Valerio 1

Ali Valerio
Dr. Hall
ENC 4275
26 November 2014
Too Much Tutor Talk: Gender Roles and Authority in the Writing Center
As tutors in the Writing Center, we never know how our sessions will turn out. They
range from delightful to miserable, from pleasant to downright painful. This session was by far
the worst Ive had this semester, and Im not proud of it. My patterns of talk are so poor at some
points, Im embarrassed to even acknowledge their existence. Yet, there are some valuable
lessons I can take away from this experience. For this consultation, student Lewis came in with a
rough draft for his education class, and he wanted to check the APA formatting of his paper.
Throughout our session there was a power struggle that came from gender roles and Lewiss
perception of the Writing Center. This led to me feeling extremely intimidated throughout the
consultation, and that was evident in my patterns of talk. In my essay I will communicate how
gender roles affected my speech patterns in the consultation, and how they contributed to a
struggle for power that hindered the work being done.
Laurel Johnson Black is an English professor who knows quite a lot about the power of
talk. In her book Between Talk and Teaching: Reconsidering the Writing Conference, she
analyzes patterns of speech that occur between student-teacher conferences. This complex
conversation analysis gives her insight into how these patterns affect the delicate dynamics of
each conference. My objective is to replicate Blacks method with my own conversation analysis
by examining my patterns of speech and supporting my findings with her research. I will also

Valerio 2

include research from Close Vertical Transcription in Writing Center Training and Research, a
piece by professors Magdalena Gilewics and Terese Thonus. With evidence from their works, I
will determine how my speech patterns affect the dynamics of my particular Writing Center
consultation. From there, I will make inferences about my own tutoring practices and imagine
alternatives for how those practices can be improved.
From the very beginning of the consultation, I was influenced by gender roles. Black
talks extensively in her book about gender roles in student-teacher conferences. She specifically
comments on patterns of speech between female teachers and male students, as well as vice
versa. This was not a conference between a female teacher and a male student, but a consultation
between a male student and a female peer tutor. Yet, we adhered to a combination of gendered
speech patterns that typically appear between both female teacher male student conferences
and male teacher female student conferences.
One example of this lies in the exchange of authority that occurs continually throughout
the consultation. Black notes in her book that control and performance shift from moment to
moment in an intricate dance between participants (68). At the beginning of the consultation, I
gave Lewis the authority to talk, and we assumed conventions typical to female student male
teacher conferences that Black analyzes. The primary way I did this was through
backchannelling. Black discusses backchannelling as agreement or support either latched onto
[ones] utterance or positioned during normal pauses (49). Gilewics and Thonus provide a more
concrete definition, describing it as contributions made by other participants while the first
speaker maintains the floor (29). They go on to say that speakers generally deploy
backchannels at sentence and clause boundaries as a supportive move to show agreement,
attention, or empathy while accompanying the on-the-floor speaker (32).

Valerio 3

Another pattern I used to show encouragement was cooperative overlaps. Black talks
about cooperative overlaps in relation to female student male teacher conferences, so it
supports the notion that Im somewhat giving up authority in this part of the consultation. She
describes a study in which female students overlapped cooperatively with male instructors
almost four times more frequently than with female instructors. In doing so, they indicate not
only the strict attention they are paying to the male partners but their willingness to assist the
male teacher in continuing to speak their cooperative overlaps register consciously with male
teachers as support and encouragement (64).
Although I was meaning to relay support and encouragement at the time, I wasnt
necessarily trying to actively participate in backchannelling or cooperative overlaps. Also, Im
not entirely sure if the cooperative overlaps registered as encouragement, like Black suggests.
This is an excerpt of my transcript that takes place very early in the consultation. My speech is
indicated by the T (for tutor), and is in bold for clarity. The students speech is indicated by an S.
The backchannelling is indicated by a yellow highlighter, and cooperative overlaps are preceded
by a right-facing bracket [ and highlighted in green.
1 Tutor: Okay, so, what are you working on today?
2 Student: Um, focus more on the APA formatting and the citations (.)
sure that everything is
3 T:

making

okay

4 S: formatted properly.
5 T: (3s) And what is your paper about?
6 S: It is a literature review on online curriculum and distance education.
7 T: (2s) Okay. (4s) What class is this for?
8 S: Umm, EDH 6065.
9 T: Great, and Im just, just get- making notes, you know, just helps me
out. Um, cool, so, and when is your assignment due?

