3/6 Blog

I've never done official online tutoring (of course I send emails to students about papers, but that doesn't seem the same), so I'm rather wary. Both the Bedford and Remington mention drawbacks to asynchronous online tutoring that result from its "static" nature. I'm inclined to agree with all of these. I rely, perhaps too much, on "reading" people in session: body language, facial expressions, tone of voice, or other physical cues. It makes the back-and-forth in session easier for me to direct or lets me know what I need to spend some more time on. Both of these things are necessarily missing from an asynchronous online session because of the medium.

I think the Bedford indicates four important advantages for asynchronous tutoring: time, collaboration, anonymity, and a written record. These are, indeed, advantages, but I was more taken with Remington's idea of modeling, both implicit and explicit. Giving student's the opportunity to see tutor's writing is probably valuable for them, but it also gives tutors the opportunity to demonstrate what they're talking about in a way that they can't in a face-to-face session. I also think using an example that's not in the student's writing can be valuable. Talking about an issue at a remove makes it less personal and, hopefully, emotionally charged for the writer, which gives them the opportunity to process the advice/strategy and work out for themselves how to apply it.

Comments

  1. Lindsey QuinnMarch 2, 2018 at 7:10 AM

    I love the idea of the medium as the message, but I wonder if our students would be aware enough to notice our modeling unless it's really exaggerated (like Remington's example on p.4).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing to Learn, Learning to Write

I'm familiar with different approaches in different contexts. As an instructor, I'm most familiar with learning to write, because even my content-based assignments receive extensive writing attention. As a student, though, I was and am more familiar with writing to learn. But I'm still displeased that as a student in English at the undergraduate, MA, and PhD levels, there was/is not more attention placed on learning to write. At this stage, this seems to be something professors take for granted. (I was recently told: "That's not how you title a dissertation chapter." And I responded: "Can you please tell me how you title a book chapter? I have never done this.") I think also in liberal arts required courses, writing to learn is prioritized in many (most?) disciplines. I'm not particularly persuaded by one form over another, though I have never succeeded in writing to learn language models. But I am partial to the idea that learning to write sho...
Read more

Emi 03/27

These two case studies consider two different research methods that will inevitably lead to very different discussions and presentation of the ideas.  T he non-fiction case study (Lorraine) is purely qualitative, while the academic case study (Fei) is a mixed methods study in which qualitative data is quantitized and the rest of the collected qualitative data (e.g. interview) mainly serves to enhance legitimation. These two different focus, qualitative (Lorraine) and Mixed methods with a focus on quantitative (Fei) are well accepted in research. However, the way that readers approach them may be very different. The qualitative (non-fiction) case study is more engaging, more relatable, and easier to read. As promoted in Qualitative research, the authors present the data as if it were a story and include very detailed anecdotes (called vignettes) that represent the main point to be conveyed. The study is not replicable, but the authors do provide additional information to ensure...
Read more

4/17

In my tutoring sessions, I've been most familiar with the 'learning to write' paradigm. I felt Ortega's statement that "...LW places at the center of attention the cognitive activity of the writer and her or his authorial voice" encapsulates the work my students have called on me to do. Whether they're working on a Peace Corps application, a psychology paper, a global health paper or a speech for Rhetoric, I've found my work can be described in Ortega's twofold statement: helping students put in writing first, their cognitive activity (their opinions, arguments, and questions) and second, their authorial voice (by airing confusions, doubts, and identifying needs for further research). In class, I'm wondering if we can have a discussion about the overlap between LW and WLL when it comes to students picking up specific language necessary for academic assignments. As Ortega writes, there is a difference between students "learning to write abo...
Read more