Jacqueline Lebron Macdonal
ENG 4070
Dr. Sally Chandler
Topic: Effective questioning in a tutoring session.
I. INTRODUCTION
Effective questioning during a tutoring session in higher education between peers can have both positive results and a tremendous learning experience. Although notable authors will still argue that writing centers are moving closer to finding the right formula to one-on-one peer tutoring, as my study conveys—there is no right method. Across the country, universities nationwide use the model of peer tutoring as a backbone of their writing centers. Even though many students, even within the institutions see writing centers as a fix up shop, to my surprise these human experiments in our case studies prove just the opposite. Even so with various methods of training, workshops, and mentors, writing center coaches in the case studies prove that there is no one answers on how to tutor students.
Effective questioning is a tool used by coaches to enhance, assist, and guide the peer-to-peer tutoring session; yet by this method alone, a tutoring session alone cannot co-exist. The case studies also prove that there is no one answer to each specific scenario imaginable. Thus, effective questioning does allow to develop a rapport with the student and using other tools, as tutoring moves, body language, and intuition, those same questions can be used during the session to promote a more productive, and effective session. Many notable authors have proved that effective questions do work in a coach-to-writer aspect, where college students especially are involved, relevant information on effective questions has been passed around, workshops on the subject given, and through my case study observations, the same will be proven. Yet also taking into consideration, that as other literary analysis has already proven, the answers are inconclusive and more human experiments are thoroughly needed.
“We train our tutors to have interpersonal skills and a toolbox of strategies that will give them the versatility to move across no-repeat sessions. …Chaos theory tells us not to even expect repetition in a system that’s as complex as tutoring writing.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 27) When this chapter talks about the tutoring writing, and how chaos can lead to accomplishment, an example is given how a student tutoring session went from undetermined to a string of writing ideas that eventually lead to published work from the author. “When questioned about what he liked, he replied, “WWF wrestling.” The tutor said, “Why not write about that?” And the writer did, for the next nine months of the school year, producing the “Wednesday wrestling weekly” [the student’s in-school publication distributed] every week. A conference with the student which lasted less than a minute, led to nine months of a writing accomplishment [for the student].” (McAndrew & Reigstad 27)
So we see that not only effective questioning can have an extended impact on a student but prolong the career of the writer for long periods of time. And thus proves that this method of effective questioning still promotes a better outlook of himself/herself as a writer. “Tutoring is not a matter of applying preformed thoughts and actions to the present situation as much as it is of developing a repertoire of interpersonal and pedagogical skills that put the tutor in a general state of readiness.” McAndrew & Reigstad 27)
II. Literature Review—this provides an outlook of the literature read by notable authors in the Writing Center circuit which provided much after thought on my subject matter: effective questioning during a tutoring session.
"Allison waltzes into the Writing Center. With her nose in the air, she lowers herself reluctantly into a chair and gingerly hands over her paper. As the tutor reads her work. Allison asks obnoxiously, "Are you qualified to read my paper?" As the tutor makes suggestions, Allison raises her eyebrows and defends her paper, dismissing every word. At this point, several thoughts fly through the tutor's head. What's the best way to handle a student like Allison? How do you stay collected and still attempt to help her?" (Shaw 12) Can effective questioning work in this scenario? How can that be accomplished?
"Nearly every tutor encounters students that are so apathetic that they seem frightening, annoying, infuriating, or all of the above. Icy students definitely pose a unique challenge to tutors. Regardless of the type, though, tutors should make an effort to both help the student and save their own sanity!" (Shaw 12) Even though she starts off her article with an arrogant, impulsive student, the example the writer is trying to demonstrate is that, many times through rhetoric and questioning, a student's attitude and session will be turned around, and as a coach, one's cool is not lost, in order to continue helping the student. I wasn't sure what "icy" meant but after careful review, understand that the author meant hard to break like ice. Thus meaning working with a difficult person in a tutoring session and insinuating the student has the attitude of an ice queen (ill mannered and obnoxious even though she is the one needing the help, not the coach.) This scenario proved that after the tutor knows to ask the right questions and with the right training provided to the coach, the student has a fighting change at definitely being helped.
The review goes on to pinpoint (3) three options in handling such a student.
"One option for the tutor is to try to melt the student immediately. After opening with friendly small-talk, pointed question like, "What can I help you with today?" or "How would you like to revise your paper and make it better?" can encourage the student to open up and get involved in the session." (Shaw 12) As you will see further along in my case studies, these type of questions opened the session on a positive note.