Valerio 4
10 S: Tomorrow.
11 T: Due tomorrow. Um, and you, is this, uhhh, okay, great, is this like a
rough draft or a final draft
12 S: Its a final draft
formatting and citations
13 T:
mm-hmm

except for, shes very strict about the APA

[final draft

14 S:
and, being that I havent written a lot of papers in a long period of
time, and I always did
15 T: mm-hmm
16 S: MLA and not APA
not that worried about
17 T:

kinda worried about the format side,

right, right

Im

mm-hmm

18 S: content if you see something that jumps out (2s) we can address it but Im
comfortable handing in
19 T:

okay

20 S: the content (.) the way it is

havent done an abstract
21 T:

Im just worried that (.) something (.) like I

[the way it is

22 S: before,
and then going through here I wanna make sure things like
this is proper (points at
23 T:
mm-hmm

mm-hmm

24 S: paper), um, she stressed the whole paraphrasing as opposed to direct cites
Im used to doing
25 T:
hmm

mm-

26 S: direct quotes, and, not worrying about (.) where in the paper this goes when
youre paraphrasing, cause, you put the quotes and you put it at the end is what
Im used to,
so,
that aspect
27 T:
hmm

mm-hmm

28 S: of the paper is different (.)

correctly before I hand it in
29 T:

mm-

and I just wanna make sure Ive done it all

okay

30 S: and (.) get a zero because I plagiarized on accident

its not my intention its

because

Valerio 5
31 T:

mm-hmm, yeah

32 S: all original work-33 T: Right, right, I underst- yeah, I actually just wor- I had an
appointment before this one where-34 S: Yeah I, I
assignment
35 T:

were in the same class

yeah, she um

36 S:
formatting

[youre in the same class, yeah

three pages
and all of

37 T: mm-hmm
yeah

So its the same

and were just trying to make sure that the

mm-hmm

38 S: that (.) is correct.

I use backchannelling in this segment 17 times, and cooperative overlaps 3 times. I

wanted to give authority to Lewis and show him that I was willing to listen. However, in using so
much of this, I hinder him from talking and saying what he wants to say. From line 1 to line 10,
its an even exchange of information as I ask Lewis questions and he gives me answers. Then
from line 12 to line 32, Lewis has the floor, though I litter it with backchannelling. Im not trying
to take the floor at this point. However, I interrupt Lewis at line 32, indicated by a dash (--), and
take the floor for a moment. Then Lewis interrupts me back, and he holds the floor from line 34
to 38. During this exchange I try to get my turn back at line 35 with yeah, she um and then a
cooperative overlap. I dont succeed in taking the floor back, and I continue with
backchannelling until the end of the segment.
Although I take the floor once at the end of the segment, its not until the next excerpt
that I try to resume my role of authority as the peer tutor in this consultation. Here, gender roles
are just as prevalent, but they are reversedthe conventions that appear are similar to those of a
female teacher male student conference as researched by Black. This makes sense, since Im

Valerio 6

the one who now exerts my authority over the situation, although I dont have the same role as a
teacher in a conference. While I speak, Lewis also uses backchannelling. Unlike my primary
intention of providing encouragement, however, Lewis uses backchannelling to insert himself
back into the conversation. This is supported by Gilewics and Thonus, who state that
occasionally, speakers use backchannels as a strategy to seize the floor or to signal
displeasure (33). This is not unusual for males, as Black says that male students were much
more likely to interrupt their female teachers than their male teachers (70).
Apart from using backchannelling to interrupt me, other times Lewis used discourse
markers. Black regards discourse markers as ways of positioning a speaker either in relation to
the information or another speaker, of responding to an earlier utterance, even of gaining the
floor when speaking turns are contested (42). She further remarks that male students use
discourse markers to control conference talk with female teachers (70). They also use and
more forcefully to hold the floor, mark an upcoming utterance as possible disagreement with
well, and are more insistent on their own perspective (70).
This is apparent in the next excerpt. While Lewis tries to interrupt me, I try to keep hold
of the floor through minimal responses and placeholders. Gilewics and Thonus define minimal
responses as brief responses made by participants when they have the floor (29). Black defines
placeholders as keeping other parties from self-selecting, from joining in the talk (65).
Gilewics and Thonus description of placeholders is also helpful, although they use the term
filled pauses. These are hesitations during which a speaker utters sounds or words (such as
um, hmm, and like) as a means of maintaining the floor (to prevent interruptions and overlaps) or
formulating a response (31). In the excerpt, minimal responses are highlighted in purple and

