StepAside

So far, I've only consulted with 2 students at the writing center (WC). The first student was concerned with the mechanics and grammar of her paper. After having her read through, we found that there wasn't much wrong with the mechanics or grammar (between the two error types, there were 2 mistakes between 4 pages). So, what I heard as I "listened" (Harris) to her read was problems with organizing and getting her sources to talk with each other. We worked on both. How I've translated this particular session to my WRT105 course is that I've had my students perform an exercise where they make their sources have a conversation. In doing this, I ask them to use transitional words and to make sure that they are properly integrating the quoted material into the conversation. In addition to that, I asked them to interject their thoughts into the conversation that the sources were having. This is what I attempted to get my first WC student to focus on; and apparently, I was successful. She said that this provided her with a new way of analyzing her sources.

What a terrific exercise! How did your students react? Were they confused, delighted, contemptuous--what?

i haven't done any working in the WC yet--this project has come at a really cluttered time in my schedule, but i'm still planning to work it in. in the meantime, my students & i did something very like this the other day, so i don't feel too far behind, at least in terms of keeping up w/the potential boons of incorporating these bright ideas in my classroom!

So for you, Tyra, another Q: how many of your students have been to the WC this semester, and under what circumstances? Did you "send" them there? Did they go "on their own"? Etc.

Oh, I forgot to tell you about my second consult. My second student was Korean, ESL, and enrolled in WRT 105. I felt good about this because I had some sense of what was going on, although I didn't know exactly what her assignment was. She said that the major problem with her paper was that she wasn't using quotes appropriately. She said that the instructor said that her grammar needed work. So, for me, it was a conflicting moment. I didn't know whether to look at the paper from her point of veiw or the instructors. I compromised, looking at it from both angles. Personally, I didn't see anything wrong with her grammar; in fact, it was the way she structured her sentences. And at times, in her essay, she would not introduce definite and indefinite articles. I can relate this to Lisa Delpit's argument in Clark ch 10, "[T]eachers must acknowledge and validate student's' home language without using it to limit sutdents' potential" (443). In other words, in this situation, I don't think that the instructor is accepting of the fact that this is an ESL student and that this student is attemption to cross over languages (language diversity. right?). Anyhow, the session was great, and I was able to help her plow through all of the comments. I was also able to suggest things that she should consider when writing.

Apparently the WC has some sort of "no renegade" policy. Go figure. So I have until after the break to get my act together and hide my renegade-ness and consult, consult, consult!

My students were very interested in using that particular technique. It was something "new" to them. I was surprised, because I had understood from many of them, that I hadn't taught them anything new.

You've Stumped the Prof with the no-renegade remark. Expliquez, s'il-vous plait?

Oooh! Oh!

I had a thought! When Becky asked Tyra about who went to the WC (I keep reading that as "Water Closet"), it made me think of a thought I thought yesterday.

Back in Purdue, Teachers had referal slips they could fill out for theri students. It would be a little half-sheet of paper on which the teacher checked boxes that indicated where the student was having trouble. The student then took that sheet to the WC and had a focused place to start with the consultant. Would that be a good idea here? Could help with communication and understanding between consultants and TAs.

No Renegade: That was a "call-back" to a joke from earlier in the year. I guess Virtual Jer isn't as funny as real Jer.

I think Vanessa is in transit, but I'm particularly interested in her perspective on what Jeremiah is describing here. --which is not to say that I'm not interested in everybody else's perspective, but only that I think Vanessa's counseling background (and her reading of Harris' chapter on diagnosis) might be brought to bear on how useful/good/scary it is for teachers to fill out slips of papers that assess students' writing.

My consultations are scheduled for next Friday and the Friday after that, so I don't have any direct consultation experience to share yet. I kind of hope I get someone working on a personal statement or cover letter because I observed such a session and found it fascinating. What a privilege to assist someone in defining themselves in a way that may lead to opening doors.

One thing I did carry away from my observations that I am trying to apply in class, is increased clarity. I was struck at how the only thing the writing center consultant has to go on from the teacher's perspective is the assignment. I can see myself as a consultant clinging to the teacher's written words in an effort to help the student achieve what the teacher wants. This relates to our diversity discussion, because teachers have so many different standards and expectations when it comes to the actual evaluation of a student's work.

Jer is always already funny, under all circumstances :)

One of the challenges of consulting, I think, is this absence of the teacher. It's so easy for the consultant, with assignment in hand, to endeavor to "interpret" the instructor "for" the student. A risky business, that. Yet one cannot ignore the instructor, either; one *has* to address and, yes, interpret the assignment & hence the instructor. And then the student can so easily see the consultant as a champion against the hegemonic instructor, or as the only true judge of the quality of the student's writing, etc.

i have no idea how many of my students have been to the WC, b/c as we discussed in class, our WC keeps no records of student attendance (and i haven't asked/required them to tell me). i've suggested in end-comments on their papers that they see a tutor to work w/specific features (always also giving the option for them to come see ME one-on-one, b/c i don't want them to feel farmed out, while i DO want them to know they have extra help available).

one student came to meet w/me the other day and complained that her friends always found the WC helpful, but when she went in with a bunch of printed-out sources for a topic she liked but no idea what she wanted to argue, the consultant talked with her about possible ideas but really didn't help her make up her mind what to do, & she was disappointed in that.

i laughed at her and said something along the lines of "so you were hoping the tutor would go inside your head and come up with ideas for you so you wouldn't have to do that part yourself? that's YOUR job!!!"

another student came in w/a re-write and said she'd worked with a consultant who gave her some great guidance on how to better organize her ideas--i haven't read the re-write though to see how this turned out on the page!

