E-tutoring: The benefits and limitations of online tutoring

Through the Glass The UIC Writing Center Magazine Spring 2015 In this issue: Standard and Non-Standard English A Narrative of Learning Stlye Online Tutoring The Psychology of Tutoring Student Contributors Emily Gahan Alexandra Sydor Steven Kushner Lenore Tahara-Eckl Faculty Editor Charitianne Williams with a BA 200 assignment. You asked if I would be willing to take the session, even though our class hadn’t started formally tutoring. I said yes, and that writer became someone that I continued to work our toolbox for tutoring. The em- with throughout his remaining phasis on “peerness” in our center time at UIC. I think this very irst and on tutors being collaborative time tutoring helped in building in their style of tutoring, as well as my conidence about tutoring. All getting the chance to cross-tutor, the things we had discussed about helped me to alleviate some of “peerness” were true! Tutoring rethe nerves that I had about tutor- ally was a conversation between ing for the irst time. Even still, I you and the writer! Knowing this had some questions and nerves helped me going forward in the and I remember coming to you in rest of my sessions. It’s also somethe week prior to when we were to thing that I tell other tutors now oicially start tutoring to ask you when they come to me with the some questions. This conversation same nerves I had about tutoring actually lead to my very irst ses- for the irst time. Do you remember your irst sion tutoring one on one. time teaching ENGL 222? Did you There was a student that dropped-in shortly after our con- have similar concerns as irst-time versation ended who needed help tutors or were they diferent? From the Director’s Corner: A dialogue between Samantha Gordon and Vainis Aleksa Samantha Gordon has been working at the Writing Center for over four years. When she was a irst year student, she took English 222, our training course, and remained a tutor until she graduated with an Accounting degree. She continued working as a tutor and a staf leader as she returned the following year to complete her MBA. The following is a dialogue between her and me as we relect on our time at the Writing Center. Vainis: Sam, what is your impression of your irst days at the Writing Center over four years ago? Samantha: Prior to taking ENGL 222, I did not have the opportunity to use the Writing Center. It was my irst year at UIC and I had just inished taking my ENGL 161 course. As an Accounting major this would have been one of the last in-depth writing courses I would take during my college career. In the last year or so of high school, I felt like I had just started inding out what my writing style and process was, so I was reluctant not to have the opportunity to at least explore a little more. So when I received the email about the ENGL 222 course, I thought that it sounded like something that would allow me to continue to discuss and practice my writing style. I remember us discussing feminist and anti-oppressive pedagogy in class, as well as talking about strategies we could use in After four amazing years, we bid Writing Center tutor Samantha Gordon a fond farewell. Vainis: Wow! The person you tutored irst ended up working with you for four years?! That is truly amazing, but not really surprising. Even when you are tutoring someone new to our Center, you seem to be able to treat the person as if you have known that person for a long time. So often, you can hear both you and the writer having a moment of laughter in your tutoring conversations -- and always, your writer is talking as much as you are. I know when I talk to you, despite all the work you have to do and all the distractions around us, you attend to our conversation and take anything I say in the best possible way -- and even pretend that my jokes are slightly funny. Who doesn’t like talking to you? :) You ask about teaching Engl 222. It is very rewarding, but also daunting to teach. Rewarding because there is a close connection between what we talk about in class and the weekly experiences students have as tutors. Daunting because as students start tutoring, the number of questions, concerns, and successful experiences they want to share can become overwhelming. In the beginning I wasn’t too worried about teaching the course. I had already taught writing, both in college and high school, for about 15 years at that point and I thought I had a lot to bring to the students in the course. It didn’t take long to realize that my experience teaching students was signiicantly diferent from the relationship tutors aim to build among their fellow students. The more I teach the course, the more anxious I am in the weeks before class begins. I have really high expectations for peer tutoring. When approached in the right frame of mind, tutoring not only helps individual students, but begins to create a community for students where they see each other as resources. Peer tutoring is a rare opportunity to have not only a helpful, but also a meaningful conversation with a perfect stranger. When it works, both tutor and writer have a deeper sense of belonging on our campus. I want this sense of belonging to be especially true for students who feel that their experience on campus has not been hospitable. But “training” for that can sometimes create a gap between students and me. I am always asking tutors to revise their tutoring conversations so that they become richer and more layered -- helpful, hopeful, and meaningful. I think what I am asking for is hard to describe and it can come of at times as negative -- as if I am never acknowledging the ways a tutor has been successful despite of not reaching an ideal. But easy for me to talk about the ideals of tutoring from my corner oice. You, on the other hand, practice tutoring every other day (and have had literally hundreds of tutoring sessions). How have your hopes for what tutoring can accomplish changed or developed over the years? Samantha: Yes, that writer and I worked together for four years. Now, he as a big fancy accounting job. =) I appreciate that you think people enjoy talking to me. My mother and grandmother think it’s just because I don’t give people a choice not to. They’ve told me that I’d talk to a wall as long as I get to talk. But, the jokes on them because I’ll give you one guess where I get it from, and it’s not my dad. I don’t think that what you are asking of us is negative at all. It’s what we ask of our writers all the time. They sometimes come in with completely inished drafts of assignments and we ask them to go back through all their hard work and make changes based on the conversations we have with them. I think taking the time to relect on your process whether it be in tutoring, writing, or anything can only help us grow. Similar to the relection we did during the panel we recently did about how our identities and experiences have lent themselves to who we are as tutors or professors. I think when I started tutoring I was more assignment-focused and my biggest goal was getting through the entire assignment with the writer. I felt that if we didn’t get through everything, that the session wasn’t as productive as it could have been. But after many, many sessions I’ve realized that that sometimes isn’t a realistic benchmark of how well a session has gone. I think I focus a lot more now on the writer’s process than just the assignment. It’s more meaningful, I believe, for the writer if they’ve come away feeling like they have a better idea how to move forward or if they have a better understanding of what are some things that they can do to make writing work with any assignment, not just a speciic type of assignment. I guess overall my idea of what tutoring is has changed. I don’t view sessions as just about whatever piece of writing the writer has brought in that day, but more about the writer. I guess, I’d ask you the same thing. We’ve kind of discussed this before, but how has the Center evolved from its initial days, and what would you like to see for it in the future? We’ve talked about some things, like a tutoring hotline, but would you ever see the center matching students with tutors by discipline? P.S. I think your jokes are funny, but I’ve also been told I’m a cornball, so that might not mean much. =) Vainis: Sam, I think you are secretly interviewing me for a job. I would love to work for you, by the way, because I think you are a good leader. Right now, you were leading a group of tutors for their professional development throughout the semester and these tutors were very willing to take advice from you and felt they could be honest in describing the challenges we face as tutors. You say you talk a lot, but what I see is that you listen a lot. When you talk about tutoring to guests, as you did for the LAS Board of Visitors, what was articulated more than anything was your empathy -- your understanding of what it means to be a student asking for our help. I really hope your mom and grandmother could see you tutoring. Well, maybe they would be surprised that you have such good listening skills: “She sure doesn’t do that at home.” :) What would I like to see in the future? Tutoring conversations serve not only individual students; they create knowledge for the entire community. Tutoring helps us understand the learning process; it gives us insights into the state of literacy among students today; it teaches us to communicate and share with people we do not know; it is a small but important part of our collective hope for the future... I can imagine a Center where we can get better at tapping into and sharing this knowledge; more conversations that include people of all levels from the university -- where tutor, instructor, and student sit at the same table and hear each other and invest in education together. I think we have moments of that already, for example, in the way you got everyone at all levels involved in making a new appointment book. One assignment in 