Reading Reflections

Mike Rose's "I Just Wanna Be Average" offers details on a life that is probably worlds away from what most of us have experienced. Though I can't make claims about the social or economic backgrounds of anyone else here, those of us who are working at the Writing Center are unlikely to have been slapped with the label "underprepared." There was no "Vocational Education" for us. We're the ones who were "good" students, taking Honors, AP, or College Prep classes. How many of us here, rather than taking a "basic" writing class, were exempted from the WRA requirement?

The heart of Rose's piece is the challenges students face navigating the labyrinth of academic institutions not designed to accommodate them. Though his experiences reflect the same period of time that my parents were probably in school, I'm all too aware of how many of the problems he faced persist to this day. Schools create an artificial dichotomy between the students who excel and those who struggle. This isn't a criticism of the grading system, because it's important to have some way to quantify a student's mastery of material. However, we shouldn't confuse an individual's proficiency in a given subject with their capabilities as a student. A student who has a weak background in math might need a class that focuses more on the fundamentals, rather than more abstract concepts. That's reasonable and that's appropriate. What doesn't make sense is labeling a student as an underachiever, and then shunting them aside into remedial classes taught by teachers who aren't prepared to teach them. Rose called his classes "a dumping ground for the disaffected," and I know just how true those words can be. The students who are in these classes are the ones who need skilled, motivated teachers the most.

Even though I was always labeled an "over-achiever," my own experiences support Rose's ideas. I know how easy it is to tune out a lesson that is boring or difficult. Some teachers make it easy to coast by in their classes with a minimum of effort. I’ve had friends who were called “poor students,” and placed in classes for “their type.” I’ve seen this happen to people I know were bright, but who failed to suitably impress teachers and administrators. Some of them took this as permission to stop trying, since they weren’t being expected to excel. At my high school, if you weren’t in the advanced classes, you generally treated your coursework like a joke. What students need are teachers who can reach through the fog of disinterest, bad experiences, and discouragement to connect to students and inspire them.

At the Writing Center, we need to appreciate how challenging the writing process can be for individuals who have been labeled in the manner Rose describes. If you are told often enough that you aren’t good at something, you start to believe it yourself. This reading reinforces the importance of being supportive and encouraging to the students who come to us for help. As writing consultants, we can’t change the way classes are split or students are labeled, but we can make a difference with individual students.

(I realize after writing this how discursive it sounds, and how far it strays from the subject of the Writing Center. This happens to be something I feel strongly about, so I apologize if I rambled a bit.)

Response to Rose

Mike Rose's article has been the most entertaining reading thus far. I even considered sharing it with someone who may or may not appreciate it! So many circumstances he mentions make me think of my own life... My grandparents were Italian, came to this country around the same age as his, and lived an extremely hard life. Their grandchildren turned out completely different, though. I'm positively spoiled in comparison to Mr. Rose. But we share some of the same literacies like reading, drawing, and astronomy. The vocational classes and love of chemistry are things we do not have in common, though.

He also talks about the slacker attitude, which I have encountered just about everywhere. I can name quite a few close friends and family members who "just wanna be average" and it drives me insane. I just don't understand. Like Katie D commented below, I was labeled the "smart overachiever" of the family too. This article helped me to understand how and why a person could arrive at this situation. When Rose says that he kept seeing material he should've already learned, I just felt so horrible for students who believes they are not smart and stop trying in school. I can definitely imagine this scenario and I know which of my relatives have experienced this situation. Who hasn't observed those stereotypical slackers (who are really not slackers at all)?

A few things he mentioned in the article struck me as unusual. Namely Lester the Molester and the vocational classes. I would definitely have questioned my placement in those classes. And why include the toothless molester? Ugh, such a gruesome image... That's just sick.

His brilliant new English teacher made me think of the Dead Poets Society, starring Robin Williams. The genius, messy professor crosses the line but helps his students learn more than they ever have before. And he turns them on to reading and poetry, magically flipping their creativity switch on... I only wish I had experienced such a professor. Actually, Michelle and I have both experienced a similar professor - senior year, same English teacher, probably best class I've ever had. I think almost everyone's had a teacher like that.

I've been all over the place in this post, so here's a summary for all you skimmers out there: Me and Mike Rose should pretty much be best friends. "I Just Wanna Be Average" was my favorite reading so far. At this rate, I may even buy the book it's excerpted from.

