Redo, Redraft, Rewrite

It’s so often beneficial to ask learners to look back over their work and improve it before it gets to you for marking.

Not that they always want to to do this!

Learners tend to see the goal of the classroom as: Complete the Task.

They achieve that (and win the game) by finishing their work.

But we want to change that perception.

We don’t think the goal is ‘Complete the Task’.

We think the goal is ‘Take Ownership of Your Work’ or ‘Improve It Yourself or ‘Self-Assess Before You Hand In’.

When you ask learners to redo, redraft or rewrite their work, all of which are good things to do, try framing it around this idea.

That completing the task is only part of how you win.

The first step.

That, in your classroom, the game is played differently.

And that rewards (praise, positive feedback, stickers maybe) are tied to this.

That means we recognise that revisiting work encourages learners to look critically at what they have produced, helping them to see what they do as open to development rather than as something final and fixed.

But that we also recognise we might need to do a bit of work around how we frame this to learners.

So they see the benefit to what we are asking and embrace it, instead of pushing back against it.

Here are four ways you can structure review-style self-assessment in your classroom.

All of which mean learners are editing and improving their work, before it gets to you for marking.

Select a Section and Redo It

Ask learners to identify one part of their work they feel could be improved.

Learners should first think about what might constitute an improvement for the particular piece of work and then go through and assess what they have done.

It may be that they choose a piece of their work they feel is below par.

Or it could a section they feel is good but which they know they are capable of making better.

When learners have identified the section they are going to redo, they should make a note of why they think it needs improving, how they intend to improve it, and why this will make it better.

You might like to discuss this with them or to invite them to share their thoughts with a partner.

Finally, learners put their improvements into action.

For example, in a literacy lesson, a learner might identify using key vocabulary as an improvement, then go through their work and find a section they can rewrite in line with this.

They explain their thinking to their partner, then go ahead and do their rewrite.

Notice here that we are both structuring the process of self-assessment and making it more manageable for learners.

The latter comes because we are telling learners they only need to focus on one section of their work.

This is easier to do, and more achievable, than asking them to go back and redo everything.

Continuing our metaphor from above, this makes the game winnable for the learner – and they are likely to perceive it as such.

Which increases motivation and makes it more likely learners will recognise the benefits in what you are asking them to do.

Redraft With a Target in Mind

When it comes to redrafting, it can be useful to share a painting analogy.

Many artists produce sketches that they then develop into a final piece of work.

The sketches represent their first attempts at realising what they think and feel about what is in front of them or what they can see in their minds.

They try to make their sketches as near to what they want as possible.

But they also know that these aren’t, and never will be, the end product.

When it comes to the final piece of work, the sketches are relegated to a junior role.

They become a point on a journey in which the final painting is the culmination.

Using this to explain redrafting can help make learners feel more at ease with the process of creating a second piece of work.

Here’s how this particular strategy works:

Ask learners to look at a piece of writing they have done and to edit it from top-to-bottom.

They should aim to create a new piece that is better than their first.

To do this, learners will need a goal.

You can provide that, or they can.

If you provide it, you might give each learner something different, give the whole class the same target, or display a list of five targets on the board and invite learners to select one that is most relevant to them.

If learners provide it, they will need to do this through self-assessment.

You can scaffold this by sharing success criteria or, going a step further, by suggesting three or four possible targets that learners choose between.

The latter is preferable if learners are likely to struggle thinking up a suitable target.

Now, I mentioned in the previous strategy that doing a full redraft is challenging, and that focussing on a section of your work is easier and more accessible.

This is true.

So, with this approach, I would suggest thinking about where to use it.

If learners have done a relatively short piece of writing, then a full rewrite is not too onerous.

If it’s a longer piece, you might need to add in some additional scaffolding or think carefully about timings.

But, the one point to remember is that when learners have a target that underpins their redraft, this gives them clarity and focus, making a successful outcome easier to achieve.

To illustrate, consider the following:

• I will rewrite my story so it contains more dialogue, and I will use that dialogue to develop my characters.
• I will rewrite my story so it is better.

A specific goal targets effort.

A general one, not so much.

Redo According to X

This activity is only slightly removed from the previous two.

Ask learners to identify one success criterion or one element of the mark-scheme they have not successfully put into practice in their work.

Having done this, they should choose one or more sections of their work to which this applies and redo them accordingly.

You can use this activity with written tasks, but also with practical learning.

For example, in an art lesson, a learner might self-assess their work using the success criteria and realise that they have failed to use perspective effectively in the bottom third of their drawing.

They can then go back and focus on improving that element of their work, using the success criterion around persepective as their guide.

Speaking, Punctuation and Sense (SPS)

This is a great approach to self-assessment that helps learners develop the quality of their writing.

It was introduced to me by a talented colleague many years ago. 

It works as follows:

When a learner has finished a writing task, ask them to ‘SPS’ their work.

SPS means Spelling, Punctuation and Sense.

Learners should look over what they have done and first check that all the spelling is correct.

If they notice any errors, they should write ‘Sp’ in the margin of their work and make their corrections.

They then look through their work a second time and focus on whether they have used punctuation correctly.

If they find any errors, they should write ‘P’ in the margin and make their corrections.

Finally, learners look through their work a third time.

They are now checking whether what they have written makes sense.

If they find any sentences or paragraphs that do not, they should write ‘Se’ in the margin and then make the necessary corrections.

When learners have checked their work for ‘SPS’, they can discuss the changes they have made with you, or write you a note for when you come to mark their books.

For me, this method has three major benefits.

First, it slows learners down.

SPS ensures that learners who work quickly must look again at what they have produced.

It directs them to the process of editing and checking their work, rather than prioritising ‘getting it done’.

(Especially good for those who think the classroom game is ‘won’ by finishing as fast as possible.)

Second, it encourages learners to look closely.

The specific structure of SPS means learners are compelled to examine everything they have written – and to do so three times.

Third, the delineation of the assessment into three separate categories – spelling, punctuation and sense – helps develop learners’ understanding of what they should be thinking about when they are writing.

The success criteria are made plain.

And, because they are broken down into three separate elements, they are easier for learners to get to grips with (and to remember).