So I’ve read a little bit from Peter Elbow before and I’m often torn about his ideas. The big issue I have with this particular article is the assumption that having each reader/teacher interpret grades differently is a fault of the reader/teacher as opposed to the inability of the student to write for a particular audience.
When we teach aloud (in my opinion) we should give our students an understanding of who we are: our attitudes toward certain subjects/topics; our personality type; our history with writing; etc. I would argue that an extremely important take-away for young writers is how to write to a specific audience. IF they are writing to me, they should be aware of who I am.
This is why I believe in an extremely important bridge between in-class discussions and commenting on papers. If we depersonalize the audience, we depersonalize the writer. By keeping those two things very specific, we can help mold the writer’s ability to write toward specific audiences.
Elbow (as well as some of the other authors we’ve read for today) think that a variety of grading philosophies is somehow a detriment to the student. I think that it CAN be a detriment, but we have the power to utilize that as an opportunity for teaching how to write toward a specific audience.