Tag: November 2018 Session

Reflective Comments for the November 2018 Session at DeVry University

geoffreybelliott3 Comments

Continuing a practice I most recently iterated at the end of the September 2018 session at DeVry University, and following closely the patterns established in previous practice, comments below offer impressions of class performance among students enrolled in my sections of ENGL 135: Advanced Composition and ENGL 112: Composition during the November 2018 session at that institution. After a brief outline of each course and selected statistics about it, impressions and implications for further teaching are discussed.

ENGL 135

Students enrolled in ENGL 135 during the November 2018 session were asked to complete a number of assignments in quick succession. Many, and the weightiest, related to the overall course project; others were homework meant to practice skills used in the workplace and in later stages of the course project. Those assignments and their prescribed point-values are below, with relative weights shown in the figure below:

ENGL 135 Grade Breakdown November 2018

  • Course Project
    • Topic Selection, 50 points
    • Research Proposal, 50 points
    • Annotated Bibliography, 100 points
    • First Draft, 70 points
    • Second Draft, 80 points
    • Presentation, 100 points
    • Final Draft, 170 points
    • Career Planning, 50 points
  • Discussions, 280 points
  • Homework, 50 points
  • Total, 1000 points

As before, most assignments were assessed by means of rubrics provided by the institution or amended from them for ease of use. Some few were assessed on a percentile basis from standardized testing conducted as part of University-wide course requirements.

The section met online, with office hours generally taking place Monday evenings at 6pm Central time. Its overall data includes

  • End-of-term enrollment: 18
  • Average class score: 730.925/1000 (C)
    • Standard deviation: 210.112
  • Students earning a grade of A (900/1000 points or more): 5
  • Students earning a grade of F (below 600/1000 points): 3

Numbers of students receiving each of the traditional letter grades are indicated below:

ENGL 135 Students by Grade

Comments about the session will follow in Impressions and Implications, below.

Return to top.

ENGL 112

Students enrolled in ENGL 112 during the November 2018 session were also asked to complete a number of assignments in quick succession. Most concerned a series of short papers, presented in planning sheets before submission as full essays; a final essay additionally went through an intermediate draft before final submission. Those assignments and their prescribed point-values are below, with relative weights shown in the figure below:

ENGL 112 Grade Breakdown November 2018

  • Papers, 690 points
  • Discussions, 310 points
  • Total, 1000 points

Assignments were assessed by means of rubrics provided by the institution or amended from them for ease of use.

The section met in Room 111 of the San Antonio campus Wednesdays at 6pm, with office hours generally taking place Monday evenings at 6pm Central time. Its overall data includes

  • End-of-term enrollment: 9
  • Average class score: 610.9611/1000 (D)
    • Standard deviation: 299.4946
  • Students earning a grade of A (900/1000 points or more): 0
  • Students earning a grade of F (below 600/1000 points): 2

Numbers of students receiving each of the traditional letter grades are indicated below:

ENGL 112 Students by Grade

Additionally, since the class met physically, it was possible to take attendance. All students in the section missed at least one class meeting; some missed quite a few more, as indicated below (with the figure being classes missed, students missing that many classes, and percentage of students falling into that category):

ENGL 112 Students by Absence

Comments about the session will follow in Impressions and Implications, below.

Return to top.

Impressions and Implications

I confess to feeling some dismay at the lower performance of the November 2018 session against the September 2018. While ENGL 135 had more A-earning students than its earlier counterpart, it also had more students fail–and ENGL 112 had no students earn overall As, though it also had students failing. In each case, the lower grade was due to non-submission; many students got many zeros for work because they simply did not submit it. I have to wonder what else I could have done to chivvy them along.

Matters were complicated by a data loss I experienced late in the session. I typically keep my teaching notes and materials in a USB drive; the one I had been using ceased functioning. In retrospect, I had some indication that such would be the case, and I did not act upon it; I suffered as a result. Student grades were not affected; those I had recorded in the school’s system remained in place, as did my comments about them, and materials I had uploaded to this site also remained in place. Still, having to reconstruct information at the speed I did did not make things easier for me. How it affected my students is not as clear.

