Steve Sherwood's article regarding censorship (129) offers a humorous
look at how we, at tutors, should approach some of the questionable
material we may see in a client's paper. In the essay, he explains how he
was able to warn a student that his beliefs and opinions (as described in
the paper) may have a direct impact on his grade. However, the client
ignored the warnings of the consultant. It is here that I would have went
down a different path than the tutor in the story. While the consultant
tried once again to advise the client that his ideas may result in a poor
grade, I would have most likely shrugged it off. From there, I would have
proceeded to help the student in whatever ways he wanted. Even though his
arrogance would have most likely cost him, I realize that you cannot
necessarily change someone's mind.
I am reminded of George Orwell's 1984 when Sherwood quotes Jeane Simpson,
stating: "if we believe some speech is more equal than other, then all our
trumpeting about "academic freedom is hypocritical rot" (130). This, to
me, is important to keep in mind. Sure, students may present ideas that
may result in poor grades - but if they are ideas that the student truly
believes in, I think you must attempt to make him or her reconsider for
the sake of the writing. In the event that this attempt is unsuccessful,
I think it is the consultant's job to sit back, ignore the fallacy, and
encourage the client to keep writing.
I have not yet seen an instance in which the consultant felt the need to warn the client about the content of the paper. It seems to me that the majority of students who visit the writing center treat the word of the consultant like the gospel.
On a completely different note, I feel that revision is certainly important in regards to Toby Fulwiler's essay (156). For seem reason, it seems that there are certain negative connotations we attach to the terms "revision" and "rewriting." I'm not sure why these assumptions exist, but they really aren't so negative. I'm sure that sometimes, consultants would feel relieved to be dealing with a strong writer who is just looking for some revision strategies.
While I do agree with much of Fulwiler's essay, I still feel as if there are areas in which he digresses. Although the ability to examine your work in search of improvements is necessary, I do not entirely feel that "teaching writing is teaching rewriting." In certain situations, tutoring is largely concerned with revision. When a client is struggling to meet the length requirements for an assignment, consultants will tend to look for ways in which he or she can "add new information and more explanation" (161).
I would think that attempts at revision could be one of the most enjoyable experiences in the writing center, especially if you are having repeated sessions with the same client. It seems that you could gage how far the client has come and determine what is left to accomplish.
References: Murphy, Christina and Steve Sherwood. The St. Martin's Sourcebook for Writing Tutors. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2008. Sherwood, Steve. "Censoring Students, Censoring Ourselves: Constraining Conversations in the Writing Center." In Murphy and Sherwood, 129-136. Fulwiler, Toby. "Provocative Revision." In Murphy and Sherwood, 156-167.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"...revision could be one of the most enjoyable experiences in the writing center, especially if you are having repeated sessions with the same client". I have never thought of that. But yeah, the idea of helping (and observing) how someone develop his/her writing sounds exciting to me. I would love to help the same client from time to time because we'd have more time to develop our interpersonal relationship.
ReplyDelete"For seem reason, it seems that there are certain negative connotations we attach to the terms "revision" and "rewriting." I'm not sure why these assumptions exist, but they really aren't so negative." - I think this is a very good point: Clients want to write a paper and have it finished in one-shot, and they think that going back to revise means they did something "wrong," instead of realizing that the real point of revision is to read while looking for ways to make something better, not just to fix mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI think this is what Fulwiler is getting at by saying that writing is rewriting. Whether we overhaul a whole paper or just spend a lot of time working and reworking sentences as we compose a draft, what we are doing is revisiting our ideas and our expression of those ideas. I know you know this because you're a writer yourself, but it's in the going back and re-seeing that we really find what we want to say and how we want to say it. (Of course we spend more time revising and refining some work than others; I don't revise my blog posts heavily, for instance, but my assignment prompts I refine over and over to be sure they are clear in guidelines and expectations - and that I know what I want students to actually learn from the assignment.)
On an unrelated note, I'm going to miss your voice in class here in a couple of weeks, Sgt. Tutor!
I agree meeting with the same client habitually is good. In fact, today I met with a client who I helped Monday. We are still working on the same assignment, but we're really making progress. She will coming a third time this friday to finish the assignment. She even said that she would bring her other assignment so that we could work on it, as well. I hope to meet with her regularly, even if she doesn't have essays. I hope to work on the things she struggles, maybe make a game that will develop those weaknesses she has. I think this is a great way to help the student because we'll continually meet in a fun environment, which she wouldn't probably see if she met her professor in her office.
ReplyDelete