Week 5

          I have loved all the readings this week about how to practically apply some of the writing center theory we have been discussing. I found McAndrew and Reigstad’s “What Tutoring Is: Models and Strategies” to be especially helpful. It is a great compilation of strategies for all sorts of situations. I can’t see myself using all of them, but a few did stand out. My favorite is the “promise” strategy for helping writers recognize that their thesis is a kind of agreement they make with readers. I observed a session where the writer’s introduction was only tangentially related to the body of the paper. To help the writer recognize the issue, Shaun described the introduction of the paper as a promise of what’s to come. The writer was able to recognize that her personal anecdote “promised” an essay about her relationship with her dad, not about the book she was supposed to be responding to.

            I’ve also seen some of the development strategies at work in the center. Last week Heath used oral composing to help a writer expand his thesis and ultimately his essay. The writer didn’t have a draft, but he did have a very narrow thesis that he wanted to run by someone. Heath asked the writer what he thought he might write in his paper. As the writer poured out a list of great ideas, Heath encouraged him to write them down. From there, the student was able to expand his thesis and come up with a rough outline of the rest of his paper.

I believe that one of the best ways to help a writer develop a piece of writing is simply acting as a reader. I can point out areas where I’m confused, or areas where I would like to hear more about the topic. Asking writers questions about their topic indicates to them when and where development is lacking.

I thought the style categories in the section on voice and tone were great ways to describe it to writers who don’t have experience with various rhetorical situations. Most writers will be able to grasp what “tough, sweet, and stuffy” language is and be able to recognize it in their own writing once they’re aware of it. Asking if their voice matches their audience and purpose will quickly reveal any issues. In my experience, the biggest issue with tone and voice is that writers aren’t always conscious of it until it is brought to their attention.

The reading from Sourcebook really emphasized the pretextual and postextual dimensions of consultations because they are vital and yet so often forgotten. I got to do a “walk-in-ish” appointment in the center today and really focused on these two dimensions. The student couldn’t come in at any of the available times and his paper was due tomorrow. He needed help understanding the assignment, so I figured taking a look at it couldn’t hurt anything. This also meant we only talked for about five minutes and there wasn’t much of a textual dimension. I was sure to introduce myself and ask how his class was going. This seemed to help him relax. At the end of our conversation, I made sure he understood what his next steps were and encouraged him to come again (and make appointments ahead of time). It wasn’t a real consultation, but it seemed to be a helpful experience for both me and the writer.