Commenting Effectively on Student Writing

1. First things first. Your priorities in commenting for improvement should be similar to those in evaluating. Most instructors attend first to thesis and support (purpose), organization, voice or point of view (implying a particular audience), adequate development and complexity of analysis, and end with clarity of style (syntax, diction, grammar, and punctuation).

2. Read twice. Read through the paper once quickly, making no comments. Instead, use a system to mark the thread of the argument and note support for the writer’s claims. I mark key passages that work to advance the purpose of the paper with a single vertical line in the margin, and with a checkmark I register a point made or convincing evidence offered. I use double vertical lines to mark places where I have problems, and I bracket sentences or whole paragraphs where I get confused, where the meaning isn’t clear. I put a (?) to indicate where I want to ask a question.

3. Marginal comments aren’t enough. During the second reading make marginal comments, explaining how a specific passage advances the purpose of the paper, indicating where and why you are confused, and asking questions. (If you write in the margins, write or print clearly, as students are frustrated by comments they cannot read.) It’s very important to pull these specifics together in a paragraph or two at the end (or on a separate page if you type comments on a computer). If you haven’t written in the margins, tie your overall comments to particular passages in the student’s text by using letters or numbers: “Interpret your sources accurately. E.g., at (A) I am confused by your use of Rogers; is this a fair representation of his essay?”

4. Couch both marginal and end comments in “I” terms. Peter Elbow emphasizes first-person response in introducing the concept of “reader-based feedback.” The instructor serves to dramatize the audience the writer is trying to reach, not an evaluator she is trying to please. Give your reactions as you have them: “I got lost here. Can you help me out?” “You asserted a point at (A) but didn’t back it up. Now I’m confused.”

5. Emphasize the writer’s ideas. If you take students’ ideas seriously, they will work harder to express them. Explain your problems with understanding in terms of the content of the paper. Instead of telling the writer his writing is vague or imprecise, give examples; make points in terms of specifics. (Where is the argument vague? Where is the example irrelevant or contradictory? Where has the writer failed to consider a counterargument?) Similarly, telling the student to “develop your ideas” does not help; be specific: “Can you say more about the relationship you hint at between oil companies and US intervention on behalf of Kuwait?”

6. Ask questions. Engaging in dialogue with students is more likely to lead to meaningful change than a simple directive statement. You can begin a dialogue by posing a series of questions about the whole paper or a given passage: “What would the paper be like if you had begun with the second paragraph instead of having that big generalization at the beginning?” “Did you think about different ways to end? Does this conclusion do more than restate the points in your paper?” “I don’t get why you say [this]* here and [this]* later. Isn’t this a contradiction? Can you have it both ways?” *[Restate both points so that the writer sees the contradiction.]

7. Don’t overdo it. Marking all over a paper is likely to overwhelm the student writer. In general, limit your substantive comments on an essay to three features that need improvement.

8. Offer encouragement. Student writers can accept critique more readily if it comes from someone who is responding positively, rather than destructively, to their attempts at communicating.

9. Address the writer. Students remark that instructors who address them by name and sign their comments seem to be taking them seriously; the letter format underscores the fact that you are engaging in dialogue with a student writer.

10. Put away the red pencil. Marking sentence-level errors in graded papers does not help students to gain control over grammar, punctuation, and usage. They generally make the same or similar errors in their next paper. Here are some ways to pay attention to grammar that may lead to improvement and some understanding of the effect of poor mechanics on writers’ ability to communicate:

a. Have the students exchange papers for proofreading in pairs on the day they are due. They should mark each other’s papers in pencil, making suggestions or marking errors with a check and bracketing sentences that can be fixed with punctuation marks or by reordering a word or phrase. They should not actually make the corrections, because students sometimes mark incorrectly, and if they simply correct each other's work, they introduce errors rather than identifying them. When students get their papers back, they are responsible for marking clearly only the changes they wish to make. They don’t need to make corrections and reprint the papers to turn in later—announce that you will accept hand corrections neatly marked. The papers will have fewer errors to distract you from their claims and the way they are organized, supported, and articulated.

b. Mark with square brackets sentences or passages that are unclear or phrased so awkwardly that you can’t make sense of them. Tell students that brackets around a sentence mean, “I can’t understand your point because your language isn’t clear. Write 3 versions; one of them will clarify what you mean.” To prove that it works, do examples in class as a brief editing workshop (when you hand papers back or the day before papers are due—take examples of problem sentences from a previous paper or from drafts brought in to your office hours). Other students, even without the context, must write three versions too, then take turns reading their best one aloud. This always works, though improvement often isn’t apparent until the third version, and students may have to be urged to begin with a different part of the sentence.

c. Collect examples of similar errors in papers as you read them (I keep a file open called “grammar and punctuation review #1”). When their next paper is due, hand out this one-page compilation of sentences or passages for them to correct and explain how/why they fixed the error or changed each problem sentence. Instruct them to look at their newly completed paper for examples of any of these errors; reserve the right to penalize them for not being able to detect and correct the errors they have just focused on before turning in this paper.

d. Copy (anonymously) passages from papers that illustrate problems many students are having: sentences that don’t make sense, imprecision of language (“wrong word”), jargon or unnecessary complexity (“utilize”), vague phrasing (“there is a problem existing in this area”). Make copies or project them so that everyone can work on revising those sentences in a 20-minute workshop.

e. Papers with mechanical problems often contain a pattern of errors, such as run-on sentences or sentence fragments, dangling modifiers, vague pronoun reference, or misuse of commas around appositives. Tell those students whose writing contains such error patterns to use a handbook or online reference book to correct all instances of that error. Require the students to turn in the corrected papers with the next paper assigned, and tell them you will penalize them if they introduce instances of the same error in the new paper.

CRLT • University of Michigan • 1071 Palmer Commons • 100 Washtenaw Ave. • Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2218
Phone: (734) 764-0505 • Fax: (734) 647-3600 • Email: crlt@umich.edu
- Directions to CRLT -

Copyright © 2004 The Regents of the University of Michigan