Techy Tutors

I am from the internet generation. I entered elementary school when AOL took off. I was one of the first kids to use AOL Instant Messenger. I remember when MySpace began. I remember when Facebook started. My papers in high school were typed and emailed to teachers. In college, I've only submitted one hand-written piece of work, ever. The development of the web and online technologies has significantly influenced my life. I grew up alongside the internet. As I matured, it matured. But not everyone's like me, and no one knows my future or the internet's.

Michael Pemberton's article "Planning for Hypertexts in the Writing Center... Or Not" discusses how writing centers should respond to the plethora of new technologies for the computer and on the internet. He proposes different possible response paths ranging from not treating hypertexts any differently than any other writing to extensive training in computer applications and programs. Neither of these approaches appropriately makes space for our technological developments in the writing center. My thoughts...

First, since this article was first published in 2003, many computer and web programs have turned what used to take complicated coding into simple user-friendly tools. Many of the training concerns Pemberton stresses don't hold much water any more. Some students may be involved in projects that require advanced or specific knowledge into a particular program or coding language, for which they can utilize technology services on campuses, but the majority of hypertextual work being done by students is written via programs that all students are very familiar with.

Second, why do we need to make some type of declaration of our ultimate policy? Doing so would both require constant unnecessary adjustments to policy as technology advances but also an unnecessarily dogmatic response to something foreign. It seems like certain requests and situations involving advancing technology in the writing center will be reasonable, others will not, and that it is perfectly fine to leave that to the writing consultants discretion. If it involves deeper understanding then they feel qualified to use, then they should do what they would otherwise, and refer the student to someone with the correct expertise.

Otherwise, hypertexts are familiar territory to student writing consultants, and do not need to be treated any differently beyond accommodating for hypertext specific concerns, such as online citations, hypertext formatting (i.e. no indentations at the beginning of paragraphs), and other technical stuff. The art of writing is the same no matter the medium through which it is presented, and so if the aim of writing consultants is to make better writers, it would seem that we don't have to change our direction very much to hit the same target.

WATCHing Writers

As this blog has emphasizes for the past couple of weeks, cultural factors play a huge role in writing consultations, especially when those cultural influences are as deep as those of international and ESL students. It's clear that writing consultants and centers need to adapt their pedagogy a bit to maximize the positive impact we have on these writers, and some general cautions have been discussed, but how do these broad concerns play out in an actual consultation?

In "Creating a Common ground with ESL writers", authors David Mosher, Davin Granroth, and Troy Hicks, propose a WATCH protocol for consultations with ESL writers, highlighting nine examples of common scenarios with ESL writers to exhibit how the WATCH protocol can serve as a reliable rule of thumb for these situations. WATCH stands for: Talk about the Writer, talk about the Audience/Assignment, talk about the Text, being aware of Communication Caveats, and to be sure that you're being Helpful. The WATCH protocol echos the arguments in my previous posts about establishing a healthy relationship and deepened level of empathy/patience with ESL students.

I think, however, that the real strength of this article lies in the insights extracted from the nine specific areas of "cultural variance" that consultants need to be aware of. Even though the WATCH protocol is all well and good, it isn't very specific, and for all the talk of offering directive tutoring when appropriate, I think this is one of those times when the consultant is the one in need of directive tutoring. The nine areas of cultural variance in writing that are discussed are topic development, transition signaling, directness, metaphoric usage, digressions, argumentation and support, voice/stance, product vs. process oriented thinking, and views on intellectual property.

The advice provided in each of these areas is massively helpful, however, I noticed that a pattern emerged. When trying to bridge gaps between American norms and the norms of other cultures, the authors always suggest that the consultant ask the writer what they meant to say. The very act of rewording usually clarifies the intent of the writer for the consultant, but also shows the writer how by rewording their ideas they used language more familiar to Americans.

