On Tuesday, I had a student come in to work on a 10-minute English presentation. When we sat down and she began to talk about the assignment, her eyes welled up and she was on the verge of crying. Right then I knew I had to switch up my approach to something very laid back and confident.
We talked about the pressures of giving a presentation, and I gave her some tips on how I, a very shy student, overcame my fear of presentations. After that, we decided to start on the outline. I gave her the pen, but it didn't seem to be going as smooth as I expected, so I told her I would take notes while she went through a mock presentation.
It worked out great. She had notes to go off of in order to make her note cards, and she felt like she had a good understanding of the texts she was working with.
The best part is: I saw her yesterday, and she told me she received an "A".
Friday, April 16, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Observing Nikki
This past Tuesday Nikki and I were lucky enough to both have appointments at opposite times. While observing Nikki I noticed how energetic and friendly she was throughout the session. From the beginning the tutee, a freshman girl, was very quiet and unwilling to truly learn the points Nikki was making. However, Nikki was persistant and I really appreciated the tactics she was taking and being able to witness her tutoring take place. When the tutee walked in, Nikki sat down next to her but positioned her body so that they were face to face. She talked to the tutee as if they had been friends and used strategies that I use during my sessions as well. She makes the tutee read out loud and is very interactive with the paper. When Nikki asks questions, she gives the tutee plenty of time to think and revise on their own. There was one instance when the tutee didn't quite understand what the question was, Nikki casually rephrased the question and then went into further detail about the point she was trying to make. What I really liked about what Nikki did throughout the session was after the tutee had read a couple of sentences, Nikki would ask the tutee about it. This made the lethargic tutee have to participate and actually think about what she was putting into her essay. I thought this was extremely clever and effective for the tutee. Also, after the selected portion is read, Nikki summarizes what they just went over to make sure that the writer is getting across what is intended. Only making the tutee more involved in the session, whether she wanted to be or not. Overall, I thought the session was very successful and though the tutee could have been more willing Nikki handled herself, and the essay, with poise and enthusiasm, like any great tutor would.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Community and Food
The other day as I was walking to my car after yoga with a grumbling tummy, I found myself struck with memories from when I was an undergraduate student at SUNY Albany. I had been a part of the Women’s Studies Teaching Collective during my time there. As part of the Collective, I had the opportunity to aid in the development of an introductory course to feminisms (which we did as a group of 30) and then team teach the course (I taught with 2 other girls and we were overseen by a graduate student). It was a very unique experience not only because the department let undergrads teach other undergrads, but because so much of our time was spent building community. Our main source of community building was a series of monthly pot luck meetings outside of our regularly scheduled class periods. We rotated the location, sometimes meeting in someone’s apartment off campus, other times meeting in someone’s dorm room (this was reserved for those of us who lived in the larger apartment style dorms since the whole group of use with all of our various foods would never fit in a regular suite style room). The locations allowed us to relax and to get a glimpse of someone else’s real life , but I feel it was the food that really bonded us.
When we prepare food for others, we open up ourselves and offer a piece of us alongside a morsel. It is a gift of our time, our energy, and our affection. The dishes that appear at pot lucks can also tell a lot about the bringer/preparer. We tend to bring comfort foods, foods we are proud of, foods that remind us of our families and traditions. Even people who are too busy to make food, but who bring crackers and cheese or chips and dip expose a part of themselves – that they are busy and that these are the types of foods they gravitate towards, perhaps even as a comfort.
I can think of other instances as well that support a linkage between food and community. When my ex was working on Casey Farm, we would attend periodic pot lucks where all the local farmers, their families, and pets would bring veggies fresh from the pasture, meats that had grazed in their fields, oysters taken right out of the bay, and seasonal berries fresh picked only hours ago. There was the common element of the love of the Earth and the love of fresh foods, but it was the presenting of that food and the sharing of the meal that made conversation, music, and tomato tossing possible. And now, as a single lady looking to establish my own community in a state that is still very foreign to me, I’ve found a book club that comes complete with pot luck brunches once a month.
