Debate Over Language Use

Hi, folks. An article well worth reading in today's edition of the NYTimes: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/arguing-about-language/?hp. The writer speaks of traditionalists and revisionists, and claims both are correct, albeit in different ways. I think, in the Writing Center, we are smack dab in the middle of this discussion each day as we work with writers. (And it's really neat to use the phrase "smack dab.")

What's a Metaphor?

For keeping your sheep in. Puns aside, I'm glad the metaphors seemed to be a hit. They are intended to be a way of thinking about your work, in part by not thinking about it. When we take the first choice that comes to mind, I'd argue we are doing what Malcolm Gladwell calls "thin slicing." We are making sense of a situation quickly, so quickly that we don't notice the thinking that we are doing. He details such quick action (what others sometimes call intuition, but that's a term Gladwell dislikes) in his book _blink_, which I recommend: http://www.gladwell.com/blink/index.html. I believe as writing advisors we also begin to thin slice, building up and then using our experiences with many writers to decide where to go in a session quickly. We might not be able to chart our thinking as to why we made a decision, but it's still a thoughtful response, one made too quickly to capture. I think picking up the first metaphor (or simile) is similar. You are thinking about it, but that thinking is so buried that you are not cognizant of it.

Conversations

So I'm currently listening to a host of conversations--the English 101 folks are working with the morning group, talking about their feed essays and then brainstorming on their final papers. Lots of good moments that I've noted already, instances of writers responding with "oh, I could do that" and "yeah, I understand." You folks are saying, "As a reader, I was confused here," or "this was a really strong point for me; I understood what you meant." The third hallway of Hollenbeck is echoing with these conversations; you're spread out from one side of the building to the other.

Very cool.

ECWCA

A great conference. That's pretty much the consensus after this weekend. Seven advisors went up to present at IUPUI on Friday and Saturday, and everything went well. Leigh and Kali talked on chaos in the writing center, and no less than Mickey Harris, the keynote speaker, attended their session (yup, she wrote the article you read, Sarah). She said the presentation was excellent. And so was Jordan, Tyler, and Rebecca's, on how work in other centers influences their work in the Writing Center, and so was Colin and Kelsey's on how we talk with writers. I may even try to have them come in to 242 and give the presentation. They examined both student texts and transcripts of sessions to uncover what questions we ask and how they might affect a writer.
I also found some other sessions that sparked a lot of ideas. I've got a copy of a tutoring rubric that I'll bring in to show you. And, there are more ideas for research that we can, and should, conduct in a writing center, trying to measure and evaluate the work we do. If we look to make better writers, and better texts, then how to we determine how well or even if we are doing that.
And, of course, we found a good restaurant. An Italian place where we ordered together and ate as much as we liked. For dessert, tiramisu. Fantastic. And the fried zucchini was excellent, too. They announced at this conference that the next one will probably be over in Clarion, Pennsylvania, so perhaps some of you will be interested in attending that one. A good, energizing, invigorating time, which is what a conference should be.

Confidence and Reflection

Reading through recent blog posts of yours, I'm noticing a trend of questions about ability. Can I do this job? What if I don't know this? What can I do in this situation? Is there any way to really prepare for all these situations? Those are all good questions, and, in truth, I do think you should all be nervous. That's a sign that you care. I think most good performers, in any field, still get a little nervous about their work. It means you're engaged with it, wanting it to be the best it can be.
The catch, of course, is to balance the worry with enough confidence that you can do the job and do it productively for the writers you work with. You need to be able to reflect and critique yourself without that leading to inactivity. And that is a tough balance. You need to be in the moment, offering an honest response to the writer, but there is also the small window you leave open to watch yourself as you work, being able to shift direction as necessary during a session. And there's the larger window that opens up after a session, when you evaluate your conversation and think about what you can learn towards next time. We continue reflective work throughout your time in the Center. We observe each other; we tape our own sessions; you have sessions with me; you have sessions with each other. We're like writing center sharks; if we stop moving, we die. Hmmm, now sharks can be our new mascot.
Again, all this is a lot to ask. But, work worth doing is rarely easy.

Words, words, words

"Eager--and doomed--as words are to serve you, they want to do so in lively, dashing, dancing, swooping, curving, crossing, flapping capacities, in sense and harmony with one another. Each time a word shows its face, to countenance its fellows, new possibilities reveal themselves. Language lives, breathes, moves with you . . ." -Karen Elizabeth Gordon

Every word is a choice. That's the beauty of writing, I believe. We have a choice for every single word we put down on the page. Not a right/wrong choice, but a choice of possibilities. For each word that appears, that shows its face, we have certain other words that can follow. Each step in a sentence takes us a little further into the cave and we have to figure out which path is possible. Then again, we can always back up and start again.

