Marketing the Writing Center

When Professor Dolson mentioned that we could do our own project for the final, my mind automatically jumped to marketing. It's funny, because marketing has never been my strong suit. I have always been more of a theoretical person, someone who likes to think about lofty ideas and theories that never really make it into reality. Yet this entire semester the marketing question has kept on coming up in my blogs and in my mind. I remember very vividly sitting in class with Gyra and Allie, discussing why the Writing Center is so empty and how we could change it - they came up with the brilliant idea of the Writing Center doing a campaign to help with love letters on Valentines Day. And so when the idea of doing your own project came up, I automatically jumped on board with Gyra and Allie to start thinking about exactly how we could get the Writing Center out of Weinstein and into the rest of the campus.

I found a very interesting article about just this, marketing the writing center, in the Writing Lab Newsletter (linked below)
Marketing the Best Image of the Community College Writing Center

Though (as you can tell from the title) this article deals with community college writing centers, it has some very interesting strategies to get the name of the Writing Center out there. For example, it gives a list of recommendations for instructors in encouraging their students to use the Writing Center:

1. Give students a specifi c task(s) to complete in the writing center. 

2. Tie the task to an assignment or a graded paper. 

3. Have students bring specifi c assignment(s) to the center. 

4. Keep models of good completed assignments in the center.

5. Focus on the hierarchy that works with all levels of student writers. 

6. Tell students verbally and in their syllabus that they should take advantage of the writing 

 center’s services. 

7. Take their students into the center and have the staff explain the process and  services of 

  the writing center. 

8. Ask someone from the writing center to talk to their class. 

9. Be aware of what the writing center does and does not do. Accentuate the positive. 

10. Help students to become wiser users of the center . . . learning what questions to ask 

 and seeking guidance for the higher order concerns instead of looking only for editing 

 corrections. One way we can help instructors is to share our hierarchy with them. 

Emphasizing inclusivity, lack of labels for both the Center and the students, and intimate relations between the instructors and the Center, this article provides some answers in how to both eliminate the stigma attached to the Writing Center and how to make each consultancy more effective. 

However, this article does not touch at all on how to reach the students directly rather than going through the channel of their professors. Perhaps that is a less popular means of promoting the Writing Center, but I think that in the University of Richmond context, it would be extremely effective and beneficial if we could get the students to use the Writing Center out of their own free will, not because told to by professors. In fact, separating the Center from professors could create a more collaborative, relaxed, and less stressful environment. How can we reach the students themselves?

No Show

This Wednesday I went to my weekly writing center shadowing appointment, and my consultant did not show up. Perhaps it was a miscommunication, perhaps he didn't have any appointments, perhaps he simply forgot. I'm sad I didn't get a chance to shadow and observe a consultancy, and I will try to find some hands-on consulting experience on my own this week. I can't imagine it would be too hard, especially if everyone has as many papers to write as I do!

Boys and Girls Club, Take 2

Yesterday we went to the Boys and Girls club for a second round of tutoring. Michael and I had tutored a girl last time together, and though it went fairly well, the girl was not very invested in what we were saying or in the project in general. Though it was not a failure, it was not a rousing success either, and I remember leaving feeling a bit let down. I suppose I expected to go in and really feel like I was helping someone, whereas when we left I didn't really know what we had done to bring this girl any closer to finishing her story or helping her be a better writer.

When we returned on Monday, I didn't know what exactly to expect, but I did not expect what happened. It turned out that the girl we worked with before was no longer with the program, and we were assigned to another girl who also had not completed her interview. This is yet another example of the disparities between theory and practice, between the class room and the "real world" - nothing ever plays out how you think it will. At first I was a little worried, as we had spent all of last time forming a bond with this girl and now we had to start all over again. Yet it was a wonderful experience all in all. The new girl we tutored was very talkative and, more importantly, seemed genuinely excited about the project. She had many ideas as to what she wanted to do, and she seemed interested in our descriptions of what a digital story is, how we conducted our interviews, and our lives as college students in general. We helped her formulate her own questions for her interview as she had yet to receive the prewritten questions that they handed to every student. This ended up being a wonderful exercise for us to help her with, because we were able to discuss what makes a good story, what makes her want to interview her grandmother, and it helped her focus on what exactly she wanted to convey at the end of the project. The fact that she was able to focus her questions and see the story as having a goal, a message, rather than the ramblings of some older person, was really exciting, and it was even more exciting to help her get to that point.