"Another option for tutors is to make an effort to help icy students without doing anything extra. Tutors must be friendly, ask questions, and read the paper with care, but limit the amount of suggestions: an attitude problem does not make for receptive students!" (Shaw 12) Also you will see in the observations that the coach was friendly and read the paper with the student on several occasions.
"At the end of the session, tutors should smile and thank the student for coming. They can also remind the student of the other resources the writing center had to offer. Handouts, written-only feedback, and a website may help the student in the future and push him or her to continue using the writing center. Encouraging the student to return helps to end a less-than-ideal session on a positive note." (Shaw 12) Having other sources, like a human contact, the internet, intellectual reading material or just friendly advice assists the student open up during the session going hand in hand with the “what looks like” carefree conversation turned into effective questioning and in turn a triumphant session.
"For tutors, sometimes the greatest challenge can be to remember not to take anything personally!" (Shaw 12) Many students will give you an attitude, if they don’t understand the material or just out of frustration, coaches need to keep in mind that through the question and answer period you allow the person to vent and negate their emotional downfall.
"The point is, Allison may or may not be open to help. Maybe she was forced by a teacher to see a tutor, or perhaps she's afraid of writing since people have been overly critical of her work in the past. Tutors have zero control over these factors. All they can do is be patient, make an effort, and let it all go at the end." (Shaw 12) Effective questioning is a tool that may help all types of students and assist coaches to benefit from this powerful strategy.Basic Minimalist Tutoring
"Sit beside the student, not across a desk--that is where job interviewers and other authorities sit. This first signal is important for showing that you are not the person "in charge" of their paper." (Brooks 221) "Have the student read the paper aloud to you, and suggest that he hold a pencil while doing so. ...this will accomplish three things [:]" (Brooks 222)
"One option for the tutor is to try to melt the student immediately. After opening with friendly small-talk, pointed question like, "What can I help you with today?" or "How would you like to revise your paper and make it better?" can encourage the student to open up and get involved in the session." (Shaw 12) As you will see further along in my case studies, these type of questions opened the session on a positive note.
"Another option for tutors is to make an effort to help icy students without doing anything extra. Tutors must be friendly, ask questions, and read the paper with care, but limit the amount of suggestions: an attitude problem does not make for receptive students!" (Shaw 12) Also you will see in the observations that the coach was friendly and read the paper with the student on several occasions.
"At the end of the session, tutors should smile and thank the student for coming. They can also remind the student of the other resources the writing center had to offer. Handouts, written-only feedback, and a website may help the student in the future and push him or her to continue using the writing center. Encouraging the student to return helps to end a less-than-ideal session on a positive note." (Shaw 12) Having other sources, like a human contact, the internet, intellectual reading material or just friendly advice assists the student open up during the session going hand in hand with the “what looks like” carefree conversation turned into effective questioning and in turn a triumphant session.
"For tutors, sometimes the greatest challenge can be to remember not to take anything personally!" (Shaw 12) Many students will give you an attitude, if they don’t understand the material or just out of frustration, coaches need to keep in mind that through the question and answer period you allow the person to vent and negate their emotional downfall.
"The point is, Allison may or may not be open to help. Maybe she was forced by a teacher to see a tutor, or perhaps she's afraid of writing since people have been overly critical of her work in the past. Tutors have zero control over these factors. All they can do is be patient, make an effort, and let it all go at the end." (Shaw 12) Effective questioning is a tool that may help all types of students and assist coaches to benefit from this powerful strategy.Basic Minimalist Tutoring
"Sit beside the student, not across a desk--that is where job interviewers and other authorities sit. This first signal is important for showing that you are not the person "in charge" of their paper." (Brooks 221) "Have the student read the paper aloud to you, and suggest that he hold a pencil while doing so. ...this will accomplish three things [:]" (Brooks 222)
· "It will bypass that awkward first few moments of the session. This will actively involve the student in the paper. I find that many students are able to find and correct usage errors, awkward wording, even logic problems without prompting from me.
· This will help establish the sometimes slippery principle that good writing should sound good." (Brooks 222)
"I am convinced that if you follow these...steps,... you will have served the student better than you would if you 'edited' his paper." (Brooks 222)
Advanced Minimalist Tutoring
"As always, the main goal is to keep the student active and involved in the paper. I have three suggestions: “(Brooks 222)
Advanced Minimalist Tutoring
"As always, the main goal is to keep the student active and involved in the paper. I have three suggestions: “(Brooks 222)
· "Concentrate on success in the paper, not failure. Make it a practice to find something nice to say about every paper, no matter how hard you have to search. ...But by pointing, out to a student when he is doing something right, you reinforce behavior that my have started as felicitous accident.
