The root of the problem lies in the monolithic, product-oriented design of many technical writing assignments. The only meaningful contact between student and instructor is scheduled after the assignment is completed. Given this reality, and given the fact that somebody has to grade the papers anyway, I attempt in the following sections to work within the grading paradigm. This section analyzes elements of the evaluation process and describes efforts to make it work more efficiently and communicate more effectively. The analysis does not solve the grading problem, but it does help define its severity.
Marginal notes highlight specific weaknesses in thought processes and organization.
The end comment assesses the student's overall performance. Although corrective marks are probably responsible for most of the ink I expend on student papers, they have the least effect on a student's grade. Yet, I am aware that if I do not try to improve students' grammar, nobody else will. Corrective marks are routine, tedious, and unavoidable. Such a statement identifies the error by communicating the consequences.