I’ve recently started using text expansion software to improve the written feedback I provide to my students with regard to their writing, and it’s made a huge difference. Let me explain.
I teach students how to write. It’s a huge part of my job, and I love it…for the most part. I love talking with students about their writing. I love looking at their drafts and giving them feedback. I love reading what they write. One thing I don’t love, however, is writing up my comments about their writing, comments that not only respond to the content of their work but also to the form.
The reason I don’t love doing this is because it’s an activity that can get very repetitive. In my experience—and in the experience of most of us who read student writing—students tend to run into trouble with the same relatively limited set of problems. They need a nudge here and there with issues ranging from proper academic formatting of the document to using punctuation correctly to getting the syntax of a sentence right to incorporating transitional elements that improve the coherence of a given essay. This is, of course, why there are such things as writing handbooks: writers of all levels—but especially beginners—need a user-friendly reference book to look up the rules for various elements of writing.
With all students in possession of the same assigned writing handbook, rather than write out the rules for commas myself in the margin of every paper that has comma errors, I can just write, “See section C of the handbook,” instead. Such a shorthand reference system only works, however, if I remember what section of the handbook actually covers commas. And the system only works if the student notices the comment I’ve written and then goes and looks up section C and then figures out that there’s a problem with commas.
Maybe, just to be sure, I should write, “See section C of the handbook for an explanation of the rules about commas.” Hmm, what if the student has no idea what I mean when I refer to “the handbook”? (It happens.) Okay, how about “See section C of the writing handbook by Diana Hacker for an explanation of the rules about commas.” Yes, that’s much clearer. But now I have a very long sentence to write in the margin of every student paper that has a comma problem. This won’t do. Enter, stage right, text expansion software.
The (hypothetical) solution introduced: After reading Ryan’s ProfHacker post entitled “Smarter Typing Through Text Expansion,” back in May I began to experiment with the way I compose emails. I’m often using the same phrases over and over again, so I came up with shortcuts for them: “otoh” for “On the other hand,” “btw” for “By the way,” and “lmkwyt” for “When you get a chance, please let me know what you think. Thanks!,” to cite but three examples.
When I sat down to grade this semester’s first batch of student essays, I decided to try the same kind of thing using the assigned writing handbook as a guide to what kind of shortcuts I would create (as well as what the corresponding expansion would be). I write in pen on the pages of the students’ essays relatively economically, using what Richard Haswell terms “minimal marking.” I then turn to my word processor and, having identified which elements of their writing need the most attention, I type a few shortcuts that automatically turn into complete sentences.
- When I type the shortcut “>101handbook,” what appears on the screen is “In the Norton Field Guide to Writing, the ‘Handbook’ section is in the back of the book, ‘Part 8.’ The pages have yellow around the top and outer edges, and they’re numbered HB-1 through HB-87. Here are some recommended sections for you to read:”
(I should note that this is an example of what I wrote on the very first graded essays they’ve written. I don’t intend to keep telling them again and again where and how to find the handbook.) I then add a few bullet points like the following:
- “>101,” turns into “Review section P-1 for the rules concerning commas.”
- “>101splice” turns into “Consult section S-3 for an overview of how to identify and correct the errors known as ‘comma splices’ and ‘fused sentences.’“
- “>101#” turns into Section “P-11 explains the rules concerning the use of numbers. Sometimes you’ll want to represent them alphabetically (seven) and sometimes numerically (7,247).“
So that takes care of making comments about things like grammar or punctuation. What about commenting on the content of their work?
This first essay was a literacy narrative, an account of their experiences with reading and writing throughout their lives. Before they wrote these essays they read a chapter in the textbook about such narratives, they read examples of such essays, and we discussed in class a couple of key features of effective literacy narratives. In particular we discussed the importance of using vivid details and of making the narrative cohesive by identifying an obstacle or challenge that needed to be overcome at some point in their lives. The comments that I made about these aspects of their writing also lent themselves to a text expansion strategy.