You may be asking by this point what the connection of food and community has to do with the Writing Center. Ideally, I would like to offer up the suggestion of a pot luck send off, a celebration of the time we have spent together and an offering of ourselves to the community we strive on a daily basis to shape and form. With such little time left and the chaos that the end of the semester brings, I’m not sure that it is even feasible to strive for such an event, so perhaps it is more of a suggestion for future orientations, as the community continues to grow and change, food can provide the catalyst to new conversations and opportunities.
But, as this idea has stewed, I also wanted to connect food and community to writing. In “Consuming Prose: The Delectable Rhetoric of Food Writing,” Lynn Bloom quotes food historian Massimo Montanari discussing food as a type of discourse:
"“Just as in verbal sentences, one or more protagonists,” the principal
foods, whether meat or grain dishes (equivalent to nouns), “are in the
center of the action,” accompanied—in their syntactic place—by appetizers,
side dishes, desserts.Condiments serve as the meal’s adjectives and adverbs.
“Food acquires full expressive capacity,” concludes Montanari, “thanks to the
rhetoric that in every language is its necessary complement. Rhetoric is the
adaptation of speech to the argument,to the effects one wants to arouse or
create. If the discourse is food, that means the way it is prepared, served,
and eaten”. "(Bloom 347)
So perhaps in preparing a dish for a pot luck, one is intrinsically creating a story about themselves. It may be an introduction of the self to a new community or it may be a reinforcement of who the individual is – especially when calling upon grandma’s famous apple pie recipe or traditional hot tamales!
You can take this as food for thought or let it marinate a bit as I did to come to a better grasp of what the presentation of food can mean for the presentation of self and the building of community. After all, when we define community as a group of people with some common interest or aspect, what greater commonality do we have than the need for food?
When we prepare food for others, we open up ourselves and offer a piece of us alongside a morsel. It is a gift of our time, our energy, and our affection. The dishes that appear at pot lucks can also tell a lot about the bringer/preparer. We tend to bring comfort foods, foods we are proud of, foods that remind us of our families and traditions. Even people who are too busy to make food, but who bring crackers and cheese or chips and dip expose a part of themselves – that they are busy and that these are the types of foods they gravitate towards, perhaps even as a comfort.
I can think of other instances as well that support a linkage between food and community. When my ex was working on Casey Farm, we would attend periodic pot lucks where all the local farmers, their families, and pets would bring veggies fresh from the pasture, meats that had grazed in their fields, oysters taken right out of the bay, and seasonal berries fresh picked only hours ago. There was the common element of the love of the Earth and the love of fresh foods, but it was the presenting of that food and the sharing of the meal that made conversation, music, and tomato tossing possible. And now, as a single lady looking to establish my own community in a state that is still very foreign to me, I’ve found a book club that comes complete with pot luck brunches once a month.
You may be asking by this point what the connection of food and community has to do with the Writing Center. Ideally, I would like to offer up the suggestion of a pot luck send off, a celebration of the time we have spent together and an offering of ourselves to the community we strive on a daily basis to shape and form. With such little time left and the chaos that the end of the semester brings, I’m not sure that it is even feasible to strive for such an event, so perhaps it is more of a suggestion for future orientations, as the community continues to grow and change, food can provide the catalyst to new conversations and opportunities.
But, as this idea has stewed, I also wanted to connect food and community to writing. In “Consuming Prose: The Delectable Rhetoric of Food Writing,” Lynn Bloom quotes food historian Massimo Montanari discussing food as a type of discourse:
"“Just as in verbal sentences, one or more protagonists,” the principal
foods, whether meat or grain dishes (equivalent to nouns), “are in the
center of the action,” accompanied—in their syntactic place—by appetizers,
side dishes, desserts.Condiments serve as the meal’s adjectives and adverbs.
“Food acquires full expressive capacity,” concludes Montanari, “thanks to the
rhetoric that in every language is its necessary complement. Rhetoric is the
adaptation of speech to the argument,to the effects one wants to arouse or
create. If the discourse is food, that means the way it is prepared, served,
and eaten”. "(Bloom 347)
So perhaps in preparing a dish for a pot luck, one is intrinsically creating a story about themselves. It may be an introduction of the self to a new community or it may be a reinforcement of who the individual is – especially when calling upon grandma’s famous apple pie recipe or traditional hot tamales!
