Writing center philosophy. My new enemy. I thought we were coming to end on you. But no. Now you're more complicated. And you're multifaceted. And layered. You are a cruel mistress writing center philosophy. And I love you.
I believe the entirity of the learning experience is based in student centered learning. If it was only possible to set each student in school with one teacher for an hour at a time, we would have an army of brilliant writers (hopefully). I feel as though that is completely unrealistic though. However, that in mind, writing centers are able to give students that chance. I would love it if every writing center appointment was a mandatory two appointments, one so the tutor and student could get familiar with each other and another and another to work. On second thought, three appoints. A first meeting, a second appointment to develop the material, and a third, final appointment to go over what they've written at home. I am very Garrett.
As I'm not actually going to be teaching full time, I can devote that kind of time, as long as the student can make the time to do it. If not, I'll have to bend a bit, and in that regard, I'd go for a Burkean Parlor/Garrett hybrid. I am going to have to post more on this as it is really difficult to focus on one idea. I hope this class helps me to better understand how to teach people in a way that is realistic to reach them.
-Nick
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
BLOG 5
Kevin and I missed the class where we held mock tutoring session on the drafts of Lunsford. So, we decided to hold our own mock tutoring session, in which he tutored me on my draft.
When it started, I showed Kevin my draft and told him what I was worried about. While I read Lunsford a few times, I honestly don't feel like I had a strong enough response to it to formulate a response paper. To get us started, not that there was a lot of awkward, but he used a free talking to get the assignment flowing. He, luckily enough, having known the text, was able to add and ask about it. However, I didn't think to take the book out but Kevin reminded me that when going over a paper, especially one where I wasn't sure of the assignment or content, without a book, is nearly insane.
Through free talking, Kevin was able to get me to say more about how I feel on the topic, which he made me write down. After fifteen minutes of talking about the topic, looking down at my page, I had a ton of things I hadn't added into my paper. He took a look at my grammar, which is usually helacious to be honest, he circled my errors (as I told him I could print out another copy). He had me fix the errors (most of which I make because I'm rushing to get out all of my ideas, which seem to come so quickly I cannot slow down enough to get them all out) but he wouldn't outright tell me what I had to do to fix them.
After 45 minutes of sort of talking out the paper, I began shooting past him ideas of where I could insert the additional ideas so that they would make sense, but he reminded me just inserting additional information doesn't increase a paper's quality - only makes it longer. I took a look, and with the last 10 minutes or so we attempted to figure out how to restructure parts of the paper to include the new material.
REVIEW:
Kevin was helpful, but never led, which is very interesting, especially considering how close we are. I was able to still make my own material, without him inserting his own agenda. He very much kept me feeling comfortable and producing work of my own voice. It made me feel better knowing he wasn't trying to lead me to what he wanted to write. It was a good experience which helped me to turn out more, stronger, and better material based on what I already throught.
When it started, I showed Kevin my draft and told him what I was worried about. While I read Lunsford a few times, I honestly don't feel like I had a strong enough response to it to formulate a response paper. To get us started, not that there was a lot of awkward, but he used a free talking to get the assignment flowing. He, luckily enough, having known the text, was able to add and ask about it. However, I didn't think to take the book out but Kevin reminded me that when going over a paper, especially one where I wasn't sure of the assignment or content, without a book, is nearly insane.
Through free talking, Kevin was able to get me to say more about how I feel on the topic, which he made me write down. After fifteen minutes of talking about the topic, looking down at my page, I had a ton of things I hadn't added into my paper. He took a look at my grammar, which is usually helacious to be honest, he circled my errors (as I told him I could print out another copy). He had me fix the errors (most of which I make because I'm rushing to get out all of my ideas, which seem to come so quickly I cannot slow down enough to get them all out) but he wouldn't outright tell me what I had to do to fix them.
After 45 minutes of sort of talking out the paper, I began shooting past him ideas of where I could insert the additional ideas so that they would make sense, but he reminded me just inserting additional information doesn't increase a paper's quality - only makes it longer. I took a look, and with the last 10 minutes or so we attempted to figure out how to restructure parts of the paper to include the new material.
