Robert Taylor - Week 3

I used to be a strict adherent to the idea that writing within the conventions of proper grammar and structure was the cornerstone of good writing. This is how I workshopped my own writing, and it is how I would give feedback to others when I was assigned to do so. It wasn’t until I began training to become a teacher when I considered the notion that ideas are more important than conventions. As I’ve gained experience working with student writing, it has become clear to me that the ideas within a person’s writing should be the true focus and foundation for any conversation about revision. Additionally, I believe a curiosity about the writer’s subject should be an integral part of giving revision feedback as well.

The question, “How might the writing and tutoring of non-native speakers of English differ from the tutoring of native speakers?” seems to be a trick question when I think about the revision process. The Bedford Guide calls for tutors to take a universal design approach when tutoring. In this sense, there should be very little difference between how one approaches the writing of a non-native speaker of English and a native speaker of English. If one bases a conversation about revision on the ideas and approaches the discussion with a curiosity for the subject, there should be very little that stands in the way of productive tutoring and revision.

I realize this idealistic approach is untenable when it comes to the reality of academic writing, but it would be nice to see such a change occur in academia with a refocus on ideas over strict conventions. I do certainly have beliefs about how tutoring a non-native speaker of English might differ from tutoring a native speaker of English--I also have ideas about the importance of conventions within writing--but in the spirit of creating good digital discussion, I’ll leave those for another time.

Comments

  1. ConorSeptember 14, 2020 at 2:23 PM

    Love the idea of focusing on ideas over conventions (though obviously this is complicated in practice because what good are ideas if they cannot be understood? and what are conventions if not a means of understanding one another?). I do wonder how many conventions we could lose, or at least loosen, and still maintain understanding. It seems to clearly be a non-zero number (perhaps especially when we consider the more particular conventions of academic writing or even specific disciplines within academia).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Andrew post 9

I think it's vitally important for writing center staff to keep abreast of writing center scholarship. Because students who visit writing centers vary widely in their proficiency, their motivations for seeking help, and economic/identity categories, and bring in work from disparate disciplines, staff need to be adaptable to multitudinous tutoring relationships and scenarios. Requiring staff to go through practicum courses (held on maybe a biennial basis) and holding regular department forums where tutors can present research or seek counsel would help keep everyone on the same page with regard to the latest findings and debates in writing center theory and practice. However, I don't think that it's reasonable expect that each member regularly conduct their own research, since many tutors are graduate students or full time instructors whose resources are often already stretched thin on account of pressures to produce writing/research in their own field of study. Asking too m...
Read more

Andrew blog post #10

 I'm usually fairly confident working with writers outside my discipline. I think part of that has to do with my own experience as an undergraduate, where I switched majors from political science to literature to philosophy then, finally, to psychology. To my mind, basic critical thinking skills--the kind that I teach my students in my rhetoric classes--apply just as much to qualitative analyses as they do to quantitative/empirical analyses. Questions of audience and purpose factor into effective writing and communication--approaching any paper, regardless of the class that it's for, I always push writers to ask themselves how much information is necessary for them to provide to contextualize an argument, and remind them that each item of evidence they introduce has to be accompanied by an explanation of its relevance to their overarching thesis. One of my writing center students' first assignment for his rhetoric class was to write a paper about his major (bio-medical engi...
Read more

Andrew blog post 4

Perhaps one way to promote appreciation of other "Englishes," as the CCCC statement (as much as they would disapprove of the use of the term) is to recalibrate considerations of style in writing pedagogy, one that demonstrates that what we call "standard English" is but one among many modes of expression that can be modulated according to varying purposes/audiences. Many people, I think, don't particularly enjoy reading academic English, which, besides imposing oppressive standards on marginalized people, is often a clumsy, bland, and inefficient means of expression; writing is most effective when it comes off as the work of a singular voice and intellect.  Students' general education in universities should also include critical studies of how languages are products of conquest. This, of course, has been a constant throughout history--consider how Spanish and Portuguese integrated Arabic vocabulary by virtue of Muslim rule over the Iberian Peninsula. However...
Read more