Student Voice and Discovery

In bootcamp this week we have been talking about three primary means of student support networks: the writing center tutorial, the peer response workshop, and the student-teacher conference. As I am exploring the notion of discovery in ENC 1101 andn student writing, I have to wonder, how do these three different networks affect a student's voice, especially the development of that voice (and the process of self-discovery it entails)?

The Writing Center Tutorial

Ideally, the writing center tutorial helps build a student's confidence by working one-on-one with a tutor who is careful not to take over the student writing, not to dominate or falsely construct a student's voice. In "Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration," Muriel Harris lists among the tutor's tasks "leading the student toward finding her own answers" and "listening while the student articulates her message" (371). In this light, the tutor is like a voice coach, working to bring out the student's best work. The tutor is a guide, but the student must go through the process of writing and self-discovery in order to craft a beautiful writerly voice.

In "Our Little Secret," Boquet acknowledges the role of the center in this process, quoting Stanley, who urges us to see the writing center as "'com[ing] very close to meeting the ends of true education' by encouraging students to be independent writers and thinkers" (467). The goals of "true education" then appear to be the development of the self and the voice that can take place in the writing center. This process therefore creates good writers, not just a good written product.

The Peer Response Workshop

While the writing center tutorial aims to shape the writer, the peer response workshop works to shape both the writer and the critical reader. In this setting, students have to work together and, as a result, be prepared to respond to varying evaluations of their work. Each student voice is heard and pushed to be more articulate. The individual voice then changes a bit in this setting, as students collaborate--like picking up an interesting accent after exposure to it. The student voice within the peer response network relies not only on individual reflection and exploration but also upon collective discovery.

The Student-Teacher Conference

Many of the same voice issues exist in the student-teacher conference as in the writing center tutorial. As with the tutor, there is a risk that the teacher's voice can dominate the student's, replacing the act of discovery with regurgitation. The conference is a tool for instructors to both teach individually and to hear about the students' writing process. I could not help but think of Berlin's social-epistemic rhetoric as I read Black's thoughts on discovery within the student-teacher conference, realizing that all of her reflections were "constantly being socially constructed" (18). In the conference, the teacher must work to encourage the development of the student's voice, whether or not it is a social construction (and my expressionist side certainly wants to say no).



Voices I am joining this week:

Harris, Muriel. “Collaboration Is Not Collaboration Is Not Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups.” College Composition and Communication 43.3 (October 1992): 369-83.

Boquet, Elizabeth. “‘Our Little Secret’: A History of Writing Centers, Pre- to Post-Open Admissions. College Composition and Communication 50.3 (1999): 463-482.

Thonus, Terese. “What Are the Differences?: Tutor Interaction with First- and Second-Language Writers.” Journal of Second Language Writing 13 (2004): 227-242.

Carter, Shannon and Donna Dunbar-Odom. “The Converging Literacies Center: An Integrated Model for Writing Programs.” Kairos 14.1 (2009). http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/14.1/praxis/Carter_Dunbar-Odom/index.html

Black, Laurel Johnson. “Conversation, Teaching, and Points in Between.” Between Talk and Teaching: Reconsidering the Writing Conference. Logan, UT: Utah State UP, 1998. 11-37. (library eBook)