Wrting Lab

8/13/2019 Wrting Lab

1/16

...INSIDE......FROM THEEDITOR...

THE RITING LABN E W S L E T T E R

W Volume 21, Number 2 Promoting the exchange of voices and ideas in one-to-one teaching of writing October, 1996

We can be our ownaudience: Using ourrecords to educateourselves

Id like to share with you why I be-lieve we should consider ourselves asthe primary audience for the sessionreports we so diligently generate. As inmany writing centers, much of ourrecord-keeping is done to satisfy oth-ers, particularly university administra-tors who want statistics to justify fund-

ing. And of course faculty often wantto know what is happening in our writ-ing centers either to work with us or tocriticize us. Yet, sometimes we need toremind ourselves about how ourrecords can be used to educate our-selves.

My thinking about this issue hasevolved over the past two and a half years that I have been the assistant di-rector of the City College Writing Cen-ter, most notably influenced by whatthe tutors write on their session re-ports, and by what they told me whenthe issue of copying and sending thesereports to instructors was discussed, ormore accurately, hotly debated. Be-yond recording what happens during asession to cover ourselves, some of the tutors at the writing center began to

Were always glad to hear that you

think the newsletter is a useful publica-tion, and we appreciate your support.But some members of this group areoverly generous in sending in addi-tional checks long before your sub-scriptions run out. Mary Jo Turley, ournewsletter assistant, conscientiouslyadds those additional checks into hercomputer files and changes the expira-tion date appropriately. Thus, some of you now have subscriptions that runinto 1999 and beyond. Since wehavent solved the impending crisis of how to cope with computer programsthat will experience meltdown whenthe year 2000 approaches, wed appre-ciate your checking the expiration dateon your mailing label.

For those of you whose subscriptionsare about to expire, wed appreciateyour checking that label too and prod-ding your business offices to get thecheck to us. Particularly for long-timesubscribers, Mary Jo tries to coax thecomputer not to drop you immediately,but shed greatly appreciate checkssent to her in a timely manner.

Information on how to reach us canbe found in the box on page 2. . . . Thecommercials over now, so settle back and enjoy this months issue.

Muriel Harris, editor

We Can Be Our Own Audience: UsingOur Records to Educate Ourselves

Kim Jackson 1

Assessing Tutorials from the Inside:Interactive Exams

The Most Challenging Situation

The Re-entry Student: On BothSides of the Table

Tutors Columns:

Maureen Morrissey Archer 4

Earl Jagessar 8

Charlene A. Hirschi 9

The Benefits of a Tutor-Mentor Program Barbara Jensen 11

Conference Calendar 12

Writing Center Ethics: DefiningOur Terms Michael A. Pemberton 13

Understanding Human NatureThrough TutoringPamela C. Murphy 15


2/16

The Writing Lab Newsletter

2

The Writing Lab Newsletter , published inten monthly issues from September toJune by the Department of English,

Purdue University, is a publication of theNational Writing Centers Association, anNCTE Assembly, and is a member of theNCTE Information Exchange Agreement.ISSN 1040-3779. All Rights and Titlereserved unless permission is granted byPurdue University. Material will not bereproduced in any form without expresswritten permission.

Editor: Muriel Harris; Asst. to the Editor:Mary Jo Turley, English Dept., PurdueUniversity, 1356 Heavilon, WestLafayette, IN 47907-1356 (317)494-7268.e-mail: [email protected]

[email protected]

Subscriptions : The newsletter has nobilling procedures. Yearly payments of $15 (U.S. $20 in Canada) are requested,and checks must be received four weeksprior to the month of expiration to ensurethat subscribers do not miss an issue.Please make checks payable to PurdueUniversity and send to the editor.Prepayment is requested from businessoffices.

Manuscripts: Recommended length forarticles is ten to fifteen double-spacedtyped pages, three to five pages forreviews, and four pages for the Tutors

Column, though longer and shortermanuscripts are invited. If possible, pleasesend a 3 and 1/4 in. disk with the file,along with the hard copy. Please enclosea self-addressed envelope with returnpostage not pasted to the envelope. Thedeadline for announcements is 45 daysprior to the month of issue (e.g. August 15for October issue).

Please send articles, reviews, announce-ments, comments, queries, and yearlysubscription payments to the editor.

view the reports as a communica-tion space where they could writeabout their work with a studentwriter. For them, it became a natu-raland safeplace to record andreflect on what they were doing andwhy. Indeed, for these tutors, it isno longer a practice done to ac-count for their activities, but a ve-hicle for helping them to developtheir tutoring abilities.

Here is what Rokan recorded onhis session report about a particu-

dicating what the writer and tutor fo-cused on during their time together. Ialso urge the tutors to include anyother information about the writer thatthe tutor feels might be helpful torecord for future reference. Then, thenext time the writer comes to the cen-ter, the tutor, either the same one or an-other, can use the session report to seewhat has been discussed, perhaps re-view certain areas, and even encouragethe writer to reflect on what he or shehas done since the last session. In thisway, tutors can help writers see theprocess of revision in action. I also seeit as another way of encouraging stu-dents to take responsibility for theirwriting and their learning.

A tutor once told me that she viewsthe session report as a way of continu-ing the conversation about writingthat she has had with a student writer.Ideally, the session reports can help usbegin to build a profile of the develop-ing writer and his or her progress overtime. In addition, the information canalso offer us a way to help the studentwriter become more aware of his or herparticular writing processes, and per-haps help that student writer see his or

her development as a writer.

But more importantly, the session re-ports can also become a place for a tu-tor to witness his or her own growth asa tutor. As tutors reflect on their prac-tices in writing these reports, they de-velop a deeper understanding of thevarious processes of writers. They cantest their intuition and speculate onways to facilitate a writers develop-ment. And often, they begin to under-stand their tutoring role inconferencingand how it sometimesshifts or blurs with other roles theymay need to assume to help a studentimprove as a writer.

Here is Michelle writing about hermeeting with Ora, acknowledging thatthis writer needed something otherthan assistance with the psychologypaper she had brought with her:

This was both a fun and interesting

larly difficult and frustrating meetingwith a student:

Our session was slightly problem-atic and slow at first. Two thingsobstructed our cooperation fromthe beginning (I understand itnow). First of all, she probablywanted my direct opinions, not mysuggestions, or asking about her opinions. Second, the subject wasnot familiar to me.

After just talking for 20-25minutes, when both of us hadbecome rather irritated because of the lack of progress, the twofactors above started to diminish. Igained some knowledge of the

subject, and she started to realizethat she had to be more activeherself.

We took an extra half hour beyondour allotted time, but the sessionended fruitfully with a lot of work being done on the paper. Most of the work had to be done ondeveloping the undevelopedpoints. (Many of those undevel-oped points hindered my under-standing in the first place.)

Would Rokan have written the ses-sion report in this way if it was onlyfor the instructor? Possibly, but I dontbelieve so. I think Rokan was writingthis report to make sense of the sessionand to understand why it didnt work initially, and why it eventually did be-come productive. He was reflecting onhis actions and responsesin otherwords, he was using the session reportto educate himself about what he wasdoing and why.

In our tutor education course, whichI teach and the tutors can receive creditfor, we spend time discussing these re-ports: how to do them and what theirpurpose is. I encourage tutors to sum-marize the session in a way that an-other tutor would have an idea of whathappened during the previous meeting.In other words, I emphasize to the tu-tors that they provide an overview in-


3/16

October 1996

3

session. This woman left schoolwhen she was twelve. After 35years she has re-entered school andis AFRAID to write, feeling veryold and lacking much confi-dence. She doesnt think she canwrite, but with the introduction shewrote, I can say she has greatpotential to be a good writer. Ihonestly believe that what shereally needs is confidence which Itried to give her.

