Michelle+Longo

February 24, 2010

One of the very first things I noticed while working in the Writing Center was the importance of the client’s assignment sheet. Leigh Ryan mentions the assignment sheet in “Inside the Tutoring Session,” but I did not realize what a difference it would make in a session until I had two of my own. I assumed having an assignment sheet to look at would definitely help run the session more smoothly, but the extent to which it helps me personally as a consultant is surprising. For example, as one of my first sessions ever, I had a client come in with a short paper she needed to condense even further. The paper was actually her answers to given questions in paragraph form. When I asked her what the questions were so I could make sure she answered them to the best of her abilities and make sure I completely understood the assignment, she told me she didn’t have the information. So, I had to go over the paper without the assignment questions. At the end of the session, I felt confident we did some good consolidation but I was left with this lingering that the client may not have answered the questions and I wished I could have helped with that section of the assignment as well.

Later that same day, I had another client come in with the exact same assignment but this client brought the assignment sheet with her. I asked to read the assignment sheet while the client was filling out the necessary paperwork. I immediately understood the assignment much better than a few hours before and felt I was able to better help this client than the last. At the end of that session, I felt confident that I did all I could do for the client and she was going to turn in something she should be proud of. That feeling was much better than the previous one.

In conclusion, through Ryan and what we have learned in class, I would personally say a huge advantage to any Writing Center session is the client brining a copy of the assignment sheet. I think that is the easiest, most efficient way to help a client. Lesson for the day: if ever a client does not bring the assignment sheet but says they can access it off Blackboard, take the extra five minutes and tell them that would be a better option. It ends up benefiting both the client and the consultant.

1. If the student says they could get the sheet from the computer but does not want to, to what extent should we push them to? 2. What if the student can not remember their teacher's name? To what extent do we take time out of the session and our own time at the WC to figure it out?

February 28, 2010 Although I have heard many returning consultants, professors and other community members say some students believe the Writing Center to be just an editing service, I didn’t believe it until I personally experienced it. Because I have never once thought of the Writing Center as a pure editing organization, it was hard for me to see that many other students’ actually believe that. Last Wednesday, I had a client come in with a finished assignment. When I engaged him in conversation, he kept telling me that his paper was done and didn’t need any help but he was required to come to the Center. He said repeated times all he needed me to do was edit his paper and it would be “a quick session.” Immediately I thought back to all the readings stressing the Writing Center //not// being seen as an editing service. I especially thought about Murphy’s “Minimalist Tutoring: Making the Student Do All The Work.” In this chapter, Jeff Brooks talks about the “worst case scenario” at the Writing Center in which the consultant simply edits a client’s paper and does nothing in the way of trying to make the student a stronger writer. I knew right away I needed to stay far away from any situation close to that. I quickly and patiently explained to the client that the Writing Center was not an editing service, but I would be more than willing to work with him on his overall paper. After he got over that, we were able to work through his paper and ended up finding one trend of errors and reorganizing some of the paragraphs. By the end of the session, the client was finding his own errors as he read the paper aloud, errors he didn’t know were errors just half an hour earlier. After the session, I reread “Minimalist Tutoring” and felt confident that I avoided a bad situation and did all I could do to help the client’s writing skills, rather than just his paper. “After all, the goal of each tutoring session is learning, not a perfect paper,” (169). 1. How can we as writing center consultants get the word out about us being more than an editing service? 2. How can we get others to see that we can be involved in the writing process from the very beginning, not just as a final step?

__COMMENTS:__

I have had this same exact thing happen to me on probably half of the sessions I've had so far! I was surprised to discover that most students do actually think of the Writing Center as an editing service. Almost every student I've helped this semester has come in mainly wanting grammatical help, rather than higher-order help. And, they get frustrated when I try and help them with any higher-order needs I have noticed in their papers. The students only want me to pay strict attention to their comma usage and the parts that "sound funny."

However, sometimes a student will allow me to discuss more higher-order needs with them, but at other times, they don't really engage in conversation when I address organization or elaborating ideas. Too often I think students come ot the Writing Center as part of their final writing step. They view their paper as a final draft that just needs grammatical help, and hate to think that their paper might need bigger readjustments.

