In the Writing Center: Practice Makes Perfect

"Maintaining a stance of collaboration rather than co-authorship in the tutorial is a constant struggle." Muriel Harris

Over the past few weeks I have been observing, working, and writing in the Writing Center at Temple University. As I stated in previous posts, writing centers function to improve one's writing skills and not a single document; however, every tutorial meeting is unique and lines do get blurred by tutors and tutees. I felt revisiting Muriel Harris's (1992) Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups to enlighten my reflection. The sessions I have decided to write about were observed with three major questions in mind:

1. What strategies did the tutor use during the session?
2. How much did the writer participate in the session?
3. What writing techniques were suggested for future application?

Prior to my observations I decided to make an attempt to observe sessions that included at least one tutor whose native language is not English and one tutee whose native language is not English. I was curious about obstacles that could arise due to differences in culture, language, and education. Imagine my delight when I was able to achieve my goal.

"The tutor, then is a hybrid, somewhere between a peer and a teacher, who cannot lean too much one way or the other."

During the first session I observed two females; the tutor is a graduate student whose native language is English. The writer is an undergraduate upperclassmen and non-native speaker of English. This session was the shortest I witnessed, as it ended unsuccessfully. Both parties entered the session optimistically. Once the assignment was understood, the tutor used the questioning technique throughout the session, usually inquiring "why did you do this?" She focused on a number of small errors and did not offer feedback once the student answered her questions. After a number of these kinds of questions the writer became distant and quiet. Harris (1992) communicates that students become frustrated, even angry, when their questions are met with more questions, not answers.  I sensed she felt she was being judged and her writing confidence was diminishing. The tutor thought she was being helpful. The tutee recognized the tutor is not an authority on her writing and wanted to focus on strengthening her argument. The writer explained to the tutor that she interpreted the questions as indirectly revealing she was ignorant to the writing process and needed elementary guidance. The tutor responded in disagreement, yet she offered no alternatives to the issue. The writer then requested to work alone. Harris (1992) reports some, especially inadequately trained, tutors are prone to tackle obvious kinds of surface errors instead of more substantive issues. The student believed she would be better off working solo than with a condescending tutor who steered away from content development. Perhaps this tutor would have accomplished the "support for future writing" goal if she changed her tone, approach, and perspective. It is possible that she would have gotten further with the student. (I was informed by a writing center administrator that, in rare cases such as this one, if the writer and/or tutor decide to advocate for support the problem is immediately addressed in the writer's favor. The center functions to serve new and returning students, who wish to enhance their writing skills, with satisfactory service.)

"Students who see the tutor as a knowledgeable insider want answers from the tutor, and a common problem tutors face is straining against telling students what to do."

During the second session I observed two male English native speakers; the tutor is a graduate student and the writer is a freshmen. The student arrived with a working introductory paragraph and was in desperate need of brainstorming. With an optimistic approach the tutor started asking a series of questions about the writer's assignment. Harris (1992) points out that question-asking and listening are skills that are heavily stressed in manuals for writing tutors. The tutor started off with successfully listening and paraphrasing; however the session shifted to a tutor dominated exchange because the student lacked the direction necessary to complete his paper. Although this was not the way the tutor would have liked to conduct the session, he privately expressed what I witnessed; the student needed direction on how to prepare him to write. At the conclusion of the session the student had been provided with tips on how to: engage with sources, conduct a strong database search and spending more time in the prewriting phase. The tutor advised the student to use a highlighter, pen and post-its upon the close reading of any text to create a running dialogue and minimize time spent finding appropriate evidence for an argument. He expressed outlining on paper to visualize the format of the paper, as well as narrowing search results with specific and broad terms. Although the student wanted to expand his content, the tutor felt it was more important to help the student re-conceptualize his writing goals. I thought it was unusual that the student did not record notes to recall the valuable information the tutor offered. It is likely the student had a misconception of the purpose for writing centers, as I once did. The session ended with a clearer understanding of the next steps the writer needed to take in order to compose a decent paper and in the creation of future essays.

"Tutorial conversation may also deal with the writer's anxiety, poor motivation, cultural confusions, ineffective or dysfunctional composing strategies, lack of knowledge, or inability to follow assignment directions."

Final session was conducted by a female graduate student whose native language is not English; the writer she worked with is a female graduate student and public school teacher whose native language is English. This was the only session where there was an equidistant amount of discussion and questioning between the tutor and writer. The writer had a complete first draft which she wanted the tutor to comment on areas to improve; after the tutor read the draft the main issue was the five different arguments in the introductory paragraph. The tutor encouraged the student to select one of the topics, especially with the amount of time remaining for the paper regarding research and writing.  Harris (1992) states tutors have the ability to find revising solutions for a draft in progress while simultaneously assisting the writer's ability to weigh options. The tutor's subject suggestion was based on the paper's primary focus. Although the student agreed and took extensive notes, she seemed to forget the main point of the paper. Throughout the session the tutor redirected the student to focus on her thesis statement and the single subject she decided to expand on. During the debriefing interview the tutor revealed she was frustrated by this, yet she never expressed this to the writer. The two things the writer walked out of the center with were narrowing her argument and using her sources to support her argument with textual evidence.

Practice makes perfect...
Overall there is much to learn from my writing center observations. The first session was a clear demonstration of how too much emphasis on grammar, especially with non-native speakers, can discourage a writer and cause avoidable frustration. Conferences should encourage students to enhance their writing as well as explain the need to address what could possibly be greater issues a writer needs to tackle in the early stages of the writing process. Harris (1992) reminds her readers that writing tutors to guide students by questioning rather than by telling or explaining. The second session taught me depending on where a writer is in the actual writing process and in their own development that some conferences will naturally be dominated by the more experienced writer. The final session was an authentic demonstration of how writers need additional experiences for a writer to thoroughly explore their thesis and desired content.

Across the board, I found the assigning instructor's prompt was established at the commencement of every writing tutorial session, usually when the tutor asked the writer "What are you working on?" Although this was a part of the framework, it was not necessarily revisited throughout the session. Harris (1992) reports, tutorial negotiation becomes more complex when the teacher's expectations are included in agenda-setting conversation. The more elements added the more complicated tutorial sessions can become. None of the tutors asked the writers what they thought they were doing well in their papers, which is something I would have liked to hear in the first and final sessions. My concluding thoughts are due to the authentic nature of life, every tutorial session will be different - even if the same individuals are paired together. My concern regarding miscommunication due to language was never an issue. There were barriers that occurred in every session noted, because of the expectations and outcomes that did not meet them.

Source:
Harris, M. (1992). Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups. College Composition and Communication, 43 (3), 369-383.