Monday, May 4, 2015

Letter to Bert: Polished Draft

Dear Mr.Eisenstadt,

                My name is , and I am currently in my final semester here at LaGuardia Community College. I am moving on to Queens College to pursue a degree in Secondary Education. I love to learn; and what I love more than learning itself is to be able to help others learn. In my Seminar of Tutoring Writing, taught by Professor Justin Rogers-Cooper, I was given the opportunity to observe four different tutoring sessions at your writing center here on campus. I was personally excited to be able to watch tutors give advice to students, because it was a great opportunity to compare methods and to see which were least and most effective. Two texts that we have studied and discussed in class are Active Voice, by James Moffett, and Tutoring Writing, by Donald A. McAndrew and Thomas J. Reigstad. These two books introduce and define different strategies, theories, and methods that are practiced during (but not limited to) tutoring sessions. The methods that I noticed during my observations that I consider to be extremely effective in any good tutoring session was Student-Centered Tutoring, Conversation and Collaborative Tutoring. Closely related, these strategies focus more on the needs of the student, and how a tutor should build ideas based on the information the student provides. For the most part, the tutors cover a great deal of subject matter through conversation, and take initiative to move the student along the different processes without any confusion. Even though all of the sessions I’ve observed were very impressionable, I did notice a difference between the levels of comfort that male tutors had versus the female tutors. There were moments during some of the sessions that I believed the female tutors were too timid when they needed to be constructive, and I think that could have a negative impact on a student’s experience at the writing center.
I would like to say that the most productive tutoring session I observed was during my third session. This tutor was very laid back, which made the student automatically feel welcomed and comfortable. The student chose the topic of culture in America. In short, the student’s topic was based around a fictional character born in India, who moved to America and had to learn to adjust to a new lifestyle without losing her cultural roots. The tutor listened intently as the student summarized the most important segments of the story being used, and proceeded to ask questions to further develop the student’s thoughts. The tutor asked many reflective questions, one in particular that I thought was very effective was “how can you relate to the cultural differences that we deal with on a daily basis?” That question alone helped the student write an entire paragraph based on their own critical analysis, and to me that was very collaborative. Collaborative tutoring is a method in which the tutor asks many questions, to further engage the student into their topic (McAndrew and Registad 26). I found this method to be very effective because while the tutor helped the student, most of the ideas were being generated from the student’s perspective.
The majority of the tutors I observed also made sure to have a constant flow throughout the tutoring session. The tutors overall made sure to end each part of the session with a short discussion, and moved along to a new area of the paper when it was appropriate without having the student feel rushed or confused by the transition. A great example of this happened during my fourth observation. The male tutor I was observing was working with two students as opposed to just one. One of the students being helped at the time had a 7 page draft that needed to be reviewed. Since the student had so many pages, I wondered how the tutor would be able to address all of the issues that were present between the two students. The first student’s topic was psychology. I thought this was a good opportunity for me because it was the second student I’ve seen during my observations with this topic, and I would be able to later compare the methods that were used by the tutors to help the students. The tutor first helped the student with the less lengthy paper. The second student did not have much to go by, so the tutor started the session off with conversation. The second student’s paper was more opinion based; her topic was about her opinions on minimum wage in America.  Since the second student’s paper was more opinion compared to the more factual requirement of the first student’s paper, conversation was very helpful. The tutor asked the second student questions such as “what does minimum wage mean to you? How does it affect Americans that are below middle class? Do you get paid minimum or know anyone that does?” The tutor then directed the student to then outline her paper, and to make a list of the ways minimum wage can affect a person. To me, I personally believe that conversation is the key to a successful tutoring session. If a student and tutor can converse about their topic and about different ways to develop and or improve a paper, that discussion can bring forth many new ideas. By simply conversing and making relations to off topic subjects, the tutor is able to help the student make different types of connections, which will help them generate more ideas for their paper (McAndrew and Registad 34).
While the student was working on those activities, the tutor directed his attention to the psychology assignment. He briefly had the student explain what the assignment was about, and then jumped in to reading the paper out loud. The tutor stopped to make questions, comments, and suggestions along the way. A suggestion/comment that the tutor asked the student was “I like that you defined the topic so thoroughly in the body paragraphs, but you also need to introduce the term in your introduction so that the reader has a sense of what this paper will be about”. That immediately made me happy because I knew from that moment that the session would be a lot more productive as opposed to a tutor that read silently. At the end of the session, the tutor gave mutual suggestions on how both students can critically analyze their work and relate it to the topic. I actually wrote a few of his tips down as a "note to self", because certain suggestions like that can really help a student build the foundation necessary for a successful paper. The tutor in this session showed a great deal of Student-Centered Tutoring. He addressed both of the students’ needs, and made sure to help them in any areas they were struggling in. In Tutoring Writing, McAndrew and Registad define student-centered tutoring as a “desirable” tutoring style, because it requires work and effort mostly from the student to bring forth their ideas (McAndrew and Registad 25).
