Integrated Writing Approach

 If you’re looking for a humorous and enlightening conversation, ask some professors about the writing assignments they receive from students in their courses.  The reactions will amaze you.  When I asked a professor whom I’ve had for two courses, “What are the problems with student writing that most bother you personally?” he sighed deeply, threw up his hands, and exclaimed, “Everything!”  He, then, began to explain the problems in students’ writing concerning content, organization, and mechanics that he faces in all of his courses.  You may be thinking, “Well, if he teaches freshmen, then, that’s understandable,” but this professor does not only teach freshmen; he teaches upperclassmen as well.  Why is student writing so horrendous across the board at the University level?  What is the Writing Lab’s role when helping students, from freshmen to graduate level, with academic writing?  How can the implementation of good writing practices be integrated into every course and department in the University?

During our conversation, the professor explained that our Writing Lab should be doing more to promote our image, what we do, and, especially, what we don’t do.  He suggested coming into more classes and presenting information about the resources that the Writing Lab offers.  He suggested more literature and more advertisements to get the word out that the Writing Lab exists to help all students discover strategies to recognize and address their personal strengths and weaknesses in writing, not proofread or spellcheck papers.  While I think that all of these ideas are valuable and that the role of the Writing Lab should be clearly stated to students, I could not help feeling like a misguided view of the Writing Lab was being presented.  The Writing Lab is not the superhero of writing for the University.  It is not our job to “save the day” and solve all of the problems that students face in their writing.  We are most certainly a large resource (and a good one if I do say so myself) for students to take advantage of, but I believe that the Writing Lab is just one puzzle piece in the big picture.

What universities need is an integrated writing approach.  At the University where I attend, the only support for learning about academic writing that freshmen receive in their coursework is English Composition, and, for many students, this course is not enough.  Why does the Writing Lab have to take on all the responsibility of helping undergraduate writers with their writing after this one semester course?  Shouldn’t partnerships between the Writing Lab and professors be created to promote best practices in writing?  Shouldn’t an emphasis on writing be established throughout each student’s college journey?  In the book, Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom, the author explains that “writing is closely linked with thinking and that in presenting students with significant problems to write about- and in creating an environment that demands their best writing- we can promote their general cognitive and intellectual growth” (Bean xvi).  The key aspect of this quote is about professors creating an environment that demands students’ best writing.  In order to expect college level writing, professors must create an environment that promotes the discovery of writing strategies; they must create an environment where students can address personal strengths and weaknesses in their writing.

Partnership with the Writing Lab and an emphasis on writing and best practices in writing in every course are essential for an integrated writing approach in universities.  The Writing Lab should not be the last resort when a student fails to produce a college level paper.  The Writing Lab should be a resource in partnership with professors as they create environments in their classrooms that promote, not only good writing, but good strategies for writing.  Working together, an integrated writing approach in universities can become a reality.

Bean, John C. Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011. Print.

Reminder: AEQ Winter 2013 Issue deadline approaching!

Hi All,

A friendly that the deadline for Academic Exchange Quarterly's Winter 2013 special section on Writing Center Theory and Practice is approaching! 

Articles may explore issues of theory, practice, and experience in writing center work, including qualitative and empirical studies and discussions of pedagogy. Pieces may be submitted until the end of August. 

For more information, please visit http://rapidintellect.com/AEQweb/center2.htm.

Tutors Asking ALL the Questions

To my dismay, I often find myself asking more questions than my client during consultations.  I have been a writing tutor for over a year now, and yet I’m still the one asking all the questions.  It seems opposite of what it should be right?  Well, before making any assumptions about my credentials as a tutor, let me explain. 

Questions are the root of all answers.  It is impossible to discover the desired solution if we never ask the right questions.  This is a concept that most people can agree on, but how exactly does it play into tutoring?  Questions are essential for understanding the assignment during the introductory phase of a consultation, for working cooperatively with the client during the collaboration phase, and for receiving constructive feedback as the consultation concludes. 

For starters, every consultation begins with questions.  “Have you been to the Writing Center before?”  “What are you working on today?”  “What’s the main thing you want to focus on during this session?”  Questions are an effective way for tutors to initiate conversation with clients during the introductory phase of a consultation.  Asking questions helps tutors to better understand the assignment, and it points the tutor in a direction of focus.  For example, if a student intends to work on the content of their paper, he or she will not appreciate a tutor who is only focused on their grammar.  Asking these introductory questions also allows us to clarify any ground rules with clients, such as what we mean by “editing.”  It’s important to establish these kinds of roles at the beginning of the consultation to ensure that both the client and the tutor are on the same page.  In order for both the tutor and the tutee to be on the same page, the tutor needs to specifically ask the client what he or she want to focus on.  Asking questions not only allows tutors to grasp the task or assignment at hand, but it also leads to collaboration between the tutor and client. 

