[ Back to Theory to Practice Main Page ]
|
|
|
||
|
|
THEORY TO PRACTICE ESSAYS
| |
Non-traditional Students Equal Successful Conferences
On the issue of life experiences, a comparison can be made between non-traditional and traditional students and how this contributes to the overall success of the writing conference. The non-traditional student brings to the conference a variety of life experiences, more defined expectations and goals, and a responsive attitude. Non-traditional students are attending college in greater numbers than ever. John Geiger, et al. reports that “in 2000, 39% of college students were 25 years old or older” (Geiger, et al. 569). While older, non-traditional students may not be familiar with the expectations of college coursework, they do have life experiences in their favor. Non-traditional tutees may have established a career or raised a family, and realize what it takes to be successful in whatever they do. They are prepared to do the work necessary to improve their skills as writers and as students in general. Every class that non-traditional students enroll in may be a necessary step in achieving their goals, thus developing new skills is a benefit to them. Non-traditional students have learned how their jobs and lives can benefit from a variety of resources and techniques. Therefore, they seek to use the suggestions a tutor makes to them in a conference in a more holistic way. In contrast, the traditional student may have a somewhat limited number of life experiences. Most traditional students come to college directly from high school. In just eighteen or nineteen years they have not had the chance to accumulate a variety of life experiences, and their views on academic subjects may be narrow. Schooling has been the major influence in their lives to this point, as well as immediate family and friends. School and family may not have required students to interact in a variety of situations or taught them how to solve problems on their own. Many traditional students also have not decided what their future careers will be; and therefore, they do not see the intrinsic value of writing skills. To the traditional student, a particular class may be perceived as just a pre-requisite that must be taken; and therefore, the concentration during a writing session tends to be more on mechanical issues of the paper and not improving writing skills. They have not correlated a particular class with their overall success in college or in their future careers. Tambra L. Donohue and Eugene H. Wong refer to life experiences as learning experiences and state, “younger students [traditional] are less achievement oriented” (Donohue and Wong, par. 8). This may be because of their limited life experiences. Expectations and goals are another area where non-traditional and traditional tutees differ. According to The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring it is important for the tutor to “clarify the goals and expectations of the writer” (Gillespie and Lerner 50-54). In my experiences as a tutor, I have found that the goals of the non-traditional students are to improve their writing as a whole, learn techniques to use in the future, and write the correct way, and not just earn a passing grade on the current paper. Senior Writing Fellow, Melissa Maxwell comments, “Older student’s are less likely to come [to the Writing Center] just for the extra credit” (Maxwell). And Jessica Bennett, another Senior Writing Fellow, states, “Non-traditional students in the nursing program are totally immersed in their education […]. They will actually apply the techniques you show them to their writing” (Bennett). I have also encountered similar attitudes tutoring non-traditional students. These students made follow-up appointments with me and I could see that they had actually applied the strategies I taught them in our first session. This correlates to not only successful writing conferences but to overall success in college. Donohue and Wong support this theory in their paper, “Achievement Motivation and College Satisfaction in Traditional and Nontraditional Students,” by stating that non-traditional students “tend to earn higher grades” and are “more achievement oriented” (Donohue and Wong, pars. 7-8). This clearly indicates non-traditional students have clearly defined expectations and goals, making the job of the tutor easier and the writing conference more successful. Goals and expectations tend to be quite different for traditional students. Many traditional students have no clear idea of their future goals and therefore do not see the significance of the papers they bring to the writing conference. The paper is viewed in terms of acquiring a passing grade instead of a process of refining the craft of writing. I have found that traditional student’s goals include a good grade on the paper, a proofreading of the paper, or obtaining the extra credit points for meeting with a Writing Fellow. Former Writing Fellow, Vickie Dembinski expressed it this way, “[…] traditional students concentrated more on mechanical skills […]. Non-traditional students, on the other hand, focused more on content […]” (Dembinski, par. 9). There are some traditional students interested in making their papers better but only in relationship to the class it is for, not in the broader sense of improving writing skills. While successful conferences are affected by both life experiences and goals and expectations of the tutee, they can also be affected by the tutees responsiveness to the writing session. Non-traditional students, for the most