I'm just glad that I'm not the only consultant who has realized this common misconception with the Writing Center. We will probably continue to get those students only looking for an editing service, but I think the only thing to do is to explain to them that we are much more than that. - Emily Mooney

March 1, 2010

Elizabeth Boquet of Fairfield University takes on the gender issue in the Writing Center in her piece, “Intellectual Tug-of-War: Snapshots of Life in the Center.” She argues clients are more likely to engage female consultants than male consultants because females are known to provide a more empathetic and enabling role. Boquet gives an example of a tutor named Bill in her Writing Center that was always domineering in his sessions, forcing his clients to seek refuge in a female tutor’s hands. Obviously, I agree there are differences between how men and women deal with situations, but I disagree with Boquet that these differences have a special place in the Writing Center atmosphere. Personally, I have a very domineering personality for a female and would be inclined in a normal situation to act similar to Bill; however, I understand that the Writing Center and the clients come before my strong personality. I know that this is something that would probably make some clients, especially the ones on the shy side, uncomfortable and unable to focus on the task at hand. Therefore, both before I go to work and even during it, I consciously check myself to make sure I am tending to the writing needs of the client. A consistent theme in our class has been that the primary concern of the Writing Center should be the client and their needs. I don’t see how being male or female should affect that concern. What needs to be done to help the client strive in every way possible should be done regardless of gender.

Boquet says Writing Center’s strive on such asymmetry, but in my opinion, I don’t see how this specific asymmetry could be beneficial. Her other points about the ideal tutor, the idea session and the influence of politics and economics all fit well into this asymmetrical mold she explains. I agree with almost everything she says, but when she splits it up by gender, I see a problem. In any other circumstance, I understand the difference between men and women are prominent and even effective, but in the Writing Center when the client is clearly the main concern, I do not think it is appropriate. 1. Do you think students when students come into the center they pick a female over a male if there are both present? 2. Has anyone had to deal with this experience before?

March 9, 2010

In //The St. Martin’s Sourcebook for Writing Tutors,// Stacey Freed from George Mason University wrote a chapter on subjectivity in a tutoring session. This being our second reading on the subject, I found her ideas and opinions very interesting. In fact, I find the entire subject and how much attention is paid to the idea, interesting. I had thought about this situation before but I did not pay much attention to it as I thought it was fairly easy to handle. As a student and consultant, it is our primary job while in the Writing Center to //help// students. As the name indicates, the Writing Center is such: a center for writing. It is not a center for changing, arguing or debating, political, social, economical, etc. issues. Students do not come to consultants looking for us to badger them about their views if we do not agree. They come to us with the hope and **trust** that we will help them become better writers, while assisting with a specific paper. What would happen to that trust level if when they came in we criticized their belief system? The answer is it would disappear, and the next thing to disappear would be one student, then another and another, creating a snowball effect. Clearly, this is not what we want our Writing Center to be like. That is why I firmly think, no matter how much it may frustrate and annoy us, all consultants much swallow their pride and put up with a paper they do not agree with. The primary focus should //always// be on the student’s work and our desire to better their writing abilities. I disagree with Freed when she says it is difficult to separate the quality of writing from the quality of ideas expressed in a piece. Although the subject manner may change, the “quality” of ideas should remain the same: well thought and well supported. An opinion, good or bad, only needs to be well supported to strive in the academic world. As a consultant, I think it is our job to make the writer aware of other viewpoints, but I would do that regardless of if I agreed or disagreed with the writer. Even if I agree on the topic, I would still make the writer aware of the other side, the side I don’t agree with, because that is how a paper is correctly written. After all, it is our job to help the writer and the paper. 1. Is it subconsciously in us to question harder when we do not agree with something than if we do? 2. Do you think trust would really become an issue if we start debating? Or do you think that is a healthy function of the Center?

MY COMMENTS: Megan Justice's page (post 2) and Mike Milano's page (post 1).