· Get the student to talk. ...When there are sentence-level problems, make the student find and (if possible) correct them. When something is unclear, don't say, "This is unclear"; rather say, "What do you mean by this?" Instead of saying, "You don’t have a thesis," ask the student," Can you show me your thesis?" "What's your reason for putting Q before N?" is more effective than "N should have come before Q." It is much easier to point out mistakes than it is to point the student toward finding them, but your questions will do much more to establish the student as sole owner of the paper and you as merely an interested outsider.
· If you have time during your session, give the student a discrete writing task, then go away for a few minutes and let him do it." (Brooks 223)
For example, if the student has to complete a task, have him write a blurb or a mere continuation of what they are missing in their paper or thesis. This will allow the student to start thinking of how he/she wants to direct this paper and take a look back at what thoughts they want to relay to their audience. Then what Brooks suggests is to leave the student and his/her thoughts and revisit the scenario the student is being confronted with. This type of confrontational or pressure cooker writing results in most writers, but caution would take heed for ESL or students with disabilities, where as their function and performance are separate examples altogether. "Any experienced writer knows that a deadline is the ultimate energizer. Creating that energy for a small part of the paper is almost the best favor you can do for a student." (Brooks 223) Although keeping in mind that ESL students and those with disability not only learn and deal with issues at their own pace, yet brings about another issues altogether, that which in turn was not the focus of this study.
Defensive Minimalist Tutoring
"There are many students who fight a non-editing tutor all the way. They know you know how to fix their paper, and that is what they came to have done. Some find ingenious ways of forcing you into the role of editor: some withdraw from the paper, leaving it in front of you; some refuse to write anything down until you tell them word for word what to write; others will keep asking you questions ("What should I do here? Is this part okay?"). Don't underestimate the abilities of these students; they woo you into submission if they can." (Brooks 223)
"To fight back, I would suggest we learn some techniques from the experts: the uncooperative students themselves [:] Borrow student language [,] … [b]e completely honest with the student who is giving you a hard time. If she says, “What should I do here?” you can say in a friendly, non-threatening way, “I can’t tell you that—… “I don’t know—it’s your paper.” (Brooks 223)
This type of tutoring definitely happens with the fix-it kid, and the confrontational student, either approach assists on dealing with these types of circumstances. It allows the coach to assess the situation, and use the right questioning to combat the suddenly confused syndrome student wanting the tutor to write the paper. These are great pointers from the expert, and I will certainly take this into consideration when peer tutoring.
“This approach ensures that the entire tutorial process is a student-centered and student-oriented. The aim is to promote self-learning, not to have a tutor rewrite or edit students’ work.” (Fanning 11)
Effective Questions and What works
"A student wrote about a lacquered wooden box that her grandfather handmade for her grandmother. The piece opened with a detailed description of the box, talked about how her grandfather had made it, then described how much her grandfather and grandmother were in love. The piece finished with how her grandmother uses the box today. The tutor drew out to find which of the four issues she really wanted to foreground. ... Once the tutor helped her clarify that showing the box was important, he moved on to development strategies to help the student develop her description of the box so that she would not feel the need to fill the piece out with unrelated information." (McAndrew & Reigstad 45)
"Effective tutorials on thesis/focus are a combination of using a strategy and conversing about the results of that strategy." (McAndrew & Reigstad 45) “There is an overriding priority of concerns in most tutoring sessions. Since all tutoring sessions are geared toward improving a piece of writing within a reasonable time limit and the constraints of the writer’s energy, more serious problems should be addressed first.” Although the basic structure of most tutorial sessions is similar, every encounter with a writer demands an individualized response by the tutor.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 25) This leads to identifying Student Centered, Collaborative, and Teacher centered strategies within the questioning period of the session. Of course other details like body language and interaction are important during the process of this ordeal, yet the focus in these studies will be effective questioning back-and-forth between tutor and writer.
