David Kime [#7]

 From personal experience, I can say that one of the most difficult aspects of document review is clarity. Specifically, I found reviewing students' work without them around often means many things go left unsaid. How do I get to know them? How can I connect to them? Can they sense my tone? Can I sense theirs? What if they have further questions about a specific aspect? What if I have further questions? The immediacy and candidness of working synchronously provides an exceptional number of opportunities to build a stronger rapport (at least personally speaking). However, I will say that I appreciate the kind of time that asynchronous tutoring allows for. I can closely review the writing. I can annotate and provide more thorough feedback. I can do it all on my time. 

The question, then, is does the ability to be more thorough make up for the questions that cannot be asked. In effect, when reviewing documents, the tutor needs to anticipate questions, needs to learn to see their own writing -- which is a blessing (evidence of areas to improve) and a curse (too much time without the chance to talk through your own thoughts). 

Now, that said, I haven't really had the opportunity to tutor students asynchronously on finding, evaluating, and using outside sources. Overall, it seems like a much harder task, since one of the more effective strategies might be a walkthrough where they can ask questions to clarify any steps they feel unsure of. Understanding what to look for can be a lengthy (and effectively exasperating) experience that might result in the student taking the easier way out, even if this understanding becomes intuitive with practice. 

Comments

  1. Dylan NiceOctober 13, 2020 at 8:09 PM

    I also appreciate the greater time to think and compose feedback in writing. When giving immediate verbal feedback with a student I often feel rushed, flustered, and prone to confusing myself. If I get confused, I can't imagine what the student's experience of that interaction must be like. Of course, it is hard to say how much of my uncertainty and confusion they're really picking up on. I try to make sure that each student who comes to me in office hours leaves feeling like they've gotten something actionable from me. I ask if they feel more confident moving forward and have to trust them when they say they do. Though, I sometimes feel as though they're only being polite.

    In written feedback, however, I can change my mind and revised or delete a comment without the student having to be party to my process. As an introvert, I value that time and space.

    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