REVIEW:
Kevin was helpful, but never led, which is very interesting, especially considering how close we are. I was able to still make my own material, without him inserting his own agenda. He very much kept me feeling comfortable and producing work of my own voice. It made me feel better knowing he wasn't trying to lead me to what he wanted to write. It was a good experience which helped me to turn out more, stronger, and better material based on what I already throught.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
BLOG 4
My tutoring experience Steph:
Steph continually encouraged me to think about personal experiences I could liken my essay to, which really helped me develop an angle. That's something I'll definitely be planning on using when I tutor students. By having me think about personal experiences, I was able to get into the paper much easier. She was very supportive and tried not to give me answers/her ideas, but kept asking questions that forced me to come up with my own ideas, which made the whole experience much easier. She talked to me like a student would talk to another, not like someone who is my age, making me feel like she was on my side, not talking down to me. That's a tactic that put me at ease, as someone who hates being tutored and would rather learn on my own.
Stephanie also kept telling me to write things down, understanding that even a really brilliant idea can be fleeting and you don't want to lose anything. She was friendly and smiled,
and even told her own personal anecdotes, again reminding me she's been where I've been. She told me her weaknesses and strengths and said "Let's try to use that combination together to make this paper great." By using "we" and "us" she made me feel like I wasn't on my own, that I had help with the assignment, which I has having trouble with if I came to someone for help.
I would definitely try to use these techniques in my own tutoring sessions. She put me at ease with the assignment and got things out of me that I'm going to use in my paper. The best part is I don't feel like she led me at all. She may have guided me to answers I already had, but she didn't force her idea on my paper on me. I definitely appreciated that kind of guidance, as opposed to co-writing.
-Nick
Steph continually encouraged me to think about personal experiences I could liken my essay to, which really helped me develop an angle. That's something I'll definitely be planning on using when I tutor students. By having me think about personal experiences, I was able to get into the paper much easier. She was very supportive and tried not to give me answers/her ideas, but kept asking questions that forced me to come up with my own ideas, which made the whole experience much easier. She talked to me like a student would talk to another, not like someone who is my age, making me feel like she was on my side, not talking down to me. That's a tactic that put me at ease, as someone who hates being tutored and would rather learn on my own.
Stephanie also kept telling me to write things down, understanding that even a really brilliant idea can be fleeting and you don't want to lose anything. She was friendly and smiled,
and even told her own personal anecdotes, again reminding me she's been where I've been. She told me her weaknesses and strengths and said "Let's try to use that combination together to make this paper great." By using "we" and "us" she made me feel like I wasn't on my own, that I had help with the assignment, which I has having trouble with if I came to someone for help.
I would definitely try to use these techniques in my own tutoring sessions. She put me at ease with the assignment and got things out of me that I'm going to use in my paper. The best part is I don't feel like she led me at all. She may have guided me to answers I already had, but she didn't force her idea on my paper on me. I definitely appreciated that kind of guidance, as opposed to co-writing.
-Nick
Monday, September 22, 2008
Class notes 09/22/08
conversation - used to determine assignment, class, etc, following it with what they need to do with the paper, try to establish their understanding of the paper.
free writingwriter's alertness
Collaboration = good idea -> but has problems Collaboration masquerades as democracy -> points of conflict with collaboration Definition of collaboration Advantages of collaboration (+ why it works) Collaboration in the writing center = hard. / and to be careful - 3 models for writing center -> story of how she changed her mind -free writing -conversation
WRITING CENTER WITH STEPHANIE
Personal experience (my collaborative process with the D.A.) as it relates to the textTouch subject rather than grab it.Callabo = yes/no
Intro - discuss Lunsford says good/bad. I say Lunsford smart.
Bad - collaboration can inhibit personal veiw and voice
Good - collaboration can be helpful.
Closing - collaboration doesn't work for everyone.
Remember to keep it responsorial - state clearly my opinion.
Steph was encouraging, but not leading. Didn't give any of her ideas for the paper.
free writingwriter's alertness
Collaboration = good idea -> but has problems Collaboration masquerades as democracy -> points of conflict with collaboration Definition of collaboration Advantages of collaboration (+ why it works) Collaboration in the writing center = hard. / and to be careful - 3 models for writing center -> story of how she changed her mind -free writing -conversation
WRITING CENTER WITH STEPHANIE
Personal experience (my collaborative process with the D.A.) as it relates to the textTouch subject rather than grab it.Callabo = yes/no
Intro - discuss Lunsford says good/bad. I say Lunsford smart.