Effective Questions and What works
"A student wrote about a lacquered wooden box that her grandfather handmade for her grandmother. The piece opened with a detailed description of the box, talked about how her grandfather had made it, then described how much her grandfather and grandmother were in love. The piece finished with how her grandmother uses the box today. The tutor drew out to find which of the four issues she really wanted to foreground. ... Once the tutor helped her clarify that showing the box was important, he moved on to development strategies to help the student develop her description of the box so that she would not feel the need to fill the piece out with unrelated information." (McAndrew & Reigstad 45)
"Effective tutorials on thesis/focus are a combination of using a strategy and conversing about the results of that strategy." (McAndrew & Reigstad 45) “There is an overriding priority of concerns in most tutoring sessions. Since all tutoring sessions are geared toward improving a piece of writing within a reasonable time limit and the constraints of the writer’s energy, more serious problems should be addressed first.” Although the basic structure of most tutorial sessions is similar, every encounter with a writer demands an individualized response by the tutor.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 25) This leads to identifying Student Centered, Collaborative, and Teacher centered strategies within the questioning period of the session. Of course other details like body language and interaction are important during the process of this ordeal, yet the focus in these studies will be effective questioning back-and-forth between tutor and writer.
“Tutoring, like writing, is a process. It is an activity that consists primarily of inquiry and discussion with an emphasis on encouraging students to discover and solve their own problems.” (Fanning 1) What most authors will agree is that “posing questions” is an efficient tactic of peer tutoring sessions. With knowing what questions to ask and how to get the student to reveal those answers is key to a successful peer to peer relationship and conference. It is better to ask the right questions in qualitative effort than to focus on how many questions posed and lead to ineffectiveness. “What questions should be asked to assist students along the road [?] … How…can students be helped without compromising the integrity of their work? It is an interesting dilemma which can solve itself if effective questions are asked in the tutorial session.” (Fanning 1) III. Methodology
Definition: “The study of the principles underlying the organization of the various sciences and the conduct of scientific inquiry.” (Dictionary web)
The research conducted was obtained in various sessions performed at Kean University Writing Center in Union, NJ in hourly increment where college students would come to obtain tutorship from exemplary peers hired by the writing lab to assist their peers with college papers, thesis’s, research work, and other numerous literary reviews.
All types of students were observed who came to the Writing Center for assistance: ESL students, freshman, juniors, English majors, History majors, or just walk in students needing a little help with revising a paper already handed in and graded. Some had their thoughts on paper yet needed guidance with organization. Others worked with the coach on opening their thoughts, while many students focused on getting their ideas into the open or jot down clues to their writing agenda.
Peer coaches work in shifts depending on their work schedules in combination with their class schedules. Graduate Assistants provide the supervisory management to their peer coaches and/or guidance. In their off time, students make appointments with any tutor available or ask for a specific coach. The walk-in appointments are treated similarly, just that if one makes an appointment at an earlier time, an email shoots through the system immediately in reference to the appointment made. Then casual reminders flood your inbox with emails of the peer tutoring day to come.
The student walks through the door with the sign reading “Writing Center
After the tutoring time begins the sessions run smoothly and no one seems to mind the open space with all the tables and chairs. As a researcher, I would sit a full table away to provide comfort space and privacy to both the tutor and student. Permission slips would be signed by all parties involved for any type of liability issues, and I personally promised all the writers their names would be omitted from my analysis. After agreeing to be observed and analyzed, the sessions would begin as if I weren’t even there. Many hardly acknowledged me, until I thanked them at the end. This proves that human experiments can definitely work, because in the name of education, people are willing to study and be studied.
After all, it’s a higher education, college students are looking to obtain. The methodology was simply watching the sessions, and only being an observing researcher taking notes. Then as part of our assignments we posted an on-going blog of our observations, and for our research paper (this paper here) we were permitted to borrow other researchers’ observations. Although this was an option, the case studies conducted let me draw conclusions of my own observations and pair it with notable research already conducted with known authors such as Brooks and McAndrew & Reignstad.
“Peer tutoring is one form of peer-mediated learning that is occasionally
used in schools. Research shows that tutoring is an effective method of learning for both tutor and tutee (for reviews, see Allen, 1976; Good and Brophy, 1987). Moreover, recent studies have used specific tutorial arrangements, tutor-tutee roles, and tutorial procedures to promote success in tutoring (e.g., Fantuzzo et al., 1989; Fuchs, Fuchs, Bentz, Phillips and Hamlett, 1994; Graesser and Person, 1994; Greenwood et al., 1989; Kuti, Hinton, Fitch, and Semb, 1992; Lepper, Aspinwall, Mumme, and Chabay, 1990). These tutorial structures influence how partners in a tutoring pair interact with each other, and that interaction in turn influences learning.” (King 61)
IV. Data: Research Analysis
A. Case Study 1: The fix-it Kid scenario proves that while Writing Centers are trying to aim at producing better writers, once in a while a student will walk in with totally different intentions. And here is a perfect example of how the “fix-it kid” received proper guidance through intuitive questioning by the coach, and hence assisted in verbalizing how a college paper should be structured. Although the freshman student did not know what to expect, Coach Maria is an exemplary model of how a tutor educates the writer on how a writing center is structured without once talking about the writing philosophy of such.
