Inside the Tutoring Kingdom

            Within biology, it is the task of the taxonomist to categorize different animals into their individual kingdom, phylum, class, genus, order, and species.  In doing so, it becomes simpler to tell both the big and small differences between two different animals.  In "Tutor Taxonomy", Scott L. Miller takes a similar approach in the writing center, grouping writing tutors into different "species" based on the characteristics and differences that they share in their tutoring philosophies.

            Miller describes two different varieties of tutors, which he calls P. taciturnus and P. rhetoricus.  According to Miller's observations, the P. taciturnus variety of tutor tends to ask questions more than offer direct advice. These tutors see their role as a supporter of their tutee with a job of gently questioning and probing the tutee towards understanding.  This tutor, "...embodies faith and trust, trust that the tutee is smart enough to work it out for himself ultimately, if not today" (102).

            P. rhetoricus tutors, on the other hand, are known for being more concerned about dispensing the knowledge that they have to the tutee.  These tutors tend to believe that there is a certain way that professors want things to be written and aren't afraid to share this information with their tutee.

            Miller supports these assertions by relating each of his species of tutors to different tutoring models.  P. taciturnus is shown in relation to the minimalist tutoring model while P. rhetoricus is linked to a social-constructionist model of writing. (103) The minimalist model is set up in such a way that the tutor's position is to help the tutee express the ideas that they already possess through a series of questions.  This type of tutor believes that the tutee already knows what they want to say, they simply need help expressing those thoughts in a manner that is both meaningful and convincing.  Miller also suggests that this model of tutoring may be adopted by tutors when they are unfamiliar with the rhetoric being used in the tutee's assignment.

            P. rhetoricus, Miller suggests, is based on a social-constructionist writing philosophy.  Miller notes that this type of tutor abides by the idea that a tutee may not know what they need to say because they may not yet be familiar enough with their field to understand how or why things are done a certain way.  This type of tutor, Miller says, would argue that we all have different voices that we develop and that, "...the voices we exercise come to us along with the various subjectivities we are required to or choose to adopt in life” (104). From this assertion, this type of writing tutor would argue that tutees must be taught what they should sound like.

            With such different philosophies, one may then question which method is "right".  Should a tutor attempt to ask more questions and guide his tutee in the way of P. taciturnus or is it in the best interest of the tutee to use an approach more resembling that of P. rhetoricus in which the role of the tutor is to directly instruct the tutee in how he should write?  Miller believes that neither of these methods is necessarily better than the other nor that one should abandon one vision for the other.  Instead, he goes so far as to say that the writing center needs both varieties of tutors.

Works Cited

Miller, Scott L. "Tutor Taxonomy." Pedagogy 5.1 (2005): 102-115. Academic Search Complete.

Questions for the Tutor

1. What type of tutor do you think you are?  Do you identify more closely with P. taciturnus or P. rhetoricus tutoring “species”? What ways do your tutoring techniques reflect this?
2. What are some strong points of each of these tutoring types?  What are some weak points?
3. How can developing characteristics of each of these types of tutors make you a more adept writing tutor?
4. In what context is the P. taciturnus  type of tutor appropriate?  The P. rhetoricus?  Do you think that the methods from each type can be blended together and in what ways?

But why is there all this RED on my paper?: Empowering Students to Become Their Own Editor

            As a writing tutor, it is not uncommon for a student comes into the writing center clutching his freshly graded first draft.  Students across a variety of disciplines have been there: a first draft or lab report is handed back and you immediately flip to the final page to see your grade, desperately ignoring all the red ink in between.  After all, the grade's the most important piece of information at this point, right?

            Not if you're looking to become a better writer.  As Texas Lutheran is a liberal arts university, we can see this even in our Institutional Goals for Graduates.  In the TLU Student Handbook, these goals are divided into aspects of “Knowing”, “Doing”, and “Becoming”.  One part of the “Doing” aspect of these goals is that “TLU graduates should be able to write clearly and coherently, read with comprehension, speak effectively, and listen with care and openness.” (Handbook, 3) Keeping this in mind, it becomes clear that instead of ignoring the commentary that a professor gives on a paper, it's better to treat that information as pure gold.  Despite a grade that may seem to indicate the contrary, your professors and your university as a whole want you to do well and believe that part of that entails becoming a better writer.  As writing tutors, part of our job is helping make this happen.

            In “Learning to Read with the Eyes of a Writer”, Kristin M. Gehsmann of St. Michael’s College provides some helpful approaches that can be used to help students learn how to approach their own papers with the eyes of a writer and to eventually become more adept and being their own editor.  Often students will come in with a first draft, a lower grade than expected, and a lot of red ink.  Now, how can you teach your student how to use this information? 

            Gehsmann’s method involves sharing strong and weak versions of a paper with students and then teaching them to look for what makes a paper strong and how to improve upon weaknesses.

            Starting with a strong paper, students are asked to read through and notice what the writer did to make the essay effective.  Is there a clear statement of purpose or thesis statement?  Can the organization and structure of the paper be easily followed?  Do the author's sentences and paragraphs work together to enhance the overall organization?

            After this, share a version of the same paper that is lacking in these characteristics.  Students are asked to look for things that the writer did well and things that could be improved upon.  Once this is done, it's time for the student to become the editor.  Ask the student to provide feedback for the essay's author, including both points of strength and weakness and any areas upon which they can improve.

            Now that the student has an idea of some of the differences between a strong and weak paper, the tutor can help the student apply the same techniques used on the sample paper to their own paper.  Have the student read their own paper just as they read through the others.  Afterwards, try having them create a list of five strengths or challenges that they can see in their paper.

            At this point the tutor can help the student take their list of strengths and weaknesses and use it to develop an action plan for making edits to their paper.  This is also a good time to look at the commentary of the professor.  What recommendations has he or she made and how can those be put into effect?  Remember to start with bigger concerns and work down to smaller ones and communicate why this is important to students.  Have the student look at the differences between the strong and weak papers and see how those differences align with their own paper.  If the student notices that their overall organizational structure more closely resembles that of the weaker paper, ask them what differences there are in the stronger paper.  Simple things like developing a stronger statement of purpose, thesis statement, and creating an outline can be a great place to start.

            You’re there in the writing center, student in front of you.  The stress of a lower-than-expected grade is looming above his or her head, keeping them from focusing on how they can improve their paper.  While it may be tempting to just give them a list of things that they need to change, it’s better to take this as an opportunity to help the student learn how to become a better writer.  Rather than just trying to tell them what changes they need to make, the method outlined above can help students learn how to find those changes themselves and make them a more empowered and capable writer. 

Works Cited

Gehrsmann, Kristin M. "Learning To Read With The Eyes Of A Writer." Teaching Professor 25.1 (2011): 1-3. Academic Search Complete. 

Texas Lutheran University Student Handbook: 2012-2013. Seguin, TX: Texas Lutheran University, 2012.