Recruiting Across the Curriculum

Leone Scanlon's article Recruiting and Training Tutors for Cross-Disciplinary Writing Programs http://casebuilder.rhet.ualr.edu/wcrp/publications/wcj/wcj6.2/wcj6.2_scanlon.pdf is an argument for recruiting students from a broader pool of disciplines in order to fill the writing center with diverse tutors to equal the diverse students who utilize the services offered. Her main point is that it is wrong to assume that only English majors offer competent writers. The varied and rich experiences of cross-disciplinary students help the center deal with tutoring across the disciplines. Their specific knowledge can be shared with other tutors and everyone can learn from each other in order to better serve clients. If writing is a concern for all areas of study, then the diversity inside the writing center is evidence of that belief.

Reflection on Practice for tutor training

One of the requirements of an internship in the MSUD writing center is to reflect on tutoring through a shared journal. Reflection is used as a tool to train tutors to become aware of methods, styles, writing process, and the needs of their clients. The article Tutor Training and Reflection on Practice by Jim Bell http://casebuilder.rhet.ualr.edu/wcrp/publications/wcj/wcj21.2/WCJ21.2_Bell.pdf is about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of using reflection to change tutoring methods from tutor-centered to student-centered, to structured participation throughout a semester.

"Reflection on practice is based on the assumption that changes in thinking will lead to changes in behavior" (p.82) which is why it is so popular in fields such as teacher education. His goal, is for writing center tutors to employ the structured participation (or collaborative) method of tutoring as their first choice. What this means is the "tutor structures or manages the conference and the student does most of the writing work. The tutor establishes a framework or outline or skeleton of questions, and the student builds on or fills in or fleshes out the structure" (p 80).

In Bell's writing center, at the University of Northern British Columbia, each tutor begins with ten hours of training including instruction on tutoring methods, phases of the writing process, lower order concerns versus higher order concerns, and administration procedures. Bell encourages tutors to use structured participation (or collaboration) as their method of choice and instructs them to answer leading questions in their journals about the method they employed that day during their conferences. His questions are meant to guide tutors to think about their method of tutoring in comparison to a collaborative method.

After consulting colleagues, and recording the results of tutor training, including reflection-on-practice, in his writing center, Bell found that reflection-on-practice exercises and ten hours of training did not "seem to make major changes in tutoring". Two of the three tutors he used for this article, had identical types of conferences at the end of the semester as they did at the beginning. The third tutor changed her tutoring style from tutor-centered (tutor does most of the talking and writing) to student-centered (student runs the conference, using the tutor as a resource person), but the change was not attributed to the reflection exercises.

Bell speculated that change happens more gradually and tutoring methods can't be taught in a short period of time. Tutors can be influenced and encouraged through training and guided reflection exercises over a two to three semester period. His tutors found the reflection exercises beneficial to the program and all wanted it continue using it. I agree with his conclusion that change is gradual and reflection is a useful tool to gain insight into how one thinks about writing and tutoring.

Training Student Tutors

When students intern in the writing center - they usually come as good students with lots of writing experience, but beginning tutors don't typically have tutoring experience. This is the reason why Evelyn Posey  writes about three methods writing center administrators can implement to engage interns in an ongoing training program. These methods draw tutors in to the operations of the program as a way to train them on the writing process and tutoring techniques.
Her first suggestion is to out the tutors to work running the writing center. When student tutors are involved in marketing, development, and administration of the program they gain on-the-job training. She suggests having a project and task sign up sheet available so tutors can sign up for projects they are interested in working on. The less experienced tutor may sign up for tasks such as marketing the program or updating materials with logistical information, and other clerical duties. These activities might not seem to have much to do with tutor training, but they offer the interns the ability to take ownership of the center and learn about the center's philosophy through reading, writing, editing, and promoting.
Her second suggestion is to use a writing-process worksheet during the tutoring session. The worksheet is a checklist that moves through each stage of the writing process, with prompts for questions to ask the client and space to mark answers, suggestions, etc. This helps familiarize the tutor with the writing process, and acts as a guide for the inexperienced tutor. In her article, the worksheet is designed to be sent into the center by a professor's suggestion, however I think it would be a useful tool without a referral.
The third method Posey suggests is tutor generated writing workshops. In this case, she is suggesting a peer-review type group in which the tutor acts as a guide as well as a participant. I think having workshops with specific subjects like grammar, brainstorming, revising, etc. would be another great way to not only encourage students to visit the writing center, but for tutors to gain experience as experts in the subjects they are most interested in.