222 that has reached for this is when tutor and student interview each other and we post that writing at our center. And you? Let’s say you get tired of being an accountant and you decide to direct a writing center. What would you keep as is and what would you change? Samantha: One thing I really love about our center is that we do peer-to-peer tutoring. I think that dynamic is really important when I’m tutoring and it helps to make the writer feel more comfortable and open to sharing. Writers are a lot more candid with us as tutors and it’s super helpful when we’re trying to igure out what to tackle and accomplish during a session. One thing that I hope that continues is the building of relationships between tutors and professors. The panel discussions and talks we have had the past have been insightful and have changed how I approach tutoring. For instance, knowing that professors ask their students about what they have taken away from group work sessions, I ask the students take notes on our recap at the end of a session. I also ask students about their next steps going forward and if they know what those steps would look like. The only thing I would change is that I wish we could do professional development more often during the semester. I try to do it informally when I see other tutors around the center. I also wish all writers and classes could give us the kind of feedback we get from the ENGL 070 students when they make presentations about their experience getting tutored. Hearing directly from the writers, what really works for them and what doesn’t, is a ‘wow’ moment. So I think we both have similar visions about what we would like the Writing Center to look like in the future. I know you have been trying to spread more awareness about the Writing Center to other disciplines that haven’t typically utilized us in the past; I can see it has been working due to variety in the kinds of assignments students have been Thanks to all the tutors for making Spring 2015 one of our best semesters ever. You ARE the Writing Center! A special thanks to tutors who have been working here for more than a semester and will be graduating. We will miss you dearly: Alexandra Sydor, Frida Sanchez Vega, Grace Tagare, Hannah A. Aztlan, Maricela Ramirez, Nayela Hoda, Samantha Gordon, BA, English, BA, Anthropology & English, Masters of Education, Teaching Science BA History, BA English, BS Finance, MS Accounting. bringing in. Do you think that we would ever be able to go into classrooms of other disciplines and work with students and professors like we have for ENGL and ED courses? I keep saying we, our, and us, and then I remember I won’t be here. =( Vainis: Sam, you will be here in so many ways. Maybe we should create a “Board of Visitors” for the Writing Center? You could be its irst chair. :) We will never forget all you did here. And you should test me on that. I swear -- whenever you visit, I would be able to recognize your laughter and voice as you are “talking to a wall,” as your grandmother would say.... Group work has done wonders for our relationship with First Year Writing faculty. Over time, the faculty and tutors have developed relationships that have allowed us to better understand instructors’ expectations, and, on their part, the instructors have witnessed and better understood the beneits of discussions led by trained peer tutors. Yes, we should do this for other disciplines -- such as for some of the Business and Accounting courses you took. The hardest part of setting up this kind of group tutoring is getting everyone on the same page. One deep expectation everyone has is that tutors will evaluate and repair writing. What we do, however is something diferent – something more useful in the writer’s overall development. Tutors begin by working with students to understand criteria for the assignment and, even more importantly, by acknowledging what a student is trying to communicate. When things go right, students have the experience of being heard -- and from that we build a conversation that comes around to revision or even collaborative editing. For peer tutoring, “what’s wrong with the paper” is a subset of a bigger question, a bigger possibility: “what is there to talk about when I talk to a fellow student about writing?” If this second question is your starting point, the conversation can not only help make papers better, it can motivate, increase understanding of academic expectations, and generate learning that will transfer to other assignments. But it can be a bit of a shocker to come to the writing center expecting someone to tell you what is wrong, and then inding the tutor saying something like, “Oh, I how interesting. Your class is studying how violence has decreased over the centuries and your own argument is that even if it has decreased globally, the experience of violence locally is more signiicant. How’s it going with that?” I think you have been very important in helping students and instructors get on the same page. You have been in a lot of panels and have been a part of many conversations with students and faculty before and after group work where you have been able, step by step, to help people see the value of conversations that don’t immediately go straight to pointing out and addressing weaknesses. What in your mind might be the best way to help faculty and students in courses other than First Year Writing be prepared to make best use of a group work hour? Samantha: I feel like as much as we explain and discuss what group work is, there is nothing like experiencing it. However, I think that if the professors get a chance to talk with tutors maybe about their process and how they feel group work impacts students, then it might help. That in combination with you and the other wonderful ADs vouching for the group work process might be a step in the right direction. I know some disciplines may be harder to convince than others, but I think that it’s not something that can’t be accomplished. I think if we can ind a way to pitch the speciic ways writing is key within their discipline, then we can discuss how Writing Center tutors can be used as another teaching tool. The hardest part as you know will probably trying to get professors to be open to the experience. What has been some of your most memorable moments teaching/working within the Writing Center? Vainis: In 222 four years ago, about half way through each class when the discussion had a lull, I would look to your corner way in back of the classroom. Usually you would be silent during the discussion, but you seemed to be OK when invited to speak. “Sam, what do you think?” You would then sum up where our discussion was at that point, ofer a view, and then ask a discussion question that tied theory to practice, “I wonder if…?” By mid semester, I remember looking forward to each class because I couldn’t wait until that moment to hear what you’d have to say. It was the beginning of a dialogue we have been having for many years, a dialogue that I hope we will continue. I feel tremendously lucky that you came our way and became a part of all our lives at the Writing Center. Thank you, Sam… How do Others Learn? Let Me Count the Ways By Emily Gahan We strode together amongst the suburban wasteland in back of Rosa’s house. Her subdivision was severely afected by the economic downturn of 2008, leaving a smattering of plywood houses scattered in between empty lots baking in the summer sun. My girlfriend of ive years stared ixedly at her “smartphone” (how I loathe that marketing term). The blue streaks nestled in her lengthy black curls shone with electric ferocity, a tangible manifestation of Rosa’s lively and dynamic nature. “Renal distal convoluted tubules,” she muttered to herself while furrowing her brow. I nonchalantly wondered what she could possibly be talking about. Studying anatomy notes while walking along this long abandoned, treeless street would have been an unmanageable feat for me. I turned squarely in front of her and smiled. “You’re so hardcore when you study.” As if to prove my comment further, she quickly paused her stopwatch. She uses one to time every single second of her studying sessions. She grinned and thanked me, but not before adding this was what she needed to do in order to learn and succeed in her classes. I nodded. “You’re deinitely a kinesthetic learner. I don’t know anyone else who likes to walk while they study,” I told her. An hour before, we were discussing learning styles as I interviewed her about her study methods and interests. This was set of by a curiosity to discover more about how the closest people in my life navigated and understood the world around them. I attempted to gauge this by administering the Barsch Learning Style Inventory and interviewing my longtime friends about their results. The Barsch test assesses learning styles by taking visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning factors into account. Each of the factors are given a score out of 40. Scores for each learning variable indicate if a person has a primary learning style or more of a mix. I began to think about how tests like the Barsch Learning Style Inventory might have a qualitative or tangible application in the lives of others. I know that I can relate my inventory scores (visual: 38, auditory: 16, kinesthetic: 14) to academic situations that were challenging or beneicial to me based on the fact that I am primarily a visual learner with a weak spot for auditory and kinesthetic tasks. Observing me for ive minutes during my days in high school PE class could have helped you igure out how kinesthetic I was without looking at my Barsch scores. I lopped around a volleyball court like a breeched ish. I also debauched many hands on activities, such as labs. I can recall several harrowing close calls handling acids that could have rendered my left arm hairless for many months. My auditory skills were never much more developed. As a recent example during my time as a tutor at UIC’s writing