Most WC writings use many different names for those of us who work in the Writing Centers, working with students with various writing abilities, a multitude of writing difficulties, and at any stage of the writing process. Some say it doesn’t matter what we our called, but I disagree. What we are called or call ourselves will have an influence on what is expected of us and the session that each student is involved in.
While doing the reading for class last week, it occurred to me that there is a difference between tutoring and consulting, between a tutor and a consultant. Knowing these differences can help us in our interactions with the students. And these differences can affect how the student reacts and responds when we are trying to help them.
Let’s look at the word tutor first. By definition, tutoring is to teach or instruct especially privately. Another word that can be used in defining what a tutor does is the word guide. A tutor gives guidance. All of these give the implication that it is a process, one that happens over time. Consistent, regularly, and scheduled also come to mind. All of this meaning that tutoring is more than just one session of meeting with someone. It is where someone is lacking in knowledge in a certain area, and needs to be instructed and given the information that they do not have to become efficient in the that subject. So in this case, a tutor is someone who is an expert, a teacher, someone who can instruct a person for a duration of time as in which the individual will be apt in their knowledge.
Here is a good definition of consult, “…to seek from a presumably qualified person or source advice, opinion.” A consultant is the one who gives expert or professional advice. And a consultation is a conference at which advice is given or views are exchanged. All of this gives the impression of a limited time frame. It also gives the collaborative feel that is a main theme in academic writing of what is done in the Writing Center. It also does not give the authoritative sense that tutor implies, where the instructor is superior to the person they are helping.
It is mentioned over and over that the majority of students have fears coming into the WC. If it was expressed that they were coming in to ‘consult’ about their papers and writing process, would this not help alleviate these fears? Would this not insure that collaborative activities would be more likely to happen?
I am not ignoring that there is a need for tutoring, and that it can be done at the WC. But what if we gave the students this choice? If they felt that they just needed support for one paper at different stages, or in one specific area, then they could come in and get advice on that part. But if there was strong indication that they were lacking in knowledge of basic skills needed to be writing at a standard level, then tutoring would be offered on a regular basis with one certain person. So both services are offered separately, giving both the consultant and tutor a clear idea of the basic expectations of each session.
So basically, in the WC we are doing both tutoring and consulting. It just seems that if it were specified which one was needed and which one we were attempting, it would be better for all involved. Clarity is always a good thing, especially when it comes to writing, right?
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Add Learning Style to the List
If you looked in my The St. Martin's Sourcebook for Writing Tutors you would see written in BIG yellow highlighted letters, the word AMEN. This would be located on page 178 in the section where Shammon and Burns article entitled A Critique of Pure Tutoring says,
"...we find that the benefits of alternative tutoring practices are frequent enough to make us seriously question whether one tutoring approach fits all students and situations. Surely, students at different skills and accumulating different kinds of information, thus making them receptive to different kinds of instruction and tutoring."
Later they go on to say,
"If students are exercising different cognitive skills at different stages in their learning, it makes sense that they may be responsive to different kinds of information and tutoring styles at different stages, too. Our personal and WAC experiences suggest that, at the very least, for intermediate and advanced students, and perhaps on occasion for beginners, too, one tutoring approach does not fit all."
As much as it would make it easier to be able to tutor each student that comes into my cubicle the same and have it be effective most of the time, it is not realistic. Nor would it be interesting. And although the Writing Center and the students who come in into the Center are not there for my entertainment, it does help when there is variety. This helps me learn more about tutoring and all the different issues there are.
This also shows me that I have to stretch myself to figure out in a fairly quick span of time what might work best of the student. In trying to assess this, there is something that Shammon and Burns did not list in their essay as a consideration of what brings uniqueness to each student. That would be their learning style. All of us have certain ways that we learn the best. The most typical are visual and audio. Just talking to a visual learner is not going to be enough for them to learn what they should be doing different in their papers. They might get enough information in to 'correct' the paper in front of them, but it will not stick with them into the next paper, and they will be back the next time with the same issue.
Learning is what the ultimate goal is, right? I would love to see most of those that I have tutored come back and see me, and have had three do so. But what I would really love to see is them coming back with a different set of issues, and showing me that they have implemented what we went over the last time. So if in order to do that, I need to model exactly what they need to do, then I will do that. Not giving them the answers, but showing them what the correct way looks like, and doing it so that they can take it home with them to look at later as they process and practice what we have talked about in our short little encounter.
