First, Do No Harm

            Lindemann is wise to begin the chapter on responding with the quote from Murray.  The idea of being a healer rather than a judge appeals to me, as it would to anyone with a holistic view of composition.  Evaluation is a checkup, an examination to determine what is healthy and what needs care; prescriptivism is a scalpel.  Clear prompts, prewriting, and “formative” comments are the Rhet/Comp equivalent of diet and exercise.

            As a SIL, my students know that I do not give them grades; I only comment and provide suggestions.  My assignments are all risk-free and designed to get them to try something new (writing dialog, playing with style, etc.) or to remediate a common problem (sentence combining, elaboration, etc.).  I will note if there are fragments and run-ons in the paper, but I do not indicate every occurrence; that is their job in revision.  My professor requires the class to use WriteLab, so they have a robot to do that work anyway.  My comments on these types of errors show their impact on the reader and do not refer to “the rules.”  Recently, one student wrote a piece with several fragments that really worked; they were intentional and in keeping with the voice of the work.  When I see that kind of thoughtfulness in freshman writing, I am bound to give encouragement.

            I didn’t always have this point of view.  Working in the Toro Learning Center, I saw some pretty awful writing, mostly from non-English majors, and I used to mark every single error of grammar and syntax.  Not surprisingly, the result was either disinterest or discouragement.  SIL training helped greatly in showing me how to comment, as did the advice of fellow SILs.  The last thing I want is for a student to leave a conference not knowing how to proceed.  Comments must give praise where it is due and guidance as needed.  Take two invention techniques and call me in the morning.