Group items tagged

ABSTRACT: "This paper reports the results of a study comparing the interactional dynamics of face-to-face and on-line peer-tutoring in writing by university students in Hong Kong. Transcripts of face-to-face tutoring sessions, as well as logs of on-line sessions conducted by the same peer-tutors, were coded for speech functions using a system based on Halliday's functional-semantic view of dialogue.Results show considerable differences between the interactional dynamics in on-line and face-to-face tutoring sessions. In particular, face-to-face interactions involved more hierarchal encounters in which tutors took control of the discourse, whereas on-line interactions were more egalitarian, with clients controlling the discourse more. Differences were also found in the topics participants chose to focus on in the two modes, with issues of grammar, vocabulary, and style taking precedence in face-to-face sessions and more "global" writing concerns like content and process being discussed more in on-line sessions." "

Publication Information: Harris, Muriel. (2015). Teaching One-to-One: The Writing Conference. WAC Clearinghouse Landmark Publications in Writing Studies: http://wac.colostate.edu/books/harris/. Originally Published in Print, 1986, by National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, Illinois. This groundbreaking book offers advice for teachers new to conferencing, experienced teachers seeking to refine or expand their approaches to conferencing, and tutors working in writing centers. Since it was published in 1986, it has become one of the most widely cited books on conferencing. Harris offers a theoretical framework for conference teaching, descriptions of activities typical of and central to writing conferences, advice on diagnostic strategies for individualized instruction, and instructional strategies. Discussions in the book borrow from a wide range of fields, including counseling and therapy, cognitive science, anthropology, and education. In appendices, she includes a set of teaching materials that can be useful in tutor and teacher training.

a report from Cs on materials development; a report from Cs on "Writing Lab Possibilities as the Small College/University; a discussion of staffing (undergrad, grad peers; professional; faculty; self-instruction) for materials-centered vs. student-centered labs (i.e. the difference between teaching more students with fewer staff vs. offering one-on-one support); a 4Cs report on "Setting up a Writing Lab";

This open-access book by Steven J. Corbett, Beyond Dichotomy: Synergizing Writing Center and Classroom Pegagogies, is available to be downloaded free. it is described as follows: How closely can or should writing centers and writing classrooms collaborate? Beyond Dichotomy explores how research on peer tutoring one-to-one and in small groups can inform our work with students in writing centers and other tutoring programs, as well as in writing courses and classrooms. These multi-method (including rhetorical and discourse analyses and ethnographic and case-study) investigations center on several course-based tutoring (CBT) partnerships at two universities. Rather than practice separately in the center or in the classroom, rather than seeing teacher here and tutor there and student over there, CBT asks all participants in the dynamic drama of teaching and learning to consider the many possible means of connecting synergistically. This book offers the "more-is-more" value of designing more peer-to-peer learning situations for developmental and multicultural writers, and a more elaborate view of what happens in these peer-centered learning environments. It offers important implications-especially of directive and nondirective tutoring strategies and methods-for peer-to-peer learning and one-to-one tutoring and conferencing for all teachers and learners of writing.

Faculty and writing center tutors bring expertise to writing as practice and pro-cess. Yet at many institutions, the two groups work in relative isolation, missing opportunities to learn from each other. In this article, I describe a faculty de-velopment initiative in a multidisciplinary writing program that brings together new faculty and experienced undergraduate tutors to workshop instructors' com-ments on first-year writing. The purpose of these workshops is to assist faculty in crafting inquiry-driven written responses that pave the way for collaborative faculty-student conferences. By bringing together scholarly conversations on tu-tor expertise and the role of faculty comments in student learning, I argue for the value of extending partnerships between writing centers and programs. Such ac-counts are important to the field for challenging what Grutsch McKinney (2013) calls the "writing center grand narrative," which limits the scope of writing center work by imagining centers primarily as "comfortable, iconoclastic places where all students go to get one-to-one tutoring on their writing" to the exclusion of lived realities (p. 3). In this case, I describe a writing center where tutors bring their expertise outside the center and into the faculty office, consulting in small groups with faculty with the aim of enriching the quality of instructor feedback in first-year seminars.

a report on how one center has worked to generate student interest (and so gain departmental funding); a report on "Autotutor: A Branching Self-Instruction Program"; a report on achieving competency with basic writers; mailing list

From ABSTRACT: "For teaching practices in the Writing Center, the findings raise questions about how writing center pedagogy can empower L2 writers on their language control when the writing consultants have the ultimate control in language and the L2 learners have the inherent uncertainty. While writing center work draws on the advantages of collaborative dialogues and effects better language control for ESL writers based on a sociocultural learning perspective, writing center pedagogy needs to continue reconsidering the needs and beliefs of ESL writers (Blau & Hall, 2002; Powers, 1993). The language issue in ESL writing is not a lower order concern in the writing, but more likely a primary concern for the writer. As also found in this study, when the broader contextual factors such as the focus of writing and writers' beliefs are taken into account, language knowledge and control are not just about linguistic correctness to ESL writer development. In striving to create better writers but not just better writing for any writers, it is crucial for writing centers to continue rethinking their staff training on the topic of language issues with their diverse multilingual clientele who speaks English as a second language."