=JOURNAL SET TWO:=

March 17, 2010 A client came in one time with a “quick” question as to whether he had to document something he wrote or not. When I have him the answer, he looked very confused. I asked if he thought the opposite, and he explained he really wasn’t sure at all. In fact, he was confused throughout his entire paper on whether quotes were needed, if a citation was needed, and how to do one. So, we sat down and I looked at his paper more closely. It was immediately evident he was confused on the differences between direct quotes and paraphrasing. First we went over the terminology for both and then started to define each and their function within a paragraph. As Lisa Ede’s //Work in Progress,// says, I told the client that a direct quote only needed to be included when the author says something so memorable, or says it in such a clear and concise way that it can not be said better and must be lifted (with documentation) from the article. There were way too many direct quotes in the paper that were interrupting the flow and causing it to read in a choppy way. After we established that, we turned to paraphrasing and how, I think at least, it is one of the most useful tools in writing. I explained it was essentially the same information found in the source, but recast in the client’s own words and voice. Even though it was his own words, I reiterated that it still needed to be documented correctly because the essential idea was lifted from someone else. After we established the definitions and guidelines, he rapidly went through his paper and found the quotes that could be removed, the places where paraphrasing was a better idea and the times when a direct quote would be beneficial. By time he was done, the paper was much smoother than when we started and I think he was really beginning to understand the difference in the two techniques. Of course, I sent him off with the OWL address for his newly found talent for documentation. What are some of your favorite sources for documentation, other than the OWL? Speaking of sources, do you think Wikipedia has a place in academic papers as a cited source?

March 31, 2010. I recently had my hardest session in the Writing Center thus far. A girl came in with a completed rough draft that had already been turned in but needed to be finalized before the second deadline. When she gave me her draft, the only thing I saw was the word “organization” scribbled in blue pen ALL over the paper. Between that and the client needs survey, it immediately became evident what we were going to be working on for the next 30 minutes… well, 50 actually. The girl gave me the assignment sheet to look out and I honestly had to read it about 10 times before even partially understanding the assignment. After I read it a few times, I was beginning to think it was just me and asked if the client wouldn’t mind explaining the paper to me quickly. Not to my surprise, she didn’t understand it too well either. It was shaping up to be a rough session. We finally talked through the assignment and began to understand it, but the more I understood it, the more I realized the original paper was not written correctly (or at least not the way I would have addressed the question.) However, the girl insisted she was correct and she just needed organizational help; so that’s what we did. This is where Rafoth’s chapter on organization came to the rescue. He says, “[organization] is best addressed by helping the writer to think through her goals for the text, instead of concentrating single-mindedly on meeting teacher expectations.” This sentence was especially helpful as I had to explain to the client that her organization did not have to be structured around the multitude of comments her teacher left. While he was offering help, it was up to her and her ideas; those were going to organize the paper better than anything else. One of the first things I remembered about Rafoth’s chapter was the author’s disproval of topic sentences; rather, the recommendation of visual mapping when working with a confusing paper turned discovery draft. So that is what we did first and it helped more than anything. Rafoth says mapping as outlines is not the creation of topic sentences, but instead a discovery tool for seeing what the author has to say through looking at how she has said it. The rough draft the client presented with was the perfect discovery draft to work with. It was the first one I’ve gotten in the center, so it was kind of cool to see what we would do with it. After mapping and talking through all her ideas (which were all excellent), we set to reorganizing them within the actual paper. While this whole process took a little too long, it was rewarding at the end when the client was able to recognize where one idea should go and why it should go there. Has anyone else received a discovery draft? If so, how did you deal with it? What are some of your favorite “outlining” techniques?