Collaboration is a way for tutors to engage their clients as the consultation transitions out of the introductory phase and into a deeper focus.  While collaborating, tutors can use questions to evoke critical thinking, while simultaneously providing encouragement and assistance.  When both the tutor and the client partake in asking questions and giving answers, the entire process becomes more of a cooperative effort.   I find that students often know what they want to say, but need help figuring out how to say it.  In situations such as this, it is important for the tutor to ask questions.  “Can you explain what you are trying to say here?”  “What is the main idea you are trying to get across in this sentence?”  “What’s the significance of this point and is there a particular reason you decided to put it here?”  After all, the client is the only person who knows the answer these questions.  Asking open-ended questions allows the tutor to better understand where the client is coming from and what he or she is trying to accomplish within the assignment.  Having a good understanding of the client helps the tutor assist in a more effective manner.   

In addition to asking questions pertaining to the assignment, tutors also benefit from asking for feedback.  As the consultation concludes, the tutor has the opportunity to ask a few final questions.  These final questions are just as important, if not more important than all the others.  “Do you feel like we have adequately covered your main concerns?”  “Is there anything you still don’t understand or any concepts you would like more clarification on?”  “Do you feel like this consultation has been helpful?”  Asking these questions gives the tutor feedback on how they did.  It is a great way for tutors to recognize any topics they may have covered too quickly or incompletely, and it lets the tutor know what to suggest next.  It also shows the tutor any areas or concepts they need to work on explaining more clearly.  For example, if a client says they are still feeling a little confused about when to use articles, this could signal to the tutor that they need to think of another way to try to explain articles more clearly.  This feedback works as constructive criticism, and it allows tutors to better themselves.

Ultimately, clients are the reason tutors are able to make progress and become more advanced.  All in all, the entire tutoring process comes back to simply asking questions.

Meet the author playlist

Andrew Davis from Ole Miss has finished uploading the final two PeerCentered Meet the Author discussions with Laura Greenfield,  Karen Rowan and Harry Denny.  He has also made a spiffy play list for all the discussions that can be found at http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLR3rbubxOG7Uk6_JTseX55ikXtXTx_F6q .

I am hoping to continue on these discussions in the fall.  If you have any author suggestions, you can post them in the comments here.  There is also a fancy poll in the Facebook group.

Processing and Learning Google

College is hard, and no college student will disagree with this statement.  From an early age parents and teachers are preparing each child for the academic and financial demands that college typically entails.  But with all of that preparation is college even made any easier? All college freshman transition into college life through difficult learning experiences, but after a few months, most students seem to adjust to college life fairly well, that is, if they entered college in their late teens or early twenties. 

In the Writing Lab at Cairn University we have a lot of older students come in for sessions; students who did not come directly to college after graduation high school.  From my experience, these students can be recognized by some very distinct traits: they are very talkative, eager to learn, receptive to feedback, a little technologically behind other students, willing to accept correction, and filled with questions.  The combination of these characteristics can sometimes be a little overwhelming in a session because these students will tend to dominate the session with their own verbal processing or detailed questions.  Sometimes, the questions they ask could easily be answered through a simple Google search.  I love their verbal processing and enthusiasm but, at times, it can be a hindrance to the productiveness of a session.  I have begin to question what the purpose of a session should be with these types of students; should I as the consultant show them how to use a Goggle search over helping them with an actual writing concern? Or does it depend on the student?

Richard Leahy, author of What the College Writing Center is and isn’t, writes about the purpose of a session.  He states the following reasons for a session: to collaborate on a single project, explore new strategies, to find encouragement and coaching, to allow processing to happen, and to develop greater writing skills.  According to this description, a student who explains an assignment for the full 30 min is simply using the session for processing.  A session can consist of a variety of different methods, and some sessions will look very different from others.  The central focus should be what the student needs the most, even if that be to simply talk about their assignment and ask how to italicize something in Microsoft word. 

Leahy, Richard. "What The College Writing Center Is--And Isn't." College Teaching 38.2 (1990): 43. Academic Search Premier. Web. 27 Apr. 2013

Becoming Comfortable as a Tutor

Every appointment I have had in the writing center, I become less nervous. This week the writer showed up a few minutes early, so we just got started. She was a freshman in English 1001 and basically just wanted someone else to look over her paper. When I asked her what exactly she wanted to work on, she commented that she knew she was a bad writer and she wanted some help with the flow and the global concerns. I told her not to say she was a bad writer because that wasn’t a good way to think about herself and some people just don’t like to write, but that isn’t always a bad thing. When I read through her paper, I noticed right away that she had most of the technical writing skills down, but her paper jumped all over the place. She had one paragraph almost a page long where she introduced different arguments supporting her thesis, but provided no supporting evidence and jumped ahead to the next topic. We spent some time working to connect some of those with other areas in the paper where she mentioned the same topic. We also worked on ordering the paragraph arguments in order to make her thesis stronger, and organizing the sentences within the paragraph so that it flowed better. I also noticed that she only had two or three sources for her paper and the assignment required seven. We discussed several places she could look for more sources and ways that, now that she had some more specific arguments to support her thesis, she could search for articles on narrower topics. Over all I think it was a very productive session.