part, bring to the conference a desire to get help. They are often more receptive to constructive criticism and learn from their mistakes. Tutors find that using the Socratic Method when tutoring a non-traditional student works well because tutees appreciates being asked their opinions and have already developed problem solving skills. Non-traditional students can be taught to identify their problem areas when taught the techniques to do so. According to Bennett, a higher percentage of non-traditional students are more receptive and responsive to getting help (Bennett). I have experienced this responsive attitude in the non-traditional students I have tutored. When these tutees were required by their professor to see a Writing Fellow they stated they were glad it was required for them to come. These students truly desired help with their writing and were interested in what I had to say. On the opposite end of the spectrum are some traditional students who are not very receptive to coming to the Writing Center. I have encountered traditional students in the Writing Center who do not really want to improve their writing skills they just want to get a good grade on the present paper or get extra credit for coming to see a Writing Fellow. Then there are the traditional students who come in because their professors make it mandatory for them to see a Writing Fellow. These students generally are somewhat angry about being “forced” to come in and fail to see the value of the writing program at all. Their attitudes express their forced adherence to the requirements of the class and their desire to just get out. Former Writing Fellow Jessica Hegyi found, “The traditional student does not take the tutorials as serious as the N.T.S.” (Hegyi, par. 1). Helping traditional tutees to see how improving their writing skills will help them in all their future college work as well as aid them in their future careers can be a daunting task, often met with great resistance from tutees. However, once tutees, traditional or non-traditional, see the value in improving their skills as writers, a more successful conference can be achieved. Whether the tutee is a traditional or non-traditional student, tutors need to identify what the expectations and goals are for the session and for the paper before they begin tutoring session. Responsiveness of the tutee plays a role in how successful the writing conference will be. While each group of students present their own set of difficulties in a given writing session, non-traditional students tend to approach a writing conference with a desire to truly improve their writing – not just get extra credit on a particular paper. For these reasons, non-traditional students tend to have more successful writing conferences than those of traditional students. Works Cited Bennett, Jessica. Personal interview. 3 May 4, 2006. Dembinski, Vicki. “Traditional vs. Non-Traditional Students.” Monroe County Community College, Theory to Donohue, Tambra L. and Eugene H. Wong. “Achievement Motivation and College Satisfaction in Traditional Geiger, John F., et al. “Differences in Meaning in Life in Students: The Effect of Nontraditional Status and Region of Gillespie, Paula and Neal Lerner. The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring. New York: Pearson, 2004. Hegyi, Jessica. “Tutoring Non-Traditional Students vs. Traditional Students.” Monroe County Community College, Theory to Practice Essays: The Application of Writing and Tutoring Theories in Authentic Writing Conferences, Winter 2001. Maxwell, Melissa. Personal interview. 3 May 2006.
|
Required vs. Non-required
Non-required students, I have noticed, often show the most determination and care for their papers. Does this surprise me? No, not really. These students obviously took the time to make an appointment in the Writing Center, so they must care about their writing. One negative side affect of a non-required student, or a drop-in student as referred to by Kenneth Bruffee in “Two Related Issues in Peer Tutoring: Program Structure and Tutor Training” is that a tutor will only see the student once, and therefore does not see the outcome of the work the tutor has performed with the student (76). With a required student, a tutor might have the opportunity to see a student several times. A required student though, not always, but most of the time, will view a paper as just another task in college. The individual has no goal in mind, but to just finish the paper and turn the work in. With this type of attitude, the tutor may have a difficult time dealing with this individual. As Beverly Lyon Clark states in Talking about Writing, “Try to be objective with yourself: the paper is ultimately the student’s responsibility, and improvement in writing isn’t always reflected in improved grades” (144). A Writing Fellow’s job though, requires that we do our best to try to motivate students. I often ask open questions, which require students to answer in other ways instead of the common “yes” and “no.” This makes students become more involved in the session. I also sometimes put on a sympathy attitude. I tell the tutee that I feel for him and that even I have problems writing, but in the end, a writing assignment does not have to ruin a person’s day. Writing after all, brings out our attitudes and ideas. Our writing is our other voice in society. I discuss with the person that having to write can prove bearable, and most of all, often enjoyable. Along with the attitude of the writer to watch for, a tutor must also pay close attention to a writer’s body language. During a