The Hero’s Journey of a Paper

 

The Hero’s Journey of a Paper 

Once upon a time, there was a paper, full of its own purpose, promise, and potential. Raw and partially misunderstood by most: its possible contributions hidden by flaws of living life and wounds obtained in the complexities of schooling. A wise mentor clearly saw the flaws, but her discerning wisdom and focus guided the paper through trials and tasks to reach its purpose, promise, and potential. All while the gods of education, assessment regimes, and society sought to disrupt the paper’s transformation. Three trials awaited the paper along its journey. First, unseen by the paper, the mentor’s preparation, lens of meaning and process, and focus for planning the paper’s future. Second, the mentor’s careful design and mapping of the paper’s revelation and steps through the tasks on the revisional journey it must take alone. And finally, the characteristic design and providence of tools and insight that would serve the paper through the fires of evaluation hell and toward a higher version of itself, and ready for the next journey.  

But alas, there was another paper full of someone else’s design for purpose but strove valiantly to reach the promise and potential chosen for it. Raw and partially misunderstood by most: its possible contributions hidden by flaws of living life and wounds obtained in the complexities of schooling. A wise mentor clearly saw the flaws, but her discerning wisdom and focus guided the paper through trials and tasks that would allow the paper to appear flawless and emulate the meaning and form chosen for its success. All while the gods of education, assessment regimes, and society sought to disrupt the paper’s transformation. Three trials awaited the paper along its journey. First, unseen by the paper: the mentor’s preparation, assessment lens, and myriad of foci for the paper’s future. Second: the mentor’s careful design and mapping of where the paper failed to meet the standards of the assessment rubric and rationale for why it should be corrected during the revisional tasks on the journey it must take alone. And finally: the characteristic advice and reminders of instruction would serve the paper poorly through the fires of evaluation hell and toward a cycle of ineffectiveness and textual poverty the paper had been doomed to repeat from birth.  

 The way we give feedback to students guides the journey. Where are we leading students?