David Kime [#9], On Research

 On the surface, I think that research would be vital for a writing center to function. But that's also because I think that most disciplines, organizations, systems, etc. should have some solid research so that they can mature and develop into something that remains useful. Without said research, they fail to really learn. 

Now, that also brings up the question of "What is research?" But my response is, "Why limit it?" Research covers many different aspects including the work that we've done for this course or the material we've covered through now. Isn't that all a kind of research to make us better tutors? Or to engage with concepts that allow us to discern our strengths and weaknesses? Places for us to develop? As far as The Bedford Guide is concerned, research might be a bit more formal than I make it sound here. While informal research has its value, I do think that the more formal research described would be highly beneficial. 

I would also more immediately see qualitative research as more useful, specifically concerning the interactions between tutors and students. After all, the writing center is a place to build writers. So making and collecting resources, training staff, and providing students a worthwhile experience should be priority. I will not deny that quantitative data could be useful, I don't think it gets to the heart of what people are feeling. 

That all said, my concern would be finding a writing center in a rut -- "If it's not broken, why fix it," or "Don't reinvent the wheel." While those concepts are useful and have their place, they also can block improvement or advancement. There comes a point where the only question to ask is, "What kind of questions do we need to ask?" because you can't consider issues if you aren't able to identify any. But self-improvement should always be a consideration. For example:

Are we living up to our mission statement? Is that helping students become better writers (and in what ways)?

How might we define "good" writing? Is it bound to a standard? Does it need to be in order to have a consensus among colleagues?

What is the ideal time span for tutor-writer interactions/appointments? How might we be able to personalize those interactions without overburdening tutors or overlooking students?

Comments

  1. Carol SeverinoNovember 4, 2020 at 1:01 PM

    Those are good questions, David. It might be hard to operationalize them though--to design a study that would answer them; they seem more introspective.

    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