I feel, however, that my earlier-noted resumption of example-writing was helpful for my students. At the very least, I know that people were looking at the examples I posted; I have access to readership statistics, so that, while numbers were not as good as they were in August, they were still generally up. Enough students’ work mirrored the examples that I am confident some of the lessons made it through, which is good. Unfortunately, I am not teaching either ENGL 135 or ENGL 112 in the coming couple of sessions, so the examples will be let alone for a bit–though I mean to continue the practice with the next class I teach.

Moving forward, I also mean to follow another practice that I had in place for ENGL 135 but not ENGL 112. In my record-keeping, I more narrowly divided storage and commentary for the former than the latter; it ended up making grading easier and commentary clearer, despite having more assignments and more students in Advanced Composition than Composition. Though it requires more initial work from me, it makes for less work while I am amid work; I think I’ll continue to do it.

At the end, though, I am glad yet again to have had yet again the chance to teach, and I look forward to having it at least one more time as I move forward.

Return to top.

Class Report: ENGL 112, 19 December 2018

geoffreybelliottLeave a comment

Class was given over entirely to the completion of eighth-week work: student evaluations (if not yet done) and the reflective postscript. It met as scheduled, at 1800 in Room 106 of the San Antonio campus. The class roster listed nine students enrolled, a decline of one from last week; four attended. Student participation was reasonably good. An online office hour was held on 17 December 2018; no students attended.

Students are reminded that the reflective postscript is due online as a Word document no later than the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on Saturday, 22 December 2018. The session closes at that time, so no late submissions can be accepted.

Reflective comments are forthcoming.

Sample Assignment Response: A Reflective Postscript for ENGL 112 at DeVry University

geoffreybelliottLeave a comment

To conclude from earlier work (here, here, here, here, here, here, and here), I will carry out the assignment my students are asked to complete for their final week of the session: a brief reflective postscript. Considering work that has been done and what work is yet to be done is a useful thing, and I nourish the hope that the example I might offer will help my students and others do find such use in their own work.

Memory is a tricky thing.
Image from Psychology Today.

For the exercise, students are asked to address a series of University-provided prompts in short paragraphs that should total some two pages of text when typed in double-spaced 12-point Times New Roman on letter-sized paper with one-inch margins. The prompts ask students to consider their work and advancement during the course, especially as pertains to the commentary essay of the last few weeks of class. It is a fairly common exercise, both at the University and in colleges more generally, so it is likely students will encounter it again–and, as noted, reflection is good practice, in any event.

For my own work, I began by setting up a document in line with the expressed formatting standards. That done, I copied the prompts over from the University into the document, highlighting them in green so I could easily see what I would be addressing and would remember to delete the copy-over before completing my work.

At that point, I moved directly into drafting my responses, considering my answers to the questions posed as I went along. The questions are open-ended, but not so open-ended that they demand much delimiting. As such, answering them proved relatively easy to do–which makes sense, given the time I’ve spent on the project reflected upon and its topic.

The content made ready, I deleted the imported prompts and reviewed my document for style and mechanics. After making the adjustments that needed making, I put the document into an accessible format, which I present here: G. Elliott Sample Reflective Postscript. May it and its predecessors prove of benefit now and in time to come!

This session’s done, but other classes await; help me help them, too!

Class Report: ENGL 135, 17 December 2018

geoffreybelliottLeave a comment

Following up on the previous report, students were asked to comment on issues of design for their final papers (focusing largely on images and their integration into the text), as well as concerns of APA formatting. They were also asked to complete and submit their final papers; the present week asks for reflection on their work and its connection to their future plans.

The course roster showed 18 students enrolled, one fewer than last week; 16 participated in online discussion during the week. No online office hour was held on Monday, 10 December 2018, owing to other concerns.

Students are reminded that an office hour is scheduled for tonight, Monday, 17 December 2018, at 6pm CST. Students are also reminded that the following assignments are due before the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on Saturday, 22 December 2018:

  • Discussion Thread: Looking Ahead
  • Course Project: Career Connections (due online as a Word document)

Class Report: ENGL 112, 12 December 2018

geoffreybelliott1 Comment

After addressing a procedural concern and asking about questions from the previous week and before, discussion turned to concerns of revision. Concepts were discussed and a practice in the process offered. Upcoming assignments received attention. Time was allotted to students to conduct their own work and to complete surveys of instruction.

