"Learning Disabilities and the Writing Center"

This article, by Julie Neff, offers some concrete, specific examples about how to work with students who have learning disabilities. However, we don't know which students have them. I suppose when a student feels especially stuck, or can't seem to create ideas on her own, or struggles to organize her thoughts in some logical pattern, she might benefit from these tutoring strategies whether or not she has a documented learning disability.

Also, I was glad Neff wrote about the above-average intelligence of many students with learning disabilities. I consider this common knowledge, but on p. 240, she talks about the lingering misconceptions that some educators have about this population. No wonder people with learning disabilities often struggle with self-esteem issues!

It's odd: A person with diabetes would not likely be criticized for depending on medical insulin to stay alive. We don't make moral judgments on diabetics or urge them to "suck it up" or "pull themselves up by their bootstraps." Maybe learning disabilities are a little like diabetes: These students will probably do very well, but they may need additional support. Maybe the Writing Center is their educational insulin. (Yes, I know; I've completely exhausted this analogy.)

Neff's comments about unlocking the knowledge in student writers' minds intrigued me. To some extent, we all have to learn how we each learn best. Sometimes we do this unconsciously. For example, I realize that if I really want to absorb and synthesize new knowledge, I need some very concrete examples and I need to write about it. Passively listening just doesn't do it for me. Likewise, our students with learning disabilities need to find their own "key" so they can process information most effectively.

It seems that one implication of this (and the last) article is that we need to keep adapting our tutoring strategies to meet the needs of a complex and varied student population. Minimalist tutoring is a theoretical ideal, but certain students need more from us. How much is too much? That's a tough question, and I'm not sure I know the answer.

"Affirming Diversity"

This article, by Muriel Harris, addresses some of the ESL issues we've been talking about at the Writing Center. Some of us have long known that often, the tutors and ESL students may not have the same goals in mind. This isn't because ESL students are lazy (with a very few exceptions)--it's just that we may not have made the "rules" explicit.

The whole idea of collaborative learning, or learning through talking, is completely foreign to many of our ESL students. And when student writers expect us to become teachers, it's perilously easy to slide into that role. However, part of their educational experience here needs to be the way we learn, not just what we learn.

I've been thinking about something Diane Baumgartner said: Tutors don't need to have all the answers. We don't all have to be experts in linguistics and grammar. This is a good thing, since most of us are not. I agree with Diane that, once we accept that we don't have to be the authority, we can relax a little and enjoy the time we spend with our ESL students.

Finally, I was touched by some of the advice for tutors from the ESL students Harris surveyed: "Please try to understand problems faced by international students," "Be more patient," Try to enjoy getting to know different persons from different cultures," "Do not think of them as foreigners." Like us, ESL students just want to be accepted, respected, and liked. Like us, they don't want to be laughed at. On that very human level, we can all connect.

What do you think of this article? I know non-ESL tutors may feel uncomfortable working with ESL students. Can you explain why, or what we need to do to allay your fears? Could you be putting too much pressure on yourself?

"Intellectual Tug-of-War: Snapshots of Life in the Center"

Reading this article made me very uncomfortable. After all, it questions the foundation of our Writing Center work, the very skills and attitudes we're trying to convey to our tutors. But then I went back to the line on page 123: "Pratt reminds us that too often we teach with the goal of eliminating confusion, opposition, and discomfort when our goal should be to delve more deeply into these issues." Then I decided that my confusion and discomfort may be a positive step toward greater understanding.

Here, we push some of the practices Boquet questions: relatively minimalist tutoring, endless data collection, an exhortation to tutors not to openly criticize professors. In the process, are those of us in administration indoctrinating tutors into our institutional ideology? And most importantly, to our student tutors: Do you often feel torn between your roles as peers (equals) and as tutors (authorities)?

At the end of this article, Boquet strives for a positive note: "We can strive to produce better writers, better tutors, more humane working conditions for everyone involved (tutors and students alike)." I believe in this goal, but her tone sounded forced to me.

Frankly, this article gives me a lot of food for thought, and I'm not sure how to respond right now. I've been doing Writing Center work for eight or nine years. We do struggle with any number of challenges, including our allegiances, political leanings, "cultural determinations." But for all that, I still believe that helping students find their voice is a worthy calling.

"Writing IS Thinking"

I can't remember which of you found this article, but I think it's a good one, even though it targets faculty writers. Author Kerry Ann Rockquemore emphasizes what Ann Russell often tells us: That early drafts can be sloppy, disorganized, discombobmulated and all the other "dis-es." How many of you feel you have to complete all your research and thinking before you commit anything to the page? And of those who do, how many of you feel paralyzed to start?