What's the lesson I've learned? First of all, never expect things to turn out the way you planned, especially in hard-to-control situations. Secondly, no effort or time invested in a tutoring is lost or wasted. Thirdly, never underestimate the student you're working with, because they will surprise you!

Preparing for the paper...

I just received a copy of Michael's paper to revise for the Classmate Consultancy project, and am beginning to determine how I will conduct the appointment, how and if I'll mark up his paper, and in general what kind of writing consultant I'll be. To be honest, though no one likes doing work, it has been interesting looking back through our readings and even looking at essays we haven't read to determine what I want to do. I have a blank slate, I can take whatever direction I want, as long as I can justify it. The St. Martin's Sourcebook for Writing Tutors has been one of the best resources so far, and so I have been looking at the introduction to think of essential questions I need to address in my paper. So far, I have come up with this list:

Current traditional rhetoric vs expressivism vs social constructionism?
What role do I take? Teacher? Guide? Peer? Collaborator?
How do I create a context for the consultancy, especially with someone I know already?
Who will have the power in the consultancy?
Minimalist approach or not? 
Directive or nondirective?


The introduction separates a consultancy into three stages: Pre-textual, Textual, and Post-textual. These separations will prove helpful for both the outlining of the session and my justification, as I will have to make crucial decisions on how to handle each stage. 


Michael's paper is in the idea stages, more of an outline than a paper itself, and I have been looking for articles that specifically deal with idea-formation. I know that Lunsford's article on collaboration and the different perspectives on knowledge creation will be helpful, but I am having trouble finding others...does anyone have any suggestions?  

Empty Writing Center

Last night I went to the Writing Center to shadow my consultant. Unfortunately, he did not have any appointments during that time, and so I was not able to sit in on a tutoring session. I am always surprised and a little disappointed when the Writing Center is so empty, and this sensation struck me even more strongly yesterday. This is the time of year when essays are piling up, when students are stressing in the library until 2 am trying to write that final essay that will pull up their grade or in some cases just allow them to scrape by. In short, this is the time when the Writing Center should be filled to the brim with students, when there shouldn't be any open appointments left. But it was empty. Why is this?

Though I cannot fully answer this question, I have some ideas as to the causes. For one thing, we are a university of procrastinators. Even the best students will sometimes wait until the night before to write the paper, and I'm sure if one conducted a survey the results would show that at least 50% of students procrastinate on their papers. This unfortunately stands in the way of them using the Writing Center, as you obviously cannot take a draft to the Center at 3 am the morning of the due date. I honestly don't know how the Writing Center can do anything to change this. Perhaps if a student goes to the Center once then they will develop better writing processes and learn the importance of recursive writing and various drafts, therefore creating a consistent client for the Center. Yet for this to happen the student has to get into the Writing Center in the first place. And the majority of people I know have never stepped foot into the 3rd floor of Weinstein.

Another reason could be bad publicity. Many of my friends don't even know where the Writing Center is, let alone what they do and how to make appointments. I know that once we were joking in class about the Writing Center offering to edit love letters for Valentines day, and as goofy as that idea is I think that fun things like that could really get the name out there. Rather than see the Center as an intimidating place where teachers send you if you're a bad writer, students need to see the Center as a common resource and a collaborative environment that everyone should feel comfortable using, even a fun place. Why not use hoky advertising or tabling things like the love letter idea to get the name out there, to change the Center's reputation?

Entre les Murs

"According to Flynn, these kinds of negative first impressions seem to be a vicious circle in high 

school classrooms.  Students like Tina go into a class challenging the teacher to teach them— 

they have a standoffish attitude that seems like hostility but which is actually, according to Phil, 

more of a challenge to earn their trust.  But some teachers perceive that attitude to be hostility, 

and they respond in kind." - Tina: A Portrait of Literate Awareness 

Christie S. Johnson 

While reading Christie Johnson's Honor's Thesis on literacy and its application in tutoring "at-risk" or "difficult" students, her problem defining literacy was what jumped out at me the most. This was partially because I myself have had many difficulties defining literacy - is it being able to read? to write? Or more broadly, is it simply able to understand and communicate effectively? Or is it how Johnson seems to see it, an double-sided issue of acting and reflecting? All of these questions are important, especially in this age of literary crisis. 