center, I sometimes asked writers to repeat themselves when they were trying to explain their writing goals to me. I often needed to write down a list of goals that the writers mentioned to me so I could refer back to them. These challenges, however, are ofset by my visual strengths. I’ve always been able to retain information from texts quite easily, often so well that a quick glance can solidify an impression in my mind. I ind that I do not need to highlight passages because I can visualize where important points are Writing center tutors and writers discuss ideas for an assignment during group work. in a text and refer to them without much searching. I take extensive notes, sometimes word-for-word, when I am in a lecture. Seeing the textual result of a professor’s lecture (especially if they supplement their lectures with PowerPoint slides) has helped me achieve my goals in the past. Keeping this in mind, I remember points in my educational life where I would have appreciated more written feedback on assignments, or I resented being forced to complete a task I needed additional assistance with. An example of this would be when our class completed crafts during elementary school. I obviously lagged behind my peers in terms of ine motor skills and I always felt embarrassed to see my haggard and poorly glued work displayed alongside the projects created by more apt classmates. I know I would have beneited from being able to choose a task more tailored to me. As it turns out, I am not alone in my sentiments. Every one of my interviewees expressed that they wished their teachers were more accommodating when it came to how their learning style functioned. As a tutor and someone who is interested in literacy and librarianship, this attitude grabbed my attention and inspired me to think about the lexibility of educational environments. In educational settings, diferentiated instruction/learning is a term that deines how teachers respond each student’s varied needs in the classroom. Universal or diferentiated instruction methods recognize each student’s circumstances, learning style, and readiness level all in the same classroom. Tracey Hall, Nicole Strangman, and Anne Meyer outline a diferentiated “Learning Process” which involves preassessing each student’s learning proile, setting lexible goals based on this assessment, encouraging creative thinking using a variety of media, and allowing studentselected activities (3-5). I can see this type of teaching method being advantageous to myself and all the people I interviewed. Even among my small sample, I noticed how diverse the study methods of my friends and girlfriend were. While all of the people I interviewed did employ traditional note cards based on her lecture notes using an app on her phone. She told me she also likes to walk while she studies because this lowers her likelihood of being distracted. I thought of her ambition to be an ER nurse, a profession that requires highly responsive movement at any given second. We both acknowledged that nursing as a hands on “practice” is quite in line with her learning style. “I need to move around a lot. I need that to feel ok about my existence,” Rosa said. As a dynamic person who loves to spring into action, Rosa often felt bored sitting and listening to lectures, especially in high school where she was particularly disengaged. I remember her resentment when it came to being leashed to subjects that didn’t interest her, especially for the sake of high stakes testing. “They weren’t letting me study what I wanted to study. I wasn’t allowed to pursue my own interests. The educational system in high school was really rigid. I mean, how many times do you need to take American history? For me, the format of sitting through lectures doesn’t really work. I prefer to selfstudy in a lot of things,” she said. I nodded as we recalled how Rosa taught herself German. On top of more traditional grammatical studies, she would often read German language news sites, chat with German speakers online, and watch German TV and movies in order to keep her language skills fresh in her mind. When I asked her if she had ever been in a tutoring situation, her response was that she never really had. Her pref- “Universal or diferentiated instruction methods recognize each student’s circumstances, learning style, and readiness level all in the same classroom.” study mediums, such as creating note cards and reading textbooks, it was important to note how they went about these tasks. Universal Design Learning, or UDL, certainly accounts for this variation. Rosa sat in front of me on her bed, idgeting with her hair. I asked her what methods she uses to take notes in lecture. Her Barsch scores pointed to her being primarily a kinesthetic and visual learner with a weaker auditory score (visual: 38 kinesthetic: 36 auditory: 16). “When I go to lectures, I retain almost nothing of it,” she answered latly in reference to her listening skills. I remembered moments in our shared past where she was unable to recall if I was busy or invited her somewhere if I simply told her what was going on. She needed a text or a note to back up our conversation. Rosa makes erence for self-study might have been a reason as to why she never sought out tutoring. She told me that even study groups tended to distract her from her learning goals. I also asked her if an incorporation of more hands on activities in the classroom would have helped her maintain interest. She agreed that this may have helped her tremendously. Instead of simply looking at an anatomy diagram, Rosa beneits from her work with cadavers. As morbid as this may seem, the incorporation of cadavers in an anatomy or biology classroom caters to learners, like Rosa, who retain information by seeing it irsthand. “Information that is not attended to, that does not engage students’ cognition, is in fact inaccessible. It is inaccessible both in the moment – relevant information goes unnoticed and unprocessed – and in the future: relevant information is unlikely to be remembered” (Rose and Gravel 8). Incorporating an amount of dynamic stimuli and mediums would keep more kinetic learners like Rosa engaged and paying attention. After all, in a UDL classroom, the goal is open up as many path- ways to knowledgeable understanding as possible. Renee, Natalie, and I gathered around a screen in Renee’s newly renovated basement. We were taking turns watching each other play The Sims, a pastime fostered somewhere along the way from our irst meeting in middle school to present day. Renee just moved into her family’s basement, her various art supplies and drawings scattered haphazardly about in the murky light permeating through a single window well pane. I made a good natured joke about Renee fulilling the stereotype of a “millennial living their parent’s basement.” We all laughed. “Well, my millennial self has to study before going to class. Let’s get this interview thing done,” she said, while her Sim family broke the toilet for the third time. Natalie, an avid gamer, gladly took over the game while we sat on Renee’s ancient couch to discuss her learning style. Renee has always been known for her scathing wit and sharp features. She has been an excellent artist and photographer for as long as I can remember, often using me as a subject for various candid photo shoots over the years. This was why I was surprised that her kinesthetic score (32) was slightly higher than her visual score (30). Her auditory score (25) proved to be lower, but not incredibly so. However, Renee herself wasn’t all too surprised by her Barsch results. “I consider myself to be a jack of all trades, I guess,” she said. “I’ve been able to ‘get by’ in the average educational setting.” This versatility has always been an asset for her. I always knew her to be more of a generalist than a specialist. Even her choice of major (anthropology) relects this, as she told me she has an interest studying in the whole of humanity itself. Of all my friends, I’ve always found Renee to be the best suited to tackle the challenges of diferent types of curriculum. Her adaptable nature in academic settings shows in more tangible ways as well. “Lately my right arm has been hurting me so I’ve been switching to writing with my left hand. I’m able to do that because otherwise I wouldn’t be able to maintain interest,” she told me. Even after writing notes with her non-dominant hand, she told me that she isn’t one to go over her notes again after writing them. I found this a bit unusual, but apparently the physical act of writing down information seemed to be enough for her in many cases. In high school, she also would do homework at various odd hours, especially when it came to subjects she struggled with. Waking up at 4 A.M. in order to igure out algebra problems wasn’t uncommon for her during high school. However, she did tell me her weakness was indeed activiThe UIC Writing Center at the end of a long day. ties involving auditory components. She was recently diagnosed with auditory ADHD. In short, this means that she has diiculty ignoring noises when she is trying to concentrate. Oddly enough, she still is able to listen to music while she studies. Currently, she tends to listen to Spanish music while she studies for her Spanish class. In terms of her experiences with tutoring, Renee told me that they were not really positive. She received math tutoring in high school, which was boring and unhelpful for her because of the rigidity of the tutoring methods. “I just felt like I was sticking my nose in a book. I needed a radical re-explanation of everything. Stepby-step learning was all they ever taught you. That didn’t really help much,” she said. Renee told me she enjoyed working with “sandbox” math, or seeing how numbers played out in diferent situations. Learning about one straightforward way to solve a problem was really a hindrance to her, especially considering that she has always been so lexible in the number ways she can learn. “Alternative