Maybe those early drafts are like late-night, free-wheeling conversations, at the tail end of parties, that dart all over the place, unstructured and possibly incoherent but incredibly fertile and alternately hilarious and profound. Don't you wish you had some of those conversations down on the page? (Well...maybe not. They could be blackmail fodder for future generations.)

Besides being tutors and, in some cases, teachers, we're all writers, whether we're writing for class, for publication, for art, or for fun. And we all get stuck because we're not used to "thinking aloud" on the page.

Do any of you write a half hour to an hour a day? Does anyone want to take on the challenge (30 to 60 minutes daily, Monday through Friday)? We might feel we don't have time, but surely we could use the half-hour we typically spend watching Modern Family or half of Glee and put fingers to keyboard. Maybe we could try this for two weeks and figure out a few prizes for those who stick with it. Perhaps we'll come up with something we could submit to MU Voices.

What do you think?

"A New Generation?"

J.J. Berry (author of this article and OCC Dean of Academic and Student Services) is targeting my generation while talking about the "iYs" generation--the generation many of you belong to. I think he's right on target as far as the technological changes. The college generation today has far more distractions than we ever did.

Berry suggests that many young students today have more fluidity/flexibility and tolerance; on the other hand, attention span and depth are in short supply. For example, some "iYs" have thousands of "friends" through Facebook, but may lack face-to-face, committed relationships.

He also argues that, although our worlds may seem very different, academia has something important to share with the "iYs": self-discipline, intellectual substance and rigor, the importance of understanding context, etc. (I may be projecting here.)

What do you think about this? Are J.J. Berry's reflections accurate or not? Do you "iYs" need the challenge and demands the academic world places on you? Is the academic world still relevant, or are we lagging far behind a changing world? Or is the reality more nuanced than that?

I'll be interested in reading your thoughts about this.

"The Peer Writing Tutor Alumni Research Project"

When we were at the College of Composition and Communications Conference (4Cs) in Louisville, KY, last week, Harvey Kail (author of this article) was part of a panel presentation on this project. The presenters talked about a research kit online that schools can adapt for their own use.

After going to that session and reading the article, I realized that, although we solicit feedback from our student writers every semester, it never occurred to me to ask tutors to fill out evaluations. And we could certainly use your input. I hope we're providing the training (sometimes on-the-run), support, and flexibility you need, but is the Writing Center making a difference on a larger scale?

Kail reported very positive results from his surveys, but it did raise a question for me. Do students most interested in writing center work start out with a willingness to work collaboratively, read critically, become a better listener, and join the larger academic community? Those skills may well have been honed to some degree, but do Writing Center tutors already come to the job with those aptitudes?

Whether you're a peer or ESL tutor, what influence does working here have on you academically, professionally, and interpersonally? Has your experience here affected your choice of career? What impact has it had on your sense of yourself as a writer?

After I attended the session I mentioned, I thought about setting up a Facebook page so past and former tutors could keep track of each other as often or as rarely as they want. What do you think?

"From the (writing) center to the edge: Moving writers along the Internet"

I know, I know: When considering computer technology, this article, by Muriel Harris, is ancient. But as we get more papers online, we're pushed to expand the ways and the media through which we tutor. I'd especially like to respond to three points that Harris makes:

1. She cites Coogan's reference to "epistolary education," in which students have to write via e-mail to get help with their writing. In our last post, Sarah Kosel made an excellent point about drawing student writers into conversation about their topic. She said (and I paraphrase) that once they become fired up about their ideas, they begin to focus on the message, not the possibility of a misplaced semi-colon. We can also do this online and, as Coogan writes, "infuse the act of writing with the sound of talking..." Ideally, our online students could get so caught up in the conversation that they'd forget they were writing.

2. I didn't check to see whether the Online Writery Harris alludes to still exists. I love its apparent philosophy of inclusion and egalitarianism, a sense that everybody has something worthwhile and important to say/write. There's a great generosity of spirit in that approach.

I was also struck by the point attributed to Crump: "Conversation itself is the thing, not a means to an end." It's like focusing on the journey more than the destination.

3. Although the "global information infrastructure" has been around for what seems like ages now (especially to you younger tutors), we still work with student writers who struggle to find legitimate sources through the Madonna databases. Anyone can Google for a quick fact check, but those who know where to look for scholarly, accurate, and reputable information sources are going to fare better than those who don't. We could use the gardening analogy (in honor of Marian, our Super-Duper-Master-Gardener) that healthy plants (brains) require healthy soil (high-quality information).

So what do you all think? Specifically, how could we use the Internet to expand our services and/or educational opportunities? What do you think about Crump's observation that "conversation is the thing"? How can we help our students find and identify more reliable online information?