Teachers say the Enem writing correction has changed – 11/07/2023 – Education

Videos are circulating on social media of teachers boasting that, this year, there were changes in the criteria for correcting the Enem essay (National High School Exam).

What is said, in general, is that brokers should be more rigorous with grammatical errors and when demanding the text format, which requires a proposal for intervention to the problem presented by the topic. Some of these influencers are betting that grades will drop.

The body of the MEC (Ministry of Education) responsible for Enem, Inep (National Institute of Educational Studies and Research) denies that there has been any change in criteria and says that correctors will be trained from now on, after the wording has been applied.

The theme of the essay was “Challenges for tackling the invisibility of care work carried out by women in Brazil”. The release of Enem grades is scheduled for January 16th.

The buzz about a possible change in the Enem writing criteria is a consequence of the change, this year, of those responsible for the correction. Since 2017, this operation — which involves the selection and training of brokers — was in charge of FGV (Fundação Getulio Vargas). This year, the person who won the bid to apply and correct the Enem tests was Cebraspe (Brazilian Center for Research and Evaluation, Selection and Promotion of Events), from UnB (University of Brasília).

What gave room to talk about change was the material sent to those who applied in the selection process for writing brokers. There were around 400 pages with a theoretical apparatus on writing, in addition to a distance learning course for all registrants, which took place between August 24th and September 27th. The tests were administered on October 1st, and the list of those selected was published on the 31st.

Writing teachers with popular profiles on social media then made videos saying that the “process was chaotic” and “at the last minute”, leaving brokers in doubt.

The majority said they believe there will be less tolerance for grammatical errors, such as comma errors. If before, brokers accepted two errors without deducting points, now they will only accept one, according to influencers.

They also stated that the conclusion will be required to recap the thesis and propose an intervention for all the problems presented throughout the text. This was already the Enem editorial model, but this year, according to these influencers, the requirements were highlighted for brokers and there will be greater rigor.

Inep said, through its press office, that the material delivered by Cebraspe to would-be brokers “only presents theoretical information about the process of correcting essays.”

The body stated that “there were no changes to the evaluation criteria and that the training of brokers will be carried out after the tests have been administered, in person, based on the rules and guidelines already presented in the Participant’s Handbook”.

“The consolidated material to guide brokers regarding the work to be performed will be delivered and used in face-to-face training. All essay evaluators will participate in face-to-face training in which they will be able to definitively resolve any doubts about the essay evaluation process”, added Inep.

The training given during this year’s Enem writing corrector selection process led professor Adriano Chan to give up this job. A college entrance exam essay editor since 2015 and owner of a writing course, he said he abandoned the selection process because he was “outraged by so many last-minute changes.” “The brokers’ WhatsApp groups show that everyone has doubts.”

Chan said he believes grades could drop, a lot. “We are unlikely to have a 1,000 score this year,” she said. He is betting on a reduction of 80 to 120 points on average per student. “This is already being noticed in the correction of essays from schools that have adjusted to the changes.”

For him, “last-minute changes can increase social injustices.”

“Students with access to teachers who have undergone broker training, who are a privileged minority in prep courses and private schools, will be better prepared than the majority, who are not trained by teachers who participate in this process.”

COURSES TALK ABOUT ‘FINE ADJUSTMENTS’

Consulted by Folha, the writing coordinators of the Anglo, Objective and Poliedro courses do not consider that there has been a significant change in the correction of the writing and speak of fine adjustments, which, according to them, occur every year and are natural. They also criticized influencer teachers who trumpeted changes on social media.

“There is no official information about changes in the assessment”, says Flávia Santana Consolato, coordinator of the Anglo Course correction team. “It is recommended that the student trust the work done throughout the year and rely on official information from Inep, instead of worrying about sensationalist, like-hunting news, so common nowadays.”

Teacher at the Objective writing laboratory, Cida Custódio says that “it is important to stick to the Enem reference matrix”, a document that Inep publishes with the skills that the candidate must demonstrate in writing. “And the matrix, which has been used for many years, has not changed,” she says. “If there is greater or lesser rigor in specific criteria, this will not significantly change the result.”

For her, the Enem correction has become more careful and, this year, the preparatory material from the correctors actually points to greater rigor. “But it sounds to me like a reinforcement, for brokers, of requirements that were already part of the model.”

Gabrielle Cavalin, editorial coordinator at Poliedro, criticized the publication of the brokers’ preparation material. “All of this should be confidential. There are people taking advantage of the fact that they are Enem essay brokers to appear and sell courses.”

According to Cavalin, these videos generated stress in students, who are already experiencing anxiety problems. She emphasizes that the training of brokers only takes place after the test has been administered, including considering the topic of the essay. “Based on the theme, and with the texts already in hand, the correction is aligned. But the student who was trained from the matrix cannot be harmed by these adjustments.”

Coordinator of the Redação Nota 1000 platform, which trains students for the Enem, Julia Ferreira also criticized the dissemination of the brokers’ material. For her, “the only official Inep material that can be taken into consideration”, the Student Handbook, “shows that the structure of the essay still remains the same”.