modalities for expression should be provided both to level the playing ield among students, and to introduce all students to the full range of media that are important for communication and literacy in our multimedia culture” (Rose and Gravel 7). In this way, I discovered that UDL classrooms don’t only beneit “specialists” like me and Rosa. Students like Renee, who feel comfortable learning in a wide range of educational settings, also appreciate the incorporation of multiple explanations for a concept and a mix of kinetic, visual, and auditory stimuli (sometimes all at once). Once Renee and I inished with rocking back and forth and listenher interview, Natalie turned ing to music. This relects her high around in Renee’s swivel chair. auditory and kinesthetic scores. She had just inished giggling In lecture, she brings her laptop wildly about something that hap- to class and uses a speech-to-text pened in The Sims. I had been so program like Dragon Naturally immersed in conversation with Re- Speaking in order to take notes nee that I must have missed what since she has diiculty keeping had occurred in the game. Natalie pace with the lecture if she’s writis good-natured and childish, con- ing. She would rather be free to stantly laughing away at some- listen to the professor than strugthing silly. She has always been gling to pay attention while writknown for her expansive playlist of ing notes. While currently on track funny YouTube videos. While much to be a theater major, she is dissatcloser to Renee as they have been isied with her choice. friends since kindergarten, I still Our Mission knew Natalie well The Writing Center is committed enough to gauge to the campus-wide improvehow she learned ment of student writing best. Natalie through peer tutoring. turned out to be a Our priority is to reach students primarily auditory in formative and critical stages (32) and kinesof academic writing – students thetic (32) learner, in the First Year Writing Prowith a lower visugram, students learning English, transfer students, students al (26) score. writing in the disciplines, students applying for scholar“To be honest, I ships and jobs, and students needing additional support to really don’t study. continue in college. I just wing my We aim for the ongoing development of tutoring by assesstests,” she admiting student outcomes, maintaining communication with ted immediately when I asked her faculty, conducting research on writing pedagogy, and using experienced writing instructors to oversee our program and about her study teach the tutor training courses. methods. I nevWe aim for a diverse body of tutors and recruit from a wide er remembered Natalie as being a range of disciplines. We seek not only to help student writers, but to create an excellent educational experience for our tuparticularly studitors. In our courses for tutors, tutors are expected to advance ous person. She as academic writers, communicators, and professionals. We told me that her provide additional support for tutors in Education, ofering nearly lifelong dicareer-advancement through grant-based scholarships, agnosis of ADHD volunteer opportunities in the community, and access to has played a huge student teacher and alumni organizations. role in her academic troubles We recognize that student diversity promotes success and over the years. actively engage pedagogy that seeks to be anti-oppressive to When she does all the student populations that UIC serves. study, she told The Writing Center is a part of the English Department in the me she looks over College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. note cards while “I’m now starting to think I should stick to chemistry. I do like doing lab work, I really do. Like, I hate writing essays and I hate math. But if it’s lab work, heck yes. It’s just so fun,” she mused. The hands on component is what excites her. Natalie’s absolute aversion to writing essays has been apparent many times as well. I remember a time where she broke down in tears while hanging out with Renee and I because she had no idea how to begin a research paper in her rhetoric class. When I reminded her of this she laughed darkly. “Yeah, I made the mistake of taking a rhetoric class that was only half a semester. He [the professor] was going through the material super fast. It was essay after essay every week. I can’t do that. I dropped the class,” she said. Natalie mentioned that she was placed in special education classes in 6th grade. Unlike Rosa or Renee, she fondly remembers the extra assistance she received from her tutors. “If it wasn’t for them, I would have failed some classes. I really needed the extra help,” she said. When asked about what these tutors did that was so helpful to her, she shrugged and told me she couldn’t remember. “All I know is I would have been held back a grade,” she said. After the conclusion of this particular interview, my thoughts wandered to the model of the writing center. It hit me that classrooms could fashion themselves after the welcoming and inclusive environment that writing centers ofer. After all, many centers utilize the principles of diferentiated instruction right in their core values. UIC’s writing center literature emphasizes that “unlike other educational environments we may be accustomed to, where the educator is positioned as knowing more and the students less, peer tutoring values the contributions of both writer and tutor while acknowledging that those contributions are diferent” (Wulf et al. 7). While it is important to recognize that a teacher-student dynamic doesn’t allow for a peer relationship in most cases, teachers can help facilitate more UDL instruction by viewing students as capable of fashioning their own autonomous ideas based on what channels of learning work best for them, as opposed to the traditional idea that the teacher is an infallible authority who knows what is best for every student. “None of us likes to feel less empowered than another in interpersonal relations, and students who enter writing centers should be made to feel as comfortable as possible, if for no other reason than basic human decency” (Carino 98). If this principle was applied to the classroom setting, especially in high schools, many students (my friends and partner included) would have perhaps felt more positive about the classroom setting. Rosa felt bored by the forced and repetitive nature of the subjects she studied. An answer to this would be to allow more elective classes to count toward graduation and less required classes. Renee felt limited by the singular methods used in order to teach subjects. An answer to this would be to utilize multimedia activities and explain concepts in a multitude of ways. Natalie felt hindered by pacing of her classes. An answer to this would be to give these types of students (often with ways of learning that are in the minority) extensions on projects or alternative requirements that still fulill educational goals. All in all, my friends and partner gave me insight into an idea beyond the original goal of what I set out to accomplish (that is, to evaluate their learning styles). Their test results were really only the backdrop against the reality: that just like gender expression, sexual orientation, race, and creed, a learning proile is not a binary. It is a shade among many, among millions of thoughts. All of them are valid. All of them are worth tuning into if we truly see, feel, and listen. Works Cited Aleska, Vainis, Aneeka Henderson, Lindsay Marshall, Lydia Saravia, Charitianne Williams, and Alex Wulf. “To Be a Peer: An Introduction to Writing Center heory and Practice.” English 222 Class Files. UIC Writing Center, n.d. Web. Carino, Peter. “Power and Authority in Peer Tutoring.” he Center Will Hold: Critical Perspectives on Writing Center Scholarship. Logan: Utah State UP, 2003. 98. English 2 2 2 Class Files. Web. Gravel, Jenna, and David Rose. “Technology and Learning Meeting Special Student’s Needs.” National Center on Universal Design for Learning, 2010. Web. Hall, Tracy, Anne Meyer, and Nicole Strangman. “Diferentiated Instruction and Implications for UDL Implementation” National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum, 2003. Web. Lindsay, Rosa. Undergraduate student at Joliet Junior College. Personal Interview. 27 July 2014. Ronzone, Renee. Undergraduate student at University of Illinois at Chicago. Personal Interview. 29 July 2014. new for old,” “substitute old with new,” and “substitute old for new” all mean the same thing, but are arranged diferently (Denison 540). Also, Denison demonstrates grammatical variations between British and American dialects of the English Language. For example, in British English people say “package which came” while people say “package that came” in American English (Denison 543). In British English people say “group who” while people who speak American English say “group that” (Denison 543). Finally, when speaking British English people say “Careers Advice” rather than referring to it as “Career Advice” like people who speak American English (Denison 544). These examples refer to typical English and American English syntax and may luctuate among dialects within each of these dialects. The numerous examples indicate that a standard language is unable to exist due to the continuous adjustment of syntax: “Even if the examples above could all be dismissed as performance errors and therefore not standard English (standard cannot by deinition contain errors!), their very occurrence sheds light on the constraints that operate in standard English” (Denison 537). Even though individuals may believe that language remains relatively constant, we must understand that our judgment is biased and limited. Constant exposure to a language prevents individuals from noting gradual syntactic changes: “Most changes probably escape our attention altogether, and when we do happen to notice one, our intuitive assessment may The Discriminatory Dichotomies: Standard versus