I hope you're enjoying the reading so far. She certainly has fun with the language (perhaps overly so at times), and she does offer up the basic points that we want to have down for thinking about (and talking about) language use.

Looking forward to our talk on Tuesday. (Do grammar quizzes help at all in retaining information?)

A Blog in Two Parts

Part the First: To continue our discussion of margin and center groups, and indirect and direct communication--I think some of those concerns really come into play when we're talking with writers about revision. We questioned in class about how direct to be about a writing situation, and I think we often should lean towards the explicit--name the rules and the idea that writing works a certain way in certain situations (or rather, people expect it to look a certain way). It is one thing to ask a writer, "Is there anything about this introductory paragraph you'd like to change?" That's an indirect question, a la, "Would you like to take a bath now?" Some of us understand that neither is intended as a question, even though phrased as such. It is another thing to say, "This introductory paragraph does not seem to me to have as much of a focus as an academic essay usually does. Many faculty like to see a thesis statement early on in the paper, often towards the end of the introductory paragraph. Why don't we talk about what is possible for this paragraph?" Is that too heavy handed? I'm interested in what you think.

Part the Second: We had a good day at Xavier on Friday, and the folks there put on a good meeting. An improv group, some thoughtful talks, and good food. Just what a conference should have. We especially liked the idea of having whiteboard walls; we're going to buy some paint and do the same in our space. Also, our work connects well with the improv theme that the Xavier folks put forward. We might even be able to conduct an improv workshop at the next OWCC meeting, at Miami University, in Oxford, on October 5th. I'll keep you updated. But, do ask Autumn, Jennifer, Ana Jeanne, Evan, and Keri for their thoughts. We can talk some on it in class, too.

Blog post now ended.

Sunday Evening

It's just impossible to ignore the coincidence. People are blogging about the crows at Wittenberg, and who should be on Austin City Limits this weekend? Steve Martin. Why are these events connected? Because Steve Martin's Grammy-winning album is entitled The Crow, and he played the title track.

That's too much to ignore. And we'll also make the song the Monday Music selection on our Facebook page. You've all linked to our Facebook page, right? We've got folks from Utah, Indiana, Columbus (OK, that's a city, not a state, but still), and other locales. Check it out if you haven't yet.

Not much else on this blog post. I have enjoyed reading through your reflections, and I'll have something written up for you all on Tuesday. (Of course typing that now commits me.) Until then, watch the video and have a good Monday.

A General Note

What a beautiful day. It's the kind of day to go outside, take a walk, breath in some air, enjoy the sun. I would argue that any day is really a pretty good day, but today just seems especially nice. Hope you've had a chance to take a moment and notice it.

Also, I wanted to mention that we are six weeks in to the semester now (yes, already), and so, if you're counting blog posts at two a week, you should probably be about twelve. We'll be, or rather, you'll be writing up some blog reflections before break, noting what you've had to say so far this term, but now could be a good time to just double check where you are. And, if necessary, you could blog this weekend. For one thing, think about the names we had on the board yesterday: which ones did you most agree with? Why?

You could also blog about your summary work. Is it easy to write a summary? More difficult? Why? You could even see if you use any of the suggestions from Graff and Birkenstein about quoting and paraphrasing other writers. Just a thought.

We'll also talk soon about what we might do in the second half of the semester. We have a lot of TBA (to be announced) days, and we should fill them. I have some ideas, but I'd like to bounce them off of you, too.

All right, that's my blog, for the moment. Now it's time for a fellows meeting, and then I have some reflections I'm looking forward to reading.

Listening In

Yesterday was an example of my favorite type of class. Why's that, Mike, because you mainly get to stand around? Fair question, but no. To be able to stand in the room and listen in on all the conversations, that's the reward. Those conversations are the focus of our class, how to shape them, how to notice them, how to analyze them, how to improve them. At heart, what we do is sit and talk with a writer. But how we talk, that's the question. Stephen North even mentions in his first article that our talk is what we need to examine, to consider. And it is always wonderful for me to be able to be surrounded by such talk. Especially first sessions.

I mentioned yesterday many of the good moments that I heard--readers responding as readers. "This confused me here because I wasn't expecting it." "Do I take this to be your conclusion?" "Do you want to make more of an argument here?" There did seem to be conversations happening, not any one-sided lectures. And I do think some of the 101 folks got to see/experience what it is like to have a reader solely focused on your writing for a time. That's valuable, and I hope they will take from the talk both some revision ideas for their paper and the desire to have another conversation again.

I'm looking forward to reading your reflections.

Reading Aloud

A neat piece from the NYTimes about reading aloud. Here's an especially relevant paragraph for our work:

But listening aloud, valuable as it is, isn’t the same as reading aloud. Both require a great deal of attention. Both are good ways to learn something important about the rhythms of language. But one of the most basic tests of comprehension is to ask someone to read aloud from a book. It reveals far more than whether the reader understands the words. It reveals how far into the words — and the pattern of the words — the reader really sees.