You can take this as food for thought or let it marinate a bit as I did to come to a better grasp of what the presentation of food can mean for the presentation of self and the building of community. After all, when we define community as a group of people with some common interest or aspect, what greater commonality do we have than the need for food?
Thursday, April 8, 2010
(Re)envisioning Community: A Metanarrative
First, I would like to thank Stephen for not only providing an entry point into what could be a vibrant thread of conversation on this blog, but also for providing me, personally, a reason to refocus my energy towards this blog. While Stephen, in many ways, returned our attentions to a theme we have discussed often throughout this semester, I find it important to share my interpretation of the conversation that followed his entry, and some of the thoughts I have long mulled on but have yet put out for many of you to hear.
A recap of today's discussion: Today we discussed this blog: just one place where we enact our (micro?)community. We spoke of a "community of practice," a concept when have discussed at other times throughout the semester. After leaving the discussion, I felt (1) Invested in composing an entry (in the near-term) to this area where writing/community/reflective activity occurs (2) There was something odd about the seeming disconnection between our initial conversations of community, and those that followed regarding revision, editing, and proofreading. For example, we talked about how our perceptions of these concepts can differ from other constituencies (e.g. students and instructors) who are also (more and less active) members of the larger community in which we are situated. Moreover, Professor Dyehouse shared an opportunity to partake in a collaborative writing project with a member who is outside of our more immediate, university based, constituencies (e.g. peer tutors; writing center administrators; tuttees; faculty; AEC staff, etc.). I am beginning to wonder, then, what are the many ways "our" community comes together? Who do "we" (and, not) count as members of that community? And, what are our rationales for doing so? In other words, I am seeing our conversations about "revision" as directly interrelated with our conversations on community.
A recent thought: Almost three weeks ago, I attended a panel discussion at CCCC where Professor Hensley Owens discussed the some of the challenges of being a mother/academic. One point in particular has resonated with me since that time. She shared a story of presenting at another conference, with her newborn child in one of those shoulder carriers do-hickeys. In doing so, she provided a reflective look into her life as someone who inhabits (at least) two subjectivities (mother/academic). However, what I took as the more powerful aspects were that (1) she shared her vulnerabilities (the difficulties and complications of giving a presentation at an academic with a child attached to her hip literally), and said that while people sometimes think she makes "it look easy," occupying such a hybrid-role is nevertheless very taxing and very rewarding at times. (2) she shared so much with a large crowd, maybe of people she barely knew, but yet that she considered a community that she was nevertheless invested in.
A return to our discussion: Many of you, today, questioned what is community? You asked how do we define, and gauge what "good" or "valuable" communities are? You asked how do we perceive our roles for self and other in these communities in different ways? You shared. And, demonstrated that while we many of us hold different perspectives. we nevertheless seem to relate in amiable and happy ways. I know that I enjoy our time at 12 on Wednesdays: smiling faces, people who identify with some of the things I care about in life, people who are willing to consider, and reconsider, and than consider again a multitude of topics that are more and less "directly" linked to writing, and our roles as writing facilitators.
A thought on community: Community in the center, to me, is when I come in and say hi to the receptionist (I know all of their names, those that work during my time period). It is talking with them, getting to know a little bit about them-what they want to share, and what I want to share with them.
Another thought on community: Community in the center, to me, is knowing the faces of the regulars, and saying hi to them when they come in for a session, even when its not you.
Community etc: But the community I value most, perhaps, in the center are those moments when I am talking with others in actual physical space, in the fleeting moments where we are at some place together. Moments like when Cathryn asks if I want a cup of tea, and makes it for me; or, when, any of us are having a bad, horrible, no good day and we pause for a moment, and rally to help support one another by listening, exchanging strategies/tactics, and just showing that we a humans who care for one another. It is the moments when we realize that it is not just the material and economic products that matter in our work, but also ethical quality (in terms of how we form subjectivity not morals here) of how we approach such a process.
