Negotiating Meaning
"Writing centers are places
where students struggle to connect their public and private lives, and where
they learn that success in the academy depends on uncovering and understanding
tacit differences in value systems and expectations." - Nancy Grimm
As an individual who wants to create a writing program that assists secondary students attending public schools through developing their composition skills with collegiate tutors, it is necessary for me to prepare myself by researching successful tutorial practices. Since writing is a form of communication my goal is to help the writers I work with express what is important, relevant, and plain old interesting to them, while they discover and/or mold their authentic voices. I strive to change some people's negative attitudes towards writing to increase the number of writers who write with a passion and purpose. Collaborative and dialogue-based learning, high-ordered thinking, universally designed techniques, and cultural projects are meaningful ways for the digital natives to develop their writing skills, for their own reasons. After students understand the difference in a writing teacher and writing tutor then the collaborative process between a writer and tutor can commence.
This process is a negotiation between the two in terms of content, expectations, mechanics of writing, and cultural perspectives. In Marilyn Cooper's (1994) article, "Really Useful Knowledge: A Cultural Studies Agenda for Writing Centers," she explains five examples on what the writing center can offer students to enhance writing development; three of which I wish to highlight. For starters writing centers should encourage students to negotiate between the demands of an assignment and their own interests in writing. It is important for the student and tutor to thoroughly grasp the writing assignment, to then determine a point of entry that the writer can elaborate from. Cooper (1994) states sessions should include a critical reading of a syllabus and/or prompt for clarity on the subject positions offered (in the text) to locate untouched spaces which different positions can be constructed.
Once students are aware of the variety of approaches to a single subject they are in a position to incorporate their own interests for the most expansive response to a prompt. The more a student is engaged in a topic the more likely the student is to take intellectual risks with his or her writing, which leads to the next point Cooper (1994) expresses the consideration of hierarchical habits. Even writers who are considered outliers with a unique style of writing find themselves adhering to the hierarchical rules of writing that warrant an internal struggle on conveying one’s thoughts in a natural versus the standard way. When students bring their work to writing tutors it is important students keep their own voice and are not asked to conform to the standard rules of writing if that is not one of their goals.
Speaking from my own tutoring experience, I have encountered writers who wanted to formally compose every text. These students were not interested in exercising their own voice through their writing, nor did they see the benefit in it. (Sigh…) Here I was trying to break students free of the mental chains of banking education, but they were reluctant towards student-centered methods. In these instances the students were oppressing themselves. Paulo Freire would resist the oppressive pedagogy numerous students have been affected by so greatly that they do not recognize that their own thoughts and ideas on any subject matter are nonexistent. Many of my former students were happy regurgitating another person’s viewpoint on a topic, while I was wondering what they thought about the issue in regards to their position in society. (SMH!)
Cooper (1994) quotes Tom Fox in an effort to remind those working in writing centers that “Reflecting on the social and educational inequalities that exist within writing and learning” is essential to the feedback tutors give to writers. Are we imposing a strict American Standard English writing policy on students who possess multiple literacies? As writing tutors we have to consider cultural influences that inform, guide, and shape students’ work and they help they seek to complete the work. To add to the discussion of culture, Muriel Harris (1997) wrote “Cultural Conflicts in the Writing Center: Expectations and Assumptions of ESL Students.” While tutors are attempting to move writers towards playing an active role in their writing development, their classroom experience may teach the exact opposite.
So again the oppressed pedagogy dilemma is manifested by the teachers and perpetuated by students who want tutors to “fix” their papers to a teacher’s standards. Harris (1997) communicates that tutors are merely present to guide students through the writing process to ask questions about and guide students through writing processes in order to keep the student writer in complete power of their writing at all times. Teacher's grade papers, while tutors give suggestions on writing as a whole. The two can be confused; I understand how students sometimes expect tutors to possess the same attitude teachers do after reading a draft.
Furthermore, Harris (1997) cautions writing tutors to be wary about assuming students from other cultures share our perspectives and goals. Do student-writers want to develop their own original writing style? Do they want to take risks? Do writers want to follow the formal, standard rules of writing? Every tutorial session is unique. Every student-writer has goals and expectations in a session whether they can articulate them or not. Taking the assignment, teacher-student expectations, hierarchical standards, and culture into consideration no tutorial session will be the same – even with reoccurring sessions between the same tutor and writer.
Sources:
Cooper, M. M. (1994). Really Useful Knowledge: A Cultural Studies Agenda for Writing Centers. Writing Center Journal, 14(2), 97-111.
