Skip to main content

Marking

Marking takes us a very considerable part of language teachers' lives, although, if it's any consolation, perhaps less so than the lives of our colleagues who teach English or history. Why do teachers mark? How much time should be spent on it? How should it be done?

My starting point is this: the main aim of marking is to make sure that students have done their work. Far more important than feedback is the simple point that students have to do the work in the first place, taking as much time and care as possible. My experience, and it may be yours, was that you could not trust a significant number of students to do their work properly unless they knew you would be checking it, reading it carefully, correcting it and, possibly, grading it - although I suspect the careful checking was more important than the grading, for which research gives scant support.

Many pupils want to please their teacher and one key way they can do this is by impressing you with their written classwork and homework. If you don't mark their work regularly, they will spend less time and thus make less progress. There is research on this (google John Hattie), but actually we are in the realm of common sense here.

However, you only have so many hours in the week, so you have to mark quickly and not spend too long writing detailed comments. If the alternative is to set less work and mark it more slowly amd meticulously, it is a less desirable one in my view. Less work = less input = less recycling = less progress.

So what about making life easier by marking work in class? This is a great idea for some types of exercise, but bear in mind three points. Firstly, that type of exercise (grammar drill, gap-fill, comprehension matching task etc) has its limitations and can be easily copied. Pupils cheat. Secondly, going through and ticking an exercise in class is a bit routine and boring; I often felt I could be doing something more interesting.  Thirdly, if you do too much marking in class, some pupils may start to take their work less seriously because they know you won't be reading it personally. But yes, overall, quick marking in class is worthwhile, recycles language practised at home and, crucially, saves you time.

Taking books or papers in regularly for marking is hugely important for you as a teacher. It really shows you how carefully students are working and what they are finding easier and harder. You'll see who the careful, neat writers are; who goes the extra mile by looking things up; who has taken in what you did in class. Furthermore, it's your personal, private means of two-way communication with each student. You can give confidential praise and advice, admonish, build up a rapport, encourages them to want to impress you even more next time. All this helps you maintain good classroom control too, as each student knows that you know them and care about their progress. If you are intimately acquainted with students' written work, you can make subtle reference to it in class, building your relationship further.

That's all very well, but it takes time, I hear you say! Well, why not correct selectively, use underlinings/circles and get students to self -correct, use codes, don't write too much at the end and don't bother with systems like "two stars and a wish"? In England Ofsted have no preferred marking method. Remember that the key point is that the students did the work carefully and knew you would mark it. Two minutes a book may be more than enough for intermediate students. With experience you learn to go fast. If students know your standards are high, they will also write more neatly, making your task quicker. If work is too scruffy, don't accept it. If they have to write it out twice, they will be less inclined to hand in scruffy work in the future. No excuses.

Grading is a contentious issue and you may simply have to apply your school's or department's policy. On balance, I was in favour of it, but research in the field of formative assessment suggests that it’s not useful at all.  However, I fely that performing pupils were motivated by maintaining high grades. To get a lower grade can be a loss of face which they will want to put right next time. You can even use this to inspire pupils to better effort and performance. Similarly, you can grade tactically with lower-performing pupils - give them a merited higher grade and they will be delighted and hopefully want to keep up that standard. If your grading is criterion-referenced in some way, so much the better.

What about the old problem "They only look at the grade, not my corrections?" That's easy to fix. Just allocate a little time for written corrections to be done. Alternatively, if, like me, you found that a bit dull, make it a part of a homework or save up corrections for a 15 minute session in a later lesson. This forces pupils to go over earlier work and recycle language.

So, in sum: mark a lot, take in books, mark quickly, build those relationships.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Delayed dictation

What is “delayed dictation”?

Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music.

It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too.

Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating.

In our language teaching case, though, the earworm is a word, chunk of l…

Responsive teaching

Dylan Wiliam, the academic most associated with Assessment for Learning (AfL), aka formative assessment, has stated that these labels have not been the most helpful to teachers. He believes that they have been partly responsible for poor implementation of AfL and the fact that AfL has not led to the improved outcomes originally intended.

Wiliam wrote on Twitter in 2013:

“Example of really big mistake: calling formative assessment formative assessment rather than something like "responsive teaching".”

For the record he subsequently added:

“The point I was making—years ago now—is that it would have been much easier if we had called formative assessment "responsive teaching". However, I now realize that this wouldn't have helped since it would have given many people the idea that it was all about the teacher's role.”

I suspect he’s right about the appellation and its consequences. As a teacher I found it hard to get my head around the terms AfL and formative assess…

Sentence Stealers with a twist

Sentence Stealers is a reading aloud game invented by Gianfranco Conti. I'll describe the game to you, then suggest an extension of it which goes a bit further than reading aloud. By the way, I shouldn't need to justify the usefulness of reading aloud, but just in case, we are talking here about matching sounds to spellings, practising listening, pronunciation and intonation and repeating/recycling high frequency language patterns.

This is how it works:

Display around 15 sentences on the board, preferably ones which show language patterns you have been working on recently or some time ago.Hand out four cards or slips of paper to each student.On each card students must secretly write a sentence from the displayed list.Students then circulate around the class, approaching their classmates and reading a sentence from the displayed list. If the other person has that sentence on one of their cards, they must hand over the card. The other person then does the same, choosing a sentenc…

The age factor in language learning

This post draws on a section from Chapter 5 of Jack C. Richards' splendid handbook Key Issues in Language Teaching (2015). I'm going to summarise what Richards writes about how age factors affect language learning, then add my own comments about how this might influence classroom teaching.

It's often said that children seem to learn languages so much more quickly and effectively than adults. Yet adults do have some advantages of their own, as we'll see.

In the 1970s it was theorised that children's success was down to the notion that there is a critical period for language learning (pre-puberty). Once learners pass this period changes in the brain make it harder to learn new languages. Many took this critical period hypothesis to mean that we should get children to start learning other languages at an earlier stage. (The claim is still picked up today by decision-makers arguing for the teaching of languages in primary schools.)

Unfortunately, large amounts of rese…

Dissecting a lesson: teaching an intermediate written text

This post is a beginner’s guide about how you might go about working with a written text with low-intermediate or intermediate students (Y10-11 in England). I must emphasise that this is not what you SHOULD do, just one approach based on my own experience and keeping in mind what we know about learning and language learning in particular. Experienced teachers may find it interesting to compare this sequence with what you do yourself.

You can adapt the sequence below to the class, context and your own preferred style. I’m going to assume that the text is chosen for relevance, interest and comprehensibility. The research suggests that the best texts are at the very least 90% understandable, i.e. you would need to gloss no more than 10% of the words or phrases. The text could be authentic, or more likely adapted authentic from a text book, or teacher written. It would likely be fairly short so you have time to exploit it intensively, recycling as much useful language as possible.

So here w…