Week of January 18
Day One: What is academic writing? What isn't? Some collaborative writing. Meet with your pandemic partners for today. Collaborate on a joint Google document (keep it SHORT...no more than a short paragraph about each question) and post it to the draft exchange folder in Google Drive. Title it "Group # Date" and answer these questions.
What are some common characteristics of academic writing you all agree upon? Why? (might be a bullet list)
What are three things (and no more than three) that disqualify writing as academic? Why? (this probably should be a paragraph)
Where do members of the group disagree? Why? (paragraph, clearly)
Finally, where did you each learn these things? How? (paragraph again)
Here are my still skeletal notes for Day One.
Day Two: Do not write commentary but instead, Read "What if Drugs Were Legal?" (make notes about the writer's priorities for revision to bring to class, but there is no need for formal commentary yet). With the same groups from Day One, collaborate on a Google Document to answer this question:
"You get 'Nancy's' draft in the Writing Center. You don't have time to write commentary, but clearly she needs a sense of priorities. What are three things (and no more than three)for her to address when she revises this? And what is a positive aspect of her draft that your group could agree merits cautiously directed praise?"
NOTE WELL: You'll learn from me that the words and phrases such as "excellent," "good job," "great," "perfect," "strong thesis," "clear understanding of the material," and similar are forbidden, because only professors can make such judgments. Instead, as a reader, react personally. What did you like, what did she teach you, and WHY?
Week of January 25
Day One: Glaser, Ch. 3. "Voices You Want to Listen To." Just read it; no need to do any of his exercises. Style presi
Day Two: Bring in a short piece of your writing that you are willing to share; it should reflect your own sense of your stylistic habits as a writer. We will do some work with them together.
Before we work in groups, we will discuss this piece, "Please, Stop Printing Unicorns," by visiting (and Nebula-Award-winning) writer Fran Wilde, who held a workshop on voice in 2019 for a few Consultants. Fran is a frequent visitor to my Science Fiction class. Make notes about her stylistic techniques. Check the comments from readers, too...in on the joke and a refreshing change from the usually factious NYT commentary section. Our groups will have some fun comparing Wilde's stylistic tricks to their own favored elements of style.
Week of February 1
Day One: "Voices That Put You Off." Reading from Glaser, J. Ch. 4, Understanding Style.
First short graded response due by class time. Upload it to the draft exchange. Topic:
In no fewer than 500 and no more than 1000 words, share your story of what it is you find distasteful / boring / unpleasant in academic writing. If possible, reflect on how writing at UR has worked against your own development as the sort of writer you'd like to be. No professorial names, please, but you are invited to make this personal and "I" is most welcome.
Audience: me and your classmates (we'll share in class and do some checks for focus and evidence):
Secretly record your own bias about the topic. Did writing about it disturb you? Bore you? What could make you write less than objectively about this?
Now read both of your partners' responses.
Find what you think to be the most important point made by your pandemic partners.
Match that up with their intentions. Do they match what you found to be most important? If not, find out why.
ID any digressions, any taint from what could be a bias about the topic. Then find out your partners' biases.
NB: I'm having my FYS students conduct a similar exercise now. Since you'll be helping them before too long, this is a great way to learn about how I teach writing to them.
Day Two: Bartholomae, D. "Inventing the University" (at our e-reserve). Workshop with some FYS examples.
As we read this work, think about it: Do you find yourself using terms that Glaser would describe as "professional professional," such as "in today's world" or "the world of technology" or "everday person"? Think for a moment why they make no sense. So why do writers use them?
Friday, noon: Revisions to the response from Day One due. I'll begin grading then.
Week of February 8: A Pedagogy of Error
Day One: No class meeting. Sleep in! Read Bartholomae, D. "The Study of Error" (at our e-reserve), my The Art of Good Commentary, and this essay for a workshop on Day Two.
Day Two: Planning to write commentary: an in-class workshop.