I think this session report not onlyreflects how well-developed and sensi-tive Michelles tutoring instincts are,but she is also reporting on her successas a way of reminding herself about

her own competence as a tutor.Michelle demonstrates that she has re-ally come to understand that helpingsomeone with their writing is morethan looking over the words on thepage.

New tutors can also use the sessionreport as a way of interrogating theirown actions, particularly when they aretrying to follow the advice they havebeen provided through the course, theirreadings, and conversations with expe-

rienced tutors. Heres Ashford tryingto explain what happened in a meetingwith a writer named Lee.

Session ended prematurely becausestudent refused to continue. Shehas apparently expected a proof-reader/editor for her paper andtherefore refused to give anexplanation of the extremelyunclear and disorganized materialthat she had written. Even though Irepeated the question of what areyou trying to say here? andwaited patiently for her to respond,she just stared at the paper for along while, then repeated what shehad written. After I explained toher that she needed to explain inher own words her intendedmeaning in order to make connec-tions, she refused to continue sinceI could not get a clear meaning.

Ashfords frustration with Lee is evi-dent, and she probably was also nothappy with the session. Yet, Ashfordneeded to report that frustration to tryand understand why his questioningdidnt elicit the desired responses. As anew tutor, he has to have time to ex-periment with the techniques he haslearnedand learn how to deal withthe resistance he might meet fromsome writers. By recording his experi-ence, Ashford can begin to reflect onwhat he might do differently next timeto make the session more productive.

I mentioned earlier that my thinkingabout the use of the session reports hasevolved as a result of discussions with

the tutors, particularly over the issue of copying and sending these reports toinstructors. We do not send these orany other reports to instructors, but wedo keep a file on each student writerwho visits us. Since I havent had aninstructor who demanded to see astudents file, we havent really devel-oped a policy on this issue. But the is-sue the tutors were very adamant aboutwas whether these session reportsshould be routinely copied and sent toinstructors.

Many of the tutors were quite candidin expressing their discomfort with theidea of the instructor as the main audi-ence. One tutor felt very strongly thatwriting the session report specificallyfor an instructor damaged the tutor-stu-dent relationship. For her, it wouldmean changing the role of the peer tu-tor to that of an informant since she isvery protective of her role of beingthere to help the student. While somethought it might help to create a dia-logue with instructors, others worriedthat the tutors role might be seen astoo aligned with the instructors posi-tion. But the argument that eventuallypersuaded me was that the tutors saidthey wanted the session report as aplace where they could write abouttheir work with a student writer andquestion it (even address questions tome or the director) in safety. Theywanted to maintain that communica-

tion space where they could recordand reflect on what they were doing.

Using the session reports as a com-munication space appeals to me, espe-cially since I want the tutors to see thesession reports as a vehicle for helpingthem to develop their tutoring abilities.To help accomplish this goal, duringthe tutor education class, I require thenew tutors to copy three to five of these reports and write a paper abouttheir tutoring sessions. I ask them toconsider two major questions whenthey look over their session reports:What worked well in a session or a se-ries of sessions with a particular stu-dent? Or in several sessions with dif-

ferent students? and What will you dodifferently next time? My objectivesfor this assignment are both to push thetutor to see the importance of summa-rizing what happened in a session witha student writer, and to help the tutorbegin to reflect on his or her own de-velopment and effectiveness as a tutor.More importantly, I view the assign-ment as a way to push tutors intothinking about what might be impor-tant to record about a session. In otherwords, I want them to see how writing

the session report can help them be-come a better tutor.

One tutor, Claudia, responded to thisassignment about the session reportsby writing about how much is not saidon these reports, often forcing the nexttutor to sometimes read between thelines and silences to get a more com-plete picture of what happened duringthe session. She pointed out, very ac-curately, that what is written on thesereports only reflects a small part of thesession. However, when Claudia re-viewed the reports from several of hersessions, she said she gained a bettersense of what really happened in themutual process of understanding writ-ing. She goes on to note:

By reviewing the reports, I realizedwhat things I should have donedifferently and what were thethings that made some sessions

(cont. on page 10)


4/16


4

Assessing tutorials from the inside:Interactive exams

have on students. Interactive examshave proven to be an effective and af-fective means of evaluating tutorsskills.

Definitions and RationaleAn interactive exam is a method of

observing and assessing a tutors skillsfrom inside the tutorial. To performthis assessment, the writing center di-rector (or a senior tutor) plays the roleof interactor (inter + actor) 1 dressing,acting, and reacting as a student in atutorial. Immediately after the exam,the tutor and interactor discuss whatthey each perceived during the mock tutorial.

I began using this role-playing exam because I felt that observing a tutorialfrom (at least) five feet away was toogreat a distance to understand the twomost important aspects of a tutorial:the development of the students writ-

ing abilities and the affective relation-ship between student and tutor. From adistance of five feet the observer can-not see the students paper; therefore,it is impossible to know whether thetutor is effectively analyzing thestudents writing. Also, when observ-ing from a distance, the observer can-not tap into the mental and emotional

processes of the student. How comfort-able is the student in opening . . . upto understanding or misunderstanding,

judgment or acceptance, approval or disapproval(Murphy 45)? A students

body language can be misleading. Isthe student understanding and agreeingwith the tutors advice? Only the stu-dent knows. Therefore, in order to gainthe students perspective and to better understand the tutors techniques, I hadto become a tutee.

Role-playing has long been valued inthe training of writing tutors, so usingthis technique to evaluate tutor train-ees performance fits well within writ-

Wearing jeans and a casual shirt, Icarried my backpack into the writingcenter. A tutor welcomed me, shook my hand, and asked me to sit down. Iwasnt sure what to do next, so Iwaited for the tutor to guide me. Thetutor (Sheila, I think) asked me what Iwanted to work on. I told her I had towrite a 3-5 page essay about my favor-ite sport. I hadnt started yet because Iwasnt sure what the teacher wanted.Sheila asked me all sorts of questionsabout my topic, and by the time I left, Ihad two pages of notes about biking. I

promised to bring my first draft to her next week.

After leaving the writing center, Iwalked across the hall to another room.I put the backpack on the floor andwrote down all the insights I hadgained during the tutorial. Sheila wasvery friendly and knowledgeable, andmost of her questions helped me ex-

tract details about my memories of bik-ing, but a few times Sheila stronglyrecommended directions for the essaywhich I (acting as the student) disliked

but was too polite to mention. As I waswriting down the last of these insights,Sheila entered the room and handedme the tutorial summary sheet whichwould have been sent to my instructor (had I been a real student). Sheila and Ispent the next twenty minutes discuss-ing her impressions of the tutorial, myreactions as the student, my observa-tions as the evaluator, and her sum-mary of the tutorial.

The previous paragraphs describe anexample of the final (interactive) examI use for our Practicum in the Tutor-ing of Writing course, a three-credittraining course for our peer writing tu-tors. What I have learned during inter-active exams is both surprising anduseful for helping tutors understand theemotional and educational effects they

ing center pedagogy and within train-ees expectations. Our tutor trainingclass often held mock tutorials whichinvolved peer tutors role-playing intriads (see Garrett 96-98): one tutor acted as the student, one as the tutor,and one as the observer-commenta-tor. After a mock tutorial, each triadmember would share his or her insightsabout what happened during the tuto-rial. Interactive exams use a dyad in-stead of triad, collapsing the roles of student and observer-commentator intoone: the interactor. Thus the multitudeof viewpoints from inside and outside (Garrett 98) the tutorial are captured byone person who is experienced in tuto-rial assessment. Trainees are tutors,relatively comfortable roles for themafter many mock tutorials.