This got me thinking. Why do we only go out of our way to engage in this type of consultation for ESL students? Wouldn't these same technique be just as effective with American students, who though they may not face enormous cultural barriers, still have difficulty communicating their ideas? I think so. I think it would also allow consultants to ethically be more directive with American students. We can specifically point to errors or areas of concern and why they could be better, but then force the task of addressing those issues back onto the writer.

What I mean to say is, I think the style of tutoring we adopt for ESL students is the superior style of tutoring for all students. Students are looking for direct help, and we can provide that direct help ethically as long as we don't become the "fixers". As consultants, our job should be to highlight weak spots in writing, explain why they are weak spots, and then the writer has to use that information to initiate a dialogue with the consultant about how to strengthen those areas. That style of tutoring would both engage the student more, give them more control of their writing, and increase their satisfaction with the session since they feel like they "fixed" specific points in their paper.

We should be WATCHing all writers, not just ESL writers.

ESL Consultations

Interesting fact: Research has shown that the primary motivation behind medical malpractice lawsuits is not a doctor's negligence, but their relationships with their patients. A patient is more likely to sue a doctor they have a cool or neutral relationship with who was not grossly negligent than a cheery and personable doctor who made a more negligent mistake. When avoiding malpractice lawsuits then, the most important thing for doctors is not how well they practice medicine and treat their patients, but how they make their patients feel.

Similarly, the more I read about writing consulting and the more experience I gain, the less I think that a consultant's mastery of language is the most helpful asset for leading effective consulting sessions. You can be the most brilliant writer at a university, but if you can't impart that knowledge to those you are trying to help, you aren't doing a good job. On the other hand, if you are a decent writer with a few good tips that you can communicate clearly, you can help someone much more than the linguistic pro. Surely a writing consultant should be a strong writer with a higher than average writing fluency, but it's perfectly fine for them to admit their own weaknesses and utilize outside sources like writer's web to supplement their own knowledge.

While the tutee is interested in the package of knowledge (and the package is what motivated a professor to recommend me for this class), how the package is delivered seems most paramount. This is compounded for non-traditional students, especially ESL students, who already are more likely to struggle to communicate clearly with you. To help improve communication, The Bedford Guide for Writing Tutors includes 10 really helpful tips from pages 67 to 69 that include making sure you can phrase things in multiple ways, avoiding bizarre english idioms, and helping the writer to feel at ease. All of these concerns stem from a desire to make ESL students comfortable. As Harris points out in "Cultural Conflicts in the Writing Center, ESL students "need sympathy and understanding when they ask what they perceive to be dumb questions or when they make silly mistakes that native speakers never will" (214).

But how do you accommodate a special type of communication while still achieving your goal (making better writers) when you're so used to your usual way of doing things? After helping my roommate (an ESL student) and watching the videos on ESL tutorials, I'd venture to propose the following overarching guidelines for consulting ESL students.

Allow them to speak. When you are first introduced, go out of your way to show interest in whatever they want to talk about. Don't force a topic on them. Maybe bring a more broad topic up like where they are from, what their native language is, what their academic interests are, and see where they take it. Getting them to do some interpersonal talking will improve your chances of getting verbal feedback during the actual consultation.

Be directive. ESL students can learn more from directive tutoring than we would expect of other students. While this may be a generalization, I think it's a true one and not something we should ignore if we want to help each student as best as we can. Though in this situation, a problem with directive commentary is that it can lead to the consultant doing a lot of the talking. Try bringing up a specific point, pointing to the area of concern, look up at the writer, and listen attentively as they respond. This gets them to interact with you and the text, and hopefully in a way that is comfortable for them if you introduce yourself to them and converse with them politely and happily.

By providing concise directive commentary and then allowing the ESL student to react in a comfortable environment, I'm convinced that they're going to get much more out of a session than they would if they were treated as American students with primary fluency in English. Remember that sometimes less is more, and that reassuring smiles are more important than commas (or medical treatment, for that matter).