tutoring session, the tutor, if paying attention, can conclude whether the tutee cares for the session or not clearly by looking at the non-verbal communication of the student. The body language of a tutee tells the tutor exactly what the writer thinks of the current session. Non-required students, I have noticed, often show the most encouraging body signals during a session. Good eye contact, nodding of the head, or just leaning forward in the chair exhibits good body language. Those characteristics show that the writer truly cares about his work and that the tutee will take in the information suggested by the Writing Fellow. A non-required student may often show positive signs of attention, but a required student often does not. Often, the required student displays uninterested non-verbal cues because the individual does not want to attend the session. The session is a nuisance in this person’s life. A tutor can tell right away whether the tutee is paying attention to the session. Throughout my short history as a Writing Fellow, I have had many experiences with this type of individual. Examples of a person not paying attention include staring off into space, rolling eyes, and lying back in the chair. If a student sits with legs crossed, this shows boredom. Often a student may use monosyllabic and unenthusiastic replies when in a session as noted by Paula Gillespie and Neal Learner in The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring (179). When a tutor has the ability to spot these body cues, the tutor should then have to ability to counter-attack them with certain techniques. As a tutor in the MCCC Writing Center, I had a walk-in student visit me for a session in which knowing certain techniques worked to my advantage and the tutee’s advantage. As she walked in, I instantly could tell this student was pressed for time by her fast paced walk. Her name was Stephanie, and her professor required the students to see a Writing Fellow for a book review paper. As soon as we sat down, I heard the usual verbal language. “I just got done writing this an hour ago,” and “How long will this take?” She also noted that the paper has a due date two hours from now. I answered the lone question and began to the best of my ability to calm her down. I told her that she might have the opportunity to gain an extension on the paper if she shows her work to her professor, but first she would have to fix up her paper to make the work presentable. That brought the tension down somewhat. After she had read her paper aloud, I began to discuss some concerns that had come to my attention. I could tell she had a hard time paying attention to the session, so I repeatedly asked her to reiterate what I had said. This required her to keep alert so that she did not feel stupid in front of me. Another technique, that I find useful, may help the student identify her problems and then correct them. I tell the student that I notice something wrong in a certain sentence; I then ask if the individual can spot the error. If not, I proceed to point out the error to the student and then show the person ways to fix the problem. Once the student understands why the error happened, I have the student practice the learned methods in front of me. I think this technique works extremely well because the individual has shown the tutor that the person can now spot and fix the problem. Often when a student comes into the Writing Center, the person feels nervous about having to see a tutor. A person can spot this just by looking at the student’s face. A few questions can help break the ice with the student. I may just ask them how well her day has gone or any other friendly type of question. I feel this helps the student realize that Writing Fellows are actually college students like themselves. We are not writing geniuses. The techniques used by a tutor will all vary in every session. Some may have usefulness in one session and may not in another one. The tutor though, must learn to recognize which techniques suit which student best so that the session can benefit both individuals in the end. Tutoring a required student or a non-required student will always differ in many ways. No two individuals prove alike. Through research though, I have concluded that required students show the least concerns for their papers, which therefore, makes them more difficult to tutor. Tutoring required students is not impossible though. With the proper techniques and having the education to spot the signs of an unmotivated student, a tutor can accomplish a successful session with the individual. This of course will not happen regularly, but as a Writing Fellow continues to tutor more, the numbers will continue to improve. Patience is what the Writing Fellow must develop as a tutor. A tutor cannot expect the tutee to make a complete turnaround in one session. In the end, cooperating with the tutor is completely up to the tutee. The Writing Fellow controls the session, but the tutee controls the paper. The student has the ability to do what one desires, and no one else can control that fact. The unwilling student will always exist, but with the proper education and techniques, the difficulty of tutoring the reluctant student will reduce. Works Cited Gillespie, Paula and Neal Lerner. The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring. New York: Pearson Education, 2004. Bruffee, Kenneth A. “Two Related Issues in Peer Tutoring: Program Structure and Tutor Training.” College Composition Clark, Beverly Lyon. Talking About Writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1988.