Interactive exams are also similar tothe type of role-playing which occursin oral interviews (exams) in a foreign

language course. During an oral inter-view in a French course, for example,the student (the French trainee) con-verses with the instructor, and whileconversing, the instructor must assessthe students comprehension and per-formance. This duality is also presentin interactive exams, because theinteractor must act as a student whileassessing the tutor trainees perfor-mance. Just as Wilga Rivers contendsthat to accurately assess foreign lan-guage skills we must test communica-tive ability in an act of communica-tion (367), so I believe we can bestevaluate tutoring ability in an act of tu-toring.

Before the ExamBoth the tutor trainees and the

interactor need to be prepared beforethe exam. The trainees should have thedetails and the significance of theexam explained to them so they willtreat the interactor as they would a real


5/16

October 1996

5

tutee. For our exams the trainees areresponsible for scheduling an hour (athirty-minute tutorial followed by athirty-minute discussion) with me (cur-rently our only interactor) during examweek. Our trainees take the interactiveexams very seriously because the examis worth 10% of their final grade.

The tutor trainees can also partici-pate in the preparations. For example,instead of the interactor creating justone student persona, the trainees canwrite short descriptions of student per-sonalities and reasons why the studentpersonalities would come to the writ-ing center. Our trainees created suchstudent descriptions as Happy-go-lucky, more interested in socializing,giggly-headed freshman. . . . Needshelp understanding thesis sentence foran English assignment, visibly dis-tressed, somewhat reluctant in discuss-ing writing problems. . . . She wants toknow how to fix [the paper] but isnot very good in communicatingthoughts, and easy-going, averageintelligence, not overly shy or quiet. . .. Needs to generate ideas for a paper;has writers block. Over-creativity(e.g., descriptions of mass murderers)

is kept in check by reminding traineesthey may end up tutoring the studentthey create.

When learning about the exam, ourtrainees have initially responded withrelief: Thank goodness its not athree-hour written exam I need to cramfor. However, as the time nearedwhen they must tutor the writing centerdirector, the trainees often began toworry about it. This fear has proven tobe a healthy impetus for them to re-

view the practicums information. Iknow of trainees who spent manyhours the week before the exam tutor-ing each other and discussing varioustutoring situations so they could beprepared for our exam.

Before the interactive exam, theinteractor needs to prepare both men-tally and physically. The mental prepa-ration is the most difficult, because the

interactor must get in character byassuming the emotions and thoughts of a certain student persona, as well as byunderstanding the writing concerns of that student. During the first set of ex-ams I gave, I selected, ten minutes be-fore each exam, a description from thestack of student persona descriptionsand, if I could, I assumed that person-ality. There is, of course, great flexibil-ity at this stage of the process. For ex-ample, I have used the same studentessay to see the different approachestaken by each tutor (and they were of-ten very different approaches), plus,for one set of trainees, I acted as anESL student. The interactor would dowell to choose personae and writingconcerns to fit the assessment needs of the trainees.

Besides mentally preparing for thisexam, the interactor must also physi-cally prepare by dressing and acting asa student. If the interactor usuallydresses nicely and/or wears a certainstyle of clothing, the interactor canhelp the trainees suspend their disbelief by changing into more student-likegarb. I have worn my glasses insteadof my contacts, donned blue jeans and

tennis shoes, and carried a backpack laden with textbooks. Acting as a stu-dent is as important as dressing likeone. To accomplish this, I fidgetedwhen my student persona was bored orconfused, often forgot to bring pen andpaper (and sometimes my essay), andsometimes chewed gum or drank aCoke. It helped greatly to have thoughtthrough these actions before the exambegan.

During the Exam

The exam begins when the studentpersona (in the body of the interactor)enters the writing center. The traineeshould be ready to greet and tutor mystudent persona as if she were a realstudent. Only one of the thirty-threetrainees I have tested with this examdid not treat it with the necessary seri-ousness (that trainee successfully re-took the exam a few days later).

For the most part, the trainees havequickly been able to think of me as astudent. The following comments arefrom a questionnaire which traineessubmitted anonymously after the inter-active exams. Two of the questions on

the questionnaire are Were you com-fortable? and Did you feel it was re-alistic enough?

Yes, I was very comfortable. . . .I was convinced! It was extremelyrealistic; I forgot it was reallyyou.

I was uncomfortable at the begin-ning, knowing that you wereevaluating me. Trying to anticipatethe scenario made my palmssweatbut after we got started itwent well and my anxiety dissi-pated.

I found the tutoring exam effec-tive. You took on a personae andkept in character well. At first Ithought it was going to be verydifficult tutoring someone who al-ready knew everything. But it wasactually very easy.

I hate to role play, but as the ses-sion went on, I forgot you wereDr. Archer.

Surprisingly, the ability of the traineesto tutor the my student personae hasnot been a problem. Only a few of thetrainees reported that they were neverable to think of me as a student duringthe exam; the others were able to viewme as a student a few minutes into theexam.

One of the most challenging aspectsof interactive exams for the interactor

is the dual thinking required through-out the tutorial. The interactor must beconvincing as a student; he or she mustrespond to the tutors questions andsuggestions in a manner consistentwith the chosen student persona. Si-multaneously, the interactor must beevaluating the tutors skills. What Idiscovered after using this methodthirty-three times is that the studentpersona becomes the dominant (or sur-


6/16


7/16

October 1996

7

dents who may not be able to com-pletely assess a tutorial because theylack a pedagogical understanding of the tutoring process. 4 Interactive ex-ams, however, allow the knowledge-able evaluator to know the students

writing needs, see which writing con-cerns in the students paper are ad-dressed by the tutor, and understandhow the student might react to thetutors techniques.

Assessing the tutorial from the insidecan provide information necessary forfully understanding a tutors skills. Asan interactor I have been startled sev-eral times by how some tutors abilitiesare perceived differently during inter-active exams than during observations.For example, while observing a traineetutoring, I noted she came across asvery friendly and willing to help; how-ever, my impression of her from insidethe tutorial was very different; when Iwas the student she was tutoring, I per-ceived her as being too patronizing anda bit arrogant. A second trainee I ob-served tutoring seemed less friendlyand a little slow at times, but this sametrainee, when viewed through the eyesof my student persona, came across aspleasant and patient, putting me at easeand encouraging me to talk freelyabout my writing. Clearly, interactiveexams can offer valuable (and oftenstartling) insights not available throughother assessment means.

Weaknesses of ExamThe few weaknesses of interactive

exams and of how one uses them canusually be overcome. First, these men-tally-taxing exams require at least onehour from the interactor per trainee. If

this creates an unmanageable schedulefor one interactor (mentally, I can onlyhandle three exams per day), theworkload can be distributed to otherevaluators, such as highly-experiencedtutors. Second, these exams require asmall amount of acting ability; if thewriting center director feels uncom-fortable about such role-playing, an ex-perienced tutor could act the part.