Jude Carroll reflects on her 2005 recommendations on managing student plagiarism and on lessons learned since then.

Key issues: Focus on learning Make procedures user-friendly Criteria for decisions about plagiarism

"For students, personal statements and application essays are among the most difficult and most important documents they will ever write. They are difficult because they require both introspection and polish, and important because the writer may literally be competing for tens of thousands of dollars in a huge field of outstanding candidates. A writing tutor who has provided guidance on more than a thousand graduate applications, Joe Schall advises you on how to be competitive but not cocky, informed but not formulaic, openly creative yet professional. As you consider ways to write your way into your future, count on this website to help you grow and thrive in the process."

Do directors also spend time offering one-on-one writing assistance?

"Unnecessary Hangups" (in praise of using machine-based self-instruction or guided self-study tools when budgets don't allow for large tutoring staffs); report from a new WC; "Three Sources for Writing Lab Tutors" (on using funding from Veteran Affairs to provide services for veterans on the G.I. Bill); "Usage Study at BYU" (on identifying effective instructional materials); mailing list

The Journal of Response to Writing publishes papers based on research, theory, and/or practice that meaningfully contribute to an understanding of how response practices lead to better writing. JRW has three purposes: 1. Provide a venue for theorizing and reporting ground-breaking research on response to writing 2. Invite writing theorists, researchers, and practitioners to a venue to share their work with one another and colleagues in adjacent fields, most notably Composition, Applied Linguistics, and Foreign Language teaching viz a viz L1 and L2 writing 3. Provide new or inexperienced teachers with immediate suggestions for use in giving, encouraging, or managing responses to their students' writing

the first "Great Moments in Writing Lab History"; a report on "Comp-Lab Project" of York College, "where reduced classroom hours are systematically coordinated with a flexible schedule of autotutorial work in a writing laboratory"; a report from a WC on offering student support beyond auto-instruction; a report on computer-assisted instruction; mailing list

survey results on writing in the workplace/ on-the-job writing

"Are Machines the Answer?" on the benefits on one-on-one human compared to computer interaction; "Evaluation and Instruction"; "Some Tutoring Guidelines," a list of Dos and Don'ts for tutors; mailing list

This open-access book is a collection of twenty-two articles provides practical information on establishing a writing center and monitoring its daily operation. Born of the practical experiences and theoretical insights of editor Pam (Farrell) Childers, it addresses "problems and frustrations, shares successes and failures, and offers suggestions. In general, it addresses the issue of establishing and maintaining a successful high school writing lab/center. It also provides college and university writing lab/center directors with insight into what the high schools are doing." The Table of Contents is listed on this page, and the whole book is free to download through the WAC Clearninghouse link provided here.

crowdsourcing a list of resources on WCs and student learning/retention; research on cost-effectiveness; individual reports from directors that demonstrate value of WCs see also a discussion on writing centers and grade improvement: http://lyris.ttu.edu/read/messages?id=18268126

"As student populations in colleges and universities continue to diversify, composition programs do not always meet students' varying needs. English as a Second Language (ESL) students appear to fail mainstream writing courses at higher rates than their traditional counterparts, yet mainstreaming continues to be mandated, often due to budgetary constraints. Many programs offer multicultural writing courses, but these, too, are often ineffective for many students. Meanwhile, as Paul Kei Matsuda shows, there is a decided split between the disciplines of composition and ESL. Since ESL scholars have a much stronger history of working with diverse student populations than composition scholars do, this study aims to look to ESL scholarship, specifically to contrastive rhetoric, to explore more effective methods of teaching writing to students with varying needs. This case study takes an in-depth look at one student's journey writing across cultures. Ming, a Chinese immigrant who has been in the United States for approximately ten years, is a junior at the University of Rhode Island who struggles with writing. Over the course of one semester, three of her projects were studied in depth. Data include transcripts of audiotaped tutorial sessions in the URI Writing Center, Ming's assignments and papers, and the researcher's notes from interviews with Ming following the tutorial sessions. ^ The new contrastive rhetoric (Connor, Kaplan, Purves) insists that external factors such as culture, education, and media influence the rhetorical patterns writers use. Through a lens of contrastive rhetoric, it becomes clear that most of Ming's difficulties when writing stem from a lack of familiarity with the conventions of U.S. academic discourse or of what her reader expects from her text. The source of much of this is cultural. While Ming's experiences are not generalizable, an in-depth look at her experiences foregrounds some of the issues that contrastive rhetoric addresses, making th

"The WAC Clearinghouse provides access to the following books and books series. To date, more than 50 books are available on this site and additional books are in production. All books are available for free viewing and/or download. To view books, click on book covers, books series titles, or links in the new releases list."

Article in NCTE's Forum by Nicole Caswell, Jackie Grutsch McKinney, and Rebecca Jackson, "A Glimpse into the Working Lives of New Writing Center Directors." pp. A3-7. This issue of Forum focuses on "Issues about Part-Time and Contingent Faculty." Vol. 18.1 (Fall 2014). Access on the NCTE site is limited to NCTE members, but readers may have access through institutional libraries with databases of online publications. Article focuses on who does the work of directing and what work do new directors perform.