Putting Theories into Practice

Recently, I had my first tutoring session with a student who was not a native English speaker. I was somewhat nervous for this session because, even though our class has read several articles and essays about how to approach ESL students, I had never personally experienced it. It was somewhat difficult to really get her involved in the session. I tried to read the paper out loud so that we could both hear how the sentences sounded, but I realized part way through that she was not really listening or paying attention until I asked her a question about a sentence or some phrasing in the paragraph. It may have worked better if I had her read it out loud to me rather than being the one doing the reading. Also, I think I needed to directly tell her to write down some of the things she verbally told me when I asked for some explanation. I spent some time working to get her to clarify her meaning on several sentences, but she didn’t write down anything at first. I think this may have been because I never explicitly told her to do that. I told her that what she said was good and made sense or that she could say that, but I don’t think she understood that she might want to change what she had written to something like what she said. There were other times where we worked on some word choices and grammar, where she still didn’t write things unless I specifically told her to change something. It was somewhat challenging because I got the feeling that she wanted me to make changes for her instead of helping her make the changes and decide how to change the wording.  We were also on a time constraint because halfway through the session she became somewhat restless and was looking to see how much of the paper we had left. When I asked her if she needed to leave at a certain time, she said she’d like to finish as soon as possible. After that I kinda rushed through the paper and ended up giving her more corrections than I would have liked due to time. She tried to have me write things down for her, but I told her I wasn’t allowed to write on her paper. But I still tried to explain why the changes were made. Even though the session ended early, it was really encouraging when she started to catch on and fix some of the grammatical errors without my having to prompt her or feed her the answer.

PeerCentered Meet the Author Archive Now Available

This month's Meet the Author Discussions have been archived thanks to Andrew Davis and Alice Myatt of Ole Miss.  Andrew reports that the discussions will soon be closed captioned, as well.

Meet the Author Discussions (April 2013)

• April 8, 2013: Tell Me How It Reads: Tutoring Deaf and Hearing Students in the Writing Center with Rebecca Day Babcock (Moderator: Clint Gardner)
• April 15, 2013: Researching the Writing Center with Rebecca Day Babcock & Terese Thonus (Moderator: Clint Gardner) 
• April 18, 2013: I Hope to Join the Band with Frankie Condon (Moderator: Clint Gardner) 
• April 22, 2013: The Idea of a Writing Laboratory with author Neal Lerner (Moderator: Clint Gardner)

Our next discussion in the series is April 25, 2013 at  2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT): Writing Centers and the New Racism with editors Karen Rowan and Laura Greenfield (Moderator: Clint Gardner) in the PeerCentered TinyChat room.

Next week on April 29, 2013 we will wrap up the Meet the Author Discussions for the spring with Harry Denny and a discussion of Facing the Center: Toward an Identity Politics of One-to One Mentoring at  2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT).

If you have any suggestions for future PeerCentered Meet the Author Discussions, please post them in the comments below.

WCJ Research and Writing Retreat

This just in:

The incoming editors of WCJ (Michele Eodice, Kerri Jordan, and Steve Price) are excited to announce the first- annual WCJ Research and Writing Retreat, July 31-August 3rd, in Eureka Springs, Arkansas. The retreat will offer a seminar and writing workshop environment for participants working on writing center-related research and scholarship. For more information and an online application form, please visit our (temporary) Writing Center Journal website at http://writingcenterjournal.yolasite.com. 

Meet the Author Discussions

Tomorrow, April 18, 2013, we’ll be discussing I Hope to Join the Band with Frankie Condon at 2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT).
 Next week we have three sessions!  On Monday, April 22, 2013, we’ll be talking with Neal Lerner about his book The Idea of a Writing Laboratory also at 2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT).
 On Tuesday, April 23 again at 2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT), Andrew Rihn will be leading a discussion with Mickey Harris.
 On Thursday, April 25, 2013, we’ll be talking to Karen Rowan and Laura Greenfield about _Writing Centers and the New Racism _ also at 2/1/12/11/19 (E/C/M/PDT/GMT). All discussion are held in the PeerCentered TinyChat space:  https://www.slccswc.org/peercentered/tinychatpc.php Make sure you go to that URL.  We had some folks show up to the SLCC Student Writing Center’s TinyChat space.  They are most definitely not the same room.

Something about trenches, Xbox, and why I have too much to do. Also, a brief look at conversation in writing.

       There are many common difficulties that a writing consultant faces as he or she gains experience working at a writing center. Such commonalities creep their way into conversations among consultants, tales from the trenches that, when told, illicit knowing nods from all the veterans in the room. One such difficulty is that of the student who knows what she’s trying to say, but can’t for the life of her figure out how to say it on paper. It’s a strange concept for those of us who wield the pen like all of the men in my life wield Xbox 360 controllers. If you know what you’re trying to say, why don’t you just write it down? There is probably a very complex answer to this that a psychology major somewhere thought up while brewing an extra-pump soy chai tea latte, but I can give you the abridged version: They don’t just write it down because they don’t realize that they can.

