Hi Gina, Thank you for sharing your assignment with me.

I look forward to going over your rough draft! This kind of assignment is always a particularly challenging one for me, because I think of myself as more of a linear writer So well see how this goes. J I think Im going to spend most of my time just asking you more questions to see if I can get you to tease out your thoughts a bit more, and build connections between your goals. Its not as though everything I mention is stuff that I feel, as a reader, is missing from your paper (I will make note of it if it is, and discuss this more at the end). I just hope that at the end of this youll feel like you have some tangible spots in your paper that you are inspired to pursue thoroughly, and perhaps you can note an overall pattern to help develop a concrete philosophy. If there is something specific you would like to work on during our conference, go ahead and make note of it. So lets get started

Gina ONeill Matthew Pearson WRD 396 8 October 2012 What Ive learned so far in working with writers: The most effective technique in conferencing and written feedback is to ask questions: ask questions to clarify the thesis or central argument first and foremost. By asking questions, writers have to articulate their ideas verbally, forcing them to spell out their thinking process. What some writers do not comprehend is that thorough explanation is necessary. One issue Ive noticed is that some writers are caught up in the distinction between their voice as a writer and their voice as a human or arguer. For a first draft, that should not hinder their ideas. Once they explain their thought process to me, I advise them to get those words on paper and worry about fine-tuning it later. Even if the style is sloppy, the arguments turn out more developed. In addition, asking questions allows for writers to revise on their own, with me, the reader, as the facilitator, not the teacher. In reference to Nancy Sommers article, questions are a key factor in not appropriating a text. After writers explain their ideas, I praise them for their clarity and depth. They have, so far, received the praise well, and it seemed to click for them that all they needed was to dive deeper in their argument. I make the praise direct: Thats great; I want to see that thought process in your paper. If theyre not clear after some preliminary questioning, I continue to ask questions. I noticed that John Beans article provides the most concrete, applicable advice for commenting on a draft. While going through my first round of commenting, I referenced his list several times, and it alleviated some anxiety I had about having writers churn out perfect papers. Verifying that writers have followed the assignment first and then concentrating on the thesis are elements I focus on during both the written feedback and the conference, and the students seem to appreciate this. I have been asking students to jot down notes in the text during the conferences in order to retain the ideas that stem from questioning and discussion. I advise them not to attempt to be eloquent in these revisions/notes because solidifying ideas is key, not making the perfect sentence.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/13/12 1:00 PM

Comment [1]: In what ways?

Nathalia Oliveira 10/13/12 1:02 PM

Comment [2]: How does this change as a result of the modality you are using? Written Feedback does not necessarily offer you an opportunity for writers to explain themselves. Although you might benefit from having a conference with the student later so that they can explain things to you then, how can you make your written feedback suffice as a standalone method that writers can work from?

Nathalia Oliveira 10/13/12 1:02 PM

Comment [3]: Why do you do this? What do you intend to produce in the writer, how does it affect the tutorial?