How do we read a student's paper? Is it just a half-mumbled reading, more to ourselves than the writer? Or is it a true measure of comprehension? An act of communication that shows us and the writer what is making sense and what isn't? I still think the act of reading a student's paper is a performance. It should be done so that we garner the most meaning we can from it. Read boldly and for purpose. Make sense of the text.

Topics to Blog About

1. The scenarios that we had in class today. What were your thoughts about them?

2. A "what if" scenario from your list. What are you concerned about, and how might you handle it?

3. The audio response. How well does it work for you? How does it compare with other types of responses that you've received?

4. Following Sarah's lead, write about what you learned from your profile essay assignment. How did it go? What did you discover that surprised you?

5. Something else that's on your mind.

Sit down; type out your thoughts. I look forward to reading them.

Our Words

To follow up on the vegetables. The piece by Thonus is, again, a valuable one. Here is data on what actually happens in a session vs. what students report happen. Those might overlap, but in research we can't confuse one for the other. We might have stories about how sessions go, what we talk about, how we talk about it, but without recordings and analysis, we're not really sure about it. Nor do we necessarily know what parts of the conversation most influence writers. What changes do they make to a paper? Why? One of the current advisors, Devoni, just wrote a piece for Writing Center Journal about how one student's paper changed over time given their sessions. She had the good fortune to be a writing fellow for the course and thus could see the various drafts of the essay. She worked from those to note the changes in wording and organization and then tried to tie those changes back to her conversation.

And I think all of us who value language will value Thonus's article. If we believe that every word matters in writing, then why not so in speech, too? Granted, there is the immediate context for speech, the ephemeral quality of our language (and still the ability to correct and revise on the spot), but we can say a lot with each word. Every word is loaded with baggage of some kind, connotations that will differ slightly for every listener. With the Thonus article, on pp. 183-184, I challenge you to read aloud each of her examples. How do they sound? How can they sound different depending on your tone? Think on how you might make suggestions to a writer. What sounds best?

And, I also wanted to comment on the evaluative language in sessions. Some of you mentioned that an advisor commented that an argument was "good," and even that word can be problematic. One suggestion I have is to phrase praise in terms of you as a reader: "Well, for me this argument made sense. As I read the prompt, it seems that your paper does indeed address the questions and criteria." That grounds the conversation in a reader-to-text relationship and does not commit us to some general evaluation of a text as good or solid or really neato. Make sense?

A Blog on a Blog

A link for you, folks, from a former writing advisor. She now teaches over in Korea (she just signed up for a second year), and I send this to you in part to show the possibilities that exist with a background in one-to-one writing advising. Such work positions you extremely well for overseas teaching positions (and Laura just took off for China), and there are several opportunities. To be honest, I expect none of you to go into the writing center field. That's not the goal. But I do think the work you do in the Center allows you to explore and take advantage of a lot of different opportunities.

Anyway, here's Caitlin's blog: http://caitlininkorea1011.wordpress.com/. The early posts talk a lot more about her teaching; the most recent page, though, has some beautiful pictures from a recent sightseeing trip.

Saturday Night's All Right for Tutoring . . .

Bonus points for recognizing the Reginald Dwight reference (and double bonus points for noting the reference for that). Anyway, having gone back through Brooks's article today, and having read a couple of blog posts that are taking issue with the piece, I'm looking forward to Tuesday's class. I think there are some provocative points to raise and discuss. What I'll simply throw out here is this: Brooks offers nine numbered suggestions in his piece (four, then three, then two) of what advisors could/should do with writers. Of those nine, how many do you truly disagree with? And why?

We now return you to your weekend, already in progress.

Bloggin'

Happy Friday, folks. Given a couple of mentions in other postings about the blog assignment, let me offer these thoughts. The blog space should be open to a range of thoughts and ideas. We have our readings, yes, and they should provide some material for discussion. But so too should our class discussions, your other classes, your interactions with peers, your visits to the Center, you dining choices, your lives in general. Pull from whatever makes sense to you as you think about writing center work. Did going to a restaurant seem similar to going to the Writing Center? I often think of myself as a restaurant manager. I see people seated, check in with them to see if the service was acceptable, talk with the staff about our serving options, etc. That's an analogy that helps me think about our work. There's also a good article that compares writing centers to bordellos. Yes. We can read that later this semester if you like.

You might also consider blogging about the writing style of any of the authors we read. Is there one sentence in particular that really works for you? Or one that doesn't? Think about the style and talk about the sentence structure. We can analyze writing here as well.

