Figures
- Figure 1.1: Not Much Has Changed in Over 100 Years
- Figure 1.2: Targeted Writing Assignment—Punctuation
- Figure 1.3: The Pyramid of Writing Priorities
- Figure 1.4: Too Many Comments for a Student’s Brain to Focus!
- The Scale of Writing Concerns: The 4 Ds
- Figure 1.5: Persuasive Technique Rubric
- Figure 1.6: Using a simple calendar I plan what types of feedback will be happening throughout a month and school year
- Figure 2.1: Interested Reader and Detached Authority Comparison
- Figure 2.2: Student Map of Setting
- Figure 2.3: Research Paper Outline
- Figure 2.4: Describe-Evaluate-Success Model
- Figure 2.5: Example of Coyle’s Word List
- Figure 2.6: Personal Essay Rubric, With Focus on Growth Areas
- 5-6 Minutes to Read and Grade a Final Paper: Revision and Comment Sample
- Figure 2.7: Co-Constructed Criteria for Personal Essays
- “The Rest” Rubric Box
- Figure 3.1: The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve
- Figure 3.2: The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve, Multiple Revisits
- Figure 3.3: The Feedback Cycle
- Figure 3.4: Vague vs. Clear Goals
- Figure 3.5: Personal Essay Criteria, With Focus on Students’ Goals
- Figure 3.6: Conference Notes
- Figure 3.7: End (and Beginning) of Unit Reflection
- Figure 3.8: A Letter Example
- Figure 3.9: Student Mid-Semester Letters
- Figure 3.10: The Reflection Paper
- Figure 4.1: Introductory Letter
- Figure 4.2: Consistency Through Commenting
- Figure 4.3: My adaptation of the Identity-Actions-Outcomes Cycle from James Clear (2018) and Dave Stuart Jr. (2018)
- Value/Expectation Checklist
- Figure 5.1: Protocol for New Peer Responders
- Figure 5.2: Our Model Text
- Figure 5.3: The Detached Proofreader Approach
- Figure 5.4: The Five Keys for Quality Peer Response
- Figure 5.5: The Strengths
- Figure 5.6: The Growth Areas
- Figure 5.7: Good Fences Make Good Responders
- Figure 5.8: Sentence Stems for New Peer Responders
- Figure 5.9: An Example of a Targeted Checklist