A recap of today's discussion: Today we discussed this blog: just one place where we enact our (micro?)community. We spoke of a "community of practice," a concept when have discussed at other times throughout the semester. After leaving the discussion, I felt (1) Invested in composing an entry (in the near-term) to this area where writing/community/reflective activity occurs (2) There was something odd about the seeming disconnection between our initial conversations of community, and those that followed regarding revision, editing, and proofreading. For example, we talked about how our perceptions of these concepts can differ from other constituencies (e.g. students and instructors) who are also (more and less active) members of the larger community in which we are situated. Moreover, Professor Dyehouse shared an opportunity to partake in a collaborative writing project with a member who is outside of our more immediate, university based, constituencies (e.g. peer tutors; writing center administrators; tuttees; faculty; AEC staff, etc.). I am beginning to wonder, then, what are the many ways "our" community comes together? Who do "we" (and, not) count as members of that community? And, what are our rationales for doing so? In other words, I am seeing our conversations about "revision" as directly interrelated with our conversations on community.
A recent thought: Almost three weeks ago, I attended a panel discussion at CCCC where Professor Hensley Owens discussed the some of the challenges of being a mother/academic. One point in particular has resonated with me since that time. She shared a story of presenting at another conference, with her newborn child in one of those shoulder carriers do-hickeys. In doing so, she provided a reflective look into her life as someone who inhabits (at least) two subjectivities (mother/academic). However, what I took as the more powerful aspects were that (1) she shared her vulnerabilities (the difficulties and complications of giving a presentation at an academic with a child attached to her hip literally), and said that while people sometimes think she makes "it look easy," occupying such a hybrid-role is nevertheless very taxing and very rewarding at times. (2) she shared so much with a large crowd, maybe of people she barely knew, but yet that she considered a community that she was nevertheless invested in.
A return to our discussion: Many of you, today, questioned what is community? You asked how do we define, and gauge what "good" or "valuable" communities are? You asked how do we perceive our roles for self and other in these communities in different ways? You shared. And, demonstrated that while we many of us hold different perspectives. we nevertheless seem to relate in amiable and happy ways. I know that I enjoy our time at 12 on Wednesdays: smiling faces, people who identify with some of the things I care about in life, people who are willing to consider, and reconsider, and than consider again a multitude of topics that are more and less "directly" linked to writing, and our roles as writing facilitators.
A thought on community: Community in the center, to me, is when I come in and say hi to the receptionist (I know all of their names, those that work during my time period). It is talking with them, getting to know a little bit about them-what they want to share, and what I want to share with them.
Another thought on community: Community in the center, to me, is knowing the faces of the regulars, and saying hi to them when they come in for a session, even when its not you.
Community etc: But the community I value most, perhaps, in the center are those moments when I am talking with others in actual physical space, in the fleeting moments where we are at some place together. Moments like when Cathryn asks if I want a cup of tea, and makes it for me; or, when, any of us are having a bad, horrible, no good day and we pause for a moment, and rally to help support one another by listening, exchanging strategies/tactics, and just showing that we a humans who care for one another. It is the moments when we realize that it is not just the material and economic products that matter in our work, but also ethical quality (in terms of how we form subjectivity not morals here) of how we approach such a process.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
The Writing Center Staff as a Community: Conceptual Limits
As a professional community with a common objective the WC staff functions very well. Our weekly meetings—however focused or unfocused they may seem—contribute greatly to each staff members’ ability to function as an effective tutor; facilitating each individual’s negotiation of his or her role within and relationship to the community. I would go so far as to say that even when we convene without a particular objective in mind, merely gathering, seeing each other, and listening to each others' ideas and anecdotes is a useful and beneficial routine.
Regarding the limitations one might discern when considering the WC staff as a communal entity, I believe these to be consistent with those of any other community. Individuals differ in their opinions, understandings, practices, and attitudes, but these differences are, ironically, essential in terms of a community’s health and ability to thrive. It is only when unwillingness on the part of community members to articulate their apprehensions or listen to those of others emerges that a community breaks down. When factions begin to form they inevitably do so with progressively isolationist momentum and the result is often disregard for concerns over what might be accomplished and how, in deference to what is problematic and why. Answers for the latter of these concerns is, of course, ready-made.