Keep in mind that you will give written comments to a writer in person (or via e-mail / Google Doc) only when you meet. Never beforehand! These comments provide both a script for the most important issues and a reminder of tasks for the writer to take home. My comments, as a professor, tend also to justify a grade: you need to concern yourself there! In class:
As a group, decide on no more than four priorities for revision. With three of you, there should be no tie votes. Perhaps you might begin by each stating her or his biggest priority for Ned. If you agree, great. Then do another.
If you need advice, return to the main Zoom room or message me.
Next, collaborate to write a short reflection (a paragraph should do) about any patterns of error you spot with Ned, any extra things you'd keep in private notes to guide you during the conference with Ned, such as ("I'd get to his overuse of is/are/was/were if we have time!") or that you'd bring up if Ned engaged well in the meeting and understood what he needed to do.
In that paragraph, also speculate why Ned's patterns of error might have occurred. Remember, you would not know for certain until you met him to ask why (using Barthomae's error-analysis technique).
Next, in a separate paragraph (as if written TO Ned) compose together an introduction like the one I wrote for "Nancy" at "The Art of Good Commentary." Do not write any margin comments at this time for Ned. You will do so later, after I leave commentary on your group document.
We will reconvene as a group to discuss where the three groups found priorities and how they employed a voice professional but friendly enough to win Ned's confidence without giving him a false sense of security about his work (thus no "great work!" or "clear understanding of Neil Armstorng" that only a professor could make. Instead "I learned a lot about..." provides your perspective, as Ned's reader).
You'll have until the first day of class next week to collaborate on one set of comments, in the margin and at the end, on Ned's paper. I will grade that; expect to have to re-do it until everyone gets things right :)
Week of February 15: Why a Writing Center? Where Do We Start?
Day One: North, S. "The Idea of a Writing Center" (via JSTOR--if you are off campus, you must connect via VPN to see this piece) . Group Commentary Due by start of class, on this essay we discussed last week. We will discuss, as a group, perceptions of our Center.
Also sign up for a shift at the Center, just one hour. Here's the apprentice schedule. You'll begin observing next Monday.
Day Two: Ice STORM! As I spray starter fluid into the carburetor and try to start my generator while cussing like a sailor, UR will delay opening. Go dream your dreamy dreams! The least you can do, by Sunday night...
I'd like you to help Ava, my FYS student, with some feedback on her introduction. I like it so far, but perhaps we can help her with word choice, voice, and other areas. If you simply like it, direct that praise from a reader's point of view. I'll put a copy here. Each group of three should collaborate. It's due Tuesday for her, so please get me something back from the group by Sunday night.
Week of February 22: Setting Priorities in a Session Begin Observations at Writing Center
Day One: Essid, J. "Extending An Alternative: Writing Centers & Curricular Change" (download from this UR Link) & Shaparenko, B. "Focus on Focus: How to Facilitate Discussion in a Peer Group" (at our e-reserve). More discussion about what a Center can and cannot be.
Day Two: Workshop with They Say / I Say, Ch. 1 "They Say" (pay particular attention to the concept of "Return Sentences" (Graff & Birkenstein 27-28). No need to do the exercises at the end of the chapter. We will apply the templates using work from my FYS class:
Each group of three should pick one draft from the lists and copy it to a new Google Doc in our course's draft exchange folder
Don't worry about thesis or answering the question, today.
Write margin comments to us, not the writer: focus on the writer's use of return sentences and transitions.
Consider how well the writer has emphasized the "I Say" in ways that Graff & Birkenstein recommend.
Comment only on these and we'll share them with the entire class. I'll enable screen sharing so one person from each group can share the doc and walk us through what the group did.
Week of March 1: Failure, Attentiveness, Technique
Day One: Sherwood, S. "Apprenticed to Failure" (at our e-reserve) & Santa, T. “Listening in/to the Writing Center: Backchannel and Gaze.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v40/40.9-10.pdf (look for pages 2-9).