- “>101story” turned into “As the Norton explains on page 28, ‘As with most narratives, those about literacy often set up some sort of situation that needs to be resolved. That need for resolution makes readers want to keep reading.‘ I would then follow up that initial (and general) observation with comments specific to their essay.
- “>101vivid” turned into “Your paper would be improved with the use of vivid detail: As the Norton explains (page 28): ‘Details can bring a narrative to life for readers by giving them vivid mental images of the sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and textures of the world in which your story takes place. The details you use when describing something can help readers picture places, people, and events; dialogue can help them hear what is being said.’” And, again, I would follow up with comments specific to their essay.
For a hypothetical example of what my feedback looks like when I’m done, take a look at this PDF, where I’ve made all the comments that result from text expansion blue. (When the student sees the comments, however, everything is black.)
Conclusions: It’s still too early to tell, to be honest. I’ve only tried this with their first essays, and I’m going to wait until the semester is over to decide if this is a better way to provide written feedback than what I was doing before. My initial impressions, however, are that this process allows me to get through their paper much faster, and it reduces significantly the amount of time I spend on marking (and explaining) simple technical errors, allowing me more time to compose substantive comments about the content of their writing.
How about you? Have you come up with innovative uses of text-expansion software? Alternatively, have you come up with more efficient (but still effective) ways of responding to student writing? Let us hear from you in the comments!



20 Responses to Using Text-Expansion Software to Respond to Student Writing
aeonelpis - September 23, 2010 at 5:09 pm
I’ve been doing something similar with my public speaking classes, using mail merge. I am definitely going to be looking into the PC options for text expansion, though. Thanks for this post!
csdanforth - September 23, 2010 at 5:20 pm
I’ve been using an iPad app called EssayGrader. It identifies common errors/strengths and stores pre-written comments on each type of error. For each essay, I tick off the applicable boxes and it gives me a couple of paragraphs of commentary to copy and paste in a respondent each student. The software isn’t as customizable as I’d like (and it’s geared to secondary instructors), but it gets me started and cuts down on some of the repetition.
kathryntomasek - September 23, 2010 at 5:33 pm
cool idea!
magistrahf - September 23, 2010 at 6:15 pm
One of my college professors did a low-tech version of this: he wrote a number on your paper next to each problem, and then passed out a key with each number matched to a comment. Seeing which numbers we got was useful, but also, oddly, so was seeing which problems we didn’t have. It was really impersonal, though.
tejackso - September 24, 2010 at 7:25 am
for what it’s worth you don’t really need a separate program for this. you can just set up your own macros on word, that will do exactly what you tell them. it’s really easy (even for me), especially on the current version of word. i don’t use a text book, but have a whole list of little icons at the top of my word page which carry my own info for students. as i read their electronically submitted docs, i just pop the icon for whatever the generic problem is, and put my real thinking time into comments specific to their own individual form/content problems.tony jackson
michaelnelson - September 24, 2010 at 8:56 am
My own solution was to create a separate document with my general rubric for assessing student work in the format of a table. So, for instance, one section is on “Structure” and the rubric includes a number of questions I use to evaluate the structure of a paper. All of that information is in the left column. In the right column is a cell where I can either type (or write if I print this out which I often do) my general comments on that subject.I have the students use the same form when doing peer editing in class and a link to that form is here: https://wesfiles.wesleyan.edu/home/mbnelson/web/peer%20editing.docxThere have been several benefits to doing this:1. Students know what I’m looking for2. I don’t have to write out “thesis was not supported” each time. Instead, I can circle that in the left column and then draw a line to a place where I say “no!” and then explain.3. It improves my consistency in assessing student work.4. If I type these then I have this recorded on my computer. If I write out my responses, then I use our department copy machine to scan them as a computer file that I also save (it can be nice to look at these when writing letters of recommendation later on).5. It doesn’t take much effort to customize the form for different class needs.
