The Collaborative Research Paper

I teach the research paper at the beginning of the semester. From the middle of January to the middle of February, we do nothing else. A serendipitous by-product of having the paper first is that very few students drop the course. Since they have already completed the biggest project in the class, they have too much invested to drop.

The five weeks are tightly scheduled. The first day of class I get the students accustomed to working together by having them do a word game alone. I give them ten "Wordles" to solve. For example, "O¯U¯T" would be "stretched out." I give them enough time to try to solve the problems alone. Then I have them find a partner and share answers. Invariably, the students can get more correct answers if they pool responses. I then tell them that they have just experienced collaborative learning, something we will be doing in class and something industry expects us to do.

One of the first collaborative exercises the students do in preparation for working together is a library exercise. I try to match computer literate students with non-computer literate students. The students are given ten questions they have to answer using the library computers. Complete instructions are given, and the non-computer literate student must do all the work with only assistance from the computer literate person. They answer questions using key word searches, author searches, and title searches, in the process learning how to access the card catalog via computer. Then they have to find reference books based on the information found in the card catalog. Finally, I have them access microfiche and answer questions found in magazine articles. I find the hands-on approach to library usage very effective.

Choosing the topic for the paper is also a collaborative effort and the first order of business. The students choose their own subjects, but the topics must be current and arguable, and the class has to agree on only three possible topics. That means any given class might have topics different from another class; but by limiting the number of topics, I can be sure to be informed on the topics.

The students then need to find a partner for the research paper project. Again, I encourage non-computer literate people to join with computer literate people. Generally they find their own partners, but occasionally I do match people based on topic choice. More often than not, there will be a few students who do not want to work with another. I will approve such a situation if I feel that the person would not make a good partner.

By the end of January, collaborative research has been done. I then break the class into three groups based on topic choice, and have one day when they pool resources. Once the research has been garnered, the thesis sentence is written and approved, the outline is constructed and approved, and documentation exercises are done, all collaboratively.

In February, we work on learning how to acknowledge the opposition and how to refute the opposition. We also work on paraphrasing and summarizing. These exercises are also collaborative. Each student does his/her own paraphrasing and summarizing, but then the two share the responses, either choosing the best or creating a new effort together. They then hand in the work under both partners’ names and receive the same grade. Of course, if one person has been absent, then he or she does not receive any grade. Finally, we work on collaborative editing drills. I give them material that needs to be edited. Again, each student does his or her own editing at home. Then when they come to class, they compare their efforts. They can make changes to their editing based on their different responses and then hand in the best paper with both of their names on the same paper.

The fifth week of the project is devoted to conferences. Each set of partners signs up for a half-hour conference. They must bring three typed copies of the rough draft. I will mark on one, which I keep. Later, if necessary, I can check to see if they made any suggested improvements. They can take notes on the other two. We read the paper together and decide if they have followed the proper format, have an appropriate introduction, have followed the outline, have good reasons to support their thesis, have good evidence to support the reasons, have acknowledged the opposition, have refuted the opposition, have a reasonable conclusion, have run spell check, have edited, and have a properly prepared works cited page. The week is draining for the instructor, but the conferences almost guarantee a decent product, and, therefore, grading the final paper is less stressful.

One of the unique aspects of grading the papers is that the two students do not necessarily have to get the same grade. At the end of the project, I have the students do a peer evaluation. They must sit together to fill out the form. Students are asked to grade their partners on a 1-5 scale for several statements. For example, the student must say if the partner accepted responsibility, contributed a fair share to research, contributed a fair share to writing, contributed a fair share to typing, and contributed a fair share to editing. If the two partners have shared responsibility 50-50, then they will receive the same grade. If, however, one student carried the load and the other student slacked off, the two students have to agree on what percent of the grade the one student will receive who did not do his or her share. I have had one student get an "A" while another received a "C" on the same paper. I also have a grading form which I attach to the back of the paper. The students are shown the form at the beginning of the semester and know exactly how the grade will be determined. I break the 100 points for the paper into eleven categories. For example, the overall argument is worth 30 points while the punctuation is worth 10 points. Other categories include works cited page, format, use of sources, outline, coherence, and unity. I also subtract five points if the students did not run spell check or proofread carefully, and I deduct five points if the students did not come for the conference.

I feel good about the collaborative research project. Students learn from each other, and they learn about themselves. Last year I had a dual-enrollment student in my English 111. I constantly was after her to develop her ideas and provide more support. I could tell she felt I was picking on her. When we did the research project in 112, she and her partner came for the conference. At one point in the conference, I pointed out that part of the argument was well developed but that one part lacked support. The girl looked startled and said, "That part that you say needs development is what I wrote." She finally realized I was not picking on her, that indeed she did not support her points adequately. For the rest of the semester, I saw a marked improvement in both her attitude and her work.

Teaching the research paper is a lot of work, and grading is no picnic. But I feel strongly that knowing how to write a good research paper is very important, and, therefore, I feel I must be very thorough in both the presentation and evaluation. Generally I teach three 112 classes in the spring, and that means at least 75 research papers. Having half the number of papers to grade allows me to be much more thorough.

Most of the students are apprehensive at first about working with someone else, but in 95 percent of the cases, the collaborative effort works well. On rare occasions when things don’t go well, I make the two students come in together to discuss the problems with me. I will not talk to one student without the other present. By requiring the two students to talk to me together, I find that generally the students can work out their problems. After all, working collaboratively successfully means the students can work things out between themselves.