Day Two: For class, read this handout for my FYS class about Commonplaces v. Vagueness. Also read Lanham's Paramedic Method at Writer's Web but beware of going too far with it. We will workshop a draft from the current FYS class that needs help with tightening the prose. Don't write commentary on the draft or focus on big-picture items. Make a group document in our draft exchange and note patterns of error related to vague wording. Focus on instances where you lose the writer's train of thought; those end up hurting analysis, focus, and organization after all.
Week of March 8: Back To First Year!
Day One: Read this excerpt from Hjortshoj, K. The Transition to College Writing. Group discussion to return to our staring point: Are you an Eduardo or Marie? What is academic writing? Has your definition changed since 383 began? If so, how? What was the most important lesson you learned between high school & college?
Before observing Raven Baugh's work, look at her schedule and e-mail me your preferred time. The slots on the sheet are for FYS signups. Pick a time when an FYS student has signed up, please.
Day Two: Roleplay workshop with a "difficult student." Details:
Emily, Elle, and Adam will roleplay our writers.
Meet the "writer" on your pandemic team, who has been briefed in secret. The other two team-members will work as a team a the Writing Center, with no advance warning about the paper or assignment.
After helping with the paper for 30 minutes, spend 15 composing an online summary with me noted as Professor.
We'll then gather to see how you did, and if any strategies from the readings below helped (or hindered!).
Read these short pieces to prepare: Moore, A. “’But I’m Already Done:’ Early Closure and the Student Writer.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v38/38.7-8.pdf (look for pages 14-15) & Janney, A. “Flexing Nonverbal Muscles: The Role of Body Language in the Writing Center.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v36/36.1-2.pdf (look for pages 14-15).
Later in the day I will e-mail you links to drafts for the FYS students you'll help with Writing Consultant Raven Baugh.
Starting after Day Two: Observe FYS meetings with my class and Raven (you will do this in addition to your Center shift). Here is the essay topic in FYS and my grading rubric for them.
Week of March 15: Diversity in the Writing Center
Day One: Thompson, J. “Beyond Fixing Today’s Paper: Promoting Metacognition and Writing Development in the Tutorial through Self-Questioning.”https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v23/23.6.pdf (look for pages 1-6). In-class brainstorming about how to foster metacognitive work beyond my heuristics of "what is the most important thing you want to say?" and "Why does your conclusion matter?"
Day Two: Lee, K. "Black in the Writing Center" (at our e-reserve). Bring to class notes to share about how we can adapt to diversity in our work as Consultants? I'm less interested in responses to the real problems of systematic racism on campus than I am in how we can be inclusive and encourage diversity in our work with writers, by deed and word. We'll have an open discussion based on your notes and share the results with Dr. Lee (a former writing student of mine at UR, more than a decade ago).
Part two of class will have you tackle a paper on a senstive topic. See it here and some advice about what to change in commentary, thanks to Raven Baugh's feedback on your work with her and my FYS students.
Week of March 22: Diversity in the Writing Center
Day One: Davila, B. “Rewriting Race in the Writing Center.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v31/31.1.pdf (article begins on first page).
"Teach in" about our practices at the Center regarding race and identity. What role can/do we play in UR's ongoing discussion of disaffiliation by black students and practices that exclude students of color, as well as other marginalized groups? Read more about Robert Ryland at https://president.richmond.edu/inclusive-history/ryland/index.html and Douglas Southall Freeman and The Lost Cause narrative about the Civil War at: https://memory.richmond.edu/freeman
Day Two: Check my edits of the document on diversity that we prepared. Are we ready to share it with the committee on general education as well as a broader audience?
Rafoth, B. et. al. “Sex in the center: Gender differences in tutorial interactions.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v24/24.3.pdf and Johnson, M. “Different Words, Different Worlds.” Writing Lab Newsletter, vol. 24, no.5, Jan. 2000, pp.14-16, https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v24/24.5.pdf Commentary for Sensitive Topic Paper due by the start of class. In class, we will work on a document together about gender & writing teaching/tutoring on campus.