Think too about how writing is presented to you in other classes at Wittenberg. How do faculty talk about writing and the writing process, or how don't they? You have to develop (or perhaps articulate) your beliefs about writing. Is knowledge socially constructed? Is it found by oneself in a small room? Is writing a matter of transcribing what we think onto paper or is it the construction of knowledge itself? Do we think by writing? All those questions are ones that you can chase down on the blog.

Also, if you are having trouble thinking on things to write about, ask me. I can give some specific prompts if it helps anyone. I'm happy to do that. Regardless, get in the habit of sitting at the keyboard and typing. Respond. Write back to the readings, to our discussions, to your life. Sound your barbaric yawp out over the roofs of the world. At the least, give us a little yell.

Different Perspectives (heading due north)

Just a quick note here. Where I got back to the office, this email was waiting for me, from one of our professors--he had sent it out to his class and copied me in on it:

"To avoid losing points due to grammatical or stylistic errors in your weekly journals, group presentation, and final paper, please have your work proofread at the Writing Center before submitting it to me."

So, this is one idea of a writing center. Does it match with ours? Does it need to?

Power and Authority and Carino, Oh My.

My kids just watched The Wizard of Oz this past weekend, so the "lions and tigers and bears" line is right at the top of my mind. And here we have the power and authority, those creatures that might jump out of the writing center woods and heed our progress towards Oz. To not pay attention to them makes us, in Carino's words, immature or gullible or, to reference the movie again, cowardly. Granted, some of that is on centers themselves (and the administrators) rather than advisors, but at the least an advisor without knowledge of power and authority in a tutorial would be, well, like the Scarecrow.

This article is, I believe, an important one for us. It, and the next two, from Brooks and Shamoon & Burns, will probably influence your pedagogy a great deal. Here is where we begin to articulate what the relationship is (or can be) between writer and reader. I know Jennifer and Brandon have already commented on the reading, agreeing in part but also offering counters to Carino. Good. This is a crucial discussion for us to have (and probably never finish). What does it mean for us to have power in a session? When do we have it? I especially hope we talk some about real questions vs. ploys today. And, I'm also curious if this essay, as it seems to indicate, actually makes an argument for an advisor writing on a student's paper.

Grammar Humor

Seven Bar Jokes
Involving Grammar
and Punctuation.
BY Eric K. Auld
- - - -
1. A comma splice walks into a bar, it has a drink and then leaves.
2. A dangling modifier walks into a bar. After finishing a drink, the bartender asks it to leave.
3. A question mark walks into a bar?
4. Two quotation marks “walk into” a bar.
5. A gerund and an infinitive walk into a bar, drinking to drink.
6. The bar was walked into by the passive voice.
7. Three intransitive verbs walk into a bar. They sit. They drink. They leave.

Why the Class?

Do we even need English 242? That is, perhaps, a dangerous question with which to start, but then again, dangerous questions are usually the most productive. Other schools certainly ask the question, and not every writing center requires a course; some hold day-long workshops, or a week-long introduction, and others have student advisors simply jump into the pool and start advising (there's a mixed metaphor). The idea, at least in part, is that students will learn as they go. Readings and exercises and mock tutorials are optional.

Now, in some cases, this approach is guided not so much by a sense of pedagogy but rather by budget. Not all schools can afford a credit course for their advisors. I would argue that we are fortunate in that this course has been on the books for many years and that the community here believes that there is a value in exploring and discussing the literature regarding writing centers. I do believe there is more to advising than being a good writer. But, I don't want to assume and blind myself to other possibilities--I should always ask why we are requiring this class. And, I know from past semesters that the readings we will be covering will seem dense at times and, perhaps, unnecessary. For me, though, we are laying the theoretical groundwork for our future work in the Center. We all stand somewhere, we all believe something about writing and reality, whether or not we articulate that belief. So, one of my goals for the semester is to have us all articulate exactly where we do stand. (You already read some provocative statements from Murphy and Sherwood about our work possibly supporting and extending racist and sexist policies. Those are some heavy accusations.)

One more point to open with: you will no doubt look to make comparisons between your own experiences in the Center as a writer with what we discuss in class. And you should. I do not expect that every session you had went as well as it could have, and you should take those experiences and build from them. Most important, I hope you always remember what it is like to sit in the writer's chair when you hold your sessions. Identifying with that role is perhaps the most important part of advising.

And, here's the link to that video I wanted to show you on Sunday: take a look when you can. http://www.peercentered.org/2012/01/ron-maxwells-advice-to-tutors.html

Mike's Blog

Welcome to Mike's blog for English 242, Spring 2012. Each of us in the course will be keeping a blog, writing about our readings, our class discussions, our mock and real consultations. The electronic space is a place to work through our thinking, to also share that thinking with others, and to collaborate with one another as we wrestle with questions about our writing and about working with others on their writing.

I too will try to keep current with this blog, offering some thoughts about the classes and the conversations. I hope each of you will take some time to respond to those posts when the feeling strikes you.