Valerio 7

placeholders / filled pauses are highlighted in gray. Our use of discourse markers is highlighted
in light blue and our backchannelling is still highlighted in yellow.

55 T: Okay, (.) well we have some um, we have some (.) you know (.)
handouts here
and do (.) we
56 S:

okay

57 T: have this is (.) we have some for references so just a reference page,
and we can look at that too if you want,
and then we also have some
for parenthetical documentation and youre also
58 S:
yep

mm-hmm

59 T: welcome to take these home.

what we did with um (.)
60 S:

So um, would you like to look first,

Yep. Okay

61 T: with (.) Deborah was we um looked at the reference page first and
then went into in-text
62 T: citations if
the way you know (.) make
63 S:

if you wanna do that we just get it out of

that works for me

okay

64 T: sure oh wait you have, you have two drafts of your paper, is this
perfect, great-65 S:
one for me

one for you,

66 S: And then I have the electronic here and I have all my sources here too if you
wanna see the actual source (.)
67 T: (.) Okay, okay. Um, thats, thats (.) great-68 S: So I (.) whatever you need I have ready to go-69 T: Okay, and um, perfect perfect. So, lets just go ahead and look at
your reference then quickly and Im also, I also, I dont use (.) APA, I really
dont use APA either I use MLA (.) um (.) so (.) were at your references
page and (.) um (.) we can see (.) I mean weve got, weve got um I know
this um
70 S: Well I have two, I have two handbooks at home for APA
the best that I could
71 T:

okay

and I copied them

Valerio 8
72 S: so
so
73 T:
so

looking at this is no different than what Ive already done at home

okay

okay

74 S: I dont know how much, like, if you wanna look at this too we can
Ive already done my
75 T:

but (.)

mm-hmm

76 S: due diligence on (.) I have the (.) 6 th edition APA handbook that (.) all grad
students are supposed to have
and I also went online to the Purdue Writing
Center (.) APA (.)
standard website
77 T:

yeah

okay

78 S: that all the professors tell you to use (2s) and I copied it the best I could, but
(.)
if somebody (.)
79 T:

okay

80 S: and if youre not the person I can make another appointment with the right
person (.) to (.) make sure that (.) this is correct.
81 T: Mm-hmm. I mean, it seems to me that if you did take it from the
handbook and you looked at the Purdue Owl I really dont think there,
there would be any problems it seems to me that
82 S:

mm-hmm

83 S: And two, two of the (.) no, Im sorry (.) four of the sites are straight from (.)
like if I click here (2s to show me source on laptop) to cite this article (.) in APA
format (.) its right there. So Im assuming its right
I figured writing
center people are the experts so (.)
the professor kind of (.) didnt
84 T:
mm-hmm
(laugh)
85 S: require it but it was strongly suggested we have an appointment with review
for formatting and
86 T:
hmm

mm-

87 S: all of that, so
88 T:

Im doing my due diligence to get that done.

mm-hmm

In this segment of the transcript, I try to resume my role as authority. That happens at
some parts, but in the entire segment I speak 232 words and Lewis speaks 254. I have the floor