However, another aspect of the article stood out to me after having viewed a film for my French film class later this week. The movie, "Entre les Murs" (directly translated to "Between the Walls"; its English title is "The Class") details a year in a middle school on the outskirts of Paris, one of the arrondissements that deal with poverty and increased immigration. The movie hit many chords with me, but most relevantly for our writing class was its depiction of the often vicious circle of student-teacher interactions in difficult classrooms. Just as Johnson notes, a sense of hostility comes about when students "challenge" teachers to in turn challenge them, and this is detailed sometimes painfully in the movie. One of the students, Khoumba, has a very strained relationship with the teacher, M. Marin. At first I did not understand her hostility and then his responding hostility, but placing it in the context of Johnson's article it makes perfect sense. It is a simple yet large problem if miscommunication - Khoumba was wanting to be viewed seriously and to be challenged, but her stand-offish attitude just seemed like insolence to M. Marin, which caused him to treat her with even more condescension, exacerbating the problem. 

This is mostly a problem in the classroom, and I am not quite sure how the Writing Center can help or what role it can play in decreasing miscommunications between students and teachers. Does anyone have any ideas?

Common Ground

This past Monday we went to the Boys and Girls club to help students with their digital stories and more importantly, to learn ourselves how to interact and create a safe and productive atmosphere with people other than the typical Richmond student. 

To be honest, I'm not sure how effective our session was. First of all, we had to pair up because there were not enough students to tutor. This presented many difficulties. For example, I'm afraid we intimidated the girl who we worked with a little bit since there were two of us trying to help her at the same time. Possibly if we had known that we would be teaming up and who we would be teamed up with, we could have worked out a strategy together and been both less overwhelming and less unorganized. Secondly, our student had not yet done her interview, which left us a little at a loss as to what we should do during the hour. Thankfully, both Michael and I realized the importance of finding that common ground that Smith speaks of in her article, "Non-traditional students in the Writing Center", and spent a majority of the time simply getting to know her, making her feel more comfortable with us, and casually discussing what she thought of the project and what she thought of stories in general. In this aspect, I feel that we were fairly successful in establishing a rapport with her, and she seemed fairly interested in what we had to say.

The most interesting observation I have taken away from the experience is the concept of speaking in the same language. This very much relates to the concept of common ground, of having things in common with the student you are tutoring. I was very nervous about speaking in the same "language" as this girl, as we did not have much in common at all. Even at the most basic level, I wanted to make sure I didn't use words that she would not understand that I would typically use in a classroom, such as "exposition" or "denouement" while also not seeming condescending in speaking in overly simple terms. And to be honest, it was fairly difficult and there were times when I saw just blankness in her eyes while I was talking, like she did not understand a word I said even though I was speaking English. However, when I asked her about her life and what she liked to do, she answered that she loved to read, and that immediately created a commonality that I tried to play off of during the rest of the hour. Honestly, I was giddy the moment she said that, to find something in common with her, and it definitely helped ease the tension and create a backdrop off of which I could move towards discussing what makes a good book, what makes a good story, what she wants her story to convey, etc. 

Harsh

"They appear very rarely—only, it seems, when the teacher is sufficiently frustrated with the level of

work represented by the paper to abandon worries about harming the student's

selfesteem. For example, one teacher wrote, "The poor quality of the ideas, style,

and proofreading tells me that you didn't spend much time on this paper."" - Straub

In our discussion of end comments a few weeks back we focused mostly on overly positive or watered down end comments made by teachers on papers. Yet this week at the Writing Center I encountered a paper with quite the opposite type of end comment. A senior brought in a rough draft of a paper for a senior seminar that his professor required him to bring to the Writing Center. This paper contained the professor's comments, which were some of the harshest if not the harshest I have encountered in my academic experience. Fully in the "judging" genre, the professor in short stated that the paper was in no way appropriate for a senior seminar, that it made no sense, that there were an unacceptable amount of mistakes, that he was a horrible student in the class itself, and that if he didn't change then he would fail the class. After reading these comments, I was almost scared to see what the student would be like - I expected someone sullen and unresponsive, or someone unintelligent (stereotypes I regret taking a part in). Yet when he came into the appointment he came with an open mind and very responsive attitude. He asked questions, took notes, marked on his paper, and was extremely active in the meeting. He seemed to genuinely want to write a good paper, and when prompted by the writing consultant seemed interested in what he was writing about.

The student painted by the professor in the end comment and the student I encountered were completely at odds with each other. Granted, while the student was very good at expressing himself vocally, when prompted by the consultant to write down what he just said he always lost something in translation between vocal and writing. Yet the entire experience made me question the end comment itself. Was the harshness the cause of a turn around, did it scare the student out of his passivity? Or was it too harsh, too judging? I'm not sure if there's any way that I can judge the comment since I have had no experience with the student in class, yet an end comment that brutal cannot be beneficial in my mind.