      Those of us who are comfortable with writing (likely due to an awesome high school English teacher and an avid love of reading) see it as what it is, namely, an outlet for what we want to say. We therefore have no trouble translating our thoughts to paper. We are fluent when it comes to the art of the written word. Unfortunately, many of the students that we are trying to help suffered the majority of their pre-college education at the hands of incompetency. They have it in their heads that writing is this big, complicated, headache-inducing THING, and before they even start, they resign themselves to the idea that they are going to struggle with it. Writing is complicated, with rules, structures, formats, and its own college majors. There’s no way that what a student would normally just say to a friend would fly if submitted to a professor on paper, right?

      Our clients have this internal wall built up that somehow separates conversation and writing. So as writing consultants, what do we do to break down this wall? I’m sure many people could weigh in on this with their own ideas. We could start a lively discussion that would be infinitely more productive than anything the comment boards of YouTube have ever experienced. However, all I can do is simply present my own experience with this topic. To break down the wall, I simply show the student that it doesn’t actually exist. I push the paper away, and have her tell me, to my face, what she is trying to say. I then have her write down what she just said.  And 9 times out of 10, she is amazed that what she has just told me is OK to have in her paper. Surely it can’t be that easy?

      Now, let me just stop here to clarify that I am not encouraging grammatical and rhetorical anarchy (I can only imagine the time required of such an undertaking, and quite frankly, I’ve got enough on my plate.) After the student copies down what she just said, often revisions are needed to make it grammatically correct and give it the necessary level of formality. But the point is that this is something that should be done after the ideas are on the paper; worrying about it beforehand is what got the student stuck in the first place. Such details are what make writing scary. However, once the student actually has what she wants to say written down, these details can then be explored, with the consultant leading the way, of course.

P.S. All that I’m implying with my exclusive use of “she” is that I dislike constantly writing out “he or she” because there is no gender neutral singular pronoun. I really think we need to get one of those. I would make one myself, but here I refer you back to my previous comment about already having enough on my plate.

Ramblings of a Writing Tutor: Getting Excited About Writing

Recently, while perusing the shelves of Barnes and Noble, I came across a journal. The journal had a beautiful floral cover with the quote by C.S. Lewis, "You can make anything by writing." As a read the quote, I got goose bumps. I was inspired. Here, in my hands was a blank book filled with endless possibilities. I could write anything I wanted on this journal's pages. The pages of the journal were just waiting to be filled with my thoughts, fears, prayers, hopes, dreams, and ideas. I obviously decided to purchase the journal. It is currently sitting on my desk in my dorm room, waiting patiently for me to finish filling up the pages of my current journal and fill up its pages with anything that I care to.

Every time that I read the quote on its cover, I stop and think about its implications. “You can make anything by writing.”  It is a pretty exciting idea if you really stop and think about it. Writing is not just for the purposes of completing college research papers for a grade; writing is a wonderful form of self-expression. Whether one is writing a personal journal entry, a prayer, a poem, or a college paper; writing is a way for any individual to communicate whatever it is that they are thinking about. When one takes their writing seriously, and intentionally tries to communicate their thoughts and ideas in clear and correct ways, the outcome is a piece of writing that they can be proud of and that can be shared with the broader community: whether it be the broader academic community or a group of close friends.

Recently, while writing a research paper for my Earth Science class, I found myself, for the first time in a while, really enjoying the writing process. I had taken the time to do research on my topic, and I had intentionally planned out what I wanted to say in each paragraph of my paper. As I was writing, I was realizing that I had learned a lot about a topic that I originally had known nothing about. This research paper was a way for me to not only explore a previously mysterious topic, but to process and communicate all that I had learned about it through the process of writing. I gained a new appreciation for the purpose of my assignment and found myself thankful for the late night of writing and revising to meet the assignment deadline.

Now, I do realize that sometimes I get overly enthusiastic about seemingly trivial things. However, I wonder if there is a way to bring this kind of excitement and enthusiasm about writing to students who perhaps have a fear of writing. I wonder, if students were able to in some small way appreciate writing as a form of communicating their thoughts and ideas, their aversion to it would decrease. I am not saying that all student-writers need to pull a Tom Cruise and start jumping up and down on a sofa in all their excitement about writing, but I am saying that there is a lot more to writing than just writing to complete an assignment or to receive a grade. The process of writing opens up a myriad of opportunities for communication, learning, and expression, and as writing tutors, we should probably seek to encourage our student-writers with all that the process of writing can offer them.

Math in the Writing Center? How Two "Incompatable" Disciplines Can Work Together

Currently, the writing center I work at is investigating ways that we can be of better service to each discipline. We are in the process of interviewing faculty from each school within our university - Liberal Arts and Sciences, Bible, Music, Education, Social Work, and Business - about the role of writing in their fields. The idea is to get a better understanding of what each field requires so that we consultants can better help the students involved. One area that most would assume does not use writing is math.

