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?
No comments:
Post a Comment