IV. Data: Research Analysis
A. Case Study 1: The fix-it Kid scenario proves that while Writing Centers are trying to aim at producing better writers, once in a while a student will walk in with totally different intentions. And here is a perfect example of how the “fix-it kid” received proper guidance through intuitive questioning by the coach, and hence assisted in verbalizing how a college paper should be structured. Although the freshman student did not know what to expect, Coach Maria is an exemplary model of how a tutor educates the writer on how a writing center is structured without once talking about the writing philosophy of such.
The effective questioning certainly helped this particular student who wanted "to fix" her paper but deep down I know it assisted the tutor tackle future fix-it kids and learn from this experience. The questioning did not only co-exist with the coach’s gut feeling of where to lead the student, rather be able to quickly access the student’s aptitude and give them proper feedback.
“The typical session begins with students explaining the details of their assignment and elaborating on their approach to the topic. The questioning [usually] begins immediately.” (Fanning 2) Yet for the fix-it kid, her purpose and goal were different from the tutor’s. The effective questioning was the ultimate piece for her toolkit to assist the student.
Case Study 1: Session 1: October 19, 2010
THE FIX IT KID = Teacher-Centered Tutoring
Coach: female (Maria)*
Student: female (Curly)*
*= real names have been made up to protect individual's privacy.
The student walked in coming from an English 1030 class, saying, "I need to fix my paper."
The coach eased into conversation, and began asking what she can do to help. Yet the student was persistent, and said "I need to fix it, need to rewrite for tomorrow"
Coach Maria: "You want to read [it] together," the coach said pointing to a paper already corrected with markings all over the copy.
The tutor came closer to student by strolling her seat closer to the student. They started to read together the highlighted comments of what the student's professor wrote. "Curly" became frustrated by putting her hand on her head and sighed. The student took out a pencil.
Coach: "She [professor] wants details." Student seemed a little frustrated but as the session continued writing paper aloud, "You're good..."
Coach: "What are you trying to say?"
Student: "What do you mean normal?
Coach: "Why don't you say:"In that way..." and motioned for student to fill in the blanks on the paper.
When the student resisted, and said "Okay," yet her body language with her hand on her head with the elbow to the table mostly said the contrary and that she was not comfortable with what the tutor was saying. Then the coach said, "Your paper...your choice...the way you said it, it's not the way you meant it..."
With this tutorly move, the coach was able to get the student talking about what the student's paper was all about and what she [the writer] was trying to get across.
Good questions overall was seen in this session--with the student resistant at first, because the tutor's initial reaction was the thought that the tutor was going to fix her paper. In not doing so, the session was an effective one, allowing the tutor to control the progress of the session.
Then at this point the tutor got student talking about what she meant and what is she trying to say?
Coach: female (Maria)*
Student: female (Curly)*
*= real names have been made up to protect individual's privacy.
The student walked in coming from an English 1030 class, saying, "I need to fix my paper."
The coach eased into conversation, and began asking what she can do to help. Yet the student was persistent, and said "I need to fix it, need to rewrite for tomorrow"
Coach Maria: "You want to read [it] together," the coach said pointing to a paper already corrected with markings all over the copy.
The tutor came closer to student by strolling her seat closer to the student. They started to read together the highlighted comments of what the student's professor wrote. "Curly" became frustrated by putting her hand on her head and sighed. The student took out a pencil.
Coach: "She [professor] wants details." Student seemed a little frustrated but as the session continued writing paper aloud, "You're good..."
Coach: "What are you trying to say?"
Student: "What do you mean normal?
Coach: "Why don't you say:"In that way..." and motioned for student to fill in the blanks on the paper.
When the student resisted, and said "Okay," yet her body language with her hand on her head with the elbow to the table mostly said the contrary and that she was not comfortable with what the tutor was saying. Then the coach said, "Your paper...your choice...the way you said it, it's not the way you meant it..."
With this tutorly move, the coach was able to get the student talking about what the student's paper was all about and what she [the writer] was trying to get across.