Bad - collaboration can inhibit personal veiw and voice
Good - collaboration can be helpful.
Closing - collaboration doesn't work for everyone.
Remember to keep it responsorial - state clearly my opinion.
Steph was encouraging, but not leading. Didn't give any of her ideas for the paper.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
BLOG #3
Garret or Stock? Who will win? You decide on tonight's WRITING CENTER PHILOSOPHY IDOL FINALE!
Really, though. I don't think either one can truly be "the single learning process" anyone uses. For Garret to be accurate, all people must learn all things at the same pace. By having division of learning levels (from honors to resource room), the government is saying that they understand that all people do not learn the exact same, and in fact, knowledge is not a pen.
Realistically, though, there does need to be some kind of standard by which we measure knowledge. While it would be awesome for everyone to learn uniquely and specialized to their needs and personality, we do not have the resources, economic or man-powerwise, to give each and every student their own unique learning experience. There exist issue with both.
Personally, I straddle the middle on the issue. I can't fully give my all to either side - I do believe one is more right than the other (knowledge is not a pen, but something earned differently by each person), but realistically, we need to have some standard by which we measure learning - some constant we can use as a general guide for most cases. I respect and understand that we each learning individually, but we don't each have brains that are set up infinite numbers of different ways - we have commonality to some extent. It's that commonality that allows most of our students to fill 102 to 104 classes in high school, with a few falling to either side of that general middle who do recieve special learning enviornments. I'm proud to say that I have been taught by smart enough and good enough teachers to understand that it takes both concepts to truly teach someone and I will be glad try to apply both to my upcoming experiences in the writing center.
-Nick
Really, though. I don't think either one can truly be "the single learning process" anyone uses. For Garret to be accurate, all people must learn all things at the same pace. By having division of learning levels (from honors to resource room), the government is saying that they understand that all people do not learn the exact same, and in fact, knowledge is not a pen.
Realistically, though, there does need to be some kind of standard by which we measure knowledge. While it would be awesome for everyone to learn uniquely and specialized to their needs and personality, we do not have the resources, economic or man-powerwise, to give each and every student their own unique learning experience. There exist issue with both.
Personally, I straddle the middle on the issue. I can't fully give my all to either side - I do believe one is more right than the other (knowledge is not a pen, but something earned differently by each person), but realistically, we need to have some standard by which we measure learning - some constant we can use as a general guide for most cases. I respect and understand that we each learning individually, but we don't each have brains that are set up infinite numbers of different ways - we have commonality to some extent. It's that commonality that allows most of our students to fill 102 to 104 classes in high school, with a few falling to either side of that general middle who do recieve special learning enviornments. I'm proud to say that I have been taught by smart enough and good enough teachers to understand that it takes both concepts to truly teach someone and I will be glad try to apply both to my upcoming experiences in the writing center.
-Nick
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Classnotes 9/17
MODEL TUTORING SESSION
THINGS TO LOOK FOR:
Descriptive, rather than interpretive notes.
Body language
Questions/responses in conversation
Quote if necessary
Context /setting
Description of subjects
What changes/they do to their assignments
STEPH VS CHANDLER – THE GOLD TUTORING BELT – FIGHT ON!
Began with starting by asking about the assignment (the class, the the actual assignment, the story)
Double checked her understanding of the assignment.
Asked to see the book
Asked what the student expected to gain from this.
Asked the student what she thought the book was trying to say
Repeated again what she thought the student was trying to say.
She then encouraged the student to write down what she interpreted the subject of the paper to be, and wrote it down herself.
Chandler keeps asking to find out what she’s trying to say, avoiding questions that are too leading.
Stephanie seems to be acknowledging and nodding a lot.
Laughter indicating the situation is comfortable.
Chandler is being encouraging when appropriate (commenting on her understanding of essay writing)
They have gone back into the book, Chandler asking what Stephanie thought was important about the essay. They then found common interests in the work – they continue to talk about big points in the work.
