Feedback Givers

The individual needs of each writer completely vary. Some need help with sentence structure, some need help with supporting details, some even need help finding out what the assignment is! The role of feedback also varies greatly between the roles of student and "feedback provider" (there's a better word, please tell me what it is, commenters). There's really 4 main "feedback providers": parents, peers, teachers, and coaches. Because I'm not a parent, I'm not going to focus on how they do things. Frankly, I'm not an expert in it at all. Me saying how parents should treat their kids is like a politician without educational experience controlling educational policy. Glad that never happens!

Peers: Everybody knows what peers are. There the other classmates. Despite a lot of people trying to make peer editing a thing, I don't think it should be a thing. Let's be real, students aren't experts in writing. They might not be able to acknowledge mistakes and offer critique. They just don't have the skills yet! Worse, a peer could tell their student is doing things wrong, but they're actually doing things right. Come grading time, they'll lose points because they were led astray by their peers. Clearly not good. So what are they good for? Positive feedback and emotional encouragement. Students can offer positive praise and keep kids going when their interest is faltering. They can also help more in the brainstorming session, but again, peers might give incorrect information. Peers also have secret knowledges of one another, so they can easily "understand better their emotions and know when to reach out for help when needed" (Herrera, 6).

Teachers: the biggest "feedback providers" we have. They give a lot of information. They set the standards on how the work students create should be graded. They're the experts, so they should be constantly providing feedback of all manners in order to get them to complete the assignments and achieve higher proficiency.  Teachers should be giving more critical feedback based on what the assignment says and expects from them. 

Coaches: These are a mix between teachers and peers. They're experts (hopefully), so they know their stuff. Unlike teachers, they have no authority when it comes to the final grade. So what do they do? They do a bit of everything. They offer critiques, praises, feedback, and emotional encouragement for the entire student. Sometimes this involves helping with life problems or different subjects, as well as the content provided by the teacher. For example, one of my students was complaining about choir being difficult. I shared some resources with them. Am I a trained choir teacher? No! But I can offer encouragement and some resources that I pick up using my adult level searching skills. 

One resource I always offer is Flocabulary. It is a tool that turns concepts and ideas into cool rap songs. They're usually pretty cringe, but every so often there's a banger and the kids are hooked! It's a fun way to mix things up in the classroom, and it includes quizzes, readings, and kids can even make their own raps. It also allows you to see what students struggle on so educators can provide more effective feedback.

In the end, each of these groups are very beneficial in different ways, and because of this, different students will need different amounts of each. Knowing what's best for your students will help them succeed. 

Digital Production

I have a lot of experience with digital storytelling and all the other jazz that comes along with it. I have been teaching at Milwaukee Visionaries Project, a youth-based film workshop for four years now and have a bunch of experience making films. Many of these made it into the Milwaukee Film Fest and I am actively involved in the development of many. The one thing I learned from this process is that digital storytelling is best done collaboratively. I'm not saying that people can't make great work alone (they can), but having a group of people who are experts makes the product so much more effective. That's something I've seen from experience and has also been found in scientific articles as well: "Teachers need to master more than the subject matter they teach, they must also have a deep understanding of the manner in which the subject matter (or the kinds of representations that can be constructed) can be changed by the application of technology" (Hicks, Turner & Stratton, pg. 181 (as cited in Hicks, Turner & Stratton (2013))).

In our digital world, there are countless examples of digital storytelling, to the point where coming up with 2 is inherently limiting. I have two recommendations which I consider experts in the art of digital storytelling

The first is Mid-Day of the Living Dead. The title being a clear reference to the film Night of the Living Dead, the story follows suite. It follows a young person being chased by zombies. Eventually, the person gets caught and attacked, with a twist rendering a "game over" screen. The person walks outside to see hordes of people walking on their phone. 

What's clear from the use of greenscreen in the first half  of this film is that many scenes would be impossible to produce in person. Perhaps the filmmaker didn't have the ability to drive to these places and take these shots, so they were digitally added. We only see 1 person as a zombie. Perhaps that was the only person available for those shots? Regardless of the answer, the ability to use digital media is allowed the filmmaker to design the film in the way they wanted, regardless of physical limitations.

The second is The Bob Emergency: a study of athletes named Bob. As the title suggests, this video essay explores the history of athletes named "Bob". What stands out to me most is the nearly complete lack of animation. It doesn't need any. Instead, it starts as a blank canvas, slowly adding more and more details as the narrator, Jon Bois, goes more in depth on the histories of the Bobs. 

What I like most about this story is that it focuses on what we can do as digital writers. Too often when we see digital storytelling we think "film". This makes sense. After all, there are countless digital animators who create high quality films circulated throughout our culture. But the thing is, film isn't a requirement for digital storytelling. You can create effective and engaging stories without animation and characters. All you need is an interest in digital production and a good story. Thankfully, we all have them.

Journal 3: Writing Processes

    As pointed out by Flowers and Hayes, "The most important thing about writing goals is the fact that they are created by the writer." (Flower and Hayes, pg. 372).  These are split up into two types, content goals and process goals. "Process goals are essentially the instructions people give themselves about how to carry out the process of writing... Content goals and plans, on the other hand, specify all things the writer wants to say or to do to an audience." (Flower and Hayes, pg. 377). Of course, real writing is never at neatly defined as Flower and Hayes assert, but then again, writing never is. 

    Due to the inherent chaos of writing, my own writing goals vary greatly on the style of writing I am creating. When I am writing a story, I focus on my process. I just start writing down whatever comes to mind and sort it out later, if I feel like it. If I'm to my friends, I try to keep my objective in mind and state it in a reasonably appropriate manner.  Regardless of process, the goal here is to effectively communicate content.

    I try to emphasize my freedom to write whatever I want, wherever I want, whenever I want, and with whomever I want. Of course, this isn't always the case. Sometimes we have to write very specific information in order to achieve a goal. For example, I am currently writing a research proposal to the IRB. This requires me to plan carefully, think about what I'm saying, and how what I am saying is expressing the content I wish to express. This makes the writing experience much harder because I know I have to write in a certain way or fail to achieve my goal (get approval). 

Unfortunately, students are usually in the same boat. Nearly every rubric has a section for grammar and convention. Are these bad things? No! Especially if these things are being actively taught. The problem is teachers encourage perfected writing regardless of what is being taught in the classroom. The majority of all writing we do is imperfect. Heck, I bet you could spot an error or 7 in this writing. Are projects the time and place for perfect grammar? It makes sense. But how can you grade someone on something they haven't learned. Is that not unfair to the student? It causes them to be wary of writing and feel like poor writers (the same thing happens to readers!). As educators, we need to keep in mind how we teach writing and what we're teaching. Grading and analyzing those should be the main goals, not perfection.