demery1 - September 24, 2010 at 9:33 am
I also use rubrics, macros and voice recognition software (Dragon 11). Macros can address recurring themes and the VR software allows me to respond faster than I type (140 words a minute, adjusted for errors). Every one is a time saver, but none of them is very satisfying. I know it makes me a better teacher, but I don’t know if it makes students better writers. Unless there is evidence that students actually USE this feedback, I think the innovation is useless. Thousands of instructors have offered variations of “here’s where to look it up” and hundreds of thousands of students have ignored this advice. While I like innovation a lot, we NEED EVIDENCE of LEARNING, not just faster marking. Three hundred annecdotes may follow about dedicated teachers whose marking strategies changed the lives of particular students, but when considered against the total number of students who receive written feedback, the evidence is inadequate. We lack evidence to demonstrate that this learning transfers into subsequent courses and contexts, and indeed have a good deal of competing evidence to suggests that when students change genres, old errors emerge.Read Richard Haswell’s “The Complexities of Responding to Student Writing,” published in Across the Disciplines.
mottgreene - September 24, 2010 at 9:56 am
I use a combination of CopyPaste Pro, that allows a palette of text phrases as numerous as I desire, and Hopper and Gale’s Essentials of English – where all the grammer and usage notes are numbered, with a key in the front of the book. So the margins of the papers bristle with things like, 8D, !5E, 12A – all of which direct the student to thsose sections of the handbook that contain the requisite instructions and advice. Substantive comments about good writing are entered with a “paste” command from the CopyPaste Pro palette. I keep track of the mistakes made by students with these alphanumeric keys, and then compare the range of numbers in subsequent assignments. When a student makes an identical mistake 2 papers running, this triggers an order to write out the rule or principle. Third error calls for an office hour visit. Once you have the text palette of comments written in, and the numbers in the manual by heart, a stack of 20-25 papers dwindles very rapidly!
kkirkemtp - September 24, 2010 at 9:58 am
Another free program to use for this would be shortkeys lite. As with much of the Web2.0 technology, there is an upgraded version that offers more shortkeys…but the lite version works great and gives you up to 15 shortcuts.This same concept can be used to “work smarter not harder” in e-mail responses and a variety of online course work. Before Shortkeys or Text Expander, I had a word document with all of my “canned” responses. I would then just copy and paste the responses.Kelly KirkDirector of Distance EducationRandolph Community CollegeAshebor, NClkkirk@randolph.edu
nyhist - September 24, 2010 at 10:09 am
I simply underline or circle problematic words, phrases, or punctuation. I tell the students to figure out what the issues are. Or I tell them in person if they come to see me, which is best anyway. I used to use the number system with a typed page key, but I like to have the students do a little mental work themselves instead of my spoon-feeding them. When they rewrite (as they should) I check to see if they have fixed things as I always type out a one or two ΒΆ comment for each student–so I have a copy of it to retain.
11196496 - September 24, 2010 at 10:14 am
I do not teach writing per se but believe that writing needs to be taught across the curriculum. In my written instructions for a writing assignment in theology, I include a section headed, “Your essay will be graded on these points . . .” or “I will be looking for . . . .” When I return the essays I include a cover sheet with the same items, how much each was worth, and how many points the student got for each element. I have additional check boxes for items I don’t want to have to repeat on multiple papers. I leave room on the sheet for comments to each student. This balances the formulaic (saving me time)with the personal (meeting individual student needs). The numbers involved also help students believe that their essays were graded fairly. Since I began using this system, informal grade appeals have diminished to zero. It’s a low tech approach but it may provide a stepping stone for people moving from labor intensive to high tech. approaches.
wvdirtboy - September 24, 2010 at 10:16 am
A very simple trick will allow this in Word.1. Type your phrase (“See page 101…”.2. Highlight it.3. Open Autocorrect.4. Give selected text a place name (e.g., >101
philosophy - September 24, 2010 at 11:56 am
A yet simpler way. Just circle the errors and problems, then send students (especially those with lots of circles) to the Writing Center where consultants will go over the paper with them and write a brief report of what they did and give students a copy, which I require them to turn in as verification of the consultation.
