You Papers

            It is not an easy task to write or talk about oneself.  The irony behind the “You Paper” assignment is that there is so much to say about ourselves, yet when asked to elaborate, many times the words fail to pierce the air.  I cannot define why it is that this phenomenon occurs, but I do know that each individual is a wonderful creature that was designed for a specific purpose on this planet.  Nonetheless, our differences depict our uniqueness, our similarities unite us.

I must admit that these papers brought a smile to my face and made me thankful for the chance to be a part of this day, this year, and more importantly, this time that we have as members of the Wittenberg Writing Center community.  In spite of our differences, preferences, and varying knowledge of writing, our goal is to help all that enter the center, and grow individually as writers, workers, and future leaders.  I believe these goals will create an atmosphere where individual and group learning can transpire, and where our mistakes and faults will become flaws of the past.  This is the beauty defined in Alison’s paper.  She recognizes that God is stronger than our flaws and big enough to trample any of our obstacles.  I wanted to affirm what Alison wrote by publicly stating that I felt a sincere connection to her writing. 

Alison begins by emphasizing her love of written text as opposed to typed versions.  As a fellow writer that utilizes cursive on a daily basis, I was immediately attracted to that aspect of her writing.  I do not however, have a favorite pack of pens J.  She continues to define her character as one who is, “not always the most articulate out loud.”  My immediate reaction to that statement was a nodding head.  I was not agreeing with Alison that she may be slightly introverted, but rather, agreeing that I too, greatly prefer to write a paper than speak in front of an audience.  It is a fear that I have yet to conquer, but it is not a flaw that is bigger than my Creator.  He can eliminate all fear.

Fortunately, as Alison has stated, our God does not expect nor look down upon us as humans because of our imperfections.  He loves us anyway.  Alison states, “That’s not religion.  That’s my relationship with the God who created the universe, cried when it fell, and then died for me out of unfathomable love.  That defines my life.”  Beautifully written, I commend Alison for her faith to write what would normally be challenged by sinful mankind.  She is a brave individual who displays honesty, integrity, and tremendous faith.  Thus, I affirm Alison’s words and wanted to offer a perspective similar to her own.  It’s not easy to step beyond what the world may challenge, and sometimes stand alone in doing so.  So I thank you, Alison, for writing out of courage, and bringing a smile to my face.    

Tutors and Doctors: Peers and Patients

            Why do people seek the advice of doctors? Is it because they trust the doctor’s expertise? Or is it because the initiative to feel better and/or live a healthier lifestyle is enough motivation to seek the answers to their health problems?  The goal is not to answer these questions specifically but rather, apply this mindset to the rationale behind a visit to the Writing Center.  Do students schedule a session because they trust the honest evaluations supplied by the tutor? Or is it because the writer strives to perform well in the class and ultimately become a better writer?  There is no question that each writer has his/her own reasoning for stepping into the Writing Center.  However, I believe that a visit to the doctor’s office is analogous to a visit to the Writing Center; the tutor reflects the ideals of a doctor, the writer resembles the patient.

            Each time a student enters the Writing Center, the tutor must adjust to the needs, concerns, and knowledge of the writer.  Each appointment must reflect a case-by-case evaluation.  In other words, a tutor is neither capable of predicting the symptoms that lead the writer to the center, nor fully capable of prescribing the antidote that will guarantee a satisfactory grade.  Just as the doctor must apply his/her knowledge to the patient’s unique situation, so too must the tutor adapt to the writer’s needs.  This idea of each appointment being a different opportunity to engage with various writers has certainly challenged me.  I like to think rigidly in the sense that specific events will occur in a very uniform matter.  In essence, I originally fantasized that each session would only vary in topic and technical issues that need alteration, but the overall order in which I was to evaluate the assignment would not change.  I’ve learned however, that each session will be different.  The pre-reading questions prompted by the tutor are the only aspect of the session that remains relatively consistent. 

            Furthermore, I have also learned that the goals of a tutor and doctor are relatively similar.  In many cases, the doctor works to address both the current issues and future quality of life for their patients.  Similarly, the writing tutor seeks to perfect the work at hand, and encourage the writer to grow.  In the words of Stephen M. North, “our job is to produce better writers, not better writing.” 

            In the end, writing tutors have a crucial role for the success of student writers.  They must supply expertise, offer encouragement, and strive to motivate those that enter the Writing Center to become better writers.  They must be gentle and understanding like a successful doctor, all while understanding that each Writing Center session is a different experience.  Whether doctor or tutor, patient or peer, the conversation and interaction that transpire will make a lasting impression.            

                       

The Idea of a Writing Center-Response to essay by Stephen M. North

The establishment of the writing center in various academic settings was meant to engage writers in any stage of the writing process.  Comfortable in atmosphere and welcoming in nature, the writing center is a place where insightful conversation and positive interaction transpire.  The unique communication between tutor and writer is the basis for academic and literary growth.  However, the writing center is not a place where students should be unengaged or consider the tutor as sole editor of the work.  Sadly, current connotative trends regard the writing center as a “skills center” or “fix-it shop” for students striving to impress professors rather than grow as individual writers.  Stephen M. North has challenged these incorrect portrayals of the writing center and poignantly defined this resource as entirely student-centered.  By depicting North’s rationale behind the student-focused writing center, and through supplication of personal experience, one will note the transformation of thought that must occur. No longer are writing centers to be viewed as “skills centers” or “fix-it shops” but rather, a place for personal growth.

To begin, North describes the writing center as a place where written text is not the only component of a work to be altered.  It is important to engage the writer in a manner that will allow them to see visible mistakes, and learn to adapt positive changes in their assignments.  In other words, “the object is to make sure that writers, and not necessarily their texts, are what get changed by instruction.”  From a personal standpoint, I was originally challenged by this idea.  I struggled with a professor that heavily critiqued my work and suggested the writing center’s aid.  The professor argued that I used words incorrectly and that I did not concisely portray my ideas.  Initially determined to impress the professor and prove that I could compose an acceptable paper, I frustratingly entered the writing center.  I intended to make the necessary alterations and be more conscious of my thinking throughout the writing process.  What I learned however, was that the professor was correct in his/her critique.  I understood the importance of relaying ideas effectively, and that concise wording was more important than trying to impress the audience with unnecessary language.  Guilty of triggering North’s frustration, I had regarded the writing center as the “fix-it shop.”  I worked hard to make changes on my own, but still sought the tutor’s aid to fix any of the prior mistakes.  Moreover, I learned to adapt a new manner of thinking in my writing that seeks to clearly emphasize ideas and make sure that I use words effectively.  I have also learned that it is more important to consciously think about these changes in my writing than to sit next to a tutor and have them tell me the negatives.  In the end, I am the one who benefited because I will not need to rely on a tutor to simply “fix” all mistakes.  By taking priority in my writing, I ensure that my writing will progress.  As Stephen M. North concludes, the success of a writing center and its tutors relies on the visible changes of the writers that enter.