Nonstandard English by Alexandra Sydor A dialect is a variation of a language that is inluenced by an individual’s social and economic background. Since many economic and social factors inluence a person’s use of language, many dialects of a single language will exist. Dialects are typically categorized as either standard or nonstandard. Standard English is a single dialect that is arbitrarily elevated to the status of standard. By implicitly and explicitly valorizing the standard dialect while depreciating the nonstandard dialects, are we marginalizing some groups of people and privileging others? What is gained and lost by doing this? This paper investigates the impossibility of a standard English, examines the detrimental efects of categorizing language as standard and nonstandard, and proposes the possible solutions for resolving this issue. The purpose of this paper is to provide research and articles on the subject provided by prominent researchers and educators, and conclude with an analysis of these claims. Evolution in Syntax To begin, the analysis of syntax, the arrangement of words in a sentence, demonstrates the impossibility of establishing a standard English. David Denison, a Professor of English Language and Medieval Literature at the University at Manchester, studies changes in English syntax. He has published several articles and books concerning the topic. In “Clues to Language Change from Non-Standard English,” he argues that syntax changes over time: “non-standard language often preigures changes which spread eventually into the standard… [and that] linguistic change in standard English can sometimes be detected by looking at diferent forms of non-standard English, or by comparison of diferent national standards” (Denison 533). The purpose of analyzing sentence structure is to take note of the gradual variations that syntax has, and continues, to undergo: “Even when it [nonstandard English] does appear to conform to normal sentence structure, however, its detailed syntax can ofer clues to the direction in which the language as a whole – and therefore eventually even standard English – may be moving” (Denison 537). To begin his analysis of syntactical luctuations, Denison examines common speech. First, Denison demonstrates that individuals are not consistent with verb tenses. For example, when referring to a speciic subject, individuals either state “if there had actually have been a general election today” or “if there would actually have been a general election today” (Denison 538). Next, he has pointed out how people arrange sentences diferently. For example, people have stated “the manager’s secretary of the Co-op” and “the manager of the Co-op’s secretary” when referring to the same thing (Denison 535). Finally, he demonstrates how individuals phrase concepts differently. For example, “substitute boxes looked identical, but the voices that played from a hidden speaker within each box were different: Steve spoke Standard American English and Kenneth spoke African-AmeriSemesterly-meeting UIC WC staf groups talk about tutoring methods, writing can English” center theory, and Halloween costumes! (Wolfram 27). not be wholly trustworthy” (Deni- When the students were asked son 544-545). As a result, Denison which box they would take the proposes that there is no stability items from, they automatically inof English, which leads to the im- cluded the dichotomies of ‘good’ possibility of establishing a stan- and ‘bad’ in their decisions: “’Cause Steve is good, Kenneth is bad’” dard English. (Wolfram 27). At a very early age, Discrimination: the Dichotomy of people are conditioned to believe that there is a ‘good’ and a ‘bad’ ‘Good’ and ‘Bad’ Not only is having a standard language: “Children acquire attilanguage not syntactically possi- tudes about language diferences ble, but the categories of ‘standard’ early and these attitudes quickly and ‘nonstandard’ are detrimen- become entrenched” (Wolfram tal to society since it perpetuates 27). This dichotomy validates the discrimination. Discrimination involves unjust and unequal treat- presence of “accent discriminament of groups of people based tion” (Wolfram 28). According to on various factors such as class, Wolfram, this discrimination is race, religion, gender, age, and et- still prevalent in 2015: “While othcetera. Walt Wolfram, an English er forms of inequality, prejudice, Professor at North Carolina State and discrimination have become University, has been conducting more widely recognized and exresearch, writing books, and pub- posed in recent decades, language lishing articles on dialects since prejudice is often overlooked and, the 1960s. In his article “Challeng- in some cases, even promoted” ing Language Prejudice in the (Wolfram 28). In order to justify his Classroom,” Wolfram provided an claim, Wolfram noted that televiinteresting study on children and sion encourages dialect discrimidialects: “In a telling experiment nation: “Voices in television carconducted by Marilyn S. Rosen- toons frequently portray villains thal, children were asked to accept as accented speakers of English. a box of crayons and drawing pad Standard English is reserved for from one of two ‘magic boxes.’ The superheroes and winsome char- acters. Even the voices in Disney’s animation reinforce stereotypes” (Wolfram 28). Even though there is dialect discrimination, Wolfram argues that all individuals speak a dialect: “Dialects are inevitable and natural, and we all speak them” due to “regional, social, and ethnic associations” (Wolfram 28). Over time, numerous terms have been utilized to address one object. For example, “We may order a soda, pop, Coke, co-cola, tonic, or soft drink with our submarine sandwich, sub, hoagie, grinder, torpedo, or hero” (Wolfram 28). People judge each other based on their dialect and word choices. For example, “New York City regional speech is often seen as aggressive and rude; Southern speech might be seen as backward and ‘country’” (Wolfram 28). Overall, Wolfram sheds light on the discriminatory and marginalizing efects that the terms ‘standard’ and ‘nonstandard’ connote. Dialect Discrimination in the Classroom While Wolfram provides a researcher’s perspective on the issue of dialect discrimination, Natalie Sydor provides an educator’s perspective. Sydor has a Bachelor’s Degree in English and a minor in Journalism. She also has a Master’s Degree in Teaching and Leadership and is endorsed in English, ESL, and Bilingual/Spanish education. She is certiied to teach grades six through twelve and currently teaches seventh and eighth grade bilingual. Sydor believes that there is no standard language, but there is formal and informal language. For example, individuals in a business and an academic setting must be able to communicate in both a formal and informal man- ner so they can communicate with a diverse audience. When asked if schools discriminate against dialects, Sydor responded that administration is too preoccupied by other matters. However, she states that it is possible for individual teachers to discriminate against students, whether it is done consciously or unconsciously. In order to be more accepting of these dialects, Sydor states that educators must be more accepting of diversity. Tolerance of these dialectical diferences is based upon one’s background. If an individual understands linguistics and language acquisition, then that person is usually more accepting of diferent dialects. She states that she is empathetic towards others and gives them credit for trying to speak to the best of their abilities due to her ESL and bilingual background: “When a teacher is empathetic and respectful of her students’ individuality, they learn to model the same qualities and the learning environment takes on a more positive atmosphere” (Sydor). She has noticed that students tend to respect their teachers more if the educators are accepting of diversity and dialects. Sydor claims that her students tend to misbehave less, be more willing to complete their homework assignments, and are more attentive to notes and directions because she is accepting of diversity. When asked to elaborate on how students respect her for be- ing tolerant of diferent dialects, she spoke about her eighth grade students during the 2013-2014 academic school year. Sydor noted that even though her class was predominantly Hispanic, each of the students spoke a diferent variation of Spanish – like Columbian, Guatemalan, and Mexican. She noticed that “there was a notable intolerance among the Hispanic students” (Sydor). Even though some of the students laughed at each other’s Spanglish dialects, she explained to her students that speak- ing and practicing English was the only way the language was to be acquired. She mentioned that everyone is learning the language and that no one should make fun of others for stepping out of their comfort zone. To help students learn English, she “slowly tried to help them with their grammar in a nonjudgmental way” (Sydor). Sydor avoids being judgmental by not blatantly stating that students are wrong. For example, “When a student makes a mistake, I do not stop the class to have everyone focus on their mistake. I acknowledge their response and I rephrase their statement correctly. This way, they do not feel threatened. At times the student will repeat what I say so they can learn. For example, I say ‘turn in your worksheet.’ Then a student says, ‘I can’t. I writted it in my notebook.’ I follow with, ‘Oh, you wrote it in your notebook?’ Then they usually respond ‘Oh, I wrote it in my notebook.’ This way, it is a nonthreatening correction.” (Sydor) Reevaluating the Term ‘Dialect’ Since the dialects of standard and nonstandard English connote the dichotomies of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ language, the term ‘dialect’ should be reevaluated. Ahmad and Nero believe that this negatively charged term should be exchanged for a less discriminatory one. Dora Ahmad is an associate professor of English at St. John’s University. Shondel J. Nero is an associate professor of Teaching of English as a Second Language at New York University. They believe that the term ‘vernacular’ is less prejudiced and embraces diversity: Whichever term we chose would likely be highly charged, especially in educational settings, because of deeply entrenched, socially constructed language attitudes. Still, we wanted to choose a term that is less apt to be seen pejoratively and that captures the richness and diversity of native language use within and beyond the classroom, so that we may show how its use in literature can serve as an efective tool for engaging and learning about the dynamic organic nature of all human language. (Ahmad and Nero 71) Even though “vernacular seems to foreground a spoken medium,” Ahmad and Nero justify the usage of the term since individuals write using their vernacular vocabulary. These dialects, or vernaculars, should be respected because they do adhere to speciic rules: “Linguistics teaches us that vernacular forms are language varieties in their own right, complete with phonological, morphological, and syntactic rules, variations, and discourse norms, spoken by people in every socioeconomic class” (Ahmad and Nero 72). Possible Solutions Wolfram, Nero, and Ahmad believe that teaching students about dialects will help reduce dialect discrimination. To begin, Wolfram states that “educating students about language diversity should be an essential component of… all disciplines” (Wolfram 29). He justiies his claim by providing a study that was conducted at a middle school in North Carolina. The curriculum consisted of “activities ranging from analytical exercises to uncover the patterned nature of dialect diferences to engagement with an array of audio and video resources featuring diferent local dialects” (Wolfram 29). This study – that was conducted in 2005 and again in 2007 – resulted in “ninetyeight percent of students” beneitting from the exercises (Wolfram 29). According to Wolfram, the students stated that “’dialects aren’t sloppy versions of Standard English…they follow speciic patterns that are logical…there are tons of stereotypes, which are almost always wrong…dialects represent people’s culture and past’” (Wolfram 29). Wolfram recommends that all educators should be active to reduce dialect discrimination. At the end of his article, Wolfram lists three tasks for educators: 1. “Expose students regularly to language diferences in cultural context.” 2. “Challenge assumptions about language diferences as they occur.” 3. “Integrate the discussion of language variation into the conversation of cultural and regional diferences”(30).” Ahmad and Nero respond similarly to Wolfram, but they discuss solutions that should be implemented at universities. They state that universities should: 1. Incorporate courses in graduate and undergraduate programs that raise language awareness, reexamine language attitudes, and address language diversity based on sound, research based linguistic principles rather than folk linguistic beliefs. 2. Diversify school assignments and assessments to accommodate more language variation. 3. Value students’ vernacular in classrooms and use it as a springboard for literacy development. 4. Make vernacular use, and particularly vernacular literature, the object of study. (82) When encouraging students to write in the vernacular, they should not attempt to write in someone else’s vernacular because we each have our own vernacular: “we are all products of multiple inluences and complex circumstances; we all speak multiple dialects and vary them according to circumstance” (Ahmad and Nero 84). Conclusions From the analysis of these sources, I have concluded that there is no standard language, but there are some standards among dialects. Also, language is constantly changing as a result of the new inventions and the improvement of society. For example, since Google was created, people have begun to say ‘Let’s Google it.’ Finally, there is dialect discrimination because there is a competition for success. There are scarce resources, such as good paying jobs, and people must ight in order to succeed. Not all people are privileged to be educated in the ‘standards’ of American culture. Overall, in order to for the discrimination to be stopped, we must change the structure that is reinforcing this discrimination, which is our culture and its ideology. A systemic change, even though it is not simple, is the only way that this issue will be resolved. Simply focusing on the academic institutions will not address how other institutions, such as the workforce and media, encourage and perpetuate the culture’s ideology. Works Cited Ahmad, Dora, and Shondel J. Nero. “Productive Paradoxes.” Pedagogy 12.1 (2012): 69-95. Print. Denison, David. “Clues to Language Change from Non-Standard English.” German Life & Letters 61.4 (2008): 533-545. Print. Sydor, Natalie. Personal Interview. 29 July 2014. Wolfram, Walt. “Challenging Language Prejudice in the Classroom.” Education Digest. 79.1 (2013): 2730. Print. ing, the uncomfortable feeling of silence disappears because there is no physical contact. Rather, silence is valued. • One of the extraordinary elements of technology is the ability to work on the same project with another person, even at different locations, at the same time. As a high school teacher, my students often create slideshows using Google Docs because they can edit and revise the project simultaneously. Similarly, with online tutoring both the tutor and student can revise the same paper concurrently. Because I can literally see the changes the student is making in real-time - every word deleted, every sentence restructured, and every quote added – I am more likely to understand the thought process of the student and how they are making sense of their own paper. • The most important aspect of online tutoring is that the student can work from home. Meeting with a tutor can be quite intimidating, particularly if a stu- E-tutoring: The beneits and limitations of online tutoring By Steven Kushner The future of education is in cyberspace. In fact, online universities and online courses are already competing with brick-and-mortar institutions for student enrollment. The beneits and limitations of e-learning, compared with faceto-face teaching methods, are still being explored and critiqued in the research community (Appana, 2008). On a personal note, my irst experience taking on the role of an ‘online instructor’ occurred at the UIC Writing Center during a summer session (In addition to being a doctoral candidate at UIC in the College of Education, I am a high school psychology teacher today in the south suburbs of Chicago). I vividly remember our instructor – Vainis – asking me if I felt comfortable tutoring in this approach. Although I eventually consented, I held reservations because tutoring is challenging enough faceto-face. Throughout the summer session I met with several students online and helped them revise their academic papers. In the end, my attitude toward online tutoring remained divisive. As such, the beneits and limitations of “E-tutoring” is a conversation that must take place. Beneits • One advantage of online tutoring is that both the tutor and student remain on task. In many face-to-face tutoring sessions, it is commonplace to get sidetracked with conversations about sports, Behind the front desk at the UIC Writing Center politics, school, and anything but the actual paper that needs review. Digression is a frequent occurrence during face-to-face sessions because a rapport is quickly developed between the tutor and student. However, friendly banter can often take precious time away from the revision process. • Every second of prolonged silence during a face-to-face tutoring session can feel like an eternity. These moments typically occur after a direct question is posed to the student, such as, “How do you think this paragraph can be restructured?” or “How could you reword this sentence to make it clearer?” Quite honestly, silence can make a tutoring session a little awkward. However, patience and silence are critical elements during a tutoring session because it gives the student time to think and process what has been discussed. In my experiences with online tutor- dent feels uncomfortable meeting with a stranger who is about to critique their work. Working from homes creates a more relaxed environment for the student which ensures that all of our time and energy is devoted to the paper. Limitations • Body language is everything –we habitually “read” people through facial expressions, posture, and eye contact. However, during online tutoring sessions it is almost impossible to see if a student is happy, sad, confused, conident, etc. with the revision process. As a tutor, these nonverbal signs are critical because they let me know if what I said made sense or needs greater clariication. Quite frankly, typing “LOL” only leads to more confusion. • One of the biggest challenges of online tutoring is not being able to express a complex thought to a student. Though typing is faster and easier for many students, it is almost impossible to express a multifaceted or elaborate idea through keystrokes. Revising papers is more than grammar and syntax; it is about restructuring larger themes and modifying a student’s thinking. Meeting faceto-face allows for a speciic type of discussion that cannot be accomplished via the internet. • Revision is a messy process. From my own experiences, I would frequently use scratch paper to brainstorm ideas, draw lines and arrows between common themes, circle words and key phrases, underline sentences, and draw graphic organizers to help students visualize their arguments, etc. The ability to verbally discuss a concept, while simultaneously illustrating or annotating a paper, is too diicult online. This is also important for the student who is trying to express a particular point about his or her paper. • It goes without