|
|
 |
|
|
|
Home > Improving Student Writing Proficiency in the AP French Classroom
|
Improving Student Writing Proficiency in the AP French Classroom
|
|
| |
by Geneviève Delfosse
Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology
Fairfax, Virginia
|
|
| |
Introduction
Teachers and students know that "practice makes perfect," or, as we say in French, "C'est en forgeant qu'on devient forgeron." Students must practice consistently the skills they will have to demonstrate on the AP French Language and Literature Exams. In the AP French Language Exam, students write an essay and answer grammar questions that count for 25 percent of their overall grade. On the AP French Literature Exam, both essays count for two-thirds of the final grade. Therefore, students' ability to communicate effectively in writing is vital to their success and overall proficiency in French. Students might understand a literary piece, but poor writing skills will certainly handicap them. "Ce que l'on conçoit bien, s'énonce clairement" was true for Boileau, and it is still valid today.
Practice alone, however, is not sufficient to improve the writing proficiency of students. Regular essay writing and feedback from the teacher do not sufficiently improve students' ability to communicate in writing. It is true that the very diligent students will pore over their errors, ask questions, and benefit from corrections without any further system put in place. Those are the students who learn without teachers. In contrast, many students will glance quickly over their graded papers, stop mostly at the grade, and file the paper away; some may forget it under their desks or even throw it in the wastebasket.
Obviously, some system must be put in place to make students accountable for their errors so that they learn from them and progressively gain more control when writing in French. This growing control will also transfer, albeit at a much more modest rate, to their spoken expression. In this article, I will share with colleagues the system that I have put in place and used in my AP French classes for many years. It is nothing grand or revolutionary, but my students have told me that it helps them a lot in controlling their mistakes.
Experimenting with Feedback
Having taught for many years, I tried many systems to improve my students' written proficiency. I tried coding the mistakes in multiple colors -- red highlights for verbs, green for articles, and so on. Eventually, this turned out to be too cumbersome: I want my students, especially my AP French Literature students, to write very frequently, one log per week, one essay in class every two weeks. When polled, the students said that color differentiation did not help them.
I also let students do some peer editing, but, in my opinion, this has its limitations in the French Literature classes. One can group students and put a student in charge of the verbs, another in charge of the spelling, and so forth. However, while the most obvious mistakes in the writings are spotted, many good forms are deleted, and incorrect syntax is very often ignored. Obviously, peer editing cannot be the routine way to assessing student writing in the AP classroom.
Writing software can also provide some support to the students, but unless the teacher has unlimited access to a writing lab, those experiences are infrequent. They are also extremely time consuming. I find it much more efficient to have students write their essays in the manner in which they will write them on the AP Exam: on their own, without dictionary or computer, and within a certain time frame.
Intensive Writing and Correction
I will use specific examples from my AP French Literature course to describe my editing and review system. In this course, most classes are dedicated to oral discussions. Students write intensively in class and outside the classroom. They take quizzes and tests in class, which I base on essay-type questions. At home, they write three journaux per author studied. In class, they will also write exam-style essays on the works from the reading list, for instance, an Analyse Dirigée or a general essay. In these different types of writing, I will correct most errors in the students' first draft.
Elementary errors, such as a forgotten "s", or "ent" forgotten at the end of verbs, only get circled. All other errors are fully corrected. Students skip lines between their writing, which makes my editing easier. I grade each log on a 100-point scale, using a holistic rubric. Exam-type essays count double. When I return the writings, I always allow five minutes for students to clarify their errors and make sure they understand the editing. Their responsibility, for an additional grade of 30 points, is to give me a final copy of their writing with all errors corrected and to analyze each mistake they have made. If they made less than five errors, they will analyze those errors but will not have to recopy the log. I generally allow two or three days to complete the editing process. I apply this system to all the language classes I teach, including French I.