Good questions overall was seen in this session--with the student resistant at first, because the tutor's initial reaction was the thought that the tutor was going to fix her paper. In not doing so, the session was an effective one, allowing the tutor to control the progress of the session.
Then at this point the tutor got student talking about what she meant and what is she trying to say?
“You cold start by,” said the tutor and began to explain to the student what components were missing in her paper.
Then the tutor began with the questioning again: “Is that what you want to say?”
“Yeah!” the student responded.
Tutor: “We generally don’t use that in writing—its like when we say “What’s up? We don’t put that in a paper, but we use it to say hi to someone.”
Maria started to explain to Curly bringing about a conversation on talking vs. writing. This move was done in a very subtle manner.
Student said, “Okay.” Student appeared to read aloud her paper and while tutor was guiding her through proper format, grammar, and English prose writing.
The tutor was going ove the professor’s notes with the student. “We have to change the word ‘prostitute? Abuse? What do you want to say by prostituting then—abusing is fine?!”
Even though the student was sighing—through her attentiveness one can tell that she was into the session, felt she was being helped, and seemed like a coy person—where she kept having the coach break her in with the questioning.
Just when we think the tutor will let her off the hook, Maria challenges Curly another step. “Why don’t you write that? Exactly that?”
The student burst a laughter of relief then flipped over typed copy of her revisioins and pointed with a pencil on where tutor can help her. Her non-verbal cues assist to move the questioning along, and give fuel for the coach to keep them coming.
Student: “She [the professor] wants to be more specific.”
Tutor: “She wants detail?” -“Yeah.” The student answered.
Student is writing over her paper at this point making corrections with still the guidance of the tutor. Student seemed calmer than at the beginning of the session with less quivering with her pencil.
-“How can you tell?” the tutor starts the questioning again. This inquisitive section of the progress of thoughts allowed the writer to think what she wanted to say on paper. Student got stuck and became unresponsive. Tutor kept talking to see if something cliqued.
“You can continue with that,” the coach shifted gears by telling her what she was missing, “a comma needs to go there.”
The questions continued to the very end of the session, but seemingly using the toggle Q & A strategy, she added straight directives when the student became lost, or intimidated she would say the wrong thing. The student most of the time would start to flip pages of her paper aimlessly, then looked up again at the tutor, and actively listened. The good eye contact allowed me to come to the conclusion that it was a productive session. Because of the interchange of responses, the “session progresses and the discussion continues, the students present both written and spoken material, allowing the tutor to evaluate how much they really know and how best to assist them.” (Fanning 11)
The questioning seemed like a normal session, but as we see in case 2 and 3 like 1, all three cases are normal just done to a different twist. This session proves a teacher-centered tutoring session where “even though the ultimate goal of a tutoring session is to help the writer, not the piece of writing, there are occasions where a teacher-centered approach is appropriate and valuable. The tutor dominates the talk, relying on closed, leading, or yes/no questions, and little of the talk is off-the-paper” proves in this session that the effective questioning had a game plan behind it and the end result to allow the writer to have an effective session, develop as a writer, and attain more knowledge through the process than on the student’s previous writing experiences. (McAndrew and Reigstad 26) This was a perfect example on how the Coach acted like a teacher and guided the student through as much intuition and wisdom the coach had attained as a tutor. You will notice that as a recommendation in my conclusive statements of this research, where more training is advisable so that “this instruction [does not become stagnant and outdated rather acknowledged and respected] … as culturally diverse population in our universities and colleges continue to increase.” (Munger, Rubenstein, and Burow 2) B. Case Study 2: The Coach keeps asking questions but the student is not responding. The tutor somehow "turned-around" the student to where she wanted her to be. Did she make a 360 degree change in the student? I believe the student left knowing a little more than she anticipated. Yet was the session proven effective? Yes and No. Yes, because the student got good solid pointers and ideas on how to conduct her paper. No, because the confrontation was not mutual, being the tutor a non-confrontational person (as perceived from her mannerisms) and the student not allowing the coach to do her job accurately and tutor her. Both sides of the spectrum have validity yet what percentage is effective which is not? Watch for yourself.
Case Study 2: October 19, 2010
THE POW-WOW CONFRONTATION = Collaborative Tutoring
Tutor (female) = “Madeline”
Student (female) = “Rebecca”
*= real names have been made up to protect individual's privacy.
Student (female) = “Rebecca”
*= real names have been made up to protect individual's privacy.