Valerio 9

from line 55 to line 54, then on lines 67, 69, and 81. Each time I take back over the floor, I begin
with a minimal response. I also include discourse markers and placeholders throughout my
speech because Im trying to keep hold of the floor. Lewis backchannels throughout my talk,
trying to insert himself into the discussion, and he successfully interrupts me at lines 65, 68, 70,
and 73. Each of these lines begin with a discourse marker, as Lewis tries to assert his position on
the situation. Clearly there is a power struggle here.
Black discusses this power struggle in her book, particularly with female teacher male
student conferences. She refers to this as a balancing act between the control that teachers
conventionally exert over students and the deference and support that women are supposed to
show men. Thus there is often a sense of struggle in the conferences between female teachers and
male students that isnt present in conferences between these same female teachers and their
female students (71); the control [female teachers] maintain over male students is often
subtly challenged (71) and that their responses to these challenges to their power are often
mixed and very complex (70). She goes on to say that in many contexts, cultural constructs for
males involve asserting dominance. In conferences with female instructors, the gender of the
instructor undermines at least slightly the power of her position as a teacher, thus permitting
male students to perform in some dominant ways (74).
So, according to Black, through my use of conventions in my talk, I allow Lewis to
continue asserting his dominance and adhere to typical gender roles. It begins when I outwardly
state my lack of knowledge about APA style on line 69, saying I dont really use APA. Perhaps
this is where I made my first big mistake, because right after comes three separate attacks on my
authority. The first is during Lewiss turn from line 70 78. After I tell him we can look at APA
resources together to check his citations, he states that he already used resources at home,

Valerio 10

indicating this would be a waste of time. Then on line 79, he says that he can make an
appointment with another tutor if Im not the right person. Hes fighting for authority while at the
same time undermining my authority, due to my lack of knowledge about APA style. Finally on
line 83, he goes even further to recognize my lack of knowledge by asserting his belief that
Writing Center people are experts, indicating that I am supposed to be an expert at APA style.
Therefore, even though I try to remain an authority in this segment, Lewis asserts dominance by
calling me out on my perceived lack of authority.
If my patterns of talk were considered poor before this attack on my authority, they
certainly dont improve after that. At this point in the consultation I am very intimidated, and I
struggle to remain in a position of authority. I weakly defend myself, and my fellow tutors, in
response to his perceptions about the Writing Center. The excerpt that follows takes place
immediately after the previous one. Minimal responses are again indicated in purple,
placeholders are in gray, discourse markers are in light blue, and relational markers are in teal.

88 T: Okay, um, yeah. Well, one thing is, we (.) we dont (.) were not (.)
we dont want to be considered as experts, um, I mean we (.) we uh (.) we
definitely were trained and things but were also (.) we (.) we wanna (.)
help you work to figure it out together, you know?
Um (.) it seems to
me that
89 S:

mm-hmm

90 T: if you (.) looked at all these sources, and you have it right there, um,
and Im, Im not an expert, Im not, um, were not experts.
But we
do, we do know how to (.) still find the answer, you know
91 S:

mm-hmm

92 T: what I mean?
So, um, if you, um, looked at those sources and
you have how to cite it, um, I, I
93 S:

yes

Valerio 11
94 T: think that its (.) fine
it matches but it seems like
95 S:

you know? And, we can still look and see if

okay

96 T: you did all of that

There is a lot that happens in this messy, miserable excerpt. I actively prepare myself to
give a response, and that is apparent in the transcript, although clearly it shouldnt be. I begin
with the minimal response okay, indicating that Im acknowledging his statement. I use um, the
first of 9 placeholders to help me maintain the floor for my defense. Then I use the discourse
marker well to position my argumentwhile subtly displaying my disagreementfor how we as
tutors work in the Writing Center. Then I state my response, using the word we 12 times
(referring to we specifically as Writing Center tutors) because Im constantly trying to reposition
myself. Saying that, the word we in this instance could be thought of as a discourse marker.
Instead of plainly telling Lewis he is wrong about the Writing Center, I attempt to use my
language to pleasantly get him back on the same page, meanwhile continuing my gender-typical
efforts to offer encouragement. I do this with what Black calls relational markers, which she says
are meant to invite or evoke the concept of shared knowledge and of the students entry into the
community (53). I use relational markers 4 times in this excerpt, trying to bridge the gap
between the students understanding and the reality of the Writing Center.
In my essay so far, I have worked to understand the reasoning behind the conventions
that take place in this consultation. I have found that my patterns of speechparticularly
backchannelling, cooperative overlaps, placeholders, and relational makerstake place because
I adhere to gender roles typically observed in female student male teacher conferences as well
as female teacher male teacher conferences. In short, my patterns of talk are typical to those of

Valerio 12

females in general. I predominantly want to be encouraging and supporting in my speech.