The two weaknesses in ourprograms use of this assessmentmethod are that the exam involves onlyone tutorial from one interactor. Doingat least two exams would assure a bet-ter assessment of the range of eachtrainees talents. The weakness of as-sessing the tutorial from only one per-spective could be corrected by video-taping the interactive exam. Thiswould be ideal in that it would allowthe trainee and the interactor to viewthe tutorial as they discuss it.

ConclusionInteractive exams provide data from

inside the tutorial which other meansof tutorial assessment (such as observ-ing, videotaping, and student evalua-tions) cannot provide. Interactive ex-ams allow the interactor to see thestudents writing, know what the stu-dent is thinking, and understand howthe trainee is affecting the student.These exams can be used as part of atutor practicum and as a means of con-tinual tutor evaluation and education.

Maureen Morrissey Archer Christopher Newport University

Newport News, VA

Notes1 I chose the term interactor be-

cause the connotation of this interac-tive role is not captured by other terms:evaluator and assessor sound tooauthoritarian, observer does not re-flect the active nature of the role-play-ing, and actor describes the outwardactivity well but not the duality of theinner activity.

2

The ten criteria on our evaluationsheet are friendliness, question use,student involvement, assessment of students writing, knowledge of writ-ing, use of handouts/handbooks, pro-fessionalism, opening of tutorial, clos-ing of tutorial, and paperwork.

3 See Muriel Harriss MultiserviceWriting Lab in a Multiversity formore about overly-positive student

evaluations.

4 DePauls Writing Center Confer-ence Diagnostic ( WCCD ) consists of the following steps: Facilitator-Con-sultant Preliminary Meeting, Facilita-tor-Student Meeting, Facilitator-Con-sultant Follow-Up, andConsultant-Student Dialogue. I agreewith Bowden that the WCCD would bean excellent way for all participants toexchange ideas and learn more aboutthe tutoring process; however, as an as-sessment technique, it is more time-consuming, complex, and comment-observation based than interactiveexams.

Works Cited

Bowden, Darsie. Inter-Activism:Strengthening the Writing Confer-ence. Writing Center Journal 15.2(1995): 164-175.

Brannon, Lil. On Becoming a MoreEffective Tutor. Tutoring Writing:

A Sourcebook for Writing Labs. Ed.Muriel Harris. Glenview: Scott,Foresman, 1982.

Garrett, Marvin P. Toward a DelicateBalance: The Importance of RolePlaying and Peer Criticism in Peer-Tutor Training. Tutoring Writing:

A Sourcebook for Writing Labs . Ed.Muriel Harris. Glenview: Scott,Foresman, 1982. 94-100.

Harris, Muriel. A Multi-Service Labin a Multiversity: The Purdue Uni-versity Writing Lab. Writing Cen-ters in Context: Twelve Case Stud-

ies. Eds. Joyce A. Kinkead andJeanette G. Harris. Urbana: NCTE,1993. 1-27.

Murphy, Christina. Freud in the Writ-ing Center: The Psychoanalysis of Tutoring Well. The St. MartinsSourcebook for Writing Tutors.Eds. Christina Murphy and SteveSherwood. New York: St. Martins,1995. 43-47.

Rivers, Wilga M. Teaching Foreign- Language Skills . 2nd ed. Chicago:U of Chicago P, 1981.


8/16


8

was perfect (this would have been atravesty because her paper was farfrom perfect) and relieve myself from the torture, or should I face upto the rigid interrogation and proveto the student that I deserve to be awriting tutor? I chose the latter;what an experience!

During the remainder of the ses-sion which lasted about forty min-utes, I was bombarded with ques-tions and cross-examinations onevery conceivable aspect of herwork that I indicated as needing ad-

justments. I did my best on my partof the explanations and in return Ialso had her explaining to me whyshe wrote or did certain things in thepaper. At first the student was get-ting very frustrated and angry by

having to explain why she had cer-tain structures, but by talking abouther writing and why she repeatedlymade the same errors, she began torealize that she was actually correct-ing the paper for herself and learn-ing in the process.

The session ended and I was re-lieved. Somehow I was hoping thatmaybe the student would interrogateanother tutor in her next appoint-ment: not me please, I didnt de-

serve double jeopardy; I am pro-tected by the Constitution! Littledid I suspect that she went straightto the appointment office and madean appointment specifically to seeme on her next visit.

When we met for the next session,the same student was one of themost respectful and willing studentsthat I ever tutored. I had paid mydues.

Earl Jagessar Peer Tutor

City College of New York

Things were working out just fine forme until one day I had an encounterwith a student who came to the WritingCenter (and I firmly believe this) withthe intention of testing one of thosetutors to see how much he/she reallyknows. Poor me! From the momentthe student sat down, the interrogationhad begun! The first question sheasked was if I was an English majorand how long I had been tutoringwriting. I told the student that I was apsychology major and had been tutor-ing writing for two semesters. The stu-dent then responded by saying thatsince I was a psychology major, then Iwas not qualified to tutor English. Ithen asked the student if she knewwhat qualifications were required forsomeone to tutor writing. The studentreplied that the person must be able to

teach good English and write paperswith only A grades. I realized that thestudent was intent on prolonging thattype of discourse, so I immediatelychanged the focus of discussion andasked her what the purpose of her visitwas. The student replied that she camefor proofreading of her paper.

We started reading her paper (aworld humanities assignment) and Iwas scared as hell to pinpoint theerrors because I was sure (my intu-

ition was on target) that the studentwas going to ask me for comprehen-sive historical details to explain why Ithought that something was wrong.Deep down inside I knew that althoughI was able to figure out why some-thing did not fit, I might not be able toexplain my rationale. I began to think about two options: Should I runthrough her paper and tell her that it

UTORSCOLUMNT The most challengingsituation

Kellogg Institute forthe Training andCertification of Devel-opmental Educators June 27-July 25, 1997

The Kellogg Institute offers an inten-sive four-week residency followed by asupervised practicum completed at theparticipants home campus. For detailsand application information, contactthe Director of the Kellogg Institute,National Center for DevelopmentalEducation, Appalachian State Univer-sity, Boone, NC 28608 (704-262-3057)

Index Update for Volumes 1-21 of the Writing Lab Newsletter is ready.Send $12 for paper or disk copy. If disk, specify Mac or DOS and pre-ferred extension (comma- or tab-separated or BASIC/SYLK/DIF/ WKS/DBF).

Discounted subscriptions to thenewsletter are now available forclasses$12.50/year for ten or moreto the same address, $10/year fortwenty or more.

Call for rates if youre consideringthe purchase of multiple back copiesand/or volumes.

Mary Jo TurleyPhone: 317-494-7268

Fax: 317-494-3780 E-mail: [email protected]

P.S. Our area code changes nextFebruary to 765. (You heard it herefirst!)

From the AssistantEditor. . .


9/16

October 1996

9

The re-entry student: On bothsides of the table

ing as I have talked to other re-entrystudents who have related the samefeelings of insecurity about their firstwriting attempts after returning toschool. One friend, who was a success-ful bank manager for many years, re-turned to school after retirement andreported having panic attacks when shefaced her first one-to-one tutorial con-ference with a peer 45 years her junior.The fear of failure is strong, and thepossibility of face-to-face humiliationis much more threatening than the ano-nymity of simply receiving a gradedpaper back with the professors writtencomments.

At the same time, the traditional stu-dent may have some serious misgiv-ings about tutoring the re-entry stu-dent. When I finally got my essaydown on paper and met with my tutor,the first words out of her mouth were,Ive never tutored an English majorbefore, but her insecure behaviortranslated to: Youre a lot older than Iam. What can I teach you? Well, theanswer isplenty!