Library Observations

Today I had my first satellite observation. It was a lot different than Bessey. There are fewer resources in the library in terms of copiers, reference books (Well, technically there aren't. But there is no easily accessible shelf of tutoring books like the main center). After the session, the tutor expressed the concern that the satellites are more disorganized in terms of appointments, receptionists, etc.

So the biographies available online are extremely helpful when scheduling a session, as I saw today. It was a very isolated case, or so the tutor insisted. She began by asking the client her purpose in coming to the center. The student wanted help coming up with new ideas to write about or brainstorm in her paper. I just thought the tutor would help with the general pre-writing process. They explored the paper's guidelines in more detail to make sure that they were addressing its concerns. But the guidelines were really general; the student could talk about any aspect of feminism that she wanted.

So she wanted brainstorming help. She had made a list of more topics to talk about, but all of them were politically centered. I could literally see the tutor's mind turning amidst her decision to give the student ideas instead of helping her draw off of her list. Was it too directive? Should she just have followed the student's list?

I watched, dumbfounded, as the tutor revealed 20+ more topics of feminism, including specific people, places, and different doctrines. She urged the student to get away from the political side of feminism, and provided many examples of how to do so. I naturally figured this must be a tutor with an impressive feminist background. But the rhythm of the session was being dictated by this soft-spoken tutor who knew so much about feminism it left the tutee speechless. Not good!

The student took a few notes, but was otherwise looking around the library (it was quite loud). Her concentration was not aided by a conversation held by Writing Center employees at the next table. The tutor also gave advice concerning the use of rhetorical questions. She said that professors sometimes have negative views of introductions that begin with rhetorical questions because it makes the writer seem doubtable, or unsure of their position in the paper. It seems like they let the reader narrow the topic down themselves. I thought this was a very legitimate area of advice. She was scrambling for things to work on in the paper, though. The client had another session scheduled for the following week, as well. Parting advice was issued: the student should specify the type of citations needed in the paper when asking for formatting help. All in all, this session lasted ten minutes!

The tutor was incredulous. "Usually," she said, "They're not that short."

Being Tutored, Round One

So I went for my first session of being tutored at the WC in the library. When I was making the appointment, I read consultant bios and found one that seemed to specialize in areas that were relevant to the paper I was working on - an ESL grad student. I was really interested to see how he approached my paper. He was very friendly and welcoming, and his attitude put me totally at ease. Because my paper was long-ish and our time was limited, he suggested skipping the 'read out loud' part, because he said he worked a bit slower than some of the other consultants. That was totally fine by me. I was kind of worried at first, because as I was trying to explain the assignment to him, it seemed that the language barrier was making it difficult for him to understand what I meant... but I think after a while we began to understand each other better. My paper was somewhat research based, and he proved extremely knowledgable about the conventions of presenting data. I think he could tell I had little experience with such writing, and he gave a lengthy description of different methods for presenting research and helped me to think about the paper in ways I had not thought of. He asked me what I wanted to get from the session, and he was very careful to give me feedback in every area that I requested. He frequently referenced my assignment sheet and my questions, staying on task and working though the paper to point out things I could add or do differently. When his next appointment was late, he offered to continue working with me until they showed up. Overall, it was a good experience.

This week's thoughts

Well, I'll start by saying I enjoyed this week's readings. It was very refreshing to read narrative style rather than the usual academic texts. They all helped me to get a clearer picture of how one's life experiences can shape their literacies and their writing and their communication. It still makes me uncomfortable to think of literacies as more than reading and writing, but rather as bodies of knowledge and expertise in different areas. So I got thinking about what I would cover in my own literacy narrative, and hit somewhat of a roadblock.

I don't think I'm alone in this... but I started thinking that music has been a pretty huge influence in my life. I sang in the church choir since I was very little and began formal music lessons in middle school. Band was a huge part of my social life in high school (you can scream "band geek" now if you'd like, but whatever, doesn't phase me :) ) and music in general is just one of the most important things to me in life. I am just having a really difficult time seeing how that translates to literacy. I know that reading music is a different kind of literacy than reading words, but I don't see how being able to read music has influenced my reading and writing. I kind of feel like there is some part of this concept that just isn't clicking.