In order to conceive of the WC staff as a community I believe it is important for individuals to recognize themselves as such—in possession of unique attributes and goals that distinguish them from others—but perhaps more importantly, to remain mindful of others’ individuality, and to bear in mind that we needn’t be unanimous in our opinions in order to be a community; rather, we need to communicate our differences.
Regarding the limitations one might discern when considering the WC staff as a communal entity, I believe these to be consistent with those of any other community. Individuals differ in their opinions, understandings, practices, and attitudes, but these differences are, ironically, essential in terms of a community’s health and ability to thrive. It is only when unwillingness on the part of community members to articulate their apprehensions or listen to those of others emerges that a community breaks down. When factions begin to form they inevitably do so with progressively isolationist momentum and the result is often disregard for concerns over what might be accomplished and how, in deference to what is problematic and why. Answers for the latter of these concerns is, of course, ready-made.
In order to conceive of the WC staff as a community I believe it is important for individuals to recognize themselves as such—in possession of unique attributes and goals that distinguish them from others—but perhaps more importantly, to remain mindful of others’ individuality, and to bear in mind that we needn’t be unanimous in our opinions in order to be a community; rather, we need to communicate our differences.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Monday, April 5, 2010
Mihaela observes Tim L.
Mihaela:
Tim L. and I had a very “interesting” session for the peer-observation assignment (Tim tutored, I observed). The tutee, a senior with a lengthy project, had already met with someone on Monday, after a misunderstanding regarding her scheduled appointment had been resolved, but had not managed to complete reviewing the paper during that session. Thus, she had requested a one-hour appointment on Tuesday, but had been scheduled for 30 minutes with me (my last session) and 30 minutes with Tim (his first session). This raised the question of one-hour appointments again for me, and I realized that I am still not quite clear on whether tutees can be scheduled for a full hour upon request. Considering the scope of this particular project, it seemed to me that it would have been best had the tutee been able to meet with the same tutor again (especially since she had found the previous session productive), but she ended up meeting with me and with Tim instead. Basically (and this is purely my perspective), she was not looking for much more than editing help (and, since she was sick, Tim and I both chose to read out loud as opposed to asking her to read). In retrospect, perhaps this was not the most exciting or apposite session to observe, since “nothing” happened. But as I was thinking this on my way home afterwards, I also thought that perhaps this session was very much like many of our sessions and in that sense was the most appropriate to observe. I also wondered how much Tim’s tutoring was changed by my observing, and wished that I had sat at a table nearby which may (or may not) have allowed for a more organic dynamic, if I can call it that; but this is a question that you could address, Tim, if you feel like it.
Tim:
I honestly felt like the session was exactly how I would handle a session where a student wanted editing help, but was still there to work with me. I had told the tutee before the session started that I would not just simply edit her paper. She agreed that it would be good to work with me on this paper. And I felt like she really was working with me, and I wasn’t simply an editing service.
M:
We didn’t have time to discuss any of my observations because he had a session right after, and I had to leave (but this is perhaps something that other peer-observers should do—sign themselves up for the session right after observing). So, Tim and I decided that I will e-mail him my thoughts (this section of the post) and, once he enters his own, he can post it as our collaborative work. But, to get to my specific thoughts:
1. I have been on prior occasions in passing (my leaving and his starting a session) and was again this time impressed by the balance that Tim strikes instantaneously among soft-spokenness, confidence, alertness, and calmness. In thinking about it, it seems to me a very useful (conscious or unconscious) approach, because it allows access to an array of modes, one of which could be emphasized depending on the tutee and the situation without an abrupt change in attitude.
T:
Thank you Mihaela, that is a very nice compliment!
M:
2. Tim began the session with a few “small talk” questions, which made me think about my own session beginnings and that I rarely do this, when in certain situations it may be quite useful (let the tutee catch her/his breath so to speak).