My favorite moment this week was with my most difficult session. A 'required' guy came in with his English 101 persuasive paper. There was only three pages and he needed at least 6 to 7. Although grammar was not what he needed help on, I still went ahead and read it out loud so he could hear his words instead of just reading them. For the first few paragraphs I stopped and pointed out different subjects in a sentence that could possibly be expanded on. By the second page of the paper I gave him the opportunity to say if he saw anything and he did! We talked through his different ideas, and he wrote and wrote, filling up two pages of the WC notepad. He had more than enough to research and reach 6 pages.
After we had gone over expansion, I asked if he had noticed anything else about his paper while I was reading it. He said he noticed that he was very repetitive, which he very much had been. I was proud of myself for not mentioning this during the reading, even though I really wanted to. But there had been signs that he was an auditory learner, and this proved that he indeed was.
Even more than this, I was excited about the session because as he left he almost smiled and said, "Thanks. I learned a lot." I got the feeling that this kid doesn't say very much that he doesn't mean. Usually the quiet ones don't. So even though he was not very talkative, and showed signs of not really wanting to be there, I am pretty sure he was glad he had. And I learned to keep silent about something because I had listened to my instincts about what kind of learner he might be. A great session is where both the student AND the tutor learn something!
"...we find that the benefits of alternative tutoring practices are frequent enough to make us seriously question whether one tutoring approach fits all students and situations. Surely, students at different skills and accumulating different kinds of information, thus making them receptive to different kinds of instruction and tutoring."
Later they go on to say,
"If students are exercising different cognitive skills at different stages in their learning, it makes sense that they may be responsive to different kinds of information and tutoring styles at different stages, too. Our personal and WAC experiences suggest that, at the very least, for intermediate and advanced students, and perhaps on occasion for beginners, too, one tutoring approach does not fit all."
As much as it would make it easier to be able to tutor each student that comes into my cubicle the same and have it be effective most of the time, it is not realistic. Nor would it be interesting. And although the Writing Center and the students who come in into the Center are not there for my entertainment, it does help when there is variety. This helps me learn more about tutoring and all the different issues there are.
This also shows me that I have to stretch myself to figure out in a fairly quick span of time what might work best of the student. In trying to assess this, there is something that Shammon and Burns did not list in their essay as a consideration of what brings uniqueness to each student. That would be their learning style. All of us have certain ways that we learn the best. The most typical are visual and audio. Just talking to a visual learner is not going to be enough for them to learn what they should be doing different in their papers. They might get enough information in to 'correct' the paper in front of them, but it will not stick with them into the next paper, and they will be back the next time with the same issue.
Learning is what the ultimate goal is, right? I would love to see most of those that I have tutored come back and see me, and have had three do so. But what I would really love to see is them coming back with a different set of issues, and showing me that they have implemented what we went over the last time. So if in order to do that, I need to model exactly what they need to do, then I will do that. Not giving them the answers, but showing them what the correct way looks like, and doing it so that they can take it home with them to look at later as they process and practice what we have talked about in our short little encounter.
My favorite moment this week was with my most difficult session. A 'required' guy came in with his English 101 persuasive paper. There was only three pages and he needed at least 6 to 7. Although grammar was not what he needed help on, I still went ahead and read it out loud so he could hear his words instead of just reading them. For the first few paragraphs I stopped and pointed out different subjects in a sentence that could possibly be expanded on. By the second page of the paper I gave him the opportunity to say if he saw anything and he did! We talked through his different ideas, and he wrote and wrote, filling up two pages of the WC notepad. He had more than enough to research and reach 6 pages.
After we had gone over expansion, I asked if he had noticed anything else about his paper while I was reading it. He said he noticed that he was very repetitive, which he very much had been. I was proud of myself for not mentioning this during the reading, even though I really wanted to. But there had been signs that he was an auditory learner, and this proved that he indeed was.
Even more than this, I was excited about the session because as he left he almost smiled and said, "Thanks. I learned a lot." I got the feeling that this kid doesn't say very much that he doesn't mean. Usually the quiet ones don't. So even though he was not very talkative, and showed signs of not really wanting to be there, I am pretty sure he was glad he had. And I learned to keep silent about something because I had listened to my instincts about what kind of learner he might be. A great session is where both the student AND the tutor learn something!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)