Following that line of thought, I suggest writers do their revisions shortly after the conference in order to keep the ideas fresh in their minds. Then, drawing from the article on heuristics, I advise them to let the paper rest and incubate for a while before revisiting it and editing for grammar and style. John Bean made an excellent point in deeming grammar and style lesser concerns. Unless an error affects overall meaning of a sentence or argument, writers should focus on that later in the process. What I can take away as a whole from these strategies is that my main concern, as at tutor, is making sure writers possess clear, supported theses or central arguments. Without that, they lose credibility, focus and organization, and that overshadows the positive attributes of their paper. While that may seem reminiscent of the five-paragraph essay philosophy, I see a clear distinction. Every paper should make an argument; that does not mean five uniform paragraphs are necessary. Something I like but has not worked 100 percent of the time / Things I dont know: In asking writers to draft a thesis or make revisions to a sentence in the conference, some are willing to do so and some are reluctant. Im still figuring out how to go about that without sounding demanding. What I have been saying is, I would love it if you would draft a thesis right now so that you can walk away feeling confident in your argument. I dont know if I should be more assertive or if thats already appropriating the text. Going along with that, in regards to Brooks Minimalist Tutoring, asking the writer to do some writing or revising and then walking away while they draft has been difficult. Some writers have been eager to forge new arguments and sentences, but some have felt uncomfortable and under pressure. Finding the right way to give them space is dicey. Sometimes Ill say, Im going to look at this on WC online for a moment, but other times, I dont know what to say. How can I do this effectively? Is asking the writer to construct a thesis then and there effective? I dont want them to feel pressured. I try to ask the so what? for every draft in order to assign and spark more interest in their writing for them. I have always felt that every piece of writing should contain a point thats still pertinent today. For the majority of the time, asking this worked, but sometimes, writers were too caught up in explaining the how instead of the why. How do I make it clearer? When writers want to concentrate on grammar and style when the other aspects of their paper are so strong that we can look at the lower-tier concerns how do I approach this without appropriating the text or sounding like a know-it-all? In my experiences with talking about grammar, because Im knowledgeable of the conventions and rules, I feel like I sound arrogant. I say, When you do this, you have to use a comma because But in what other ways can I say it? Ive tried the reading out loud technique, and that can help writers identify places where they paused in reading but not in their writing (through punctuation). Ive also tried identifying the error in one sentence and then asking the writer to find it in the rest of her paper. Bean suggests doing this or going through the paper and marking each sentence that commits the error. Is that too harsh? Telling them directly puts me in more of a teacher position than that of a tutor, but is wrong to be direct? Ive been grappling with this issue through some of my conferences.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 10:46 AM

Comment [4]: How do you think this affects what a writer might be expecting a tutorial to look like, or wanting to work on?

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 10:46 AM

Comment [5]: I have a very similar philosophy. I think one thing I would consider are the underlying assumptions about the types of papers that are coming at you. It makes sense in most academic pieces, but do you still feel like someone is trying to make an argument/prove a point in a resume? A creative piece? It really might be the case that they still are, so its not like this defeats your purpose. I would take a moment to think about refining your words and thoughts here to show me how it applies to a great spectrum of things, if you think it does.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:50 PM

Comment [6]: Have you thought about asking the writer what s/he would like to do? Most of the time I find that theyre happy to get a thesis down if they dont already have one they like.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:50 PM

Comment [7]: Im not very sure how that is.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:53 PM

Comment [8]: This is great insight. The thing about minimalist tutors that Ive worked with is that I notice they are very comfortable with silences while others (myself included) are always feeling tempted to break the silence somehow. I think a lot of the empowerment writers get from minimalist tutoring is that they are allowed to come to their own conclusions/epiphanies about writing.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:51 PM

Comment [9]: Again, I think that a lot of this can be navigated through a direct conversation with the writer themselves.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:54 PM

Comment [10]: This reads a bit awkwardly to me, what do you think?

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:56 PM

Comment [11]: Im not sure Im following you exactly; this is something perhaps we can discuss at our conference as Im not sure what the distinction is here.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:58 PM

Comment [12]: Not necessarily. Im sure youve already come across pedagogical literature out there discussing directive tutoring. Neither do I think its fair to really dichotomize yourself/all tutorials as directive/non-directive only. I think you can push yourself to go deeper here and explore the concept of directive vs. non-directive tutoring and their benefits in different circumstances.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 2:59 PM

