M. 1

It was a very important differential for the learning of students, as they needed to read the texts before the classes. That method also helped improve the writing skill and the power of synthesis from students. We observed the evolution of the understanding of studied themes, and also the critical writing factor for students along the process.

M. 2

There was definite improvement. And that improvement is exclusively due to the gradual comprehension of the experienced process: in regards to the proposed objectives, to the teacher’s committed stance, to the choice of the materials, to the didactic choice (previous reading and summary, class, correction, and returning of texts), and to the required engagement by students.

M. 3

I noticed a clear improvement in the work from students. Initially, they could not even correctly mention the authors of texts used; they ended up plagiarizing without knowing they were doing it. As the time went by, they started citing the authors, and there was also improvement in the presentation of texts, and in the clarity of ideas. Many of them improved their work a lot.

M. 4

The process of a higher investment and care in the process of written production is visible. Besides that, corrections were mostly incorporated by students, which helped them build better quality summaries.