Harris, M. (1997). Cultural Conflicts in the Writing Center: Expectations and Assumptions of ESL Students. Writing in Multicultural Settings, 220-233.
As an individual who wants to create a writing program that assists secondary students attending public schools through developing their composition skills with collegiate tutors, it is necessary for me to prepare myself by researching successful tutorial practices. Since writing is a form of communication my goal is to help the writers I work with express what is important, relevant, and plain old interesting to them, while they discover and/or mold their authentic voices. I strive to change some people's negative attitudes towards writing to increase the number of writers who write with a passion and purpose. Collaborative and dialogue-based learning, high-ordered thinking, universally designed techniques, and cultural projects are meaningful ways for the digital natives to develop their writing skills, for their own reasons. After students understand the difference in a writing teacher and writing tutor then the collaborative process between a writer and tutor can commence.
This process is a negotiation between the two in terms of content, expectations, mechanics of writing, and cultural perspectives. In Marilyn Cooper's (1994) article, "Really Useful Knowledge: A Cultural Studies Agenda for Writing Centers," she explains five examples on what the writing center can offer students to enhance writing development; three of which I wish to highlight. For starters writing centers should encourage students to negotiate between the demands of an assignment and their own interests in writing. It is important for the student and tutor to thoroughly grasp the writing assignment, to then determine a point of entry that the writer can elaborate from. Cooper (1994) states sessions should include a critical reading of a syllabus and/or prompt for clarity on the subject positions offered (in the text) to locate untouched spaces which different positions can be constructed.
Once students are aware of the variety of approaches to a single subject they are in a position to incorporate their own interests for the most expansive response to a prompt. The more a student is engaged in a topic the more likely the student is to take intellectual risks with his or her writing, which leads to the next point Cooper (1994) expresses the consideration of hierarchical habits. Even writers who are considered outliers with a unique style of writing find themselves adhering to the hierarchical rules of writing that warrant an internal struggle on conveying one’s thoughts in a natural versus the standard way. When students bring their work to writing tutors it is important students keep their own voice and are not asked to conform to the standard rules of writing if that is not one of their goals.
Speaking from my own tutoring experience, I have encountered writers who wanted to formally compose every text. These students were not interested in exercising their own voice through their writing, nor did they see the benefit in it. (Sigh…) Here I was trying to break students free of the mental chains of banking education, but they were reluctant towards student-centered methods. In these instances the students were oppressing themselves. Paulo Freire would resist the oppressive pedagogy numerous students have been affected by so greatly that they do not recognize that their own thoughts and ideas on any subject matter are nonexistent. Many of my former students were happy regurgitating another person’s viewpoint on a topic, while I was wondering what they thought about the issue in regards to their position in society. (SMH!)
Cooper (1994) quotes Tom Fox in an effort to remind those working in writing centers that “Reflecting on the social and educational inequalities that exist within writing and learning” is essential to the feedback tutors give to writers. Are we imposing a strict American Standard English writing policy on students who possess multiple literacies? As writing tutors we have to consider cultural influences that inform, guide, and shape students’ work and they help they seek to complete the work. To add to the discussion of culture, Muriel Harris (1997) wrote “Cultural Conflicts in the Writing Center: Expectations and Assumptions of ESL Students.” While tutors are attempting to move writers towards playing an active role in their writing development, their classroom experience may teach the exact opposite.
So again the oppressed pedagogy dilemma is manifested by the teachers and perpetuated by students who want tutors to “fix” their papers to a teacher’s standards. Harris (1997) communicates that tutors are merely present to guide students through the writing process to ask questions about and guide students through writing processes in order to keep the student writer in complete power of their writing at all times. Teacher's grade papers, while tutors give suggestions on writing as a whole. The two can be confused; I understand how students sometimes expect tutors to possess the same attitude teachers do after reading a draft.
Furthermore, Harris (1997) cautions writing tutors to be wary about assuming students from other cultures share our perspectives and goals. Do student-writers want to develop their own original writing style? Do they want to take risks? Do writers want to follow the formal, standard rules of writing? Every tutorial session is unique. Every student-writer has goals and expectations in a session whether they can articulate them or not. Taking the assignment, teacher-student expectations, hierarchical standards, and culture into consideration no tutorial session will be the same – even with reoccurring sessions between the same tutor and writer.
Sources:
Cooper, M. M. (1994). Really Useful Knowledge: A Cultural Studies Agenda for Writing Centers. Writing Center Journal, 14(2), 97-111.
Harris, M. (1997). Cultural Conflicts in the Writing Center: Expectations and Assumptions of ESL Students. Writing in Multicultural Settings, 220-233.
Comments