Week of March 29: Taking Care of Yourself
Day One: Parsons, K. “Just Say 'No': Setting Emotional Boundaries in the Writing Center is a Practice in Self-Care.” https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v44/44.5-6.pdf (look for pages 26-29).
Day Two: "The Fix-it Shop" from Training for Tough Tutorials. Read Siobhan's paper and watch the videos (click a flow-chart box to watch each short segment; they are laid out by good/poor choices). Consider what other courses of action might have been open to Luke, as well as how our readings so far could apply (such as exercises to give Siobhan, ways to make a representative correction, words to use in replying to her requests).
In class, we'll collaborate in groups on a response (don't fill out a response form until we meet in class).
Week of April 5: Intercultural Rhetoric
Day One: Read over the assignment for the FYS Research Proposal. After discussion of it, we will be working with 2 ESL essays. I will provide them at the start of class.
Day Two: Harris, M, & Silva, T. "Tutoring ESL students: Issues and Options" (at our e-reserve) & Enders, D. "The Idea Check: Changing ESL Students' Use of the Writing Center." https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v37/37.9-10.pdf (look for pages 6-9). Read Rita Chen's paper but no need to do more than take a few notes about it before doing group work in class.
Week of April 12: Intercultural Rhetoric
Day One: Mosher, D., Granroth, D., Hicks, T. "Creating a Common Ground with ESL Writers" https://wlnjournal.org/archives/v24/24.7.pdf (starts on page 1) & Sullivan, P, Zhang, Y,, and Zheng, F. "College Writing in China and America: A Modest and Humble Conversation, with Writing Samples." https://www.jstor.org/stable/43490754 (dial in via VPN if you are off campus to see this piece). In class, I want you to return to the work done last time for Rita Chen's paper. Add to your group document notes about how Mosher, Ganroth & Hicks and Sullivan, Zhang & Zheng's articles might influence the way in which you write commentary for Rita. We'll work on that together in the next class.
Day Two: Workshop with Rita's paper. In your groups that have been keeping notes, our guide to commentary to prepare a set of remarks for Rita.
After 5pm, April 15th: Draft of Research Proposal from FYS class will be sent to you by e-mail. Here's the schedule of sign-ups to meet FYS students.
Week of April 19: Writing in the Disciplines
Day One: Graff & Birkenstein, Ch. 15 "Analyze This: Writing in the Social Sciences" (chapter by Erin Ackerman) and from Ch. 18, Cullington, M. "Does Texting Affect Writing?" Workshop with Cullington's essay.
Day Two: Writing in Business, for specific audiences by Consultant Sally Hu, Common mistakes for beginners, Getting Started with writing in Accounting by Consultant Sally Hu. Workshop with examples. Commentary Due for Rita Chen.
Week of April 26: Writing in the Disciplines
Day One: Writing in the Natural Sciences
Writing for general audiences: Rread Mann, A. "So Much Hinges on the Existence of Ancient Black Holes."
Qs for groups:
What did Mann teach you that you never knew before?
How does Mann use metaphor and other techniques associated with other disciplines to explain difficult ideas?
What questions do you still have after reading the article?
Writing for specialists: from Writer's Web read Writing Consultant Shannon Biello's Writing in Chemistry (focus on her pages "Introduction," "Formatting a Lab Report," and "Terminology. Just skim over "Comparing Biology & Chemistry," which we will use in class, to answer these questions:
Where do the writers of the biology and chemistry reports speak to a specialist as if speaking to a peer?
Can you determine what the "so what" is for each report?
Final Day of Spring Classes, T April 27.
May 5, 5pm by e-mail: Final reflective essay due. This will give you a chance to sum up what you have learned and what remains your biggest concern as you begin the job in the Fall.