Be aware that re-entry students haveserious misgivings about their abilityto succeed in the academic arena. Welook around at all of the quick, youngminds, and our own brains feel like a

soggy sponge. Re-entry is a good wordfor us, because its a lot like comingfrom outer space and splashing downin the middle of the ocean. We areawash in new experiences that can beoverwhelming. We may not know acomma splice from a banana split, or adangling modifier from a trapeze artist.Dont be frightened by our age and ex-perience; you know more about what isexpected at the college level than we

do. Encourage us and boost our confi-dence, but dont hesitate to point outour writing problems. Be aware thatwe are probably inordinately con-cerned with punctuation: commas areused much more sparingly than theywere 30 years ago. Explain what acomma splice is; if the opening para-graph is dull, say so. Show us how touse the MLA Handbook , or introduceus to a grammar handbook. If yourschool has a writing center, tell usabout it and encourage us to use it.These things didnt even exist prior to1970.

Some older students may have prob-lems with the Id rather do it myself syndrome. Dont be put off by this atti-tude. In reality, it is probably just acover-up for some deep-rooted insecu-rities. Proceed just as you would withany other student. Listen to our con-cerns, answer our questions, give usyour honest feedback, and dont be in-timidated. For the most part, however,I think you will find us eager for yoursuggestions and appreciative of anyhelp you can give us. Re-entry studentsare usually highly motivated; returningto school isnt something we have todo, but something we want to do. Mostof us have waited many years for thisopportunity, and once we understand

that the writing tutor is a resource whowill help us achieve our goals, you willfind us to be your loyal and enthusias-tic supporters.

So, did my student tutor help me? Illsay she did! She taught me how to ana-lyze my writing and pointed out someof my pitfalls, such as needless wordslike that and very ; sentence frag-ments; abrupt leaps in ideas without

Picture the following scenario:youve received your assigned tutorialpapers from the professor, read themthrough two or three times, made yourpenciled comments, and now wait forthe moment of truththe student con-ference. As you review the paper foryour first appointment, you look up tosee someone sitting across from you

who is old enough to be your mother .

The fact is, more and more olderpeople are returning to college eachyear: some after a successful careerand others to improve their job oppor-tunities. From my own experience Ihave found that an average class of 45students will usually have two or threere-entry students. The chances that youwill draw one or more to tutor are rap-idly increasing.

How do you tutor re-entry studentsand what do they need from the writingtutor? I have been on both sides of thetable, last year as a re-entry studentwriter and this year as a tutor. There isno question that older students presentsome unique challenges for the tutorand have some unusual needs as a stu-dent.

Before returning to school, I spent 33years in business management posi-tions. I have composed letters to corpo-rate presidents, written sales brochuresand proposals for million dollar con-tracts, and authored a company policymanual. Yet as I approached my firstwriting assignment in English 212, Iwas as nervous as any 18-year-oldfreshman. My anxiety level soaredwhen the professor announced that ourpapers would be read by a student tu-tor. I know I am not alone in this feel-

UTORSCOLUMNT


10/16


10

lead-in sentences; and yes, my punc-tuation errors. As we both relaxed andbecame more comfortable with eachother, the ideas and questions flowedfreely between us. By the time our ap-pointment was over, I was excited toget back to the computer and startmaking the revisions we had talkedabout. With her help, my writing im-proved to the point that I was recom-mended for the student tutor programat the end of the quarter.

After I was accepted as a tutor, theold re-entry anxiety surfaced again,but this time I shrugged it off andplunged right in. I found that theyounger students seemed to take com-

fort from my maturity; my age didntpresent any discernible barriers. I alsohad the opportunity to tutor Carol, a re-entry student, which was a very satis-fying experience. Having sat across thetable myself only a year before, I had apretty good idea of her concerns. Itwasnt just her writing she wanted re-assurance about, it was the whole re-entry experience. The day she handedin her paper, I met her in the hall be-tween classes. She thanked me for myhelp and told me she had been thinking

of me as she put the finishing toucheson her paper the night before. Caroland I have formed a friendship that

National WritingCenters Association

Call for ProposalsSept. 17-20,1997Park City, Utah

All members of the NWCA and other interested parties are invited to the mountain resort community of Park City,Utah, for the NWCAs third conference. Request a proposal form or a registration form from Penny C. Bird, BrighamYoung University, English Department, Box 26280, Provo, Utah 84602-6289. Fax: 801-378-4720; phone: 801-378-5471; e-mail: [email protected] Proposal deadline: March 15, 1997.

very informative narratives about asession while others write very crypticnotes; others reflect on things they didthat either did or did not work, some-times even directly questioning theirmethods on the report; and still otherswill record what the student writerplans to do next. And when tutors needto vent about a session in order to un-derstand what happened or didnt hap-pen, they feel free to do so.

Which brings me back to looking atthe issues concerning session reportsand using them to educate ourselves.Id like to think that our methods areboth a reflection of our philosophy anda response to our situation. I know we

will continue to discuss the session re-port, especially in the preparationcourse required of all new tutors. I alsoknow I like the idea of allowing the tu-tors to discover what needs to be in asession report by doing them and read-ing themand talking about them inclass. Providing tutors with the oppor-tunity to reflect on what they are doingand why is, in my view, the best wayto educate tutors.

Here, we view the CCNY Writing

Center as another educational sitewithin the universityfor both the stu-dents who work here and the studentswho come here to talk about writing. Iview the tutor preparation course as away of educating students to educateothers, and I view the session reportsas part of the educational process forall of the students who make use of thewriting center. Our records can domore than just keep us informed aboutwhat we dothey can help us reflecton how and why we do what we do.

Kim JacksonCity College of New York

New York, NY

more successful than others.Interesting enough, what I foundwas already written in the philoso-phy of our center; however, these

things seem more meaningful tome now than at the beginning of the semester.

While Claudia goes on to detail someof the specific tutoring principles thatshe has come to understand, Im mostdelighted in seeing how she has trans-formed a required record-keeping prac-tice into an important part of her edu-cational growth as a tutor.

When I review these reports, I find awide range of reporting stylesalmostmirroring the variety of tutoring stylesof the various individuals working atour writing center. Some tutors write

We can be our ownaudience

will go beyond our tutoring session, asituation singular to our both being re-entry students.

Can the re-entry student be a suc-cessful writer and benefit from tutor-ing? You bet. Can the re-entry studentbe successful as a tutor? Again, the an-swer is an emphatic yes . Our hair maybe gray, our hearing dim, and ourmovements a little slow, but we stillhave a lot to offer in the academic situ-ation. Accept us as peers, treat us withrespect, and give our writing the samecareful attention you expect for yourown.

Charlene A. HirschiPeer Tutor

Utah State UniversityLogan, UT

(contued from p. 3)


11/16

October 1996

11

The benefits of a tutor-mentor program

Muriel Harris has said that the pro-cess of creating a writing center is likebuilding a violin while playing it(Slate Starter Sheet 2). Anyone whoworks in or closely with a writing cen-ter can see how well this analogy ap-plies. Programs develop and grow outof attempts to meet the changing needsof students and tutors. One such tutorprogram has recently taken shape inour writing center, and its success has

dramatically improved the way tutorsinteract among themselves and withstudents.