While it's true that most math classes will not require many papers, William L. Morris talks about how his writing center was able to help math students in his article "Math in the Writing Center." Morris had little background in math, but he was able to help a number of freshmen in a difficult math course improve through simple conversation. When the students came into his center, Morris would have them explain the problems they were working on to him in English. This was the key to improving their understanding: having them verbalize the problem helped the students understand the principles behind the equations. In addition, Morris had the opportunity to visit their classroom and work with the students as a group. He showed them how they can work with each other in a classroom setting so that everyone can learn more. Morris states that "The proprietary languages of math, science, art, English, foreign language, and history are useful to people who know the subjects but a mystery to those trying to learn the discipline" (Morris, 1). Basically, he says that jargon is useful to those already familiar with a subject, but but can inhibit the learning of novices. Having students explain their math problems in English in a sense counter-acted the effect jargon had on the students' learning.

Simple conversation is an underestimated tool in the learning process. In Morris' case, it solved many issues that students were having with their math. Ironically, the best teacher was not a math expert but a writer. His ignorance about the subject turned out to be to his advantage because it enabled him to "see how students were attempting to solve [the problem]" (Morris, 1). Morris' article demonstrates a valid way Peer Writing Consultants can help math students: conversation that utilizes many of the same questions and principles as a tutoring session. The method is so effective because everything must be communicated through language; Language is our "only reliable problem solver" (Morris, 1).

The Writing Center becomes a place where these conversations can happen. Most English people are not math people, but every English person can hold a conversation. We know how to be inquisitive, how to ask questions, and, most importantly, how to listen. We can utilize the same techniques to help a math student that we use to help other students write research papers: "where they stumbled,

I asked why; where they skipped steps, I asked them to slow down and explain" (Morris, 1). Truthfully, I was shocked to discover a method so simple for helping math students. Morris claims - indeed, his own experience demonstrates - that there is no need to understand complicated mathematical principles. All we have to be able to do is talk and listen.  

 

 

Morris, William L. “Math in the Writing Center.” Clearing House 80.2 (2006) : 70-73.

            EBSCOhost. Web. 11 Apr. 2013.

International Students, Instructors, and Audience

International students face a particular set of problems when coming to study in America. Beyond the commonly noted language barriers, I have learned this semester that the cultural and rhetorical frameworks of some instructors play a large role in shaping the positive or negative experiences had by these students.  As an optimist, I had never considered that the simplest choice made by a teacher could so drastically affect one of her students. And even more so, I hadn't really considered that unannounced teacher biases would be so visibly detectable to a student from another country. To both these issues, I will relate a couple of anecdotes:

I thought my writing center appointment with Yashvant would be like any other I’d had with a freshman composition student; we’d talk about the rhetorical triangle. We’d cover the basis of writing analytic essays. Maybe we’d go over some grammar concepts—All of this I was expecting and prepared for. Never would I have imagined that we would actually spend our 45 minutes discussing the workings of the American political system.

It turned out that Yashvant wasn't having trouble with the rhetorical analysis portion of his assignment. He knew precisely how to objectively analyze an object, and, for someone who hadn't been in the country for more than a couple of months, he had an amazing command of English. What had brought him to the writing center was his need to understand the context of his objects of analysis. Yashvant was told to choose a campaign as from the 2012 presidential election and analyze it, and therein laid the problem:  He didn't know who Mitt Romney or Barack Obama was. He didn't know the difference between a Republican and a Democrat. He didn't know how American government was set up or how election systems functioned. And these gaps in knowledge made him feel that he couldn't write the paper. And this feeling of inability had taken him over. He told me that he felt he had been set up for failure because he didn't possess the same assumed knowledge that his classmates did. Even though many of them may have not been politics aficionados, they at least had some rudimentary knowledge of the governmental system; and this gave them the edge. In that moment it was clear to both of us: the assignment had been designed for an American student, and Yashvant was just supposed to deal with it.

Now, I do not believe that the professor who gave this assignment knowingly created it so that international students would struggle. But I also do not believe that the professor was thinking too clearly about the rhetorical context in which he/she teaches. I believe that to successfully appeal to the widest range of students, a clear audience analysis is in order. In this case, it seems that no such analysis was present and, unfortunately, it was to the detriment of a very bright, determined young man.

In thinking about the challenges confronted by international students, I must also relate the story of a friend I mentored in the writing center. Anna is a Korean-born graduate student in English literature and a very fine writer. The first time we met, I will never forget the tears that streaked her face as she explained that her grammar had to be flawless. Perfect. No exceptions. She explained that the inherent bias of her professors toward non-native English speakers dictated that her syntactical performance be of the highest standard. This was her only recourse to convincing her profs that she deserved to be here, studying in America. Again, the audience analysis deficit rears its ugly head. Anna’s professors had failed to consider the situation of one of their students and had caused the terrible grief of a fine, talented student.