This summer, interns in the writing center have taken on marketing projects individually and as a group with Yvonne. Social Media projects are an easy way to get involved in promoting the writing center and learning about writing and tutoring at the same time. A writing-process checklist is something I would definitely implement for future training purposes as well as having more experienced tutors plan and lead writing workshops with the assistance of beginning tutors. I also suggest new tutors bring in their own writing to workshop with other tutors - it provides valuable insight into the student's point-of-view during a tutoring session.

Posey, Evelyn. "An Ongoing Tutor-Training Program." Writing Center Journal 6.2 (1986): 29-35. Found in The Longman Guide to Writing Center Theory and Practice. Barnett R. and Blumner, J.

Teaching Interst in Writing

“Interest for Writing: How Teachers can Make a Difference” by Rebecca L. Lipstein and K. Ann Renninger explores ways of finding out how to teach students how to love writing. Students who are interested in writing are more likely to set goals, use pedagogical strategies and seek feedback. So it’s no surprise that students who are interested in writing become better writers. The goal of this article is to inform students and teachers alike about how to teach interest in writing. Student participation in the construction of assignments can create assignments that leave students feeling confident and motivated to succeed.  The levels of interest are rated one through four based on the students desire to seek out writing on their own. For each level there are specific approaches that incorporate the student’s interest in writing within the pedagogical approach.  While I love the idea of catering an education to the students’ needs I can see how this approach would not be effective in a classroom because teachers are already spread so thin. The best way to help a student is to find out what they need/ want specifically but rewriting the curriculum to suit each individual student may be more than teachers can handle.  Also some students may not fall neatly into one category, perhaps between two categories or switching categories. Over all I think the idea of crafting a curriculum around the student is no doubt the best way to motivate and educate however it is not the most efficient.

Writing for self

“Self Directed Writing, Giving Voice to Student Writers” by Kim Brian Lovejoy illuminates issues teachers have with pushing curriculums and their own love for what they are teaching, “We can reclaim the passion for reading and writing that often gets buried in times when curricular and legislative mandates become the focus of attention in a testing environment”. Lovejoy’s idea for self-directed writing promotes students to communicate effectively while sharing their knowledge. Selfdirecting writing gives students the opportunity to write about something that interests them, gives them a reason to write on a regular basis, encourages both the natural voice of the student as well as encourages students to write with different voices for different purposes, builds community, gives students an idea of the writing process (brainstorming, drafting, editing, revising and publishing. Writing for one’s self appears to be the best way to grapple with issues surrounding writing. The self analysis of one’s own writing as well as placing one’s own writing into a cultural context are the major benefits of allowing students to write for self rather than an assignment. Of course the progress must be monitored by a teacher but if students could see writing as a form of expression and not just a tedious assignment they will become more interested and become better writers.  

Start em young

“Context in Children’s Writing” by Sally Hudson discusses a study that was done in which children discussed the context of their own work.  The children were asked to look at writing they had done at school and at home and judge it on five criteria: ownership, setting, audience, purpose, and genre.  In the study children’s desire to write varied based on if it was something they chose to do or if they were required to do it. Asking children to think critically about their work is a valuable skill that should be tough at a younger age. In addition students can learn more about grammar punctuation and organization by editing their own papers, as opposed to worksheets and tests. Asking children to start thinking about the public nature of writing from a young age will help them develop skills in audience recognition.  While this was just a simple study done on elementary students I can see the benefits of this research in the classroom. If more children we asked to critically think about their work from a young age they would be better prepared for higher education.