|
Do I Have to; or Do I Want to? Required vs. Non-required Students
Student’s attitudes about tutoring sessions reflect their reason for having them. This means that if students are forced to attend tutoring sessions, they may feel they are being told that they cannot write. Sometimes the task of going to a writing center is rewarded with extra credit. These students normally behave the same as in a required session—sitting in the chair waiting for time to pass. Teachers may also punish students who do not make appointments by lowering their grades. The students who come into a writing center with papers in which they presume are completed—simply looking for a writing fellow completion form—are the students who believe they do not need help. These students often exhibit the same behaviors as a stubborn child who knows that his or her way is the right way. Occasionally a student will ask questions about a surface error, but when a bigger problem is addressed she may dodge the criticism with a roll of the eyes or a harsh explanation. Non-required students, although they may not be completely open to changing all of their work, are usually more understanding of the tutor’s suggestions. “Student’s who come in on their own accord are actually interested in writing and/or self improvement,” stated Amanda Lundy, senior Writing Fellow at Monroe County Community College. Not only are the attitudes of the students different, their behavior also signifies their true feelings. After collecting surveys from thirteen MCCC Writing Fellows asking them for their opinions about required and non-required students, I was bombarded with repetitive answers. Each writing fellow described characteristics of required students similarly. “Unresponsive” “distant” and “uncooperative” were the most common adjectives used in these responses. Apparently, required students have given themselves a bad reputation for having attitude problems. They may seem distant and disinterested, watching the clock and counting down the minutes until they are free. Normally they are inactive listeners, which mean they may be unresponsive and may make communication difficult for both people. Characteristics that the tutors listed about non-required students read a little differently, “interested” “focused” and “ accepting” were a few of the descriptions repeated throughout the surveys. Non-required students would be active listeners, most likely asking questions and paying attention to questions being asked and advice that is given. However, miscommunication does not completely rest in the hands of the student. As tutors we need to understand how our attitudes and behaviors can affect the student’s comfort level. Kenneth Bruffee, professor of English at Brooklyn College, claims that required tutoring is an extension of the classroom in which the tutor is considered to be a second teacher. He also states that this may make students uncomfortable with asking questions, and cause intimidation and miscommunication between students and the tutors. We may assume that when students seems distant or unfriendly that they do not want to learn. This, however, may not be true; we never know what events may be going on in a person’s life or how a student is feeling about sitting in a writing center chair. It may be up to us as tutors to change students’ minds about the tutoring process. Required students may be intimidated by the idea of needing help. If we become frustrated or give-up in any way these students will see tutoring as a waste of their time. If we look disinterested in their work, or watch the clock, they will be less likely to ask questions. If a writing fellow goes into a session with either high expectations or low expectations this could be the driving force of the session. To make students comfortable we have many options as tutors. We must always greet them in a friendly manner and use a soft tone of voice that is un-intimidating. Required students, as well as non-required students, do not like to be talked down to or yelled at by a tutor. We must also sit with an appropriate amount of space between the students and ourselves. Making eye contact when speaking to them is important in active listening, but a comfortable level of eye contact needs to be maintained. When students feel as though they are on the same level as the tutor, they may open up with questions. As long as we understand the importance of our behavior, we can create a healthy tutoring environment for both types of students. Required students are more likely to become returning non-required students after a successful session. The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring defines the ideal session as “two peers having a conversation about writing, where each is equally likely to ask a question, move the conversation forward or point out his or her confusion as a reader” (37). A session such as this does not occur often, and when one happens it is most likely between non-required students and tutors. Per my survey, 54% of MCCC Writing Fellows are up to the challenge of required or non-required students, 38% would rather work with non-required students, and 8% wanted to work with required students only. These percentages show the more desirable choice for a tutoring session. Although required students may be uncooperative at first, we have the power to sway their opinions and bring them back for further tutoring. Bruffee makes the point that since students are required to come to the writing center, we will be able to see their evolution in writing, whereas, drop-ins may come in once and never again. Tutors will always have their favorite types of sessions, but whether they like them or not, required students are here to stay. Any tutoring session can be productive if both parties are willing to communicate. Tutors will benefit as well as students if we take the time to understand how the student needs to be approached. A comfortable environment is important for both types of students to succeed. Student attitudes and behavior differ during required and non-required sessions, as well as tutors’ attitudes and behavior. Communication is the key to a successful session and a returning non-required visit. Works Cited Bruffee, Kenneth A. “Two Related Issues in Peer Tutoring: Program Structure and Tutor Training.” College Composition Gillespie, Paula and Neal Lerner. The Allyn and Bacon Guide to Peer Tutoring. New York: Pearson, 2004. Personal Survey in Writing Center, Monroe MI. 19 Apr. 2006.