saying that learning is an emotional experience. One of the issues I came across with online tutoring is the lack of connection I made with students. Yes, I could hear a voice on my headset, but I wasn’t able to relate to this person on an affective level. Displaying emotions, such as empathy and passion, is a signiicant factor of eliciting trust with students – and without trust, a tutoring session is bound to fail. Online tutoring felt robotic at times and the human element of learning was nowhere to be found. In the high school classroom, I distinctly remember asking my students to ponder the future of education. There were a few students who believed teachers were on the “endangered species” list, as we will most likely be replaced by iPads, E-Readers, computers and other tablets. After tutoring online in the UIC Writing Center, it is easy for me to make similar connections and ask similar questions about the future of tutoring. For example, is it too farfetched to think that tutoring sessions can be outsourced to save money and time? Can tutors be replaced by online editing software? As I stated in the introduction, my views of online tutoring, or e-tutoring, remain unsettled; there are both beneits and limitations to this approach. I just hope I will not be extinct by the time the debate is resolved. References Appana, S. (2008). A Review of beneits and limitations of online learning in the context of the student, the instructor and the tenured faculty. International Journal on E-Learning, 7(1), 5-22. Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). the writer. In the next several paragraphs, I will illustrate how tutoring and therapy are very similar into what goes into them, but that there are still some distinct features that set them apart. At the beginning of both a tutoring and a therapy session, it is important to display non-directive listening behaviors towards the person you are interacting with. Non-Directive skills include characteristics such as listening, being open, being warm, and being congruent. Congruency can be diicult to establish, and may be impossible, because it not only has the tutor/therapist to try to understand the person, but it also has the tutor/therapist to try to actually be in the person’s shoes in order to understand what the person may be feeling. These techniques are what allow the writer/client to openly discuss what is on their minds without feeling rejected. To establish this beginning relationship, at the start of the session, it is beneicial to engage in some sort of small talk, such as asking how their day went, instead of delving into the writer’s paper immediately. This is similar to Staben and Nordhaus’s “Looking at the Whole Text,” advises tutors to not immediately begin in reading the writer’s paper, but to talk with the writer in a casual way. For me, as the tutor in the beginning of the session, I always greet and introduce myself to the writer, and ask how their day was so far. Often, I try to connect with the writer in some unique way as well, on other things that I may notice about them. For example, I engaged in a small chit-chat with one of my writers as I asked The Therapeutic Writing Session by Lenore Tahara-Eckl Dear new tutors, and to all who are interested in the writing schema: I want to tell you about my experience in being a tutor for the writing center here at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). Let me start by quoting the humanistic therapist Carl Rogers, who established many current forms of therapy today: “In my early professional years I was asking the question: How can I treat, or cure, or change this person? Now I would phrase the question in this way: How can I provide a relationship which this person may use for his own personal growth?” (32) This quote relects that Carl Rogers understood that people are not machines in which their problems can be simply found and ixed. Instead, people are complex beings that require much understanding and trust in order to get to their core. Similarly, a writing center cannot be used to simply “ix” a writer’s paper or their writing, instead, the writer must learn and grow from their own writing experience, in which the tutor can act as their guide. Though this quote comes from the ield of psychology, I ind that its very philosophy is strikingly similar to how English writing tutors treat their writers in a session. In majoring in Psychology and minoring in English, I found that both of these worlds do contain many similarities, despite their diferences. This year at UIC, I am taking a Psychology clinical interviewing class and an English tutoring class, and I have learned that their approach agrees in many ways. The non-directive techniques of openness, warmth, and congruency, as well as having genuine interest and being honest, is what allows the tutor/therapist to connect to their writer/client. Most of all, I have found that both of these areas emphasize that there is not only one set way to do a session, but that one must practice and gain experience from each situation to another. In this way, even with the diferences between the two ields, I ind that both sides of the spectrum (tutoring and therapy) are very similar in its philosophy, approach, and techniques administered. In both the English and Psychology world, when interacting and providing help to someone, there is no strict set form of rules that one is bound by. Instead, these types of sessions are only possible through the several experiences that one must go through. That is not to say that there are not good ways written down that one can learn from—but ultimately, in helping one with both writing and with therapy, much of it comes from the ability to connect with the person and establish a bond with them. Carl Rogers stresses this, in that rather than the speciic techniques administered, it is the supportive and trusting relationship that reaches out and helps the one in need. While this notion can be very helpful in both a therapy and a tutoring session (and may be only what a therapy session needs), a tutoring session requires a little more than just establishing a bond between the tutor and them about their lime-green “Otter phone case” that they had. This simple conversation had only lasted less than a couple of minutes, but it essentially “broke the ice,” for us to discuss the writer’s complex paper. This is also done in therapeutic settings, in which therapist will often talk with the client about nonessential things, often while they are both walking from the waiting room to the therapy room together, before their session oficially starts. This helps the writer know that they are speaking to a “normal person” in a safe setting, and that the tutor is open-minded with any ideas that they throw forward. Being warm also helps out with establishing a bond with the writer. Being warm means that the tutor openly listens closely to what the writer has to say without judging them. Tutors have a genuine interest in the writer and their topic, and tutors also do things such as listen, ask questions, and paraphrase in order to clarify what the writing is saying. These attributes are very similar to the clinical techniques of paraphrasing and summarizing. The purpose of these techniques is to show that you are listening, and that you are trying to understand. Although these techniques are not used as much in writing sessions as in clinical interviews, they are nevertheless, very useful and good to use when writers are having a diicult time in expressing themselves to the tutor. For one of my sessions, I used paraphrasing for one of my writers who was struggling in developing their thesis, and their ideas to then support their thesis. The writer was working on an argumentative essay that was addressing current issues on race and was also asking for a potential solution to the problem. The writer came in, a bit lustered, and said something like, “Well, I’m white, so…I don’t really know what to do.” I responded by saying something like, “So because you’re white, you’re not sure how to approach this writing topic.” The writer responded airmatively, but then hesitantly added that they had some ideas. By simply paraphrasing, it allows the writer to know that the tutor is listening to them, and it most often has them elaborate on their thoughts that they may have been previously holding back on. Here, in the beginning the writer said that they had no idea, but later they admitted into having some inkling of an idea. From there, we openly discussed the topic and went into much depth, and were able to come up with a very good thesis that directly related to the writer’s original thoughts on the topic. Having a genuine interest is also very important because it allows us to engage into more than just the surface with a person. I feel that if the tutor is not a bit at least interested in the writer’s topic, then it would be very diicult to provide any help. Similarly, in the clinical setting, if a therapist is not engaged with their client, then their proposed help will seem dismissive and diminutive. Even more so, if the therapist has strong reactions to the client (such as previously knowing them in a diferent setting before their session) or to the client’s beliefs, it may be very diicult to treat the client properly. Sometimes, because of this, the therapist may have to refer the client to another therapist. This is also similar to a writing session-if the writer writes about something that the tutor is in complete disagreement about, it is the tutor’s duty to be tolerant and to try to not put personal beliefs into the session. However, I feel that this situation in the writing center is not as extreme as it would be in a therapeutic setting because oftentimes, a writer is taught to not only be “one-sided,” but to critically engage and address the complexity of the issue that is assigned. This type of situation is similar in Marilyn Sternglass’s “A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level,” a