Tutoring, Being Tutored, and Co-Tutoring

Tutoring:

I tutored a girl on my own for the first time today. She came in needing help with grammar and making sure her sentences were clear. We sat down she read her paper paragraph by paragraph and we discussed each section afterward. Her paper was extremely well written, the only problem she had was misplaced commas. There were commas all over the page, I discussed with her why they didn't belong and we moved on. The session didn't last an entire hour but she left happy and I felt comfortable with where her paper had progressed to.


Being Tutored:
The first time I was tutored I went in with a paper I had just written and was not due for another two weeks. I knew the paper had some problems but I had been working on it for so long I didn't know what to change because I was so involved with the paper. I took my paper in to Bessey and had an hour long session. There were a lot of problems with the way I had organized my paper. I was so thankful I went into the writing center. The tutor was able to help me figure out what I needed and didn't need in my paper, what parts of my paper stuck out because there weren't in the right order, and how to strengthen my argument. It was so helpful to get someone else's point of view who wasn't just a friend on my floor. The tutors at the writing center are truly concerned with your paper and its content. They look for ways to better you as a writer which in turn helps better your future papers. It was a wonderful experience.

My second time being tutored and this time I went to the library instead of the Writing Center. It was a disaster. I arrived about five minutes late because the bus never came, and when I arrived the guy looked annoyed with me. We sat down, I explained to him what I wanted from our session and that I had already come to the center once and had also spoken to my teacher about my paper. I asked him if he would like me to read my paper again, he said that he had been reading all day so why not. I read my paper and the whole time he was yawning, above and beyond seven times. He also spent the same time resting his head in his hand and staring off into space. I was completely annoyed and even a little embarrassed. Was my paper really that boring? So boring he felt like sleeping? Then he insults my thesis basically telling me my paper sucked. It made me feel terrible about my paper. Then to top it all off he didn't even answer Any of the questions I had to begin with. When I left I felt that I had completely wasted a half hour of my day.

Co-Tutoring:
I've co-tutored twice. The first time it went extremely well, I was asked to actively participate and the other tutor and I spoke about sections one after the other and gave the student the best advice we had. The student asked when I was going to be hired as a full time tutor and told me I was incredibly helpful, I felt really awesome after that session. The second co-tutoring session the tutor told me he didn't feel comfortable with having two tutors because he felt it would confuse the student. I was only asked to participate once he was done with the sections. It was a little awkward but I still felt that I was able to add productively to the session.

Time Warp...

I wanted to write this blog entry a few weeks ago, but we ended up having specific assignments for them instead. So this week, I want to talk about working with ESL students and how far a tutor should really go with their writing.

One example of a consultant "going too far" (in my opinion) happened during my first writing center observation three weeks ago. The session I observed was obviously with an ESL student, but the consultant often made changes to the student's paper and then asked the student if they were okay. The third session I observed was also with an ESL client, and this was the one where the consultant took up a very firm stance of the use of the word "university" in place of "academy," even though I don't think this was the meaning that the student was really aiming for. The student used "academy" several times in reference to academic jobs that post-BS/BA students want in phrases such as, "jobs in the academy". It is obvious that simply replacing the word "academy" with "university" here is too vague and doesn't work, but the consultant did not explain any other contextual changes that would have to be made in order to use this substitution. Even after looking up the word "academy" in a dictionary, the student still did not have a full understanding of why the consultant was pushing for the change, but the consultant didn't explain any farther and insisted on making the change at every mention of the word "academy."

In my opinion, both of these approaches were too direct and there was not enough explanation going on. The student should have been more involved in the process. I don't mean that the consultants should have asked their clients what was wrong with each problem area they found since this would probably be stressful for an ESL student, but that when they came to a mistake, the consultants should have explained it more to the clients. How else could the clients be expected to learn? In the first example I gave, if all the student has to work with after the session is her original and the consultant-edited copies of her paper with no kind of descriptive link between them, any writing she does based on those changes will be blind imitation. If she doesn't understand his corrections, she runs the risk of applying the rules she sees incorrectly in other areas. If an ESL student asks for help with the grammar of their paper then the writing center should obviously provide that, but a more instructional and helpful structure should really be in place in all consulting sessions, not just ones working with ESL students. In these sessions suggested changes should be comprehensively explained to the writer if it is clear that the writer cannot determine these changes on their own. After all, a writing center's purpose is to change writers, not their writing.