The class met as scheduled, at 1800 in Room 106 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster showed 10 students enrolled, a decline of one from previous weeks. Five attended; student participation was good. The regularly scheduled office hour on 10 December 2018 was canceled.

Students are advised that the office hour scheduled for Monday, 17 December 2018, at 6pm Central Standard Time is expected to occur. Students are also reminded that the following assignments are due before the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on 16 December 2018:

  • Discussion Threads: Revision Process and Peer Reviews (3 posts/thread, rubric online)
  • Commentary Final, due online as a Word document

Sample Assignment Response: A Commentary Essay for ENGL 112 at DeVry University

geoffreybelliott4 Comments

To continue on from earlier work (here, here, here, here, here, and here), I will do more to round out the assignment sequence expected of the students in ENGL 112: Composition and develop the assignment students in the class are asked to do for their seventh week: a finalized commentary paper. I continue to hope that, despite the errors that are in any work, what I do will help my students and others to better understand what they are asked to do and so help them do it better.

Keep on doing it.
Image from tenor.com.

For the exercise, students are asked to revise their work from the previous week as needed and to add to it the remaining bulk of their papers, bringing their commentaries to a full five pages (1500 to 1750 words) plus title page and references list.  To complete it, I began by opening the document I’d made for last week’s exercise and saving it again as a new file for the final. (Keeping the earlier version separate allows for more radical revision in some circumstances.) Looking over it again, as it had been a few days since I had last done, so, I noted that I still had not settled on a thesis because I was still puzzling through my issue. I noted also that I had addressed appropriation but not appreciation; it was to the latter that I set myself.

I picked up writing where I had left off, moving directly into drafting as I thought through the issue and angle I had set for myself in the earlier work. As I drafted, too, I was able to determine a thesis, which I inserted into the usual place for such statements in first-year composition papers–the end of the introductory paragraph–before ensuring that connection to it sufficed throughout the rest of the text. I also made sure I offered the kind of conclusion to the paper–not filling out the repetitive “tell ’em what you’re gonna tell ’em, tell ’em, and tell ’em what you told ’em” model, but moving ahead from the thesis–I want to see from my students and, indeed, from most of the writing I read.

The content made ready, I reviewed my document for style and mechanics. After making the adjustments that needed making, I put the document into an accessible format, which I present here: G. Elliott Sample Commentary Final. I hope it will help others.

Help me keep doing this, please!

Class Report: ENGL 135, 10 December 2018

geoffreybelliott1 Comment

Following up on the previous report, students were asked to assess each other’s work on presentations related to their ongoing projects and to submit the same for instructor review and feedback. Presently, they should be working to complete their course projects, which are due this week.

The course roster showed 19 students enrolled; 18 participated in online discussion during the week. An online office hour was held on Monday, 3 December 2018; no students attended.

Students are reminded that no office hour is scheduled for tonight, Monday, 10 December 2018; other obligations have called the instructor away at that time. Students are also reminded that the following assignments are due before the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on 16 December 2018:

  • Discussion Threads: Designing the Course Project and APA Workshop (3 posts/thread, rubric online)
  • Course Project: Course Project, Final Draft (due online as a Word document)

Class Report: ENGL 112, 5 December 2018

geoffreybelliott1 Comment

After addressing a procedural concern and asking about questions from the previous week and before, discussion turned to concerns of theses and integrating sources in support of the present week’s writing assignment.

The class met as scheduled, at 1800 in Room 106 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster showed 11 students enrolled, unchanged from previous weeks. Eight attended; student participation was good. An online office hour was held on Monday, 3 December 2018; no students attended.

Students are advised that the office hour scheduled for Monday, 10 December 2018, at 6pm Central Standard Time is canceled against an event the instructor must attend. Students are also reminded that the following assignments are due before the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on 9 December 2018:

  • Discussion Threads: Position-based Writing and Integrating Research in APA Style (3 posts/thread, rubric online)
  • Commentary Draft, due online as a Word document

Sample Assignment Response: A Commentary Rough Draft for ENGL 112 at DeVry University

geoffreybelliott3 Comments

To continue on from earlier work (here, here, here, here, and here), I will go further along the assignment sequence expected of the students in ENGL 112: Composition and develop the assignment students in the class are asked to do for their sixth week: a draft of a commentary paper. I continue to hope that my efforts will assist in my students’ work and others’ to write better and help still others to do the same.