|
Word processors have provided enhancements to the writing process. With a word processor, students can type efficiently and edit their documents to complete writing assignments with very little effort. Word processors provide spelling checker programs to help students edit their papers and check for spelling errors before printing the final copy of a paper. However, a spelling checker program can be helpful or harmful to students because of the way the spelling checker program is designed. Students are able to check the spellings of words, but the program causes problems because its design cannot check every word in the English language nor can it check the usage of the words in a paper. Spelling checker programs provide suggestions to students to help students learn how to spell words, but some suggestions may not be accurate to the original meaning of the intended word. This presents the question, Are spelling checker programs helpful or harmful for students? As tutors in the writing center, we must consider both the pros and cons when examining spelling errors or using the computer’s spelling checker as a tool for helping students find misspelled words. The benefits of spelling checkers, and their advancements, lessen the impact of the spelling error in the writing process. However, changes must be made to overcome the limitations in its design before spelling checkers can be a trustworthy source for students
The tutors in the Writing Center at Monroe County Community College see many students throughout the year. Most of the students are traditional students, those who have come directly from high school to college; there are also many non-traditional students, those who have been out of high school for many years. I am in the latter category as I have been out of high school for over twenty years and like many other non-traditional students I am returning to college to change careers. There are many factors that directly affect the outcome of a writing conference, such as tutees’ life experiences—meaning what situations they have encountered, how they have handled them, or what they have experienced in their lives thus far. The tutee’s expectations and goals for the session and for college overall, such as earning extra credit or improving writing skills, are other factors. The tutee’s responsiveness or attitude to the tutor is another reason for the accomplishment or failure of the writing conference. These three factors combined with the status (traditional or non-traditional) of the student may determine the overall success of the writing conference. 
I barely remember when I first heard of MCCC’s Writing Center. My Comp I teacher had said something along the line of, “If you need help writing, you can visit the LAL lab.” Great. Whatever. My mind quickly translated the information—“If you are stupid and cannot manage to write a single essay, you can see some professionals who will embarrass you by explaining the difference between a noun and a verb.” Well, I was certainly not a Pulitzer Prize winner, but I could surely manage to write my own papers—without using the LAL. It was not until a later class that required seeing a Writing Fellow that I learned how beneficial the Writing Center truly is. When I later became a Writing Fellow myself, I fully realized how the program worked and how important it is to combat student misconceptions. Misconceptions about writing centers can lead to miscommunication, unrealistic expectations, and avoidance between faculty, students, and writing fellows. Questioned tutors feel they could have more productive writing sessions if students did not come in with erroneous agendas. Solving this dilemma requires better communication, presentation, and staff participation at college writing centers. 
“How did I get myself into this? I cannot tutor someone else,” I think to myself as I nervously wait for my first tutee to walk through the double doors. I begin to think of all the horror stories that I had read in the classroom text book and hope that I will never have to experience one. Waiting five more minutes, a door finally opens and a young man named John walks through. We introduce ourselves and my first session begins. “So what problems arose when writing this paper?” I ask him. He replies, “Nothing really, just have to be here.” A person might as well tattoo a note on his fore head saying “Required.” So much for the student yearning to have himself tutored. I would have to work hard to motivate John to work on his paper. Fortunately, I was able to teach John some new techniques in writing, but he definitely gave me an education in tutoring that day. I left that day wondering if a non-required student compared at all to a required student. Which one would prove easier to tutor? As my tutoring continued, the characteristics of these two types of students began to clearly show. The attention given to the paper by the individual and the body language shown by the tutee can single out the type of student, but the tutor must realize what techniques will work best for that student.
Tutoring students in the MCCC Writing Center can prove difficult when the student does not want the help. Some students come into the Writing Center looking for guidance, while others need a report form for extra credit. This is but one comparison between a required student’s visit and a non-required student’s visit. Tutors need to be aware of a student’s feelings about a writing center and the approach that should be taken to have a successful session. Student attitudes and behavior during required and non-required sessions differ due to the communication between the tutor and student. Required students may become non-required students after a productive, comfortable session.
How much work is accomplished during a session depends on how aware the tutor is of different students’ learning styles. Females and males differ immensely in the way they learn, communicate, and relate to their comfort zones. Knowing the differences between these factors, for both genders, may become the deciding factor of the success of the session. Differences in gender, within learning and communication styles, affect both the tutor and the tutee. There are four different gender combinations that occur within the writing center: a male tutoring a female, a male tutoring a male, a female tutoring a male, and a female tutoring a female. These different forms of tutoring relate to opposite and same sex tutoring. Different characteristics of learning between females and males tend to create problems within the tutoring sessions. To achieve the greatest amount of success in a session, it is important to be aware of the difference between female and male learning styles.