of case study of a student named Ricardo, who had very strong beliefs on one side of his argument. Because of this, Ricardo was often marked with bad grades because he only peered through one set of lenses. He was very expressive, but only saw his opinions as right; it was only when he began developing his writing and consulted evidence to back up his beliefs, and also looked at the other side and addressed it in his paper, that he became a stronger writer. From having a genuine interest, it is also important to have an open discussion with the writer. In “Retheorizing Writing Center Work to Transform a System of Advantage Based on Race,” Nancy Grimm talks about the many misconceptions that writers may have of a writing center, and that tutors may display in a writing center. She argues that there should not be “one standard of writing” because there is much diversity in the understandings and perceptions of others. She encourages tutors to have a “dialogic conversation” with their writers, which is having a cooperative, open conversation together with the writer that allows for a collaboration of ideas. This is simi- lar to how a therapist may speak with their client. To stimulate an open conversation, the therapist often asks open-ended questions that provoke deep thoughts of the client. The client engages in a sort of “stream of unconsciousness,” which has them speak their thoughts openly on the matter. Similarly, a tutor would ask many questions about the writer’s ideas, as it allows them to formulate their ideas in a more focused way. Often, when I am tutoring, many of my writers present to me their very good ideas, but then they tell me that they do not how to “writer it all out” on paper. To help out, I ask the writer to lead me step-by-step through their argument and how their ideas support it. This gives the expertise and power to the writer, allowing them to take the lead, as well as allowing them to see how their writing formulates. From this, oftentimes, I ask the writer if they would care to take notes or write out an outline as writing it down can help in organizing their ideas in a logical way. At this point, it is very important for the tutor to have not Group Work Sessions in the Writing Center Instructors: Did you know that you could bring your class to the Writing Center for Writing Workshops? During weeks 6 through 12, the Writing Center ofers two types of group work sessions. Both types of workshops require instructor interaction throughout the workshop and a quick debrieing with tutors at end. 1. Beginning a New Writing Task: • Tutors observe as you introduce the writing project to your students. • Students get into groups with a tutor to analyze the task. Speciic attention is paid to genre demands. • Together students and tutors imagine and map the format and features of a inished project. • Tutors discuss and model brainstorming techniques. • Instructors “loat,” answering questions and ofering input. • The session ends with a writing exercise where students write an initial plan. 2. Developing a Thesis with Consequence: • Tutors observe as you review goals and challenges of the assignment and of developing a thesis. • The group discusses the essential features of a thesis in regards to the product, and creates criteria for a strong thesis statement. • Students bring a partial draft of the project with their working thesis, which they present to each other and the tutor. • Groups focus on articulating strong thesis statements that meet the established criteria. • Instructors “loat,” answering questions and ofering input. • The session ends with a writing exercise where students revise their working thesis and create a plan for revision of their writing projects as a whole. To schedule a group work session, instructors can contact Kim O’Neil at [email protected]. only an open, but an honest conversation with them. In “Should I Write About My Grandparents or America? Writing Center Tutors, Secrets, and Democratic Change,” John Tassoni emphasizes on how important honesty is between the two individuals. Without honesty, a divergence is created between the writer and tutor, and it would perpetuate, causing misunderstandings and poor communication. It also creates the problem of “secrecy,” which is when the writer thinks that the tutor is hiding the answer and purposefully keeping it away from them. This often happens in the writing center because many writers assume that the tutor is the “expert” over the writer. However, this is not true—in reality, it is the writer who is the expert of their own paper because it is their own ideas. If the writer does not understand the ideas that they have, then the tutor will have a dificult time in helping them. This happened to me in the writing center when I felt that my writer was trying to ish out “the one, golden, secret answer” from me. We were working on an argumentative paper, in which the writer wanted to write about how the U.S. government was not addressing the issues that Latinos experience today. I tried asking the writer many questions about their topic, but many of their responses were, “I don’t know.” Even when I directly asked the writer what he wanted to write about, he struggled in answering the question. Instead of demanding to get an answer for myself from the writer, it would have been better to openly ask the writer if we could begin by looking up some background ideas to get started on the topic itself. Furthermore, as Tassoni advised, it would have been better if I did tell them that I did not know much about the writer’s topic, but then ofer help through consulting other sources. Even though it is good to be honest with the writer, it may not be the best to bluntly tell them that you do not have the expertise, as it may ruin your credentials, which may cause them to not take you seriously. This dilemma is very similar to how a therapist may interact with the client. Like the writer, a client may think that the therapist has the solution to all of their problems that they are experiencing, and may try to “ish out” an answer. This especially happens in the irst session, when the client comes to believe that the therapist is an expert on their lives. From this, if the therapist feels that the client is pressuring them for an answer, a therapist can respond openly and honestly by telling them that they feel that the client is trying to get an answer from them, but that they cannot provide one because they do not know the client well enough to assess their problems. Like the tutor, the therapist is being honest in telling their client that they are not the experts in knowing them the best, but that the client knows themselves the best, and that until they tell more about themselves, the therapist cannot help them. While many of the techniques and approaches listed above do The administrators and tutors of the UIC Writing Center extends a big “Thank You!” and “Good Luck!” to Assistant Director Nikki Paley-Cox as she leaves UIC after 12 wonderful years. allow for establishing rapport (support) with the writer/client, there are some things that both the writing and therapy advisors request new tutors/therapist not do. As said before, at this point, a therapy session may end in this with only open listening and encouraging support; however, a writing session requires more attention and more action from the tutor. In a tutoring session, these non-directive characteristics are very useful in the beginning to establish a bond with the writer. However, as the session goes on, the tutor must provide some of their insight and expertise to the writer. There is a ine line in giving advice to the writer as the tutor— like in the therapeutic setting, it is tempting to give premature advice, but to which then, it may become more damaging to the client. In the writing schema, giving advice may also be damaging towards the writer. For instance, in “Avoiding Appropriation,” Carol Severino talks about how a tutor may take away the unique voice of the writer if edited too much. Additionally, in “Editing Line By Line,” Cynthia Linville discusses how often a writer wants the tutor to only look at their grammar error like an auto-correct machine. Instead of just doing that, the tutor should allow the writer to try to ind their own patterns of problems and try to correct them; in this way, it allows for the writer to have some power and learn from their mistakes. From giving advice and appropriation, it is helpful to remember to always establish a good bond with the writer before giving any advice—and if given advice, to always check in with the writer to see if they are okay and understand it. In my inal words, I would like to say that like in a therapy session, a writing session may go in any direction because it is impossible to keep it strictly in one way. Thus, expect that the session will not always go accordingly to how you planned it to be—a tutor will make many mistakes, but it can still be for the better. Instead of contemplating on making a “perfect session,” be yourself and provide the best help you can, and make the most out of the experience of it. Sincerely, Lenore Tahara-Eckl Works Cited: Grimm, Nancy. “Retheorizing Writing Center Work to Transform a System of Advantage Based on Race.” Writing Centers and the New Racism. 2011: 75-99. Print. Linville, Cynthia. “Editing Line By Line.” he ESL Tutoring Session. 8493. Print. Rogers, Carl. On Becoming a Person: A herapist’s View of Psychotherapy. Houghton Milin Harcourt, 2012. Print. Severino, Carol. “Avoiding Appropriation.” he ESL Tutoring Session. 48-59. Print. Staben, Jennifer & Nordhaus, Kathryn D. “Looking at the Whole Text.” he ESL Tutoring Session. 71-83. Print. Sternglass, Marilyn S. “A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level.” Time to Know hem. 222-240. Print. Tassoni, John P. “Should I Write About My Grandparents or America? Writing Center Tutors, Secrets, and Democratic Change.” Journal of Teaching Writing. 195-207. Print.