T:
I find that the small talk helps to get the tutee in their own sort of comfortable situation, especially tutees that have not been to the writing center before. They become more apt to tell me their exact feelings on a paper, rather than just being quiet and general.
M:
3. He asked about goals, which I think is necessary pretty much always (unless the tutee has been to the Writing Center many times and starts the session by discussing goals her/himself), and this opened a brief exchange about editing. The student announced awareness of editing not being the Writing Center’s purpose, and I thought it was productive that Tim elaborated on this by making an explicative note on the difference between editing a paper and working on improving a paper. (It made me wonder if we should all contribute our definitions of this distinction to a collage that we could put up on one of the walls).
T:
Most of the time that I receive tutees that want a strictly editing session, I resort to these definitions of editing and working on a paper. I feel that explaining both definitions gets repetitive and we should probably get a poster in the writing center that states both. Although, this discussion does help a lot as far as clearing the air with editing goes.
M:
4. I especially liked that Tim paused over problematic sentences and allowing the tutee to take a stab at them first, asked for clarification on the ideas expressed, and explained most of the sentence-level suggestions that he was making. I find maintaining all three of these throughout a session to be crucial, if we are not to compromise our position on editing, even though (or because?) they take time and effort. It seems to me that these are also the most critical aspects in terms of the difference pointed out above, in 3 (and wouldn’t it be a clear indication of how a tutee really feels about editing versus working on their paper, if they are not listening or answer questions carefully, or are getting annoyed that it is taking much longer than they expected?).
T:
I find that working on all three fronts will show the student exactly where I am going with their pieces to the big puzzle. Smaller orders of concerns such as the three listed above seem to be most of what I am thinking about when tutoring. The higher orders of concerns such as the general idea of the paper, and the flow of the piece are in the back of my mind, as I feel that smaller order concerns really do affect the piece more than higher order concerns do, because if you didn’t have any small orders, there would not be any large order concerns.
M:
5. In addition, when the tutee seemed uncertain about a sentence revision suggestion, Tim pointed out that it is merely a suggestion, which I find a particularly useful technique for putting a slipping dynamic back on track.
I suppose that I could keep going, but this entry may get a bit too long…
T:
To me, this session seemed to be very routine. The tutee initially wanted me to edit her piece, but I was not going to let that happen. After explaining what us tutors do in the Writing Center, the tutee seemed to be more understanding of the ways in which this session would proceed. When this situation happens, many of times I get a hint that the students eventually lose interest in their small order concerns. However, I refuse to sit back and “edit” their work. It just isn’t right to let the student boss me over and take advantage of tutors as peer editors. It seems as many tutees come in with very high expectations, and leave with a mediocre result. Perhaps the tutees think that appointments are an hour and not simply a half an hour? Or tutees really do believe that we are an editing service…
Tim L. and I had a very “interesting” session for the peer-observation assignment (Tim tutored, I observed). The tutee, a senior with a lengthy project, had already met with someone on Monday, after a misunderstanding regarding her scheduled appointment had been resolved, but had not managed to complete reviewing the paper during that session. Thus, she had requested a one-hour appointment on Tuesday, but had been scheduled for 30 minutes with me (my last session) and 30 minutes with Tim (his first session). This raised the question of one-hour appointments again for me, and I realized that I am still not quite clear on whether tutees can be scheduled for a full hour upon request. Considering the scope of this particular project, it seemed to me that it would have been best had the tutee been able to meet with the same tutor again (especially since she had found the previous session productive), but she ended up meeting with me and with Tim instead. Basically (and this is purely my perspective), she was not looking for much more than editing help (and, since she was sick, Tim and I both chose to read out loud as opposed to asking her to read). In retrospect, perhaps this was not the most exciting or apposite session to observe, since “nothing” happened. But as I was thinking this on my way home afterwards, I also thought that perhaps this session was very much like many of our sessions and in that sense was the most appropriate to observe. I also wondered how much Tim’s tutoring was changed by my observing, and wished that I had sat at a table nearby which may (or may not) have allowed for a more organic dynamic, if I can call it that; but this is a question that you could address, Tim, if you feel like it.