Training Tutors in the Writing Center

In his article "Great and no-so-great expectations: Training faculty and student tutors", (https://writinglabnewsletter.org/archives/v25/25.9.pdf)Writing Center director Joseph Zeppetello writes about the effectiveness of shadow/mentoring training of both faculty tutors and student interns. His article also points out the diverse point-of-view and concerns of  interns in comparison to faculty.

Shadow/mentoring training is where a new tutor observes tutoring sessions for a week or two, and encouraged to contribute when they feel ready to tutor. It’s a simple method similar to how I have been trained so far this summer. Along with sitting in on sessions, intern and faculty tutors participate in weekly meetings and keep journals that are submitted for a grade at the end of the semester (for students). We haven’t had this kind of group meeting, but I keep an online journal that is shared with Liz and other interns using Evernote (www.evernote.com ).

The weekly meetings are used as training sessions. They start with a student text to be read together followed by a general discussion which might include questions like: how one might begin the tutoring session, what would your focus be, and what are the main concerns the paper?     

The discussion and answers to the above questions were quite different between student interns and faculty tutors. For example, faculty were most concerned with how to tutor rather than teach, how to connect with the student in such a short time, grammar and spelling, structure of the paper, or as Zeppetello puts it “teacherly concerns”. The intern’s main concerns were more focused on “student concerns” such as understanding the assignment and getting the best grade. They were also more concerned with “getting it right” and whether they would know the right answer or not. In general, interns were concerned with “helping the writer improve the grade”. Open-ended conversations such as this are beneficial to both the intern tutor and the faculty tutor as they consider the implications of approaching tutoring from a fresh perspective.

Impoving writing assessment

Improving The Writing Skills of Social Work Students by Catherine Alter and Carl Adkins explores how Social Work students are falling behind with writing performance, rhetorical skill in narrative writing and rhetorical skills in persuasive writing. The test subjects were graded based on the following: spelling, punctuation, vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and omission.  While I can see the need to grade students based on these criteria, there are also more important criteria that are not being addressed, such as organization, thesis development and audience recognition. Perhaps if some of the Higher Order Concerns were addressed the root of the problem could be addressed more efficiently. While I can see the need to focus on spelling and punctuation I don’t think they are the most important element of writing and likewise they do not accurately depict one’s higher understanding of writing. I feel for the students who are labeled “not proficient” because of this test. Even if their skills were not up to the standard, rating them based on a standardized test is not the most fair or accurate way to assess their skills.

Collaborative learning in the classroom.

Conducting Writing Assignments” By Richard Leahy explores the benefits of allowing students to be included in the creation of assignments. Students are more likely to genuinely participate in assignments they feel a part of. In addition this method allows teachers to be aware of the needs of the student as well as clarifying for students what the most important elements of the assignment. One drawback with this method is the amount of time it takes. Also, cooperation and compromise can be difficult depending on the group.  I found this method particularly interesting because of its connection to collaborative leaving, a key component of The Writing Center.  Our method is not necessarily the most time efficient way to tutor students (fix it workshop is super time efficient) but it is the best way to hold students accountable for their work while teaching them to be self-sufficient.

Wen Fu in the Writing Center

Written in 200 C.E. - Wen Fu by Lu Chi is one of the first Chinese works about the use of language. Chinese for "The Art of Writing", Wen Fu is a collection of prose poems offering practical advice for writers.
Jeffry C. Davis of Wheaton College uses Wen Fu and other heuristic quotations in the writing center -  promoting fresh ideas, inspiring problem solving, and reinforcing "our collaborative approach to peer consulting".
The following are quotations about revising from the translated Wen Fu found in Davis's article.
http://projects.uwc.utexas.edu/praxis/index.html/index.php/praxis/article/view/134/pdf


"Only through writing and then revising
and revising
may one gain the necessary insight."

"Only when revisions are precise
may the building stand
square and plumb."

"Know when the work should be full,
and when it should be
compacted.
Know when to lift your eyes
and when to scrutinize."                

"Through letters, there is no road
too difficult to travel,
no idea too confusing
to be ordered."