Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • TJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Christa on Must Law Practice and Scholarship be Exciting?

    • AYY on Privacy and Tattletales

    • Lsat Prep on Improving the US News Rankings: A Wish List

    • Lsat Prep on Fantasy Law School League

    • Legal Fact Finder on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Observer on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

  •  

    Site Meter

Grading redux: Spelling and grammar

posted by Kaimipono D. Wenger

Another question from my friend “Jim”:

How much weight should I place on spelling and grammar? I myself place a very high value on perfect spelling and grammar, and I personally used to spend hours and hours combing through my documents to guarantee that my documents were free of absolutely any spelling or grammatical errors before I submitted them to a professor or a client. So, it’s frustrating me to no end to read a paper that was apparently thrown together without, as I admonished the students plenty of times in class, the student paying meticulous attention to eradicate any spelling errors or incorrect grammar in their final papers. How have you handled this?

It’s my sense that every professor handles it differently, but that everyone gives some weight to spelling, grammar, and so on. Personally, I allocate about a quarter of the points in my exams and papers to a category I call “writing and organization.” Students lose points from this pool if they have misspellings, bad grammar, bad organization, and so on. I think that this more or less mimics life on the outside. A brief or memo full of bad grammar and misspellings will not be viewed particularly kindly by a judge or a law firm partner. Because of this reality, I think it’s important to keep students focused on the importance of good grammar, spelling, and organization. On the other hand, perfect spelling of bad law won’t help either.

For me, the number of points at stake depends on the context. A few misspellings in a final exam will typically cost a student one or two points out of the total pool. Students are hastily putting together answers in a two or three hour period, and I’m not expecting polished perfection. The same few misspellings on a final paper, however, will cost a student significantly more points. A student who has months to put together a paper has more than enough time to ferret out any spelling, grammar, or organization problems in her paper.


 March 13, 2006 at 5:26 pm   Posted in: Law School, Law School (Teaching)   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (7)

  1. tim zinnecker - March 13, 2006 at 8:45 pm

    I graded approx. 140 exams last semester. I’m guessing that close to 25% misspelled my last name in the bluebooks, notwithstanding the fact that my name appeared on the exam itself.

  2. Kaimi - March 13, 2006 at 8:57 pm

    Wow – that really takes the cake, Mr. Zinecker.

  3. asdf - March 14, 2006 at 2:30 am

    I myself place a very high value on perfect spelling and grammar, and I personally used to spend hours and hours combing through my documents to guarantee that my documents were free of absolutely any spelling or grammatical errors before I submitted them to a professor or a client. So,

    Superfluous comma.

    it’s frustrating me to no end to read a paper that was apparently thrown together without, as I admonished the students plenty of times in class,

    Could this interjected clause be more, as Ms. Hildebrand often admonished her students, awkward?

    the student paying meticulous attention to eradicate any spelling errors or incorrect grammar

    “… thrown together without meticulous attention to spelling and grammar”

    Or are there bonus points for convoluted sentence constructions, so long as the spelling and grammar are perfect?

    in their final papers. How have you handled this?

    “… to read a paper … in their final papers” is akward.

    “eradicate from” not “eradicate in”.

    Sorry, I had too many professors like Jim.

  4. Jason - March 14, 2006 at 6:29 am

    asdf makes a good point. Were I grading in-class exams, I don’t think I’d count spelling and grammar at all unless it was just unreadable. I’d expect coherence, so organization of the answer might count for something, but the other things are often just typographical mistakes, and we all make plenty of those, especially under time pressure.

    Also, what about foreign-born students whose command of English may not be quite as good? At my school, I know that LLM students who are non-native English speakers are supposed to make a notation saying as much on their exam, but I don’t know what the rules are for the professors grading those exams.

  5. Daniel J. Solove - March 14, 2006 at 10:48 am

    I don’t factor spelling into my grade for in-class exams. Students don’t have time to run spell check, and I don’t think that spelling matters at all in a timed exam. Likewise for most grammatical errors.

    As for organization, this goes to the clarity of thought, and I do factor that into my grade. If a student’s answer is unclear or awkward or poorly expressed, I also factor that into the grade, as I believe it goes to quality of thought.

    On papers, however, spelling and grammar matter, as the student has time to ensure that the final product is proofread. But in a timed exam, students are too busy rushing to complete the answers to have be thinking about fixing spelling and grammar.

    I don’t think that spelling and grammar are relevant to a timed in-class exam. The timed in-class exam is a very imperfect metric, as speed becomes a major factor, and in real life, judges or partners don’t ask attorneys to write out their answers in three hours in a bluebook. At best, an in-class exam can reflect the quality of a student’s thought process and provide a window into the student’s analytical abilities. That’s what I look for when I grade in-class exams.

  6. Hirbod Rashidi - March 14, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    I gather much of it is not a deduction in the sense that there are points reserved for it on a cut-sheet. There is a subjective element to grading exams and I am sure most professors are influenced by bad writing.

    I tend to agree with the school of thought that on a timed exam there should not be any points deducted for spelling errors unless it deals with a legal concept that no law student should be misspelling, e.g., “moot” spelled “mute,” or “cite” spelled “site” or “sight” (A3G exempt).

  7. Jim - March 15, 2006 at 8:14 am

    Touche’, asdf. The email in the original post was dashed off to a friend. On the other hand, my students have had months to write and polish their final papers. I agree that spelling and grammatical errors are generally immaterial to in-class exams.

    For the record, my email was written from noting obvious typos (”suite” instead of suit, or “akward” instead of awkward) and citation errors, rather than sentence structure.

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress