To Mr. Bert Eisenstadt,
My name is __ and I am a student enrolled into
Professor Justin Roger-Cooper’s Seminar in Teaching Writing (Spring 2014). This
course is a mandatory requirement for my major – Secondary Education (English)
and plays an important role in enhancing my skills as an aspiring educator. The
main objective of this course, from a student’s perspective, is to become
better versed in the art of teaching writing across different academic levels.
The course texts, Tutoring Writing by
Donald A. McAndrew & Thomas J. Reigstad and Active Voice by James Moffett outline fundamental strategies for
teaching writing that were constantly referred to throughout the semester.
Through in-class discussions, activities, and projects revolving around the
strategies presented in both texts, I discovered that writing is simply an
individualistic tool that needs careful nurturing. One of the main components
of the course allowed for the exploration as an observer into the field
tutoring writing at the Writing Center, where I was given the opportunity to
witness some teaching-of-writing strategies in close proximity. During my four
observations at the writing center, I will highlight that Collaborative
Learning and Talk and Writing were
the most effective of the strategies. On the other hand, Correcting Errors and
Usurping Ownership were least
effective strategies, and may require a more measured implementation going
forward.
During my first observation, the Collaborative Learning
strategy was on display. The student came into the writing center in search of
guidance as it pertained to a short essay pitch as a tour agent for his
E-Business class. He asked the tutor for specific help as it pertained to the
structure of his paper, as well as the vocabulary and punctuation throughout.
The tutor set about by reading the draft silently to herself, intervening
throughout to highlight stations where corrections maybe required. The tutor
then activated the strategy to connect with the student’s piece. Collaborative
Learning is defined in the text, Tutoring
Writing as, “The tutor and the writer are connected as they question,
propose, and evaluate both the draft and their interaction” (McAndrew &
Reigstad 6). This process was carried out in the form of a lengthy dialogue
between both the tutor and student as they re-read each line of the piece
together to identify important stoppages where revision was required. For
instance, the tutor asked two questions along the lines of, “Can you think of a
better suited word to use here?” or “can you say a bit more about the place you
are advertising?” The student also asked a few questions along the way, mostly
relating to ideas he had, “do you think I should speak about the prices here?”
or “do you think I should form a new paragraph to present this idea?” The
characteristics of this strategy allowed for a smooth and progressive session
as the student and tutor worked collectively to make significant strides
towards completely a polished piece. More importantly, this strategy also
provided the student that invaluable perspective of the outside reader and what
she thought of the piece as a whole. After all, many students enter the writing
center in search of obtaining the perspective of someone close to the expertise
of their own instructor. I would certainly use this strategy in my future
tutoring endeavors.
An
extension of Collaborative Learning is the Talk and Writing strategy that was
evident during my second observation. This strategy was implemented by the
tutor because of the peculiar circumstances of the session. The student came
into writing center for help pertaining to an English 102 thesis driven essay.
Having stated, “Fix essay” on her sign-in sheet as her reason for visit, the
tutor pulled me aside and said, “This might be a long session!” Nevertheless,
after skimming and highlighting through the student’s paper while silently
reading, the tutor wore a perplexed look. Before the tutor went any further,
she asked the student if she had a copy of the assignment instructions. When
given the instructions of the assignment, the tutor quickly reviewed it and
instantly realized that the student had misinterpreted the assignment
completely. At this point, whatever the student had initially planned for the
revision of her paper was slowly shifting in its primary necessity. The tutor
then stated to the student, “Your thesis statement and the contents in your
body paragraphs do no match – you always need to support the claims you are
making”. The tutor then explained the assignment instructions indepthly and
pointed to the possible reasons for the comments left by the professor. After
the student had understood where she’d lost track, she asked, “What should I do
next?” To assist the student with her question, the tutor turned to the Talk
and Writing strategy. This strategy is complexly defined in the text, Tutoring Writing as, “talk allows
writers to bounce their ideas off an audience, which requires them to practice
rhetorical skills as they adjust the ideas to the audience, and they thus
develop the analytical and critical skills that are essential to drafting and
revising” (McAndrew & Reigstad 4). Having already identified where
corrections needed to occur, the tutor used this technique as the catalyst for
the student to use her own thought-process during the revision. The tutor then
asked the student questions along the lines of, “Tell me all you know about
this particular short story?” or “What exactly where you trying to prove with
your thesis?” While they both engaged in conversation, the tutor asked the
student to take notes and use it as a reference when constructing the revised
version of the assignment. This was a great improvisation my both parties to
create a well managed session that had to shift completely from its initial
goal. Most importantly though, just before the session ended, the tutor
reassured the student that it wasn’t entirely her fault that she didn’t grasp
the assignment instructions initially. At this point the tutor had recognized
that the student was clearly distraught with the grade she’d received and
seemed quite overwhelmed that she would have to restructure the entire piece in
a short space of time. In Active Voice,
Moffett articulates strong views regarding the forceful teachings of
composition because, “Untold damage has been done in the teaching of
composition by asking students to cover too much in too short a length”
(Moffett 7). This theory connects well with the emotional toll that was
displayed by the student. Clearly overwhelmed by the assignment, the student
became of victim learning composition in an accelerated manner, one in which
Moffett is completely opposed to. Nevertheless, this tutoring session was
handled extremely well by both parties and sits as an exemplary example for my
future encounters as an educator.
On
the opposite side, there are also methods taught to refrain from when tutoring
composition, they fall under ‘What Tutoring Writing Is Not’. Correcting Errors
and Usurping Ownership were the two apparent strategies on display during my
third and fourth observations. During my third observation, the student came in
seeking help with a scholarship essay. The student specifically asked the tutor
to review the contents of the essay as well as its structure. This session
lasted a mere thirty minutes due to the tutor’s straightforward assessment. The
tutor resorted to the Correcting Errors strategy to assist the student’s piece,
which resulted in an ineffective session because it didn’t cover any of
student’s primary concerns. Firstly, the tutor read the essay to himself a
couple of times before giving the student his feedback. Having made his
assessment, he then turned to the student and simultaneously activated the
flawed method and began singling out to the grammatical and punctuation errors
throughout the paper. In Tutoring
Writing, this type of ill-advised tutoring strategy is defined as,
“Premature concern about grammatical correctness and other rules of standard
written English may truncate the rhythm of writing” (McAndrew & Reigstad
17). Obviously the tutor had strayed away from what was most important not only
to the student’s needs, but more importantly the strict focus on grammatical
and punctuation correctness are ‘secondary’ issues when tutoring composition.
Likewise, my fourth and final observation had a similar ineffectiveness solely
due to the flawed method implemented. It was another short session that lasted
roughly thirty minutes and the tutor was again quite straightforward in his
assessment. The student had come in with an English 101 thesis driven essay and
wanted specific help as it pertained to her thesis statement. The student
wanted to know if her thesis statement was applicable to the specific
assignment instructions. The tutor began to read the paper and before turning
to the second page said, “This will not work…this thesis needs added support or
you should reconsider your views and construct a new claim”. My initial
reaction to this quick judgment was one of shock, but I did understand that
thesis driven essays rely strongly on a well-written thesis statement. However
though, I cannot excuse the manner, in which the tutor dismissed the student’s
ideas, it was an example of Usurping Ownership. In Tutoring Writing, this flawed method is defined as, “Writers should
feel welcome to explore their own ideas and find their own ways to express
them, without unwelcomed intrusions from the tutor” (McAndrew & Reigstad
19). Regardless of the quality or direction of the student’s work, the tutor
should’ve displayed a better reasoning and reaction to what he evaluated – at
least he should’ve read the entire essay before making a final judgment.
Tutoring writing, from a tutor’s perspective is not about changing the way a
writer thinks or writes it’s simply assisting as best he or she can on a
particular assignment. In fact, the entire writing process is something never
ends; it’s a gradual progression that improves with age; the implementation
positive strategies and correct instructing. I believe that both tutors in
these situations with better strategies would’ve had a more comprehensive and
efficient sessions.
Being an aspiring Secondary Education English teacher, I
cannot stress enough my gratitude for the opportunity to observe first-hand at
the writing center. Knowing that writing is an individualistic tool that
requires precise nurturing has given me a new perspective regarding the proper
ways in which it should be taught. I’ve observed so many different strategies,
both positive and negative that have enlightened me about the precise measures
surrounding the field of teaching composition. I hope the contents in this
letter have provided equal recognition of the great work done by all associated
at the writing center, as well as worthy suggestions for future improvements. I
came away with great experiences, many of which I’ll hold onto for future
references. Thank you again for the opportunity.
Sincerely,
No comments:
Post a Comment