Comment [13]: Im always still grappling with this too. J

What I want writers to take out of this experience: When writers ask me, Does this sound OK?, how do I answer without appropriating the text? The Idea of a Writing Center, one article we read, speaks specifically on how tutors and writers should collaborate. As tutors, we are observers. Its hard for me not to make the decisions for them. I want them to see me as an equal who has the upper hand only because Im not the author of the paper. I want them to realize that it is easier for an outsider to sort out the positives areas of an essay from the areas that need work. I want to strive for my remaining fellowing conferences to be more studentguided. I usually come in with a list of things to work on and questions I have, which is necessary in order to not walk into the conference blind, but I feel like students rely on that. Is that necessarily wrong? I always ask them if they have specific things they want to work on, and usually, they go from what I mentioned in my comments. I dont want the focus of their revision to be based solely on my suggestions, but how can I change that? There have been times where students have said, Yes, I totally noticed that, or, Your comments made so much sense to me. I know I have to work on this, but you took this further While I feel like that is a natural product of commenting and conferencing, I dont want students to develop a habit of depending on me as the source for what they should revise. How do I make it more of their idea instead of my own? In the conferences, as we work on revising single statements (i.e. the thesis) or even ideas, I try to ask questions to prompt their revisions. I find myself saying, I think this would make your argument stronger, but I want them to realize that of their own accord. When I ask questions that are too specific, I feel like Im making the choices for them on what to include or remove. How do I formulate my questions and advice to be general enough to allow them to guide the revisions and include their own ideas? I want them to walk away feeling confident, but I want them to have the confidence to know that its due to their own work, not mine. For example, after this class, I want them to be capable of going through the same process of revising without a tutor, remaining cognizant of areas they should improve on and revise in their future papers. Hi Gina, I think you do a fantastic job of really pulling on the real experiences you have had both shadowing and working as a Fellow so far. I think this is fantastic because it gives you the foundations of being able to build tangible, actionable steps for your tutorials moving forward in the direction of achieving some greater goal. If you havent noticed it already, Matthew is huge on actionable steps. J One thing I felt you can do more with is your conversation between directive and non-directive tutoring. You certainly seem to already have some thoughts on which you think is more effective or better, and as this is an exploration of your personal tutoring pedagogies, I would really strive to devote more time to these important conversations that we continue to have in the discourse. I think you can apply your real experiences to this stuff youre learning in class more concretely and still make some great theoretical observations from which you can deduce more opinions and come to your own conclusions.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 3:00 PM

Comment [14]: Do you think this is redundant to mention at this point? Remember your audience.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 3:00 PM

Comment [15]: This is an interesting language choice; I didnt really understand what you were getting at until the next sentence.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 3:01 PM

Comment [16]: I think this is sometimes a bit inevitable. One thing I like to do is encourage folks to do is come up with some of their own concerns or thoughts or questions in my comments. That gives a good starting point for conferences.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 3:03 PM

Comment [17]: These are all fantastic questions. I wonder what your ultimate end goal for writers are as a result of you wanting them to develop their own thoughts/abilities to self-revise.

Nathalia Oliveira 10/14/12 3:05 PM

Comment [18]: Again, great points. Just be wary about repeating yourself too much particularly as this is such a short paper. And what is your final, overarching goal for the writers you work with that directly relate to your desires of what you want them to walk away knowing/being able to do?

I also think that, especially towards the end, you are telling me all about what you want a writer to walk away with but you dont give me what your ultimate goal is for them. Do you think there is one? And do you think you can use that as a framework for everything you talk about throughout your paper? I think youre almost there, but as a reader, I sense that you didnt build that bridge completely for me. So before our conference, I challenge you to try and take some time to think about these things. If there is anything additional youd like to go over, make a note of that too, and we can get to that in the conference. Im looking forward to our meeting! Best, Nathalia O. Writing for a point more clear, not just a thesis Flesh out some goals, deep down students do this on their own Goal at the end? Idea of whats driving me Actionable steps, reflecting about things Im grappling with Asking large questions Goal framework for what I know now, things that I dont know Address at the beginning of the paper evolution of thoughts Own encounters Give more specific examples? Relevant? Written feedback section of handbook directive/non-directive commenting - not fair to always apply same method context matters - non-directive long pauses minimalist why, for me, is it more effective to do one way or another? Relative to situation? Written feedback no chance to speak with writer in person Reflecting on processes/tangible action steps how to do that with written feedback? Keep that in mind. - modalities What might be suited better for conference save that for reading out loud, etc. Depends on writing itself context, strategies effective b/c I use them myself Keep in the questions