Beteiligte: | |
---|---|
In: | Journal of Basic Writing, 28, 2009, 2, S. 6-27 |
veröffentlicht: |
City University of New York
|
Medientyp: | Artikel, E-Artikel |
Umfang: | 6-27 |
---|---|
ISSN: |
0147-1635
|
veröffentlicht in: | Journal of Basic Writing |
Sprache: | Englisch |
Kollektion: | sid-55-col-jstoras14 JSTOR Arts & Sciences XIV Archive |
<p>This essay responds to Jane Danielewicz's and Peter Elbow's recent piece on contract grading in College Composition and Communication (December 2009). I discuss the similarities of their approach to my own contract process, finding that we share a quantitative/performative method for grading. I also explore our differences. While they guarantee students a B grade for meeting quantitative minimums and do not judge writing quality unless it is "better than B," I grade writing along the full spectrum A-F. I also negotiate the syllabus and grading system instead of announcing it unilaterally, so as to position students as stakeholders who co-author the terms of the contract. Finally, I argue the value of negotiated contracts in light of the neo-liberal capture of school and society.</p> |