Home >> Teaching >> EDF 3604 >> Assignments >> Perspectives paper >> Writing standard
EDF 3604—Edited written English standard
Formal writing in college should conform to a standard of edited written English acceptable throughout academic and professional life. Edited written English is different from spoken English in that it has fairly rigid conventions that readers use to help understand the written word. Some of the conventions (such as spelling) are admittedly arbitrary; other conventions of argumentative essay-writing (such as a linear sequence, in contrast to other structures such as the parable) are culture-bound even while they have a logical rationale. Nonetheless, the writing of edited English is an expected skill of college graduates and future teachers and is part of the "code of power" Lisa Delpit describes in her book Other People's Children (1995). Deviating dramatically from readers' expectations interferes with smooth reading, and one can use the following as a rough guidelines for what will interfere with Sherman Dorn's reading:
- A paper without a clear sequence a reader can follow: Unplanned and rambling writing is difficult to understand.
- More than one error in sentence formation (such as a sentence fragment, run-on sentence, or comma splice) for every two pages of text. (Please note any deliberate fragments for effect with a brief penciled comment in the margin.)
- More than one error per page in what one might call word formation, including any of the following: inappropriate apostrophe use or plural formation, subject-verb or pronoun-antecedent disagreement, incorrect verb or pronoun form, inconsistent tense, or substitution of a homonym for the correct word (such as "they're" for "their")
- Repeated misspellings (and typographical errors count as misspellings)
- Gross errors in citation mechanics. Students may use any reasonable and consistent format for citation that would allow a stranger to find the source for information in a library.
I reserve the right to deduct 30 points from any perspectives paper that does not meet this standard, and the revised short paper will earn 5 points for meeting this standard. Note that this standard does not apply to in-class exams but only to formal writing, and that I am willing to look at drafts in person or discuss them over the telephone if e-mailed. (For a similar example see Barbara Walvoord and Virginia Anderson, Effective Grading, Jossey-Bass, 1998, p. 77.)