Now, I know some might think it a strange assertion to recommend to instructors that they think of their students as their audience, but that’s just what they are. To successfully teach a student (or persuade them to follow you in their quest for higher knowledge), identification between the rhetor (teacher) and the audience (students) must take place. If instructors realize this and embrace it, a bright future will certainly lie ahead for all of their students, American and international alike. And specifically in the case of our international students, I hope teachers remember that instructor framework can make all the difference in a student’s reaction to her time in the States. To this I say, “Teachers, remember your audience. Remember your students.  Consider all of them.” If we can keep this mantra in mind, we’ll be able to better appreciate the truly great things our students can do.

 

Discovering a World of Words

    During the course of a session last week, an ELL student asked me what strategies I recommended for improving vocabulary. She wanted to be able to understand and use more words, but didn’t know how to go about it. While I have certainly seen the results of ramshackle vocabularies, I had never been asked that particular question before, so I didn’t have a ready, thoughtful answer for her. I told the student what I personally have done to help my vocabulary (look up unfamiliar words that I encounter and keep a list with their definitions), but was left wondering what other or better strategies are available, what principles should be kept in mind, and how I can help students use more meaningful words.
    In Larry Bate’s “Responsible Vocabulary Word Selection: Turning the Tide of 50-cent Words,”  he begins by discussing the type of vocabulary words that are actually useful to students. In general, high-frequency words of a middling difficulty are much more worthwhile than words that are impressive but obscure. Not only that, but “…research indicates that word knowledge is sequential,” so it is important to fully comprehend very basic words before even attempting to build a versatile vocabulary. (70) Nonetheless, these principles are not usually reflected in standardized vocabulary lists, which Bate’s says appear to have been selected “using a blindfold and a dartboard.” (69) So for the student who is looking to improve their writing and comprehension, a more organic method will likely prove helpful.
    The primary principle to keep in mind is that a word will be easier to learn and implement if there is at least one familiar element to it. At its simplest, this applies to words that have a root, prefix, or other component that the student understands already. But it also applies to words that the student has read or seen frequently, words that can be thematically associated with other words, and for ELL students, words that are akin to words in their native tongue.
    Because of the aid that familiarity gives to learning, the best place to find new vocabulary is not the dictionary, but in students’ individual contexts. What words are their teachers using? What about their peers? What vocabulary is in the books they are reading? If you and they know where to look for helpful acquisitions, the first step is taken care of. The second step is to make those discoveries usable. In “Vocabulary in Action: Strategies for Turning Students Into Wordsmiths,” Amy Hardwick-Ivey suggests a number of strategies for learning and remembering words by building associations. Two of them particularly struck my fancy. First, drawing a picture or illustration of a word can help make that word memorable by giving a non-verbal aid, and can even help someone process what it means. Similarly, creating a short rhyme or poem that uses the word can both help to solidify an understanding of the word and make it easier to recall.
    I may never have a chance to use this information in a session. For that matter, I may never have someone ask me about vocabulary again. Nonetheless, I think that vocabulary is a critical component of writing, and that pointing students towards the world of words that is at their fingertips and helping them know how to understand it better can ultimately foster greater comprehension, better writing, and increased confidence.


Amy R. Hardwick-Ivey. “Vocabulary in Action: Strategies for Turning Students Into Wordsmiths.” The English Journal , Vol. 97, No. 4 (Mar., 2008), pp. 56-61 Published by: National Council of Teachers of English Article. Web. 6 March 2013.

Larry Bates. “Responsible Vocabulary Word Selection: Turning the Tide of 50-cent Words.” The English Journal , Vol. 97, No. 4 (Mar., 2008), pp. 68-76 Published by: National Council of Teachers of English. Web. 6 March 2013.

PeerCentered Discussion of Tell Me How It Reads: Tutoring Deaf and Hearing Students in the Writing Center with Rebecca Day Babcock

To kick off the PeerCentered discussions with authors, we will be talking with Rebecca Day Babcock about her book Tell Me How It Reads:  Tutoring Deaf and Hearing Students in the Writing Center on April 8, 2013 at 2p/1p/12p/11a/19 (EDT/CDT/MDT/PDT/GMT).  While I will be leading the discussion, these sessions really are drive by you, the participants.   You don’t have to have read the book to participate, but I encourage you to do so.  The discussions will be held in PeerCentered’s TinyChat space at https://www.slccswc.org/peercentered/tinychatpc.php.   Please let any peer writing tutors you know about this opportunity.

Here is a blurb about Tell Me How It Reads and Rebecca:

"Deaf students are attending mainstream postsecondary institutions in increasing numbers, raising the stakes for the complicated and multifaceted task of tutoring deaf students at these schools. Common tutoring practices used with hearing students do not necessarily work for deaf people. Rebecca Day Babcock researched and wrote Tell Me How It Reads: Tutoring Deaf and Hearing Students in the Writing Center to supply writing instructors an effective set of methods for teaching Deaf and other students how to be better writers.