Okay. So back to JT's comment on the slip of paper. It would be nice to have students actually use "the slip". I say this because it gives us (teachers) an idea of who's going to the WC to get help. I mean there are some students who could really use it. Really. It would also be a way of tracking or monitoring writing center statistics.

I asked you that question, Tyra, because I'm always interested in the circumstances under which students go to the WC (which, thanks to Jer, I will now always think of as the "water closet"). Do they go because they're good writers who know how to work dialogically with knowledgable Others? Do they go because they think of themselves as basket cases who need the Writing "Clinic"? Do they go because their instructor has urged the whole class to avail themselves of the WC resources? Because their instructor has *required* them to? Because they have a slip of paper that "diagnoses" their "problems"? Etc.

Yet, Aleshia, when you consulted in the WC, you felt that the teacher's concerns might be a bit misplaced and that there were other things more important. And if you'd had that Slip of Paper, wouldn't that have somehow mandated that you attend solely or at least primarily to the teacher's concerns? Then again, maybe you *should* have, because both student and instructor might see the consultation as a "failed" session if it didn't address the issues that the instructor had identified and on the basis of which s/he was determining the student's grade.
???

I wanted to chime in again on the "slip" that I suggested and see if i can make it less creepy/scary to Becky.

I'm not talking about making blanket reqiurements or "diagnosing" students at random. In fact, any time we give feedback on a paper we're performing a diagnosis of what went well and what didn't. If we write a comment that says, "You would benefit from a trip to the WC to work on thesis clarity," is that not a sort of diagnosis? The reason, then, that I argue in favor of "the slip" is because it's a bit more formal in nature, the student might understand it better and take it more seriously, and it gives the consultant an idea of what the teacher is thinking.

As much as we resist this sort of thinking, i don't think we can deny that *part* of our job is diagnosing "problems" in student writing.

diagnostic slips. hm.

i can see their potential for limiting the scope of conversations, but i think how much of a danger it really is is more about consultant training than about the usefulness of having slips. consultants are trained to nod & smile & look beyond students saying what they need help with is just grammar--because we acknowledge that they don't have the vocabulary/expertise to get beyond that in looking at problems? or because we believe that other things matter more?

in either case, if consultants can be trained to look at BOTH student concerns and larger issues, why not both teacher concerns and larger issues? if i were a consultant, i'd be more comfortable having teacher input too--not because i'd want to just lock-step into/with what the teacher diagnoses as needing cured, but because, as you pointed out above, as consultants, you have to "interpret" teachers anyway by reading their assignment sheets or listening to students' translations of what they think the teacher meant. wouldn't navigating that complex maze be a little easier if you ALSO had a little input from the teacher?

Yes and no. The slip should not be seen or used as a mandate. It should be a suggested way of starting the session. However, if there is something that the instructor is insisting should be covered in that session, yes, it should be addressed. But when one is working with an ESL student, he/she should be aware of the implications of code switching within the language. I only see a "failed" session as one where the tutee becomes a non-participant. Where the tutor is doing 100% of the talking. But that's my take on WC consulting.

But, is it possible to give instructors and consultants a "shared text" to draw on so people don't falsely identify "grammar" as the issue when it's really usage? And also, is it possible that the instructions from the teacher get lost in translation when moving from the teach to the student to the instructor? The teacher may say, "You need to work on your sentence style and word usage," and the student may hear, "You need to work on your grammar."

Alas! I'm not in transit... I kept waiting for a break but didn't see it so I stayed tuned. My computer is moving a little faster as it warms up.

Water closet? Cute.

OK, from the diagnosis chapter related to slips of paper marking a student's deficiencies... Harris tells us on page 81 that "Matching, or mismatching, our preferences with those of our students is a major concern". What a teacher is marking off then would indicate the teacher's preferences. That's the disconnect that keeps bothering me. The only line of communication between the teacher and PWI is the student. Now the student clearly comes wanting to please their teacher and the only way the PWI can assist the student in achieving this goal is consulting towards what the teacher wants. There seems to be no room for diagnosis.

Becky, doesn't this relate to what you were saying about the best way to teach WRT 105 is in combination with another class? Well, it seems the most effective way for a PWI to consult is to have a conversation with the teacher so the teacher and PWI can be on the same wavelength (as much as possible). My fear is that I will ignore grammar and focus on structure when what was bothering the teacher was grammar, thus the student comes to the writing center gets his/her paper reorganized and goes back and gets a bad grade. Harris only talks about recognizing our own yardsticks and doesn't take into consideration that in WCs there is another yardstick to consider (that of the absent teacher).

Back to Jeremiah's slip for the WC...Maybe before a student goes to the WC, the teacher and student should have a conference and fill out a paper together that lists the teacher's yardstick (concerns) and has a place for what the student does well and also a place for a student to list his or her own goals. In mental health centers, concerned with empowerment, clients would be involved in the treatment planning process. The therapist is still in charge of the final diagnosis, but what is done about it is viewed (ideally) as a team process. Perhaps the teacher, the student and the PWI need to figure out how to create a team.

OMG, you all, we're approaching the end of our allotted time. Class dismissed, and thank you for playing. Whatever the aggravations you've experienced with the genre, from my perspective this has been a great success. In fact, here on my blog I'll start a thread that reflects on my experience today, and I hope you all will post to it, if you're interested.
And you can stay today and keep "talking" as much as you wish, of course!
And because these threads will stay online, you can return to them and continue to post to them. That would be extremely interesting, I think. Because I'm sure we'll all have more to say after today's conversations, and after some cogitation may want to make more entries. Eventually today's threads will drop into the blog archives, but you can return to them easily, by clicking today's date in the calendar that's on the main page of this blog.
Thanks for a great morning!
Becky