3/6


I’m not really sure what the biggest challenge in asynchronous tutoring is.  I think maybe it’s having to anticipate student questions. There’s no chance to explain something and see if the student understood; you’ve got to make the concept clear the first time.  During a synchronous tutoring session, I had a student ask about when she could use “one of those clauses with ‘that’” and she pointed out a relative clause.  I thought she was asking the difference between a restrictive and not restrictive relative clause and launched into a long-winded explanation.  She didn’t interrupt, but when I’d finished she clarified that she wanted to know stylistically when a relative clause is appropriate. If she’s made a note about her question on an online form, I’d have answered the wrong question with no chance to remedy it.

Another possible pitfall with asynchronous tutoring can be seen when we compare the benefit of online tutoring that we can “step away from the assignment, then return to it with a fresh and potentially new perspective” (p.91) to the admonition that we should try to stick within the set time, not take long breaks and finish all papers in one sitting (p.94).  It seems a lot easier to try to focus on everything that could be clarified/expanded/strengthened in a paper (which would take too much time, plus the student would be overwhelmed/disheartened & might spend time changing the less important things before the paper’s due). 

The first advantage I thought of is that with the WC’s online system, we get to read through potential papers before claiming them.  We could pick something that matches our interests rather than whatever’s next in the queue. Having the time to plan a cohesive response also seems beneficial.  The distance allows for thinking more before responding. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

post 2/27

I found strategies like Show that All Texts Reflect the Author's Frame of Reference and Thus are Subject to Interrogation and Analysis  and Writing 'Translations' particularly helpful for my students who struggle to delineate form from content in their assigned readings. They carry this confusion into their writing by either making clear arguments without providing adequate context, or mimicking the convoluted syntax of academic writing instead of articulating in terms clearest to them what they mean. One question I have is, what are some resources we can point students to help them parse through academic jargon (especially when their instructors have not provided them this resource/ training in class)? Are there existing "Reading guides" online like those described on p.141?
Read more

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