craigc - September 24, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Turnitin has a add-on product called GradeMark which has a number common errors created which you can just place on the paper. You can also create others.
emwhite - September 24, 2010 at 1:31 pm
I find it sad that no one yet has shown awareness of the substantial scholarship that has been published in this area. There are about 65 PhD programs in rhetoric/composition, with dozens of journals and scores of books supporting the field, generally based on research. Since Straub and Lunsford published 12 Readers Reading:Responding to Student Writing in 1995 we have learned a great deal about what is effective–and what is not. Scholars, scholars, aren’t you supposed to consult scholarship?
etmiller - September 24, 2010 at 2:00 pm
I started to do this exact same thing with Word Perfect macros–17 years ago, in 1993 as a TA at UCLA. I even used Diana Hacker’s handbook, referencing the sections for punctuation, etc. I agree with demery, above, but in any case, it saves time.
jimhenry888 - September 24, 2010 at 2:36 pm
I second @emwhite: The C&R research is VAST as concerns responding to student writing.I also share @demery1′s concerns, and last spring I began supplementing my written feedback with mp3s that walk students through that feedback, helping them see HOW they can make use of it.I downloaded the Voice Memo app to my iPod and I can compose a 3-8 minute commentary pretty easily to send along with my written response keyed to the rubric that students and I have elaborated beforehand for each assignment.
Students LOVED this added layer of response and it seemed to figure into subsequent revisions.
thomf - September 24, 2010 at 3:14 pm
I use a product called Annotate for Word for my grading. It’s a Word toolbar made by a company called 11trees. It comes with more than 70 comments on grammar, style, organization, etc. You can edit all of these comments to your liking and create more than 100 of your own comments and save them for re-use. Then it’s a breeze–you add them to student papers with one click, no typing necessary for most comments. It has cut my grading time nearly in half while actually improving the quality of the feedback I give my students. I haven’t used the text-expansion software,but based on the description above it sounds like it’s not nearly as efficient as Annotate. You can find Annotate at 11trees.com.
formerprof05 - September 25, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Did this 10 years ago in MS Word. Commented on preliminary drafts and required students to submit final drafts that took comments into account. Students who ignored comments were graded accordingly low. Generally, this approach worked.Thomf’s suggestion (#20) sounds like an improvement. Happy grading to all!
george_h_williams - September 24, 2010 at 2:06 pm
Thanks for all of the contributions to this discussion! It’s interesting to read about the different tools (and methods) that people use to manage in a structured way the feedback provided to students.As some of you have mentioned, you don’t need a separate text expansion software application for this. You can accomplish something similar with MS Word’s “AutoCorrect” function (and, probably, in several other word processors, too).In what I wrote above, I neglected to mention a couple of earlier ProfHacker posts that are related to this topic:
* Jason’s on using rubrics
* Natalie’s on using GradeMark (mentioned above by @craigc)
A couple of people have mentioned just circling problems and then telling students to figure out what’s wrong themselves (or go to the campus writing center for help). If you can tell that this works for your students (in other words, that their writing improves as a results of this kind of feedback), that’s great. Speaking only for myself, however, I find that students don’t usually figure out more than a couple of things on their own, either because it’s too confusing for them or because they don’t know where to start.
@aeonelpis: I’d be interested in hearing more about what you’re doing with mail merge.
@csdanforth: Maybe you could write a review of EssayGrader at some point in the future?
@magistrahf: Yep, I’ve tried that approach, too. In my experience, it works with students who already have a lot of initiative and not so much with students who don’t.
@demery1 makes a very good point: we need to evaluate our methods to determine if they actually work or not. I know, for example, that this method I describe above works well for me, but does it work for students? (Do they become better writers?) I’m going to pay attention (as I always try to do) to my students’ growth as writers to see whether or not the feedback I’m providing is working.
@emwhite: Don’t be shy! Fill us in on what we should know from this scholarship. It’s not enough to tell us how sad you are about what we’ve described doing. Make a substantive contribution to the discussion!