on the student's own time. I also pointed out the DECmate manuals, available in the lab with step-by-step
written instructions for all phases of operation. In addition, the students were provided with a hand-out with
start-up instructions and a list of basic procedures.

These practices assured that most students, at the end of the first three weeks of class, could generate
something in writing from the DECmate. They had also, incidentally, reviewed the basics of paragraph writing.
Having purchased their personal diskettes from the bookstore, they were at last ready for a written
assignment—a long delay, to be sure, but one I considered worthwhile. They were assigned a paragraph and
given a week to turn out a printed copy. Most students submitted typed paragraphs. | lavishly praised their
technical skills while critiquing their writing with usual rigor. Thereafter, I conducted class in the traditional
manner, though after the second or third writing assignment, I clipped achievement certificates to all DECmate-
produced papers.

As | stated at the start, I could not change basic objectives or course requirements to accommodate the
DECmate component. However, | felt that certain modifications were justified. For example, editing is an
intrinsic part of writing, and DECmate’s foremost advantage is that it eases the editing process. Therefore, |
required all papers to be rewritten and edited. Ten percent of the course grade was earned through paper
editing (and quizzes). I decided not to make that percentage any larger because I wanted students to put their
best efforts into writing an excellent paper the first time around. Editing after grading all too often consists of
correcting errors the instructor has marked, without much thought to serious revision. The DECmate, I'm sorry
to report, has not eliminated this problem, though I’m trying to change the way I grade by making the kinds of
comments that will lead to revision, not just the correction of mechanical errors.

In addition to the grade for editing, I included a requirement that all papers be typed; but again, due to the
Clark County Community College's open admission policy and the original English 101 course description, |
could not hold to this requirement absolutely. I explained this to my students up-front—stressing, of course, the
obvious advantages to typing their papers on the DECmate, including the ease of editing graded papers.

The DECmate Lab

| have not as yet said much about the set-up of the DECmate lab. I would like to outline what I consider a
workable arrangement. All labs have to be supervised by monitors, and any word processing lab is no
exception. The DECmates are remarkably durable, but abuse is always possible. Most of all, a monitor well
acquainted with DECmate is needed to assist students having difficulties. This person should understand,
though, that the students are training themselves; they should not be hovered over or given instructions verbally
when such information is available in the lab manuals. The monitor should invervene only when the problem
appears beyond the student's ability to solve it. Such supervision can most effectively take place if the
DECmates are housed separately, rather than as part of a larger entity such as a micro-processing or typing lab.
| also recommend that DECmate lab monitors be hired and supervised by the same administrative entity that
houses the English program. English faculty should be closely involved in training and supervision.

In Summary

Not only is the DECmate/English 101 marriage at Clark County Community College still intact after two years,
but offspring are on the way. In March, 1985, I trained eight adjunct English faculty in my combination
techniques. Four of them have agreed to teach English 101 sections with the DECmate component for Fall 1985.

Word processors do not automatically turn poor or mediocre students into articulate writers. But, from a
purely mechanical standpoint, they certainly make the writing process easier. They don’t teach a student to
compose any better, but they eliminate the frustration of recopying. Composition teachers today are at fault if
they do not actively encourage students to utilize the most effective techniques of getting words on paper,
thereby freeing them to concentrate on their real chores: discovering what they want to say and the best way to
say it.

Joan Doggrell
Clark County Community College

For further information, contact the author at Clark County Community College, 3200 East Cheyenne Avenue,
North Las Vegas, NV 89030.

®e

 

 

Suanne D. Roueche, Editor
April 25, 1986, Vol. VIII, No. 13

INNOVATION ABSTRACTS is a publication of the National institute for Staff and Organizational Development, EDB 348, The University of Texas at Austin,
Austin, Texas 78712, (512) 471-7545. Subscriptions are available to nonconsortium members for $35 per year. Funding in part by the W. K. Kellogg
Foundation and Sid W/. Richardson Foundation. Issued weekly when classes are in session during fall and spring terms and monthly during the summer.

© The University of Texas at Austin, 1986
Further duplication 1s permitted only by MEMBER institutions for ther own personnel ISSN 0199-106X

 

 

—