Maud and Haley, 4/13/13:
I met with Maud and Haley together this week. They had both completed the second drafts of their second papers and sent them to each other and to me. I commented on both papers, but let them lead the meeting because I thought that hearing another person’s opinion would be most beneficial to them. Haley had some grammar comments about Maud’s paper (Maud continues to struggle with tenses and sentence clarity, although she is improving.), as well as suggestions to be clearer and more specific. I asked Haley whether she could find Maud’s thesis and, when she identified the incorrect sentence, we discussed how to make Maud’s thesis clearer and more obvious to the reader. We also discussed the “generality” of the conclusion. Haley stated that Maud’s paper flowed nicely and that her argument was clear throughout (although not in the thesis). Haley said that, after seeing Maud’s paper, she realized that her paper did not flow as well and lacked successful topic sentences. Maud came with very specific and comprehensive comments about Haley’s paper. She identified specific parts which could be clearer, but her main comment was the lack of successful topic sentences. We discussed the fact that topic sentences would help with both the flow and the clarity of the argument. I asked Maud to find Haley’s thesis and she also had trouble identifying the correct sentence. Maud and I agreed that the thesis did not accurately reflect Haley’s argument (The thesis weighed two different sides equally while the paper clearly favored one side.). We discussed ways Haley can improve her thesis and make it more accurately fit the paper. Finally, we discussed the “generality” of Haley’s conclusion and different ways in which both students can be more specific and “deep.”
I also met briefly with Maud and Haley individually. In my meeting with Maud, we went through my comments and I reiterated some of Haley’s suggestions. Maud was concerned that her paper did not contain enough sources and that she had, therefore, less to talk about (Haley had decided, on her own, to include about 5 sources.). She felt a little like she was squeezing something out of nothing. We discussed this concern and I stated that I thought it was positive that she was getting all she could out of two sources and not relying too heavily on other people’s arguments. In my meeting with Haley, we focused mainly on her topic sentences and transitions. We also spent some time discussing her new thesis. While discussing topic sentences, we realized that she had to move some information around in order for the new thesis to make sense. As we worked on different parts of the paper, it became clear that she needed to work on organization and further clarifying her argument before settling on topic sentences. I also gave Haley her mid-semester grade. She was hoping to get the grade a bit higher and seemed worried about all the work that she had to do to improve the current paper in a diminishing amount of time. She left the meeting somewhat discouraged.
I’m late posting this so this is my entry for last week (4/8 through 4/12).
Amy turned in her final draft of her second paper and I was very impressed by it. She responded to all of my feedback on her first two drafts and wrote a very strong paper. She has significantly improved in her willingness/ability to analyze topics in more in-depth and original ways, and I think part of the process has been showing her ways to analyze that are not frustrating or overly intimidating. Using my analysis exercise for this paper–me giving her a list of questions to think about in analyzing every example/idea–seemed to be the turning point and I am glad that she seems more comfortable doing this type of higher-level writing. During class, I asked her to begin working on an in-class essay. The prompt has to do with ethical issues in science and whether scientific progress is good or bad, and it ties into the topic for her last paper: the ethical issues surrounding egg and sperm donation. My goal is to just get her thinking in an active way about these ideas, because the more you are actively thinking in an analytical way, the easier it becomes to write in an analytical way.
Nhung is also beginning to work on her third paper. Last week she brought me a good summary and outline of her ideas. I think with this paper, because it is a challenging topic with no clear answer (privacy protection/information issues with Google, Facebook, etc), I will have to give her extra guidance in forming a reasonable thesis. We will be able to make more progress once I can look at her thought letter and begin giving her feedback on both her content and any ESL problems. I anticipate that I will be seeing more of the same problems I’ve been seeing, so I am going to come prepared with a lesson plan that will allow us to tackle these errors together in class so hopefully by her second draft we will see concrete progress.