Effects of Peer- Versus Self-Editing on Students
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Effects of Peer- Versus Self-Editing on Students
approach and process approach. Improving the course design and assignments could increase students’ knowledge and application of grammar, formatting, and writing skills.
The literature discusses other types of writing exercises (i.e., freewriting, zero draft, journals) that an administrative writing course could incorporate. Freewriting can be a non-graded writing assignment allowing students the opportunity to overcome writer’s block or practice a new grammatical concept, such as using semicolons to combine short, related sentences. Freewriting exercises are less stressful, can last 10 to 15 minutes, and are for the student (Stanford, 1992).
Although the administrative writing course did not incorporate a writing portfolio until the second year, students should create a portfolio and self- reflect on how their writing style and ability change over the semester. As Paulson, Paulson, and Meyer (1991) explain, portfolios allow students to take ownership of their learning experience. Writing assignments and feedback from peers and the instructor are included in the final portfolio. Based on this material, students reflect and self-assess their progress, specifically their growth as a writer. This includes listing writing strengths and weaknesses for them to continue working on after the course ends. Completing a writing portfolio with self-reflection at the end of the semester allows the instruction and assessment to blend (Paulson et al., 1991).
Limitations and Future Research This article had some limitations; namely, the pre- and post-test results
reported on the students’ knowledge of grammar and formatting rules (rules- based approach) and not on the increase in general writing skills (content-based approach). Although the course implemented both pedagogical approaches, future research should measure the effectiveness of students’ use of peer editing and portfolio techniques on their writing skills. This article focused on the creation and initial implementation of an undergraduate public administration writing course, but future research should include intermediate and long-term outcome measures to test changes in students’ writing skills under the rules- based and content-based approaches.
Another limitation was that the brief survey to the program directors did not allow them to elaborate on the learning objectives in the administrative or technical writing course. Future research could study the commonalities and differences in learning objectives and class structure of administrative writing courses implemented in public administration programs. On a related note, a broader research question based on the survey results in this article should delve into the effects of an administrative writing course taught within a public administration program versus in a Business, English, or Communica- tions department.
- Connolly Knox
Journal of Public Affairs Education 527
Teaching Grammar and Editing
FOOTNOTES 1 Grammar and writing resources include Barzun’s Simple & Direct: A Rhetoric for Writers (2001),
Bernstein’s Watch Your Language (1976), William and Colomb’s Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace (2010), Sabin’s The Gregg Reference Manual: A Manual of Style, Grammar, Usage, and Formatting (2005), Strunk’s Elements of Style (2012), and Simmons’ Grammar Bytes website: http://www. chompchomp.com/menu.htm
2 Obojobo is an interactive online learning system created by the University of Central Florida. For additional information about this system, see https://obojobo.ucf.edu/
3 For additional information on short assignments and providing student feedback, see Bean (2011).
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks to the public administration, public affairs, and public policy program coordinators and directors who completed the survey. Additionally, I would like to thank Vanessa Lopez-Littleton, David Dadurka, the anonymous JPAE reviewers, and the editor for their valuable feedback.
REFERENCES Allison, L., & Williams, M. F. (2008). Writing for the government. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
Barzun, J. (2001). Simple & direct: A rhetoric for writers (4th ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Bean, J. (2011). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bernstein, T. M. (1976). Watch your language. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Calkins, L. M. (1980). When children want to punctuate: Basic skills belong in context. Language Arts, 57, 567–573.
Cho, Y. H., & Cho, K. (2011). Peer reviewers learn from giving comments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 629–643. doi:10.1007/s11251-010-9146-1
Cleary, R. E. (1990). What do public administration masters programs look like? Do they do what is needed? Public Administration Review, 50(6), 663–669.
———. (1997, June). From the section chair. SPAE Forum, 7, 1, 9.
Coplin, B. (2003). 10 things employers want you to learn in college: The know-how you need to succeed. New York, NY: Ten Speed Press.
Denhardt, R. B. (2001). The big questions of public administration education. Public Administration Review, 61(5), 526–534.
528 Journal of Public Affairs Education
Diab, N. M. (2010). Effects of peer- versus self-editing on students’ revision of language errors in revised drafts. System, 38(1), 85–95. doi:10.1016/j.system.2009.12.2008
DiStefano, P., & Killion, J. (1984). Assessing writing skills through a process approach. English Education, 16(4), 98–101.
Dillman, D. A. (2007). Mail and Internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Dougherty, G. W., Jr. (2011). A place for undergraduate public administration education. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 17(3), 325–341.
Glenn, D. (2011, January 18). Writing assignments are scarce for students in two majors at Texas Colleges. Chronicles of Higher Education, 57(21). Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/ Writing-Assignments-Are-Scarce/125984/
Harris, M., & Rowan, K. E. (1989). Explaining grammatical concepts. Journal of Basic Writing, 8(2), 21–41.