Tutor sat laid back in her chair with a calm and soothing voice. The Student was quiet, though articulated melodic voice. The writer seemed like she was an ESL student because of her Latin accent and the trouble she was having with language structure, although as a researcher not sure since we weren’t at liberty to ask cultural background nor interview the student.
Tutor Madeline: “What is your assignment?”
Student Rebecca: “What do you mean?”
Tutor Madeline explained throwing back her words...yet with a different approach at the same meaning of what she just asked. Rephrasing her question, now asking, “This is what you said what do you mean?”
Rebecca took a glance--and sat back while still holding her pen, but overall seemed like she understood.
“How will I continue?” She was stuck, but Madeline helped her get unstuck by explaining what Rebecca said versus what she meant.
Writer: "Can I say this on my paper?" (The student replied, as the student pointed to words on her paper).
The tutor looked at assignment notations—picked up student paper and placed it back on the table.
In the meantime, the student was trying to figure out 2-3 sentences (I think for her conclusion).
The session is totally lost at this point, seems that both the writer and the coach are literary at both opposing sides of the spectrum. The coach lost the session by not keeping the writer on their toes, and not consistently following the session. As if the coach was allowing the student to control the session. If the questioning was not affective at this point, I felt that the tutor needed to form a hypothesis of the progress and formulate another game plan. The writer was there to be instructed and guided, because obviously Rebecca (student) was lost, and Madeline (tutor) didn't seem to have the answers or the questions for that matter.
The tutor rebutted a few minutes too late, "It's not so much about appearance?!”
Student: "It’s supposed to be 4 pages or 1,000 words...I already did the four pages so I'm okay with that...”
Coach: "You don't want to do too much counter argument--the strongest argument should be what you agree with."
The student was continuously getting stuck on the 2-3 sentences in her paper. Rebecca was worried about quantity versus the tutor was worried about quality. Making better writers seemed like it was embedded in the coach's brain, but she really wanted to help the ESL student.
The student pulled out her laptop to begin to write her paper formally, or fix her paper on her computer.
Tutor (still on the sidelines): "The best thing to do is ask your teacher (I'm assuming) not sure if your teacher wants to go into too much detail...
The student starts to say Ah-hum's, Ah-ha, ah-huh, like in responding yes, either to ignore or just get Madeline (tutor) out of her hair.
The student started to look up her research--"the word Endorsements", glanced up quickly at the tutor for her approval, then Madeline said, "Okay, go..." as if to agree with what she was doing or what else could she say at this point when the student took over the session. And maybe, just maybe, she could have kept up the effective questioning or just shifted to another move in her session. Yet no, tutor was getting beat up on and just was standing there taking it.
Rebecca: "I think I'm going to delete sentence." (Pointing to her paper on the laptop)
Madeline: "I would do the same thing," the tutor said. "Everything's okay." (Nodding with her head down as in defeat)
Rebecca stood up, like almost leaving, and started to pack up her scholarly supplies. "2nd rough draft should be fine."
Rebecca placed her book bag on shoulder and left the writing center.
Effective questioning is tutor's move which is suppose to work but obviously was not what happened in this session. The tutor definitely lost out, and needed to rectify the situation, access it, then get back into action. Instead, she accepted defeat, allowed the student to run the session, and acted as if it didn't matter. Maybe because of time, or not caring on the position at hand, not sure, I guess we will never know. Without the ability of asking the tutor questions after the session was over, did not allow to come to a complete conclusion in my research, therefore, if conducted future human experiments such as these, I would change the plan of action and attempt the ability of interviewing the coach and student (if applicable) to get the perspective in full circle of the session, without guessing or trying to decode body language. This happens because one person's actions can be perceived either way, whether it is positive or negative, or just done unconsciously. Therefore, a more conclusive research analysis of this case would have been to allow interviewing the tutor and/or student to get a 360 angle of the situation.
Being inconclusive, in this case 2, whether the objectivity of the session was to really get the rough draft in sync, give pointers or merely was the tutor trying to figure out how I can make the subject a better writer. If we though that the student happens to be ESL, or not (not being able to verify the information with the subject), we are traveling an uphill battle accessing information or guessing data that we do not have. Not causing the situation to be inconclusive rather the lack there of facts, allows us to conclude in this manner.
C. Case Study 3: Student asked effective questions instead of the tutor, and even though she took over the session, it thus proved to be a much effective session due to the questioning of the student to the tutor.