April 5, 2010. The session I fear having most in the writing center is an emotionally charged one; not in the sense of disagreeing with the author, but a session in which the client is emotional about his/her topic. In Chapter 5 of Rafoth, the authors said literature about tutoring tends to focus mostly on the brain, leaving out the heart. While I know emotionally unstable sessions are almost nonexistent, it is still a something to think about. I think it would be easier having a preexistant plan for this type of situation than having it sprung on you when you have no previous knowledge of how to deal with the situation. The first point Rafoth makes in the chapter is that as tutors we can not allow the session to become a therapy session rather than a writing session. The authors say that while it may be tempting to comfort the client with basic human sympathy, that is not our job. “What is most important in such situations is focus and firmness. We have the complicated responsibility of showing empathy to writers while not allowing them to lose sight of the real reason that they came for help in the first place: to express ideas clearly.,” (35). I disagree with this statement. I understand the basic premise of the statement in that we are tutors for everyone, not psychiatrists, but I do not believe that a bit of empathy on our parts would make the situation worse. If anything, it would undoubtedly help soothe the writer, the tutor, onlookers and the situation in general. Given the size of our school and the sense of community so often promoted, I think it is more than appropriate for Elon tutors to take the extra step and act as a listener for an obviously emotional client, rather than cutting him/her off in order to focus on a paper. As long as there is no one else waiting and you are not the only person in the center at the time, taking the time to listen to a client about an emotional topic seems the better thing to do than to “keep pushing the focus that the writer wants to achieve” as chapter 5 suggests. I do not see fault in taking a few minutes, even a regular 30-minute session and turning into a listening session. Obviously, it would be wise to suggest seeing a counselor at a later time, but for the minute the client has chosen to open up to you as a fellow writer and it would disturb me to turn him/her down. I think it is much easier for the authors of this chapter to write what they wrote, but I believe they would have a hard time enacted it in the same way they suggest to us. Do you think the writers would feel and act differently if it happened to them? What do you think you would do if your client started crying?

April 5, 2010 I found the textbook analysis assignment one of the most interesting things we worked on thus far this semester. What intrigued me the most about this assignment was how many different perspectives on writing were presented. Not just perspectives, but teaching models and teaching theories that affect student’s everyday life. Each textbook represented had a very specific audience, genre, teaching style and writing process that differed drastically from that of its neighbors. What gets me the most about this is that these differing books are used to teach the same subject in the same school. For example, Elon’s English 110: College Writing class is a mandatory first-year class that must be completed with a C or higher. Of the nine people in our ENG 319 class, almost every single person used a different textbook in their college writing class. For some students, their first year of college is what shapes their writing style henceforth. In a specific case, the students in one class would have their future writing styles tailored to the “McGraw Hill Guide: Writing for College, Writing for Life”, whereas other student’s writing would be more argumentative if they used the “Everything’s an Argument” textbook. What plays tricks on my head the most is how affected one can become by the things they read. One writing textbook can theoretically change a student’s entire writing process turning them into Stephen King, or on the opposite side, turning them into a nobody. I can not seem to move past the fact that textbooks can so easily influence a person’s life; yet, they are all so different in so many ways. That statement is what I found to be the most important about our textbook analysis assignment. Would you ever change your writing style according to a specific textbook? Do you favor teachers teaching from a textbook, or without one?

MY COMMENTS: Michael McFarland - March 10 and Kristin Pinder - April 5


 * __THIRD SET:__**

April 13, 2010 The hardest part of this project has been picking my topic. In the beginning of the semester when we first talking about the paper briefly, I got this idea in my head about writing about the (perceived) difference in brain stimulation between math/science people and English/history people. At that time; however, I did not know all the elements of the paper. After we thoroughly talked about the expectations in class, I semi-realized my original topic may not be the best fit; but I was being stubborn as always and wanted to stick to my original idea. So, I tried. Then I failed. I had a very specific idea of what I wanted my paper to talk about, but I could not find the exact information I was looking for. I changed my search words, my databases and was lenient on my subject matter, but as hard as I looked, I could not find exactly what I was looking for. After that failure, I turned to an idea I have been looking into for a few years- how women athletes are discriminated against in university-produced magazine and how the gender of the athletic director has a direct impact on that. After looking at my research on that and conferring with Paula, I determined the only way I could do the project successfully was if I altered the topic a bit. However, because I have been interested in and working on this for a few years at this point, I did not want to change my topic in the slightest. So now I am back at zero. I have done the proposal and the annotated bibliography is coming up soon, but I still am not sure of a topic. I have tried some of the informal and formal invention strategies on a handout we have, but none of them have worked. Nothing I write excites me enough to conduct a final paper on it; or if I do like it, it is not tailored to the kind of paper we are supposed to write. Still searching… Did you use an invention strategy for your topic? Do you ever get really attached to an idea or a quote or anything else you have written and try to frame the paper around it, even though that makes it harder and possibly less understandable?