Tutorial ClassesOur writing center used to offer just

one three-unit tutorial class each se-mester. The class was and still is de-signed for first-semester tutors and en-tails:

Five hours of tutoring time in thewriting center per week

Attendance at bi-weekly work-

shop classes, two hours each Completion of a 2000-wordresearch paper on a topic relatedto the writing center or tutoring

Reading of the tutorial text forthe class (Leigh Ryans The

Bedford Guide for WritingTutors ), handouts, and articlesrelating to writing and writingcenters

Writing one to three journalentries each week that areconnected to the tutorial text or tothe tutors observations in thewriting center

This first-semester tutorial class is in-tended for first-time tutors, and there-fore does not serve those tutors whowant to return a second or even thirdsemester.

The new tutor-mentor class is de-signed to provide these returning tutorswith challenging materials and assign-

ments. This three-unit class includes: Five hours of tutoring/mentoringin the writing center each week

Attendance at bi-weekly work-shop classes (an extra creditoption)

Meeting with the director weeklyto discuss observations, problems,suggestions for improvements,and progress of the tutors they arementoring

Reading and commenting on journal entries written by newtutors

How the Tutor-Mentor ProgramWorks

Currently, thirteen returning tutorsare enrolled in the tutor-mentor classand serve as mentors in our writingcenter. At the beginning of the semes-ter, each mentor is teamed with one,two, or three new tutors. On scheduledshifts, the mentors supervise the new

tutors, showing them how our filingsystems work, how to use our hand-outs, and how to sign up students to dowriting-related work in the center. Thementors also explain our tutoring prac-tices, strategies, and principles. Mostof these tasks are accomplished withinthe first two weeks of the semester,while activity in the center is fairlyslow.

As activity picks up in the center, newtutors observe mentors during tutoring

sessions until the tutors feel confidentenough to work in the center on theirown, usually after two to three weeks.Thereafter, they continue to work closely with their mentors, whom theygo to when questions arise or when atough paper needs a second reader.

In addition to working with the newtutors, mentors read two of the three

journal entries written by the new tu-

tors for their tutorial projects class. Iread one of these entries myself. Newtutors share their entries with the tuto-rial class and then give them to me. Icheck them off in my gradebook, keepthe one designated for me, and returnthe other entries to the appropriatementors. Mentors comment on the en-tries (giving advice, suggesting strate-gies, proposing solutions, and express-ing sympathy when necessary) and

return them to the tutors. For thiswork, the mentors receive partial classcredit.

Assessment of the ProgramThe tutor-mentor program offers

many benefits. New tutors need an ex-perienced person to rely on in the writ-ing center, especially in the first two orthree weeks. They are helped by thecomments on their journal entries, too.The ready help and written responsesgive them an immediate sense of being

an integral part of the writing center.

New tutors receive more attentionthan the writing center director alonecould ever give them. They receiveprompt help in answering questionsand addressing problems during theirshifts; they receive detailed and abun-dant responses to their journal entries;and they make friends and bond to anextent I would find hard to achieve inone semester.

The mentors, for their part, welcomethe responsibility that comes with theirduties. Teaching someone about ourwriting center reinforces the principlesand procedures of the center. Respond-ing to the journal entries sharpens theircritical thinking skills, and they learnhow to encourage, sympathize, and of-fer suggestions. They are teaching on asmall scale, and I cannot think of anytraining at the junior college level that


12/16


12

would so well prepare them to teach(or lead) on a larger scale some day.Both the experience and the coursealso look good on their resumes andapplications.

This program benefits not only thenew tutors and the mentors but our stu-dents as well. The writing center isnow able to provide better service to800 students, better because it is run bya well-coordinated, enthusiastic, expe-rienced staff.

ConclusionOne of the greatest strengths of the

mentor program is that it gives conti-nuity to the tutoring program and thewriting center. In the past, our tutor

training has had to begin each semesterwith inexperienced tutors. Tutors stillpass through our program on their wayto state colleges and universities, butthe centers infrastructure remains in-tact largely because many tutors con-tinue in the mentor program.

This program also gives the directorgreater control over the centers stan-dards, procedures, and quality of tutor-ing without a great deal of visible gov-ernance. Moreover, because tutors areinteractive, helpful ideas and practicalsuggestions are shared by everyone.Each semester ideas generated by thetutors make for an increasingly effec-tive, efficiently run center, and theseideas, in turn, become part of the pro-gram and are carried forward.

The tutor-mentor program hasbrought greater unity to our writingcenter as well as continuity. The pro-gram has increased our effectivenessand given our training proceduresclearer definition and direction. Notthe least of its benefits is that the men-tors feel more than ever responsible forthe quality of tutoring we provide.Though not permanent staff, they nowrecognize that their effort has perma-nent value.

Looking AheadAlthough the mentor program is

working well, improving it continuesto be our goal. Next semester, mentors not now required to attend trainingclasses will attend at least the firstclass. In this way, mentors and new tu-tors will begin the semester with a

communal spirit, common purpose,and a clear sense of shared objectives.Improvements might be made, too, inhow often the tutors and their mentorsinteract. Currently all mentors and tu-tors on each shift meet briefly once aweek to discuss observations, feelings,suggestions, and problems. However,mentor-tutor teams could meet more

frequently to discuss general concernsand to deal with special needs of indi-vidual students. We have found thatthe more we talk among ourselves, themore responsible we feel and the betterwe perform our duties.

Though we have fashioned a viable,effective writing center, our mentorprogram has given it the flexibility itneeds to remain fully responsive andresponsible to a constantly shifting stu-dent population.

Barbara JensenModesto Junior College

Modesto, CA

Works Cited

Harris, Muriel. SLATE Starter Sheet 2.Urbana: NCTE, 1989.

Ryan, Leigh. The Bedford Guide for Writing Tutors . Boston: BedfordBooks, St. Martins, 1994.

October 4-5: Midwest Writing CentersAssociation, in St. Paul, MNContact: Ginger Young, CentralMissouri State University,Humphreys 120, 320 GoodrichDrive, Warrensburg, MO 64093

Oct. 24-26: Rocky Mountain WritingCenter Association, in Albu-querque, NMContact: Anne Mullin,WritingLab, Campus Box 8010, IdahoState University, Pocatello, ID83209 (208-236-3662).

Nov. 2: Pacific Coast Writing CentersAssociation, in Portland, ORContact:Karen Vaught-Alexander, University of Portland Writing Center, 5000N. Willamette Blvd., Portland,OR 97203-5798. Phone: 503-283-7461; e-mail:[email protected]

Feb. 28: Northern California WritingCenters Association, inHayward, CAContact: Kimberly Pratt,Division of Language Arts,Chabot College, 25555Hesperian Blvd., Hayward, CA94545. Phone: 510-786-6950.

March 1: New England WritingCenters Association, inProvidence, RI

Contact: Meg Carroll, WritingCenter, Rhode Island College,Providence, RI 02908; e-mail:[email protected]

April 18-19: East Central WritingCenters Association, inPittsburgh, PAContact: Margaret Marshall,Dept. of English, Cathedral of Learning, U. of Pittsburgh,Pittsburgh, PA 15260; phone:412-624-6555; e-mail:[email protected]

April 18-20: Southeastern WritingCenter Association, in Augusta,GAContact: Karin Sisk, AugustaCollege, Writing Center, Dept.of Languages, Literature, andCommunications, Augusta,Georgia 30904-2200. Fax: 706-737-1773; phone: 706-737-1402

or 737-1500; e-mail:[email protected]. 17-20: National Writing Centers

Association, in Park City, UTContact: Penny C. Bird, EnglishDept., Brigham Young U., Box26280, Provo, UT 84602-6280.Fax: 801-378-4720; phone: 801-378-5471; e-mail:[email protected]

Calendar for Writing Centers Associations


13/16

October 1996

13

Defining our terms

What exactly are ethics anyway?