 Babcock’s book is based on the resulting study of tutoring writing in the college context with both deaf and hearing students and their tutors. She describes sessions in detail between deaf students, hearing tutors, and the interpreters that help them communicate, using a variety of English or contact signing rather than ASL in the tutorials. These experiences illustrate the key differences between deaf-hearing and hearing-hearing tutorials and suggest ways to modify tutoring and tutor-training practices accordingly. Although this study describes methods for tutoring deaf students, its focus on students who learn differently can apply to teaching writing to learning disabled students, ESL students, and other students with different learning styles. Ultimately, the grounded theory analysis within Tell Me How It Reads provides a complete paradigm for tutoring in all writing centers. Rebecca Day Babcock is Associate Professor of English, the University of Texas of the Permian Basin, Odessa, TX.  (From Gallaudet University Press.)

Writers, Tutors, and the Humanity That Exists Betweeen Them

           What do they need? Did I help? Did I give too much? Tutors often spin out with these questions and doubt themselves because there is much confusion on how to best help students or what qualities make a good tutor. Effective tutors possess empathy for tutees, focus on writers versus papers, model positive behaviors, and foster growth in students.

            In order to sense and understand what students need, tutors must first empathize with their tutees. By doing this, tutors can better understand what state of mind their tutees are in, and this allows assessment of what approach may be most beneficial. On a daily basis, anxiety, lack of confidence, and the complete shutdown of the overwhelmed brain enter our center. There are many reasons students that feel these ways. They may be experiencing problems outside of school. They may believe that they are bad writers because of the red pen culture that is so associated with education. Regardless of the reasons, tutors must first acknowledge these negative emotions and create an environment of comfort, which aids in neutralizing these. This can be as simple as using “I” statements, such as, “I hear you are frustrated,” or “I understand you are tired.” Once students are at ease, they may drop the fight and be more receptive to help.

            Tutors are humans who interact with other humans, not grammar machines who correct papers. So often, tutoring sessions are viewed as tasks to be completed instead of writers to be aided because the paper becomes the focus. Setting an intent to help the writer grow will change what is taught in the session. A worthwhile aspiration is to teach students that mistakes are a part of learning. Using examples such as Thomas Edison or the Wright Brothers, who failed many times before success, frequently conveys this point, leaving students inspired.  Also, tutors should see content before mechanics because what students have to say is far more important than how they say it.

            Tutors must remember that they are modeling behaviors for their students. If tutors are anxious, focus on perfecting mechanics over content, or any of the plethora of negative writing habits that exist, then students are likely to learn these behaviors. Remaining calm and gracefully conducting sessions shows students that writing does not have to be stressful. Listening fully to paragraphs before jumping in with corrections teaches writers to complete their thoughts versus second guessing themselves to the point of paralysis. Students respect and admire educators; therefore, tutors must set good examples.

            Students are writers in the process of growth. Being flexible and willing to make changes is a vital lesson for tutees to learn. The most important misconception that tutors debunk is that writing is a linear process with a clear finish line. Instead, it is a cyclical procedure that visits and revisits steps such as prewriting, drafting, and revising. In sessions where deficits in this process are noticed, tutors can choose to teach students practical methods such as brainstorming, outlining, and allowing the paper to settle before revising. If the true desire of tutors is to help students become better writers, then they will teach them how to do this versus doing it for the tutees.

            Writing is often viewed as an innate talent that people either have or do not have. Because of this, many students believe that they are bad writers when they merely need practice and education. Tutors who empathize with their students, focus on tutees before their work, model positive behaviors, and foster growth in writers are essential to the education community. Tutors are given a precious gift; each day tutors have the opportunity to support students as they learn to navigate the twists and turns that ultimately lead to adventure in this beautiful, fascinating world, known as composition.

Confessions of an Antisocial Peer Tutor

I don’t particularly like people. Which is odd, considering I love my job as a writing consultant. I work with multiple strangers each day, cultivating and applying interpersonal skills with an agility that few other professions require. I can’t stand people, yet I love working with people on their writing. How does that even work?

This past semester, I worked eighteen hours a week at our writing center. However, I only consulted four of those hours and did administrative work the rest of the week. During this time, something happened that I never imagined possible.

I began to dread going to work.

After some introspection, I realized I sincerely missed working with people. Whatever it is that happens in those sessions, that was the reason I loved—and still love—coming to work. That, whatever that is, is why I do what I do. Although I may have a bit of an aversion to people in general (call me an introvert), I need that connection that comes from discussing, dissecting, reincarnating new ideas, old ideas, even emotions, all in that 45 minute session.

So what about peer tutoring makes it such a uniquely humanizing experience? And how can it be so powerful as to overcome the antisocial behavior of one as cynical as I? Sometimes I think grammar and mechanics monopolize our focus, and we lose sight of how extraordinary peer tutoring can be. It is, therefore, my hope that this catalyzes some introspection among my fellow tutors.

