While reading Valerie Perry's "My teacher hates me! The Writing Center as a Locus for a Rhetoric-based WAC Program," I came across a statement that intrigued me. Perry writes, "Some professors will claim in class, on syllabi, and on students' papers that logic and structure are more valuable than the 'entertainment' factor, and yet we choose to read books, articles and papers that entertain us, that mesh with our own interests and views; we reward, consciously or not, papers that do the same" (3). While I have never believed that professors grade papers partially, Perry's statement had me second-guessing a professor's ability to put aside his/her personal tastes in literature, papers, articles, etc. to assign the appropriate grade for a paper based on its "logic and structure".
Just consider this. I love novels by Nicholas Sparks. I absolutely love and praise his works. If asked to pick between Sparks' A Walk To Remember and Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities, I would pick A Walk To Remember without hesitation. Sparks' novels are entertaining, though A Tale of Two Cities is not bad at all. I would give higher marks to Sparks' novels because they are far more entertaining than A Tale of Two Cities. So, is it possible that professors may look for papers that appeal to their own interests? It is not completely out of the question. After all, they are human, too. In that case, should students be concerned about how well their papers will entertain their professors?