The analysis form is simple: Students make two columns, labeling the right column "Corrected form" and the left one "Why." They write their analysis in English. This process compels all the students to reflect on their errors and show me they understand them. Obviously, the level of thoroughness varies from student to student, but I do read all their rationales, albeit very quickly, and will write comments and lower their grade if I feel they did not take advantage of this opportunity to facilitate their learning. "Wrong verbal form" or "I am dense" are not acceptable entries! Often, as I read the students' explanations, I realize that they have not at all understood their errors, and I have the opportunity to clarify the issue for them. Sometimes students do not know how to explain an error, and they are allowed to put a question mark next to that entry. I address these with a short written explanation of the error.
Here are samples from actual journaux written this year in my AP French Literature course. The topics relate to the AP French Literature syllabus, but the very same system works as well in the AP French Language course, as it does in all the lower-level classes.
In my editing of this sample paragraph, only the last error ("dangereuses") was circled without explanation. The other mistakes would not be easy for this average student to figure out. Actually, I had to explain the "active preferred to passive" error. I would rather have students spend time reflecting upon their errors than produce yet another version of their log with different errors, which is what invariably happens when all errors are only highlighted or circled without any comments. I advise students not to rewrite their error, but only the correct form, because, in my opinion, they do not need to practice mistakes.
This is what Student 1 wrote to explain the errors.
| Erreur corrigée |
Pourquoi |
| Dieu |
You never put "le" in front of Dieu, in general
|
| responsable de |
adjective of feelings or subjective + de
Parallel construction! REMEMBER! |
Il dit que....et que
est un monde de souffranc |
To translate "one of suffering," repeat noun.
Idiomatique |
| de violence |
LA Meme! Repeat construction! |
| Si on laisse les enfants |
Avoid passive form like English, turn around |
dangereuses |
Une leçon: dangereux -se |
Needless to stay, not all students type their analysis in neat columns such as this, but they all pay attention to their errors. This is an example from an advanced class; in lower levels, the mistakes would be prioritized and anglicisms and awkwardness would obviously not be corrected. When I return the writing, I write five of the most frequently made errors on the board to call attention to these particular words or structures.
Other Activities to Catch Errors
With an editing system in place, you can occasionally use other activities to help move students toward greater writing proficiency. Students can bring their last four logs or essays to class. Working in groups, each student makes a list of his or her five most frequent errors, and shares that list with the partners in the group. Students will see that they often make the same errors, which they can then share with the whole class. This not only builds student confidence, it provides a quick review of many grammar topics.
In a variation of this model, students discuss their errors within their groups and then pick one or two that they deem significant and write them on a transparency to show the rest of the class. The class will try to spot the error and suggest a correction.
In addition, after every three writings, I collect about 12 to 15 errors done by the students in recent logs, and type them on a page for the students. Here are a few entries from one such list:
"Le jeune garçon adresse son père.....son père le regarde dans une façon sérieuse....en ce moment là......le père semble qu'il veut que son fils aille à l'école..."
Each of the errors is followed by the corrected form and a short rationale in English.
For instance, for error #1,
"Le jeune garçon s'adresse à son père -- Adresser alone...is used to put addresses on envelopes."
Students will take that list home and study it. Later, they will have a quiz. For instance: Translate an idiomatic expression from English to French, or use a specific word in an original sentence.
All these activities make students reflect on their knowledge and how they learn and remember the language. After a mistake appears for the third or fourth time on the lists, I finally start noticing its disappearance in most of the writings. When I polled my students in January, they recognized that this system was sometimes burdensome to them, because, although they have fun writing, they do not enjoy editing or poring over their past work. They do acknowledge, however, that they feel a sense of empowerment, because they clearly have much more control over how they write in French. I also see some of this increased control carry over in their speech. To my great delight, during a class discussion about L'Enfant noir, a student recently self-corrected: "Pendant cette conversation, le père parle dans une façon [non, non, je veux dire] d'une façon triste et déprimée"
Geneviève Delfosse has been teaching all levels of French classes, including a sizable AP French Literature course, for the last 20 years, and is the chair of the development committee for Le Grand Concours, the national French contest. She received her National Board Certification in 2002. A member of the French Development Committee for five years, she is the current French content adviser for AP Central. She does frequent presentations at national and regional language conferences and also leads AP French workshops during the summer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Course Home Pages