Tim:
I honestly felt like the session was exactly how I would handle a session where a student wanted editing help, but was still there to work with me. I had told the tutee before the session started that I would not just simply edit her paper. She agreed that it would be good to work with me on this paper. And I felt like she really was working with me, and I wasn’t simply an editing service.
M:
We didn’t have time to discuss any of my observations because he had a session right after, and I had to leave (but this is perhaps something that other peer-observers should do—sign themselves up for the session right after observing). So, Tim and I decided that I will e-mail him my thoughts (this section of the post) and, once he enters his own, he can post it as our collaborative work. But, to get to my specific thoughts:
1. I have been on prior occasions in passing (my leaving and his starting a session) and was again this time impressed by the balance that Tim strikes instantaneously among soft-spokenness, confidence, alertness, and calmness. In thinking about it, it seems to me a very useful (conscious or unconscious) approach, because it allows access to an array of modes, one of which could be emphasized depending on the tutee and the situation without an abrupt change in attitude.
T:
Thank you Mihaela, that is a very nice compliment!
M:
2. Tim began the session with a few “small talk” questions, which made me think about my own session beginnings and that I rarely do this, when in certain situations it may be quite useful (let the tutee catch her/his breath so to speak).
T:
I find that the small talk helps to get the tutee in their own sort of comfortable situation, especially tutees that have not been to the writing center before. They become more apt to tell me their exact feelings on a paper, rather than just being quiet and general.
M:
3. He asked about goals, which I think is necessary pretty much always (unless the tutee has been to the Writing Center many times and starts the session by discussing goals her/himself), and this opened a brief exchange about editing. The student announced awareness of editing not being the Writing Center’s purpose, and I thought it was productive that Tim elaborated on this by making an explicative note on the difference between editing a paper and working on improving a paper. (It made me wonder if we should all contribute our definitions of this distinction to a collage that we could put up on one of the walls).
T:
Most of the time that I receive tutees that want a strictly editing session, I resort to these definitions of editing and working on a paper. I feel that explaining both definitions gets repetitive and we should probably get a poster in the writing center that states both. Although, this discussion does help a lot as far as clearing the air with editing goes.
M:
4. I especially liked that Tim paused over problematic sentences and allowing the tutee to take a stab at them first, asked for clarification on the ideas expressed, and explained most of the sentence-level suggestions that he was making. I find maintaining all three of these throughout a session to be crucial, if we are not to compromise our position on editing, even though (or because?) they take time and effort. It seems to me that these are also the most critical aspects in terms of the difference pointed out above, in 3 (and wouldn’t it be a clear indication of how a tutee really feels about editing versus working on their paper, if they are not listening or answer questions carefully, or are getting annoyed that it is taking much longer than they expected?).
T:
I find that working on all three fronts will show the student exactly where I am going with their pieces to the big puzzle. Smaller orders of concerns such as the three listed above seem to be most of what I am thinking about when tutoring. The higher orders of concerns such as the general idea of the paper, and the flow of the piece are in the back of my mind, as I feel that smaller order concerns really do affect the piece more than higher order concerns do, because if you didn’t have any small orders, there would not be any large order concerns.
M:
5. In addition, when the tutee seemed uncertain about a sentence revision suggestion, Tim pointed out that it is merely a suggestion, which I find a particularly useful technique for putting a slipping dynamic back on track.
I suppose that I could keep going, but this entry may get a bit too long…
T:
To me, this session seemed to be very routine. The tutee initially wanted me to edit her piece, but I was not going to let that happen. After explaining what us tutors do in the Writing Center, the tutee seemed to be more understanding of the ways in which this session would proceed. When this situation happens, many of times I get a hint that the students eventually lose interest in their small order concerns. However, I refuse to sit back and “edit” their work. It just isn’t right to let the student boss me over and take advantage of tutors as peer editors. It seems as many tutees come in with very high expectations, and leave with a mediocre result. Perhaps the tutees think that appointments are an hour and not simply a half an hour? Or tutees really do believe that we are an editing service…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)