Chandler continued to write down notes, matching Stephanie’s notes.
Chandler asked if her understanding was accurate again, to which Steph replied “Um, that’s where I got confused.”
They both read over the work looking for a mutual point they can understand.
Sort of feel that Chandler is asking a leading question in an effort to get to a point that it seems like Steph is trying to get to, but doesn’t necessarily understand yet. They take notes on the new point they’ve found. Chandler commends her on her point and compliments her word usage.
Chandler broke the fourth wall.
She continued to ask questions about where she should go with her essay, leading them both back to writing.
Stephanie seemed confused, sort of pondering.
Chandler sort of leads her somewhere, but then gets back to an earlier point Stephanie has made.
She asks Stephanie a major question in terms of the paper itself, to which Stephanie replies. She tells her about her experience. She sounds like she understand the point, and is gesturing comfortably with her hands.
Chandler asks a question about is she saying good collaboration vs bad collaboration. She asks it again when she doesn’t get a response.
Stephanie replies the way it seems Chandler wants. Chandler asks for proof and supporting evidence in the article, which Stephanie is able to provide, using quotes from the text.
When prompted, Stephanie responded to a leading question with an unsure “probably.”
Chandler asks what Stephanie feels is useful or good.
Chandler asks a leading question, which is in fairness built on information Stephanie gave, and Stephanie responded with “sort of.”
And then Chandler broke the fourth wall. Again.
Stephanie just continued to make her point, fulfilling the requirements of the essay.
She then did her Matthew McConnaughey impression.
They go back to the original focus.
By this point, Stephanie has a half of page of notes. As Chandler talks, Stephanie continues to look at her book, as if she’s looking for the answers she needs in the book.
Chandler uses “we”, followed by giving her interpretation, punctuating it with “I may be wrong.”
AND YET AGAIN, MORE FOURTH WALL. Oh wait, she’s now directly addressing the audience. Oooh, meta.
Ending it with asking if she’d like another session, any other questions, etc.
20 minutes
Chandler, much like She-Hulk, broke the fourth wall a ton. On the whole, Chandler had an idea of what she wanted to hear/see happen, so she tried to lead Stephanie there.
Need to be encouraging, opening up at the beginning, and summing up.
Don’t be a cheerleader. A pluses not pom poms.
THINGS TO LOOK FOR:
Descriptive, rather than interpretive notes.
Body language
Questions/responses in conversation
Quote if necessary
Context /setting
Description of subjects
What changes/they do to their assignments
STEPH VS CHANDLER – THE GOLD TUTORING BELT – FIGHT ON!
Began with starting by asking about the assignment (the class, the the actual assignment, the story)
Double checked her understanding of the assignment.
Asked to see the book
Asked what the student expected to gain from this.
Asked the student what she thought the book was trying to say
Repeated again what she thought the student was trying to say.
She then encouraged the student to write down what she interpreted the subject of the paper to be, and wrote it down herself.
Chandler keeps asking to find out what she’s trying to say, avoiding questions that are too leading.
Stephanie seems to be acknowledging and nodding a lot.
Laughter indicating the situation is comfortable.
Chandler is being encouraging when appropriate (commenting on her understanding of essay writing)
They have gone back into the book, Chandler asking what Stephanie thought was important about the essay. They then found common interests in the work – they continue to talk about big points in the work.
Chandler continued to write down notes, matching Stephanie’s notes.
Chandler asked if her understanding was accurate again, to which Steph replied “Um, that’s where I got confused.”
They both read over the work looking for a mutual point they can understand.
Sort of feel that Chandler is asking a leading question in an effort to get to a point that it seems like Steph is trying to get to, but doesn’t necessarily understand yet. They take notes on the new point they’ve found. Chandler commends her on her point and compliments her word usage.
Chandler broke the fourth wall.
She continued to ask questions about where she should go with her essay, leading them both back to writing.
Stephanie seemed confused, sort of pondering.
Chandler sort of leads her somewhere, but then gets back to an earlier point Stephanie has made.
She asks Stephanie a major question in terms of the paper itself, to which Stephanie replies. She tells her about her experience. She sounds like she understand the point, and is gesturing comfortably with her hands.