As you might expect, this is not aneasy or a simple question to an-swer. Philosophers have been strug-gling to define this concept for thou-sands of years, both in terms of ethicsrelation to larger philosophical systemsand also in terms of the practical con-sequences it has for the governance of human conduct. In a short columnsuch as this one, I know its a forlornhope that I will be able to offer any-thing more than the briefest of over-views of such a rich and complex field,but I believe nonetheless that a reviewof some general principles that runthrough the work of many ethical phi-losophers can enlighten our under-standing of the ways in which ethicshave a strong impact on our work inwriting centers. If we are to act ethi-cally as tutors, we should be aware of the foundation of our ethics, we shouldhave the capacity to articulate the prin-ciples that undergird that foundation,and we should be able to apply thoseprinciples across a wide spectrum of students and contexts. In this monthscolumn, I plan to get us started on apath toward achieving these goals, aplan that begins with a little bit of his-tory and a little bit of philosophy. (Ishould state in advance that the bulk of this column will be devoted to a pre-

sentation of these principles, and thatin next months column I will begin toaddress more specifically how they ap-ply to writing centers. So take a bigdrink of your Mountain Dew or JoltCola now if you need it, and lets getstarted. . . .)

The study of ethics has a long and il-lustrious history, beginningin the

Western canon, at leastwith Plato(Gorgias and Philebus ) and Aristotle( Nicomachean Ethics ), and even theseearly philosophers recognized that eth-icsthe principles that characterizedand determined good actionswerenot easily described in terms of univer-sals. Platos primary interest inGorgias and Philebus was a character-ization of the good, and an explora-tion of whether good was synony-mous with pleasure, whether it wasmore closely related to wisdom, orwhether it was some other abstractquality connected to both but analo-gous to neither. In the Nicomachean

Ethics , Aristotle, too, considered thenature of the good, and though hedid admit that there may, indeed, besome ideal quality of goodness (theSupreme Good) which is equivalentto happiness or the virtuous life,

he nevertheless realized that good-ness is not a concept that is easily de-fined or realized:

We may now return to the Goodwhich is the object of our search,and try to find out what exactly itcan be. For good appears to be onething in one pursuit or art andanother in another: it is different inmedicine from what it is instrategy, and so on with the rest of the arts. What definition of theGood then will hold true in all the

arts? (10-11)

The shared themes in the works of both Plato and Aristotlegood, bad,right, wrong, duty, responsibility,moral behavior, and immoral con-ductcomprise the core topics, thetropes of ethics and ethical philosophy.As Ian McGreal states in Problems of

Ethics :

Specifically, ethics is the attemptto abstract, clarify, and examinethe ideas of good and evil, rightand wrong, duty and obligation.(1)

But how is the good to be deter-mined? How is it to be conceived?How is it to be measured? And how isit to be evaluated? What is the rela-tionship between goodness and con-text? How can this relationship be de-scribed in a meaningful way and usedto construct an ethics for a writing cen-ter (or any other entity for that matter)?

One way to begin answering thisquestion is to consider how differentethical philosophers have tried to solvethe problem of the good and then tosee if any of these systems seems par-ticularly applicable to writing centerpractice. Though many schemes havebeen advanced to taxonomize ethicalsystems, one particularly useful sys-temone which has been used by sev-eral historians of ethics, William Lillieand John Mackenzie among themgroups solutions to The Problem of the Good according to the ethicalstandard they uphold, the highest,most transcendent ethical principle in agiven philosophy of moral conductwhich can be used to adjudicate rela-tive degrees of goodness in any con-text and argue for an appropriate set of

behaviors. Though this classificationsystem is prone to oversimplify themany complexities inherent in system-atic ethical philosophies, it neverthe-less provides a rich starting point tosee some of the significant ways inwhich ethical frameworks clash, con-trast, and overlap. In brief, these stan-dards (according to Lillie andMackenzie) are as follows:

W RITINGCENTER ETHI


14/16


14

The standards of evolution andperfection advance the general prin-ciple that human beings should work toward their own ethical self-realiza-tion. Herbert Spencer ( The Principles

of Ethics ) adopted an evolutionary andteleological view of ethical develop-ment, largely influenced by Darwinswork, saying that life consists of a pro-tracted series of adjustments based onconsequences. We are faced with ethi-cal problems, we try out solutions, we

judge the results of our solutions, andwe adjust our ethics depending onwhether we feel the outcomes werebeneficial or not. In this way, our ethi-cal systems evolve over time, gradu-ally becoming better and better. There

is a kind of natural selection evident inthis process, says Spencerboth forindividuals and for society in gen-eralas the better ethical systems andpreferred consequences will naturallyreplace those systems less able to pro-duce beneficial results. Hegel and T.H.Green ( Prolegomena to Ethics ) be-lieved in the standard of perfection aswell, but their ethical philosophies fo-cused primarily on the quest for spiri-tual perfection. For Hegel, this spiri-tual perfection was to be achieved insocial life through the continual evolu-tionary interplay of thesis, antithesis,and synthesis; for Green, this perfec-tion could be reached by the use of rea-son in the pursuit of the moral ideal.

The final standard in this taxonomicsystem, the standard of value, is insome ways the most problematic of them all. What, exactly, is value andhow does one measure it? This is thesame question which was asked aboutthe concept good, and it seems sub-

ject to the same diversity of interpreta-tion. One distinction that can be made,perhaps, is that value can be assessedeither on the basis of intrinsic worth(which is equivalent to an absolute ordeontological perspective), or it can beassessed on the basis of its extrinsicworth (that is, its usefulness, conse-quences, or teleology). In his Principia

Ethica , G.E. Moore makes a case for

the intrinsic goodness of some thingslike beautiful objects or the plea-sure of human intercourse, and healso attempts to explain how this in-trinsic goodness derives from their be-ing organic wholes greater than the

sum of their parts. Though this is arather vague definition, Moorespointthat there are some actionswhich can be considered good in andof themselvesseems to have merit,even if the criteria by which those ac-tions are measured remain somewhatvague and defined in circular terms. Awell-composed student paper, for in-stance, might appear to embodyMoores sense of the good: an organicwhole whose value as a text is greaterthan the sum of its individual words.

Now that we have a scheme in placefor talking about ethics and providingsome simple definitions and distinc-tions, next month I can consider howsome of these ethical systems mightapply to writing centers.

Michael A. PembertonUniversity of Illinois, Urbana-

Champaign

Works Cited

Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Trans.R.W. Browne. London: Bell &Daldy, 1871.

Lillie, William. An Introduction to Ethics. New York: Barnes andNoble, 1961.

Mackenzie, John S. A Manual of Ethics. London: UniversityTutorial Press, 1964.

McGreal, Ian Philip. Problems of Ethics . Scranton: Chandler, 1970.