April 19, 2010 I have finally come up with a topic! Sadly though, I did not use a writing technique to do it. They did not seem to be helping me. I think they may be of more use once I actually start writing, for things like revision. For now, I used a different technique called “archives.” I went through my folders on my computer looking at the different classes I have taken and the different papers I have written, hoping that something was in there that I did not have the time to dwell on in the past but was interesting enough. And I found it! Last spring, I took a Media Law and Ethics class and got really into the class. I also formed a close relationship with the professor. Seeing this class in my documents folder got me thinking. One of the most important and interesting things to me is my desired profession- journalism. In that profession, one of the things that bothers me the most is censorship- especially in high school or college. One time when working with The Pendulum, there was an attempt of censorship against me, and it drove me crazy. It sprang my angst against press censorship. From my excitement over this topic I decided I should focus my final paper on it. My new and improved topic idea is, “How do the prior law rulings on prior restraint and censorship on high school and college newspapers affect the issue today, and what resources are available to students today to combat the problem? Have you heard of any censorship issues with student newspapers? Have you ever used this kind of “strategy” to come up with a topic?

April 26, 2010

I do not totally agree with some of the things we are reading on the writing process; however, I think the revision worksheet was of specific help to me. When I write, I tend to sit down for hours and hours and knock it all out, no matter how long it is. Of course, I do my research first and find all the information I need prior to, but when it comes to actually writing the paper, I usually do it in one swoop. Although I know that is not the best way to do it, I can never seem to tear myself away from writing once I actually begin. Once the writing process starts, I cannot seem to stop it willingly until the assignment is completed. In the revision draft, it says, “writing is a circular process, you don’t do everything in some specific order.” I agree 100 percent with this. Some of the other worksheets make it sound mandatory that you do a. b. then c., or you will fail. This worksheet made it known that revision and writing is a process and you can start and stop when and where you would like, as long as everything is done in the proper way. The most helpful part of the worksheet is when it says it is okay to revise while going along. I do that more often than not, and was not sure if I was correct in doing so or not. When the question is sometimes raised in the writing center, I am not sure exactly what to say. Personally- yes; professionally- no. It was an issue for me, but this worksheet helped clear it up. The suggestions they give for revision that are different than the ones I use now, are really good and I intend to use them fully this time around. What is your favorite part of the writing process? Do you sometimes do things out of order? Or do you have a fairly rigid system?

April 28, 2010

The next step of my writing process was the annotated bibliography. I have not written many annotated bibs before, but of the ones I have written, I usually just put the source and how I think it will contribute to my paper. When I went on the Purdue Owl Web Site to see what they said about it, I realized it was completely different than all the other ones I have written. There were three sections, summarize, assess and reflect. Each section had to be subheaded accordingly, and each section was to answer specific questions. Basically, I actually had to read the entire source, take accurate notes, reflect on what I learned and figure out the source’s place in my paper. This was actually very helpful. It gave me a great head start to my paper because I now know all about my sources, in addition to the specific role they are going to play in my paper. During my research time, I was thinking about color-coding the different sources to show which parts of my research question they pertain to. After that, I could try to think about the organization of my paper and see where those nicely color-coded papers would fall. Theoretically, if I am follow a tight organization structure, the same colored ones should fall close to one another. Of course, there are bits and pieces from each one that will need to be mentioned in other places. But I think this exercise could be a cool one to do in the context of my organization skills. I would be curious to see if I stuck to my color-coding organization, or if my ideas and flow of my paper take me outside of that specific structure. I am a very visual person and I memorize things my colors most of the time, so having my sources color-coded would actually help me immensely in figuring out where things should be placed. What exercises do you try to test your organization? Do color do anything for you? Are you more of a visual or auditory person?

I do know what you mean with the color thing, but it's a little harder for me to differentiate being colorblind. I see your point however in using alternate methods of identification to organize your work, and I totally agree with that method. I sometimes print things sideways, or highlight on the computer to keep track of what things go where and what sources apply to to which points in my papers. It's definitely helpful to use both sides of the brain when working on a lengthy project. -Mike Milano MY COMMENTS:

Kristin Pinder - April 27 Emily Mooney - April 26