It is becoming clear to me that one of the most important aspects of the tutoring process is dialogue. It is necessary to pay special attention to what is being said - from both sides. Obviously, it is important for the consultant to actively listen to the needs of the client. It is also wise for the consultant to be mindful of what he or she is saying and how the advice may be taken.
Even if we feel sure about what the client needs, we must still remain intent on focusing our attention on them. To the point, Murphy asks if we are "truly interested in what the student has to say, or are we too quick to announce our opinions?" (10).
In the case of Paul and Leonard (14), this advice is put to good use. Here, the tutor is fairly certain of how to direct the client, but is patient as he guides him. When writing a personal narrative, the client is surprised to realize that he can write about his past work experience. As a reader (and tutor in training), I laughed while thinking "duh!" to myself. Though it would seem obvious to most that a personal essay could include, well, anything about you, I suppose it isn't necessarily such a no-brainer for everyone. Positive examples from this scenario included the tutor's ability to get a feel for the client as a person. This allowed him to let the client arrive at his destination, rather that the consultant telling him what to write about. Another positive note was that Paul, the tutor, allowed his client to realize the relevance of writing abut past experiences.
This is something I hope to employ during my time as a tutor. Unfortunately, during my time in the writing center, I have not witnessed any consultants who were afforded enough time with the client in order to explain the relevance of writing. Perhaps, this is something that comes with repeat visits.
Lunsford's essay (47) is simple; collaboration is key. It aids in virtually every aspect of the writing center, which is why clients seek help in the first place. They are aware that another set of eyes, and a different perspective, may help find mistakes or spark ideas that they had not considered. Collaboration is without question, crucial in the writing center.
While Lunsford's essay represents writing centers at their best, Brooks's (168) depicts a scenario with zero collaboration. The line between tutoring and editing is not as fine as some may think. It seems to me that editing is virtually cheating. Because it does not improve the client as a writer, it is an ineffective means of attempting to tutor. With this in mind, it must be reiterated that the focus is on the student and not the paper at hand.
While I have not yet been lucky enough to observe many tutoring sessions, I have had the awkwardness of dealing with a client by myself. I warned him that I was not a tutor and explained the situation, though I would offer as much help as he desired. He obliged. Once he informed me that his paper was due in less than an hour, I figured it was best to cut the formalities. Although most of the focus seemed to be on the paper, I still tried to advise him that if he allows himself more time in the future, we may be able to develop more ideas. That day, or maybe the next, I ran into him at the gym on campus. He thanked me for what little help I offered and I reminded him that that's what we are there for. I have a feeling I may be seeing him again.
References:Murphy, Christina and Steve Sherwood. The St. Martin's Sourcebook for Writing Tutors. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. 8-23. Lunsford, Andrea. "Collaboration, Control, and the Idea of a Writing Center." In Murphy and Sherwood, 47-53. Brooks, Jeff. "Minimalist Tutoring: Making the Student Do All the Work." In Murphy and Sherwood, 168-173.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm so pleased that your first tutoring session went well (though I apologize that you were thrown into the deep end and told to swim). It's a good feeling when we know students are going to come back, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteI think you bring up a good point about tutors having limited time with students. This summer, at the International Writing Centers Association conference, I talked to a lot of directors about the appointment vs. no appointment model. Feelings are really mixed on this. Some writing center directors believe students need 30 minutes, minimum, for an effective session, and they insist that students come to the center with an appointment so their session can run between 30-50 minutes. Others believe that we can help students even in 10 minutes if we can focus on their goals and ours, splitting our focus quickly between writer/text. I'm conflicted on the issue. I think more learning happens in longer sessions, but I also hate turning students away when they've taken the initiative to come to the center, even right before a paper is due.
Maybe the best we can do, for now, is to talk to those last-minute clients (briefly) about what revision is, and how much more they would benefit from the center if they came the day before a paper was due, not the hour before, and blocked out some significant time (say, 30 minutes) to work with a tutor.
I agree with the fact that it is really hard to find a quality tutoring session to witness and I sometimes feel that the articles we read are a bit idealized, as the only sessions I've seen in the writing center are of students that are being coached through basic grammar and sentence structure. I feel like there will never be a day that goes by that I won't be asked to proofread a paper!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and amy. Many of the sessions I witness unfold very differently from how I would do it. So far, with the exception of one session, I have watched a tutor edit a clients paper.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I lean towards the idea of a collaborative tutor. I think all good things are produced by more than one mind. After all if the client had all the right things they would not be coming to us for help in the first place. If tutors knew everything there is to know we would not learn at all in the tutoring process and as a result would not become effective tutors.