                Although the sessions I observed showed great use of different tutoring techniques, there were moments that I felt could have been improved simply by the tutors feeling more comfortable with sharing their ideas to the students. During my sessions I observed two male tutors, and two females. What I noticed in the sessions with the female tutors was that they seemed shyer, and sometimes a little reluctant when it came time to share their higher order concerns. I observed the two females during my first two sessions, and I did note that there were times when they were hesitant to critique a section of the students’ paper. It wasn’t until I observed the male tutors that I began to realize just how timid the female tutors actually were. In the first tutoring session I observed, the female tutor spent about 10 minutes of the session reading one girl’s paper, and I honestly felt that time could have been used a lot more productively. There was no discussion while she read; no conclusions being made and theories being agreed upon and that was upsetting, because if I were the student I would want to talk about my paper more than anything else. After reading one students paper, the tutor actually seemed to be at a loss of what advice to give, especially since there was a language barrier between the student and tutor. Instead of reading the paper over entirely and silently, I believe that the female tutor I was observing should have read aloud and took pauses to add emphasis where needed and develop ideas along the way.
                 I felt that they were less inclined to even "constructively" criticize the students work. I do believe that some of the advice given by the female tutors were more “vague”, and didn’t focus enough on development. An example that I’d like to share with you was during my second tutoring session when the student was clearly missing a thesis, which made the paper incomplete and extremely disorganized. The tutor began to compliment the student on the work they had so far. The tutor then began on thinking of ways to expand the paper.  The issue regarding the missing thesis wasn’t addressed until later on in the session even though the thesis is a main component of any paper. I think the female tutor I sat with almost feared offending the student, and instead chose a route of appraisal when there should have been critique. In Tutoring Writing, the term Cheerleading is explained as “empty flattery” (McAndrew and Reigstad 17).
The male tutors, however, weren’t hesitant in regards to giving a more professional level critique. They weren't rude but very to the point, and I believe because they didn't sugar coat things, they had more time to work on each area that a student needed help with (McAndrew and Reigstad 17). I will always stress that time management is essential, especially if you're dealing with two students and you need to strategically share the time between them. The male tutors kept the atmosphere very relaxed. Some students get pretty nervous, but they made sure to let them know that they were there to improve their skills, not to judge there lack of. To me, the male tutors put more of their opinions and thoughts into the tutoring session, and I believe those students walked away with a more clear idea of how to improve their writing. In Moffett’s Active Voice, he states that “it’s often helpful to get advance audience reactions while changes can still be made – Anyone can serve as a kind of coach” (Moffett 19). The time that a tutor and student have at the writing center is limited, so I believe that being to the point with ideas and critique can go a long way. 
As I began planning the issue I was going to address in this letter, I wondered ‘was this difference only apparent in the set of tutors I observed?’ I honestly believe that females may often be more timid than males. A possible suggestion that I can make for you to help the female tutors with their shyness could be having tutoring workshops. Not limited to just females, but a tutoring workshop could help new tutors learn ways to critique a student without sounding too harsh or possibly offending someone. I would also recommend the two texts I’ve introduced in this letter. As I stated in the introduction, the texts are very informative, and have a lot of good tips for writers and tutors alike. Another suggestion I could make is to have tutors share their thoughts and experiences during their personal tutoring sessions. I learned that some of the things I experienced while I observed personally have happened to some of my classmates.
Lastly, I would like to commend you on the staff that you have at the Writing Center. For myself, personally I believe you had a handful of tutors who genuinely wanted to help students to further develop ideas to ensure a successful paper. And while I may have had a few things to point out during my observations, that doesn’t mean they haven’t helped to improve student’s work on a daily basis. From sharing my own experiences along with reading the experiences that my classmates have shared, the tutors seem to be doing a great job at helping the students here on campus. My pedagogy of education has always revolved around addressing the needs of the student before anything else. I strongly believe that through Collaboration, Conversation, and Student-Centered Tutoring, tutors are able to connect with students on a more personal level but still keep their level professionalism appropriate. By asking many reflective questions, I conclude from my own in class discussions that simply conversing with a student can bring forth many useful ideas. During my time at your Writing Center the methods I favor personally were present in each session that I observed, and I commend you once again for the staff that you have on hand.  LaGuardia Community College is made up of a very diverse group of people from all over New York City, and it is a privilege to myself and others to be able to have access to many tutors who are so very eager and willing to help improve our writing. I’ve visited the writing center personally as a student needing advice on a paper, and with finals coming around I most likely will be on line with the hundreds of other students that are looking for ways to improve their methods and writing strategies
                                                               
                                                               

                                                                                                Sincerely,

No comments:

Post a Comment