Dialect Transfer and the Copied Essay in Grade 9 Nepali
Ram Prasad Bhattarai teaches Nepali in Grade 9 at a secondary school in Rajbiraj, Saptari. Of his 52 students, 31 speak Maithili at home, 12 speak Bhojpuri, and 9 speak Nepali. In the terminal examination the composition section averaged 6 out of 15, while grammar averaged 11 out of 15. Scripts show list-like paragraphs, no clear thesis, frequent matra errors, and dialect vocabulary such as 'bahut' for 'dherai'. One otherwise strong student submitted an essay almost identical to a printed model essay, and three classmates then produced the same text. Ram Prasad teaches six periods a week and must mark 52 scripts. The district education office has asked schools to improve Nepali results, and the head teacher has asked him to 'give more grammar homework' because grammar marks are the only section still holding up. Ram Prasad is unsure whether marking every matra error in red ink will help or simply demoralise students.
1. Separate the errors in the scripts into categories and decide which categories deserve limited marking time and which deserve teaching time. Justify the priority order.
Read the worked answer
Four categories, four different treatments
- Dialect transfer (lexical: bahut/dherai, and similar). These are not carelessness; they are correct in the home variety. Correct them as register choices, not as moral failures, and build a two-column vocabulary notebook (home form / standard written form) that is reviewed weekly.
- Matra and spelling errors. Numerous, low teaching value individually, high value as a habit. Do not mark all of them. Choose two target features per cycle (for example, the matra of a common suffix and the distinction between similar-sounding letters) and mark only those. Announce that everything else is ignored this cycle.
- Discourse-level problems (no thesis, list paragraphs, no linking). This is where the 9 lost marks actually sit. A composition scoring 6 out of 15 is not losing marks mainly to matras; it is losing them to absence of structure and development. Highest teaching priority.
- Grammar-section performance. Already strong at 11 out of 15, so additional grammar homework yields the smallest marginal gain. The head teacher's proposed remedy misallocates effort.
Marking decision Selective correction with codes (S = structure, V = vocabulary, M = matra target) plus one comment on content. Marking every error in red across 52 scripts consumes hours, produces no learning, and signals that writing is only error-hunting. The reasoning is marginal-gain: spend teaching time where marks are actually lost.
2. Build a six-week plan to raise composition scores using the six weekly periods and the 52 scripts. Explain how marking becomes part of the teaching rather than a separate evening task.
Read the worked answer
Design logic: composition improves through modelled texts, oral rehearsal before writing, and feedback on few features, not through more grammar exercises.
Weekly structure (six periods)
- Period 1: reading and deconstructing one good short essay - students mark the thesis, the three topic sentences, the linking words.
- Period 2: oral rehearsal. Students plan and say their argument in Maithili or Nepali first, then convert it to standard written Nepali; this uses the home language as a bridge rather than treating it as an obstacle.
- Period 3: shared writing - teacher writes two paragraphs with the class, thinking aloud about paragraph breaks.
- Period 4: independent 15-minute paragraph on a familiar topic (load-shedding, migration, local market).
- Periods 5–6: response and revision.
Turning marking into teaching Do not mark all 52 scripts fully every week. Instead: (a) each student writes a short paragraph, (b) Ram Prasad reads 10 scripts only, records the two commonest problems on the board next period, (c) students peer-respond in pairs using a three-point checklist (clear opening claim, one example, linking word), (d) full marking happens only on the fortnightly longer piece.
Assessment Use a four-criterion rubric (content, organisation, vocabulary range, accuracy) so students see that structure carries marks. Track the organisation score per student across three pieces; a rise there is the success signal.
3. How should Ram Prasad handle the copied essay and the three students who followed, both as an integrity matter and as a teaching opportunity? What must he avoid?
Read the worked answer
Diagnose before punishing. The copying is likely a rational response to a task with no taught method: students who cannot generate structure copy a structure they can see. The strong student may also not know that imitating a printed model is prohibited rather than clever.
Steps
- Private conversation with the first student. Ask about process ('how did you write this?'), not accusation. Explain the difference between borrowing structure and copying sentences, and that a printed model essay is a resource for analysis, not a submission.
- Same conversation with the three followers, individually, without revealing who was spoken to first.
- Apply the school's written rule, but choose a learning sanction: all four rewrite on a new topic with a signed planning sheet showing their own outline, and the rewrite is graded with a comment on improvement. Record the original in the register with a note; do not silently replace it.
- Class-level response: teach paraphrasing and attribution explicitly in the next writing period, and use the model essay as an object of analysis - students highlight its topic sentences and then write their own on a different topic.
Avoid Public shaming, reading the copied text aloud as a warning, treating the followers and the originator identically without asking about circumstances, and pretending nothing happened. Also avoid banning model texts: the problem is the task design, not the resource. Document the conversations so repeat cases follow a consistent route.