1. Reiff mentions her exercise of having her students develop "antigenres" as alternatives to working within the defined conventions of a genre that may not fit the student's purpose. This seems like valuable assignment when it comes to learning how to operate both within and outside of established genre conventions, but does the process of creating a antigenre that is antithetical to the genre still serve to limit students in that their antigenre is inherently limited by what the genre is "not?" Would it be better to try and have the students compose entirely new genres from scratch?
2. I like the idea of using portfolios as a means for evaluating students, as I personally believe that growth is always the true goal for students in a classroom setting. However, evaluating based on growth might lead to some problematic implications. For instance, a student who writes an above average paper might receive a lower grade than a student who writes an average paper, which might cause frustration and confusion among both students and concerned parents. What would you anticipate as being the biggest roadblocks when it comes to trying to evaluate students based on growth?
Hey Michael,
ReplyDeleteI love your second question. I couldn't agree more that growth is an important part of assessing a student's writing, but you are also correct that it can interfere with more traditional methods of evaluating which writing is "above average." I wish I actually had a firm answer to your question, but I actually think there will be several roadblocks when it comes to transitioning to the use of portfolios and I've been working spending a lot of time considering ways to make this a smooth transition.