navickas could also adjust the requirements in extreme student circumstances, as needed.

Challenges

In addition to meeting their course requirements, first-year students are adjusting to work and life in college. Because of this, it can be easier for them to fall behind in a "process-oriented class" like WRIT 1370/80, especially when they have exams in other classes. Initially, students might find it difficult to adjust to the labor-based contract and using feedback to revise their writing. 

This assessment system requires a significant initial investment of time and effort to develop well-aligned activities at the right pace for students. Keeping track of the different assessment components is also labor-intensive and might be daunting for new instructors. Navickas overcomes this challenge by prioritizing her feedback efforts on drafts and choosing one day per week to quickly mark any complete/incomplete work—remembering that process work does not need as much attention. 

¹ There are clear guidelines in the syllabus for what efforts count towards “Deepening Practice.”

back to top