Intuition Law Pleasure Evolution Perfection Value

Lillie attributes the standard of intu-ition to the philosophies of Shaftesbury, Hutcheson, and Butler,and it is, in essence, an argument formoral innateness . Human beings are,according to this perspective, bornwith a fundamental, intuitive under-standing of right and wrong, and theycan appeal to this inborn sense to de-termine the proper solutions to ethicalproblems. The standard of intuitionstands in notable contrast to the stan-dard of law, however, which main-

tains that there are certain indisputable,law-like principles, not innate in thehuman psyche but discernible by ob-

jective observers, which can be used toassess the ethical value of a given be-havior. The source of these principlesvaries somewhat from philosopher tophilosopher. Some, like SamuelClarke ( Discourse upon Natural Reli-gion ), look to natural law as the ba-sis for moral standards; others, likeKant ( The Metaphysics of Morals ),turn to the laws of reason and logic asthe ultimate arbiters of morality.

The standard of pleasure, like law,has been interpreted in a variety of ways, from a kind of unrestrained indi-vidualism (egoistic hedonism) to aview that people should always try toachieve the greatest good for thegreatest number (utilitarianism). TheGreek Cyrenaics and the Epicureansbelieved in varying versions of theformer philosophy, while John StuartMill ( Utilitarianism ), Henry Sidgwick ( Methods of Ethics ), and JeremyBentham ( Principles of Morals and

Legislation) argued for different ver-sions of the latter. The central ques-tion for many of these writers was, of course, What is pleasure? and the an-swers they proposed ranged from plea-surable physical sensations to intellec-tual satisfaction to the fulfillment of anabstract goal.

NWCA Press

Carl Glover is the new business man-ager of the NWCA Press and now hasall copies of Writing Center Perspec-tives (the book reviewed by SharonStrand in the September 1996 issue of the Writing Lab Newsletter ). To ordera copy, contact him as follows:

Carl GloverDept. of Rhetoric and WritingMount St. Marys CollegeEmmitsburg, MD 21727


15/16

October 1996

15

mar is just a homework assignment, itdoesnt seem important. If it fixes aproblem the student is having, it is im-portant. Students should see grammaras a logical rhetorical strategy ratherthan a set of rules to be memorized.

Speak to others in their ownlanguage and on their own level.

All that writing we do on student pa-pers is either ignored or misunderstoodby most students. I always read whatthe teacher said to me, so I assumedthat my students did too. If they readmy comments, though, why were thestudents making the same mistakes onthe next paper? I never solved thisproblem, but after becoming a tutor itsall very clear; they never read thosecomments. When I first realized this, Iwas crushed. So did my students learnanything from my analysis of theirwriting? My clients in the writing cen-ter have told me that while some doread their comments, others only look for the grade, or try to interpret theteachers comments but cant makesense of them. These writers prove tome that what my students would havebenefited from instead of (or perhapsin addition to) written comments ontheir papers is a conference. Whichleads me to my next point.

Field-specific jargon confusesmost of us unless it happens tobe our field.

Students need to be taught how totalk about writing. Id guess that overhalf of the students who meet with mein tutoring sessions say that they wanthelp with the flow. Just what exactly

When I decided to begin my gradu-ate work in English after five years of teaching high school, I was awarded afellowship as a tutor in my universityswriting center. I was excited to con-tinue teaching while I was also busystudying because teaching was impor-tant to me, and I didnt want to give itup even for my years in graduateschool. What I was not prepared for,however, is that being a tutor wouldteach me things that I never learnedstanding in front of the classroom. As Ifinish my first year working as a writ-ing center tutor, many of my beliefsabout writing and teaching havechanged. The unique perspectivegained from tutoring students has al-lowed me to look at writing in a newlight. Some of my most important dis-coveries about writing, teaching, andtutoring follow. These discoveries aremore far reaching than just writing andteaching, thoughthey will have animpact on other portions of my life aswell.

Trust comes easiest to a peer.

No matter how much students trust ateacher, they usually feel better talkingwith a peer. During my years teachinghigh school, I served as the director of my schools drama program. In that ca-

pacity I built very strong bonds withmy students. I was one of the teachersmost students felt comfortable with,and they often shared problems andconcerns with me. When I worked withthese students on their writing, though,we werent as successful as I expected.Since I began working in the writingcenter, I started to understand why.Peers are perceived as less threatening

by a student than even the most sup-portive teacher; discussing writingwith a teacher is akin to working withan expert, while discussing it with acolleague can serve as a way to bounceideas around. Even though Im olderthan most of my clients in the writingcenter and have experience as ateacher, because they see me as a peer,they are less afraid of me.

When trying to teach someone anew skill, start with what theyhave instead of with what theyhavent.

Grammar is best understood whentaught through a students text. Gram-mar instruction in many schools is con-strained by a prescribed curriculum, in-dicating chapters in the grammar book that must be taught in a certain order.Teachers usually hate teaching them (Idid) just as much as students hatelearning them, but we do it, thinkingthat were preparing the students forlife after high school. Students cominginto the writing center, however, con-stantly tell me that they never listenedto those torture sessions, and thattheyve learned more in our fifty-minute sessions than they did in highschool. This isnt because they had badteachers, or even that the studentsdidnt pay attention. (One of my ex-students attends this university, andwhile he hasnt come to the center yet,Im sure its not because I taught himeverything he needed to know.) Stu-dents learn grammar when its appliedto their own writing. Transitions makesense not when recited from a list, butwhen used to move from one part of anessay to another, for example. If gram-

Understanding human nature through tutoring


16/16


Muriel Harris, editorDepartment of EnglishPurdue University1356 Heavilon HallWest Lafayette, IN 47907-1356

THE RITING LABN E W S L E T T E RW Non-profit Organization

U.S. PostagePAIDPurdue University

Forward & Address Correction

does this word mean to students? Someunderstand what they mean, but manymore are just echoing the jargontheyve heard from writing teachers. Inorder to carry on a meaningful discus-sion about a students writing, teachersfirst need to talk about how to talk about writing. Terms like flow, coher-ence, theme, organization, analysis,and development are words Englishteachers use with ease, but we shouldnot assume that students understandthem.

Our self-esteem determinesOur self-esteem determinesOur self-esteem determinesOur self-esteem determinesOur self-esteem determinesthe amount of work werethe amount of work werethe amount of work werethe amount of work werethe amount of work werewilling to expend on a project.willing to expend on a project.willing to expend on a project.willing to expend on a project.willing to expend on a project.

Most of all, students need to feelgood about their writing. I dont meanto say we should pass out meaninglesscompliments, but I think we shouldpass them out more frequently. A con-fident writer is eager to revise a paper

so that it becomes better, but a doubt-ing writer just wants to do the assign-ment as quickly and painlessly as pos-sible. As the director of our writingcenter says, Nobody wants to be toldthey have an ugly baby.

While Im not sure what level or inwhat situation Ill end up teachingagain, I know that with my experiencein the writing center as a tutor, Ill be abetter teacher. Working with studentsface to face gives teachers a unique ex-perience into how a writer thinks, andwhat a writer fears. Even more thanthat, though, Ive learned a lot abouthuman nature.

Pamela C. MurphyXavier UniversityCincinnati, OH

A reader asks . . . . .Recently our Writing Center re-

ceived a grant to upgrade and expand

its services. Our reference books,handbooks, workbooks (especially re-lated to ESL materials and writing re-quired in various disciplines), alongwith media packages and computersoftware are particularly skimpy and inneed of updating (early 1980s,mostly). Can anyone send me (or sug-gest) a bibliography of some of themore useful, updated resources for anyof these areas? Also, are there anymodel small college writing centerswhich have experienced similar recentupgrades or grantsor which couldprovide consultants or practical ad-vice?

John SadlonEnglish Department

Georgetown CollegeGeorgetown, KY 40324-1629

[email protected]

Wrting Lab

Documents

Transcript of Wrting Lab