1. Editing Toolbox Empowering students to proofread and polish their academic writing.

2. The goal Essay Writing for University: CQUniversity STEPS program Scaffolded learning and assessment Sentences > paragraphs > research/referencing > essay 12 week course: How to teach ‘just enough’ grammar/language skills? How much is ‘just enough’? (see Chanock, D’Cruz & Bisset 2009) How big is the problem? How many errors do students make? (see Connors & Lunsford 1988)

3. The Resource: Editing Toolbox First six weeks … Build ‘just enough’ grammar/language knowledge to edit, i.e. To recognise and repair frequently made errors (see Ellis 2002) Use ‘just enough’ – minimum – metalanguage 1.Sentence structure 2.Punctuation basics 3.Objectivity 4.Modality 5.Formatting references 6.Clarity

4. Learning & Assessment Editing Toolbox quizzes: online 3 quizzes, fortnightly Each quiz based on previous two weeks learning Students do practice editing tasks each week in Study Guide – quiz mirrors these tasks Low stakes assessment: each quiz 10 questions, 0.5 mark each (Total for three quizzes: 15% overall grade) Quizzes are ‘open book’: not a test of memory, but of application (see Nelson 1998)

5. Rationale Scaffold learning: skill building each week, practice exercises Instant formative feedback: Students can take control of learning and teachers can monitor progress Authentic editing practice: ‘short answer’ question format Engagement: regular tasks, manageable Empower students: to proofread own work, understand marker feedback

6. Results of Pilot Pilot: Term 3, 2015 (‘distance only’ term) Concerns: 1.Low scores 2.High query rate: ‘Why did I get this wrong?’ Response: Continuous review and refinement of questions, resulting in better scores, fewer queries

7. Refinements: Issue 1 1.Students came up with alternative answers Rewrite the following sentence to remove the cliché. In times of inflation, job cuts are par for the course. Our response: Added to answer bank – if appropriate common, usual, normal … Edited instructions to constrain possible answers Rewrite the following sentence to replace the cliché (in this case, a four word phrase) with ONE clear and precise word.

8. Refinements: Issue 2 2.Students made ‘typos’: misspelt words, missing words, extra spaces … Our response depends on: How long did student spend on quiz? (2 hours allowed) Side lesson: editing takes time! Is issue ‘technical’? Allow answer, edit question: e.g. hardcopy/hard copy/hard-copy Some task sentences edited to make typos less likely Distance students, who can often feel isolated, should participate in discussion forums wherever possible.

9. Refinements: Issue 3 3.Students did not follow instructions (or overthought question) Our response depends on: How long did student spend? Side lesson: take time to read the question! Ambiguous instructions? Edited to be clear and explicit. ‘Do not add, subtract or remove words (unnecessarily)’ For Term 1, introduced Practice Quiz

10. Refinements: Outcomes Better results, fewer queries in Term 1, 2015 Continued (now minor) refinements for Term 2, 2015 – question clarification, omitting problematic words

11. Learning outcomes Research pending, but from observations so far: 1.Language in student feedback and reflections demonstrates awareness ‘I need to watch out for ambiguity and work on my clarity’ 2.Students engaging online with quizzes from Week 2 3.Students making better use of marker feedback, and self-identifying areas for review

12. Teaching outcomes Markers can use language such as ‘take care with run- ons’ knowing that students (should) understand what this means Markers/teachers can refer students back to Study Guide content and practice tasks for review Teachers can monitor student engagement and progress online from week 2, and have chance for ‘dialogue’ (Chanock, D’Cruz & Bisset 2009)

13. References Chanock, K, D’Cruz, C & Bissett, D 2009, ‘Would you like grammar with that?’, Journal of Academic Language and Learning, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 1-12. Connors, RJ & Lunsford, AA 1988, ‘Frequency of formal errors in current college writing, or Ma and Pa Kettle do research’, College Composition and Communication, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 395-409. Ellis, R 2002, ‘The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curriculum’, in Hinkel, E & Fotos, S (eds), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. Nelson, GE 1998, ‘On-line evaluation: multiple choice, discussion questions, essay, and authentic projects’, paper presented at the Teaching in the Community Colleges Online Conference, Kapiolani Community College, Hawaii, April 7-9, pp. 1