Lewiss patterns of talk are also typical to those of males in general. He wants to assert
dominance in his speech. So what happens as a result of these conventions? I try to react to his
dominance by embracing my role as a tutor, but he extends his dominance by undermining my
authority. The result is a power struggle that is typical of conferences involving both genders. We
spend so much time arguing about who has the authority in the session that it becomes the focus,
instead of the work that gets done in the session. I also get intimidated from the power struggle,
and that further hinders my speech and adds to the cycle.
The truth is, I lost this power struggle as soon as I admitted to Lewis my lack of
knowledge about APA style. Although we wrestled to maintain the floor early on in the
consultation, it wasnt until I openly led with my ignorance that he verbally tried to take
authority from me. And I pretty much gave him good reason to do it. It was my own honesty that
fueled my anxiety and ultimately led to the downfall of my authority. Had I not been so
straightforward, I may have avoided the occurrences that left me feeling so intimidated. When
Lewis told me he wanted help with his APA formatting, I could have worked to discover Lewiss
understanding instead of presenting my own (or lack thereof). I could have said something such
as, What are your concerns with APA style? What questions do you have? We can work to find
the answers together using the excellent resources we have available. I believe saying this
would have left both of us feeling more satisfied and comfortable. By placing myself not entirely
in an expert position, yet not completely undermining my own authority, I would have been more
mentally prepared to help Lewis in the way he desired to be helped.
Although its clear I adhered to gender roles in this session, its less apparent why this
occurred. At first I thought it was because of Lewiss preconceived notions about the Writing

Valerio 13

Center. Now I realize that theres an even deeper issue here. I believe my patterns of speech
ultimately resulted from conflicting values. Lewis and I had different objectives in mind, but not
just different objectives for the session. Instead, we had different objectives about learning.
Where I valued teaching and learning, Lewis was only concerned with evaluating and correcting.
When he was so strong in his beliefs, I was severely intimidated because they were quite
removed from my own. Other students have come to the Writing Center with incorrect
assumptions about our role as tutors. However, those students usually figure out fairly quickly
that their notions are somewhat flawed. When Lewis refused to budge on his ideals, the
difference in values made for some tense conversation and conventions.
From this experience, I learned that adhering to gender roles results in a power struggle
that diminishes the learning that can take place in a consultation. I had excessive
backchannelling and cooperative overlaps in areas where I should have remained silent and let
Lewis do the talking. I had unnecessary placeholders, discourse markers, and relational markers
where I should have just gotten to the point of what I was trying to say. I talked much, much
more than I needed to in this consultation, even though I was only trying to help. I didnt mean to
talk so much, but I subconsciously let gender roles govern my speech. I also felt intimidated by
the writers expectations and values, and that further added to my surplus of talk. In the future, I
should be more aware of gender roles and how they can impact a consultation. When the
situation calls for it, I should be actively trying to work against gender roles, especially when a
writer has an incorrect perception about the Writing Center and those gender roles impact my
response. Perhaps most importantly, I should be prepared to work with students who have not
only different goals for a session in mind, but different ideas about what learning is and how it

Valerio 14

should take place. If I am more aware of these ideas in sessions to come, then I can avoid the
mistakes I made here and feel more comfortable and satisfied with my role in the Writing Center.

Works Cited
Black, Laurel Johnson. Between Talk and Teaching: Reconsidering the Writing Center
Conference. Logan: Utah State University Press, 1998. Print.
Gilewics, Magdalena, and Terese Thonus. Close Vertical Transcription in Writing Center

Valerio 15

Training and Research. The Writing Center Journal (2003): 25-49. Web. 27 October
2014.