I am reminded of one session in particular. For forty tedious minutes, I had been working on grammar with yet another ESL engineering grad student. Abruptly, he asked if we could work on something else. Warily, I agreed. From his backpack, he produced a handwritten paragraph, scrawled on the back of scrap paper. I was expecting more fragmented sentences and absent articles; instead, I was staring at a copy of Robert Frost’s The Road Not Taken. “Could we talk about this?” he asked. A little stunned, I agreed.

At the end of our consultation, my curiosity got the better of me. I hesitantly asked how he had come across the poem. Despite having known me for a total of 45 minutes, he genuinely replied, “My friend showed me. It made us think how different our lives would have been if we’d stayed in China; most of our friends did.”

Just like that, I was reminded that next to me sat not another engineer, or grad student drone, or even ESL student, but a human being. He, like all of us, was simply trying to find meaning in this multifarious phenomenon called life. I think what astounds me the most is these students’ willingness to open up to us—tutors, essentially complete strangers. During these consultations, I don’t feel like a tutor. I feel like a confidant, a peer, sometimes even a friend. Once we remember that there is a human being on the other side of that paper, that those ideas are coming not from somewhere but someone, then the true peer consulting begins.

James Hillman wrote that words are “independent carriers of soul between people” (Re-visioning Psychology). Stop and think about that. Words are independent carriers of soul between people. 

We tutors work with words, more specifically with other people’s words. In a very metaphysical sense, Hillman might argue that, on a day-to-day basis, we work with souls—both others’ and our own—and not words. In every consultation, there is an essence of collaboration. Our ideas (Hillman: our souls) come together with and apart from our client’s ideas. Perhaps this is why consultations give us the opportunity for a human connection that is not normally available to us. While not every consultation is like this, I find that many are.

 Perhaps these transfers of soul and intimate conversations with complete strangers are what make tutoring writing such a unique and fulfilling experience. It has nothing to do with liking people; it has everything to do with connecting to a fellow human being, appreciating where each of us has stood, now stands, and will stand. Tutoring writing is a window through which we can conceive the human condition. And we do all this in a 45 minute session.

WRITING LABS: The Expanded Edition!

            Writing Lab?

Writing: the process of putting one’s thought on a page, or, in an academic context, making content as boring as possible

Lab: a place where people with white coats conduct dangerous experiments

            Seriously, though, what is a writing lab? Stigmatized as a resource for struggling writers, or a as a place where a messy paper is magically put through a grammar machine and comes out perfectly spotless and consequently boring, writing labs are often viewed from a skewed perspective. This skewed perspective can often be negative or limited.

            Yes, writing labs can help struggling writers, but they can also help extremely skilled writers who might mistakenly believe that a writing lab would have nothing to offer them. Yes, writing labs provide help with grammar, but realistically, not all grammar errors can be fixed in the span of 30 minutes. Nor should they all be fixed in 30 minutes, because student writers need time to learn about grammar and become independent of a magical grammar-fixing machine.

            So, a writing lab helps writers of all levels and trains them to be independent and unique. But perhaps writing labs should not stop there, when they have the potential to do so much more.

            In an interview with Elizabeth Threadgill, Murriel Harris—founder of Purdue Writing Center—named a couple of extensions to writing lab goals and functions, including working with not only written communication but also with visual, oral, or other types of communication and  presentation (Threadgill 2010). I know that personally, I have worked with power point, presentations, and perhaps other methods of communication in the writing lab besides strictly writing, a fact that excites me and makes me wonder how far writing labs can go in fostering all types of effective and creative communication. The potential of writing labs does not stop there, however. In the interview, Harris also describes a variety of ways in which writing labs can take advantage of the internet as a tool for supporting and encouraging students in writing (Threadgill 2010). For example, he mentions online conferencing, iChats, and email as possible modes of online tutoring, and he suggests using YouTube videos to provide training for professors in teaching writing (Threadgill 2010). Therefore, writing labs can provide support not only for student writers but also for writing teachers.

            Harris also supports the idea that college writing labs can build into their community by working with high school writing centers and providing tutoring services to the community in general (Threadgill 2010). Harris is not the only one advocating for more connections between college writing labs and high school writing labs. For example, Littleton (2010) names many benefits from connections like this, such as preparing high school students for college writing expectations and assignments, preparing high school Writing Lab Consultants to become college Writing Lab Consultants, preparing college writing labs to receive high school writers, and allowing high school and college writing labs to share ideas and challenges.

            Therefore, writing labs need not be limited to a skewed perspective of their assigned functions, conforming to the image of stiff, white-coated grammar police performing unintelligible experiments on students’ papers until they are as boring as possible. Instead, writing labs should welcome students of all levels, working on every aspect of writing, and extending their influence and services to include an ever-growing range of issues and populations.

Littleton, C. (2006). Creating Connections between Secondary and College Writing Centers. Clearing House, 80(2), 77-78.

Threadgill, E. (2010). Writing Center Work Bridging Boundaries: An Interview with Muriel Harris. Journal Of Developmental Education, 34(2), 20-25.