Hasselkus, A. (2010, November 23). Law requires plain writing in federal documents. ASHA Leader, 15(14), 11.
Hartwell, P. (1985). Grammar, grammars and the teaching of grammar. College English, 47(2), 105–127.
Hines, R., & Basso, J. (2008). Do communication students have the “write stuff ”? Practitioners evaluate writing skills of entry-level workers. Journal of Promotion Management, 14, 293–307.
Kolln, M., & Gray, L. (2009). Rhetorical grammar: Grammatical choices, rhetorical effects (6th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Law: Waging war on legalese. (1978, January 16). Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/article/0,9171,919278,00.html
Lee, M. (2000). Public information in government organizations: A review and curriculum outline of external relations in public administration. Public Administration & Management: An Interactive Journal, 5(4), 214–246.
Londow, D. Z. (1993). Writing in political science: A brief guide to resources. PS: Political Science and Politics, 26(3), 529–533.
National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA). (1997). Guidelines for Baccalaureate Degree Programs in Public Affairs/Public Administration. Washington, DC: Author.
———. (n.d.). Undergraduate programs. Retrieved from http://www.naspaa.org/about_naspaa/members/ full/roster_loc/bs_programs.asp
National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges. (2005). Writing: A powerful message from state government. College Board. Retrieved from http://www.collegeboard. com/prod downloads/writingcom/powerful-message-from-state.pdf
Noguchi, R. R. (1991). Grammar and the teaching of writing: Limits and possibilities. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Northedge, A. (2003). Enabling participation in academic discourse. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 169–180.
- Connolly Knox
Journal of Public Affairs Education 529
Teaching Grammar and Editing
Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? Educational Leadership, 48(5), 60–63.
Pincus, J. D. (1997). To get an MBA or an MA in communication? Communication World, 14(3), 31–34.
Plain Writing Act of 2010, H.R. 946, 111th Congress. (2010). Retrieved from http://frwebgate.access. gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h946enr.txt.pdf
Quible, Z. K., & Griffin, F. (2007, September/October). Are writing deficiencies creating a lost generation of business writers? Journal of Education for Business, 83(1), 32–36.
Raphael, D. M., & Nesbary, D. (2005). Getting the message across: Rationale for a strategic communi- cations course in the public administration curriculum. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(2), 133–146.
Redish, J. C. (1985). The plain English movement. In S. Greenbaum (Ed.), The English Language Today (pp. 125–138). Oxford, England: Pergamon Institute of English.
Sabin, W. A. (2005). The Gregg Reference Manual: A manual of style, grammar, usage, and formatting (11th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Simmons, R. L. (n.d.). Grammar Bytes. Retrieved from www.chompchomp.com/menu.htm
Stanford, K. A. (1992). Disarming the hunter: Improving administrative writing in the classroom. PS: Political Science and Politics, 25(4), 696–699.
Strunk, W., Jr. (2012). Elements of style. New York, NY: Tribeca Books.
Waugh, W. L., Jr., & Manns, E. K. (1991). Communication skills and outcome assessment in public administration education. In P. J. Bergerson (Ed.), Teaching public policy: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 133–143). New York, NY: Greenwood.
Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in the context of writing. English Journal, 85(7), 15–24.
William, J. M., & Colomb, G. G. (2010). Style: Lessons in clarity and grace (10th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Zeiser, P. A. (1999). Teaching process and product: Crafting and responding to student writing assign- ments. PS: Political Science & Politics, 32(3), 593–595.
Claire Connolly Knox is an assistant professor and coordinator of the Emergency Management and Homeland Security Program in the University of Central Florida’s School of Public Administration. Her research interests include environmental policy and management, critical theory, and environmental vulnerability and disaster response. She has published in the Journal of Public Affairs Education, Public Administration Review, Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, and Journal of Emergency Management.
530 Journal of Public Affairs Education
APPENDIX A
E-mail Survey to Public Administration, Public Affairs, and Public Policy Programs
You are receiving this short email survey because NASPAA lists your under- graduate public administration program on its website. I am conducting research and writing an article about the status of writing course requirements for under- graduate public administration programs in the U.S. Although I was able to answer some questions using your department’s website, I would like to confirm this information with your input. If you could answer the following five questions at your earliest convenience, I would greatly appreciate it.
Question 1: Does your undergraduate public administration program require an administrative and/or technical writing course that is separate from any required lower division general English course? (If yes, please continue to question 2. If no, please stop here and email your survey response back to me. Thank you for your time.)
Question 2: Is this administrative and/or technical writing course listed as a core requirement or as an elective in your program?
Question 3: Is this course taught in the Public Administration Department? (If yes, continue to question 4; If no, continue to question 5).
Question 4: What is the name and number of the course offered in your department? For example, PAD 3XXX—Administrative Writing
Question 5: What is the name and number of the course offered in a different department? For example, ENG 4XXX—Technical Writing or BUS 4XXX— Business Writing
Thank you for taking the time to answer these questions. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!