Chandler asks a question about is she saying good collaboration vs bad collaboration. She asks it again when she doesn’t get a response.
Stephanie replies the way it seems Chandler wants. Chandler asks for proof and supporting evidence in the article, which Stephanie is able to provide, using quotes from the text.
When prompted, Stephanie responded to a leading question with an unsure “probably.”
Chandler asks what Stephanie feels is useful or good.
Chandler asks a leading question, which is in fairness built on information Stephanie gave, and Stephanie responded with “sort of.”
And then Chandler broke the fourth wall. Again.
Stephanie just continued to make her point, fulfilling the requirements of the essay.
She then did her Matthew McConnaughey impression.
They go back to the original focus.
By this point, Stephanie has a half of page of notes. As Chandler talks, Stephanie continues to look at her book, as if she’s looking for the answers she needs in the book.
Chandler uses “we”, followed by giving her interpretation, punctuating it with “I may be wrong.”
AND YET AGAIN, MORE FOURTH WALL. Oh wait, she’s now directly addressing the audience. Oooh, meta.
Ending it with asking if she’d like another session, any other questions, etc.
20 minutes
Chandler, much like She-Hulk, broke the fourth wall a ton. On the whole, Chandler had an idea of what she wanted to hear/see happen, so she tried to lead Stephanie there.
Need to be encouraging, opening up at the beginning, and summing up.
Don’t be a cheerleader. A pluses not pom poms.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Blog 1
I am a rewriter. Most of my writing seems to be rewriting my earlier work. To see that academics think that method of constantly fixing is okay by them, well, that makes me feel ooey gooey inside.
I don't agree, really, that there are 3 forms of tutoring and 3 forms of tutoring alone. There are such subtle variations I don't really feel that the two extremes really ever occurs anymore. It seems like all classes involve some amount of discussion or reaction. And really, any teacher who sticks to teacher-centered writing seems to me to be a little behind the times and not at all interested solely in the benefit of the student as much as solely interested in having a job with tenure when no one can fire them, short of a human kiln.
I look forward to getting to a point where I more lean towards student-centered writing, rather than so in the middle, as I'd like to help the student learn to bring out what's inside of themselves more than just what I think they have inside.
-Nicholas
I don't agree, really, that there are 3 forms of tutoring and 3 forms of tutoring alone. There are such subtle variations I don't really feel that the two extremes really ever occurs anymore. It seems like all classes involve some amount of discussion or reaction. And really, any teacher who sticks to teacher-centered writing seems to me to be a little behind the times and not at all interested solely in the benefit of the student as much as solely interested in having a job with tenure when no one can fire them, short of a human kiln.
I look forward to getting to a point where I more lean towards student-centered writing, rather than so in the middle, as I'd like to help the student learn to bring out what's inside of themselves more than just what I think they have inside.
-Nicholas
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
9/10/08 Class Notes
BOARD SHARED LEARNING EXPERIENCE:
Clarify what's expected
support practice
feedback and encouragement
validated learner's learning strategies
give information learner didn't have
helped identify strategies
connected to learner's interests and abilities
coach acknowledges that learner is in charge
model patterns
walk learner through things
support with info abouy conventions
help identify focus and organization
okay to be casting around
connecting to the students strength
limiting/focusing areas of attention
being aware of/responding to learner's emotions
help with the chaos
CHAPTER INCLUDED:
Review of research (emperical research - studies based on observation and experiences)
Not nearly enough studies
We will be focusing on qualitative studies
Page 9 oddly matches our board list of necessary features in tutoring
METALANGUAGE-
"meta" - over, the next level up
so, metalanguage is the language used to talk about language, ie: learning the different special terms involved with writing and response
(writing down goals, ideas before getting to the draft, brainstorming, outlining)
Tutoring works for students of all ages, helps with attitudes towards literature, self esteem, etc.
TUTORING DON'T'S
add your own stuff
give false praise
just detect errors
act like a therapist
take ownership
have all the answers
respond too late
FOR NEXT CLASS FOR NEXT CLASS FOR NEXT CLASS FOR NEXT CLASS
*pages 21-30 in the tiny purple book, respond to reading (any sort of response, but do include the class stuff)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)