From teachingenglish.org.uk, which seems reasonably appropriate for discussing discussion in a college English class…

For the assignment, students are asked to generate the first three pages (excluding title page and references) of a five-page commentary essay–in effect, a position paper of the sort I’ve taught in one form or another before (here, here, here, and here, among others). Introduction, thesis, and an at-least-cursory overview of current discussion of the topic are requested, as is the beginning of the argument’s development. More will follow, of course, but three pages should be enough to establish the idea to be borne out, to provide it context, and to start developing it. Additionally, the project is a continuation of last week’s work, so what was done previously should still fit the current purpose.

To begin my response to the exercise, I opened my proposal and summary from the previous week. I also opened a new document, formatting it for submission; I set up a title page, main text, and references list, putting the whole into double-spaced 12-point Times New Roman type with one-inch margins on letter-sized paper. The title page, running heads, and page numbers were set as they ought to be, while the internal title and references note were centered horizontally, and lines for references set up with half-inch hanging indentations.

With the formatting set up, I began to bring things into the new document from the old. The specific issue, the balance of appropriation and appreciation in my topic, was the first to come over; although not a thesis, as such, I copied it twice, highlighting the second in green and positioning it to serve as a moving target as I developed further materials. I also stubbed out space in which to position the thesis to come, as well as for some items I knew from the earlier work that I would want to put in place: definitions of terms relevant to the discussion. Those were highlighted in teal to remind me to attend to them.

From there, I moved to fill in context for my discussion, giving a description of my topic. I looked through earlier work done in the present session to begin with, since I could reasonably include that material in my current work without trouble.  Some details in that line were forthcoming, and I was happy to incorporate them into my work to offer background. I supplemented them with my own experience, as well, since I have it to bring to bear.

A passable attempt at an introduction started, I moved to insert my relevant definitions, working from the two sources identified in the previous exercise. Citations pulled earlier also made their ways into the appropriate part of the paper, developing a short references list. I found that I needed more material for my definitions to make sense, so I ran another search for material in Academic Search Complete and found a particularly useful piece, which I incorporated similarly to the other pieces I’d noted.

It also occurred to me that I would need to incorporate primary source materials into my project. Knowing that I would be making use of it–a thing cannot be discussed without reference to that thing, particularly in a scholarly context–I incorporated the primary source into my references list. And with that done, I used the materials to offer an overview from which to conduct further discussion.

With context reasonably established, it came time to begin to reason out the argument and to work towards a thesis. When I entered the project, I did not know how the matter would fall out, so I began writing with the intent to learn as well as to convey information and understanding to my audiences. And I had to address what I saw as a glaring issue; it seemed to need doing, and it seemed to emerge well from the way in which I had established context. Too, it allowed me to meet the requirements of the exercise and position myself to undertake the next.

The content made ready, I reviewed my document for style and mechanics. After making the adjustments that needed making and eliminating highlighted passages, I rendered the document into an accessible format, which I present here: G. Elliott Sample Commentary Draft. May it, like its predecessors, be helpful!

I continue to appreciate your support as I develop yet more material for my students and others to use to improve their own.

Class Report: ENGL 135, 3 December 2018

geoffreybelliott1 Comment

Following up on the previous report, students were asked to assess each other’s work and to submit an expanded draft of their ongoing projects for instructor review and feedback. Much the same thing is asked of them presently, though a presentation rather than a static paper is requested.

The course roster showed 21 students enrolled, a loss of one from last week’s 22; 17 participated in online discussion during the week. An online office hour was held on Monday, 26 November 2018; no students attended.

Students are reminded that another office hour is scheduled for tonight, Monday, 3 December 2018, at 6pm Central Standard Time. Students are also reminded that the following assignments are due before the end of day (Mountain Standard Time) on 9 December 2018:

  • Discussion Thread: Presentation Peer Review (3 posts/thread, rubric online)
  • Course Project: Presentation (due as a PowerPoint or similarly accessible file)