Please get into the following workshop groups today and workshop your fiction pieces. Please note that you are part of a class and should be able to work with all members of your class. It's good practice for real-life, where you may have to work with people you don't know well. i.e., no complaining! Keep an open-mind. Help each other!
In your comments, please try to be as specific as possible. It can be very helpful to a writer to have specific advice and/or commentary from another reader. Vague responses are often misunderstood and not worth the time it took to write the comment. Check this handy rubric if you have questions:
HOMEWORK: None.
Group 1: Frances, Isaiah, Damarys, KayliFor credit, you will need to fill out a response sheet for each piece of writing that you conduct a workshop for.
Group 2: Gena, Khamphasong, Diamond, Ben
Group 3: Nicole, Branden, Alexis, Carly
Group 4: Ethan, Thiery, Imani M., Shayozinique
Group 5: Imani G., Grace, Jahni, Nathan
In your comments, please try to be as specific as possible. It can be very helpful to a writer to have specific advice and/or commentary from another reader. Vague responses are often misunderstood and not worth the time it took to write the comment. Check this handy rubric if you have questions:
5: Excellent comments: Comments are helpful specific, insightful, accurately pointing to errors or weaknesses in the peer's writing. Peer reviewer has spent an excellent amount of time and energy in helping his/her peer. Offers comments and questions that make the writer think.After conducting your workshop, please use the time in the lab to revise, restructure, and rewrite (craft) your fiction. A fiction portfolio will be required for all students. Due Thursday, May 2.
4: Good comments: Comments are mostly helpful, specific, and somewhat insightful, but the peer reviewer may have missed commenting on something minor. Peer reviewer has spent an appropriate amount of time and energy in helping his/her peer. Offers comments and questions that are appropriate.
3: Fair: Comments are somewhat helpful, somewhat specific (some comments are more specific than others), accurate, but may not be insightful. Peer reviewer has spent limited time and effort in helping his/her peer. Does not offer comments or questions that help or assist in pin-pointing specific problems in the peer's work.
2: Poor: Comments are general, non-specific, inaccurate or vague. Comments are not really helpful in improving a writers' work. Peer reviewer spends little time and little effort in helping his/her peer. Does not offer comments or questions.
1: Abysmal: Peer reviewer did not comment at all; may have been a distraction during the workshop, and was, otherwise, unhelpful or uncooperative in the workshop setting.
HOMEWORK: None.
No comments:
Post a Comment