Case Study 3: November 30, 2010 3:00pm
C. Case Study 3: Student asked effective questions instead of the tutor, and even though she took over the session, it thus proved to be a much effective session due to the questioning of the student to the tutor.
Case Study 3: November 30, 2010 3:00pm
THE TAKE-OVER STUDENT= Student-Centered Session
As the student continued to read their paper with all the markings from the professor, the Coach pointed to sentence structure and attempted to fix ...by asking,
Coach: "What do you want to say here?
Student: (just glanced and nodded at coach)
Coach: "Help? Now you don't need help, write can."
Student: (just starred at paper)
Coach: "This is a period." (She pointed with her finger towards the paper as if giving a directive for the student to write on her own paper.)
Student approved directions given by continuing to look at paper--and lifting her pen then writing corrections as she went along.
Coach: "Did you write this?"
Student: (Student agreeing) "Yea I did."
Coach became extremely comfortable slouching in her seat, and placed elbow on her head, while the student kept reading her already written paper. Student glanced at her, shifting her head from sideways to straight looking for the coach's approval.
Coach: "You're a lot more comfortable with periods now."
Student: "Ha-ha!" (Lets out a burst of laughter)
At this point in the session, both student and coach are truly comfortable with each other; thus meaning they are getting comfortable in their session. It seems as if the student has received other tutoring sessions from this same coach or the relationship was instant. The rapport was more on a friendly basis as if they knew each other years on end.
This session seems way more natural than other sessions I have observed. The student accepts constructive criticism in a plausible, positive manner.
Although the coach keeps correcting her sentence structure and punctuation, the student takes all the advice in stride and even seems very calm and collective.
As the student reads, she starts to fumble with her fingers and pen—pausing and swallowing hard with pursed lips. During this time, the student seems a little worried or eager to finish the session. (It seems like she was uneasy in her chair and kept playing with her pen in hand—maybe wanting to leave the session or had a next appointment.)
The Coach asked the Student a question about what she was writing and her subject matter: "What does he have, A.D.D?" (As in Attention Deficit Disorder, an educative disability most seen in the classroom and diagnosed mostly within public school districts although many clinicians have been the first to advise the parents of their child’s needs.)
This is when student took over the session and answered, "Oh god, he has way more issues than that," (explained subject of her paper) then hurriedly she switched gears (subject of question)— the student lead the session by going back to her paper, and continued reading until the end.
Coach: (just listened and did not interrupt as she read her paper out loud.)
Then, the student fired, "Thank God I fixed it!" the student responded as she shuffled her stapled multi-page paper back to page 1. Student pushed the paper to the side and produced another stapled paper in a matter of seconds.
Coach: "You don't need quotations." Coach started to explain what she needed in her second paper and regain the session back, but student said "Okay" multiple times then shook her head, and said, "Nooo-ohh" various times during the questioning.
Questions fired back and forth but student kept saying "Yeah" as if brushing off the constant inquiries the tutor was making and the student thus ignored her and continued reading her paper.
The student was totally guiding the session at this point: stopping when she chooses and pausing to now ask the coach all the inquisitive queries.
The coach became silent at this point--and merely served as an ear to listen.
Is this what some students want, expect, or need? I was confused or lost in translation.
I feel that at this point in the process, the coach completely lost control of the situation, or is it merely a tutor's move—to allow the student to continue? Maybe? Maybe not? According to McAndrew and Reigstad, this proves a student-centered style of tutoring. (McAndrew & Reigstad 25)
Coach: (Almost jumping out of seat exclaimed) “I see the font here."
Student: "What!?" exclaimed back the student.
Then the student recognized the tutor was supposed to be in control. But it was okay because the coach was using the method where “the tutor listens a great deal, especially early in the session, asks a few questions, and contributes personal recollections and associations to
Coach: "What are you talking about strong women?"
Student: "I'll take this out, I'm not sure."
Coach: "Isn't your subject a man?"
Student: "Yeah, you're right--I wasn't sure where I was going with this?"
3:25 pm
The Coach regained control of the session, and got the session back, as her effective questioning was apparent, and although in the middle of the tutoring process the student took over the session and started to ask all the question, this method still proved effective.
In the end, the student looking almost embarrassed and guilt stricken to have taken control in the middle of the process, having a worried faced with lined lips, and during this time she stood upright in her chair and rotated her eyes back and forth horizontally without looking at the coach while the tutor rubbed her hands together, as to say with her body language let's wrap this up, kid. All the while the coach did not react as if she’d seen this before.
As the student continued to read their paper with all the markings from the professor, the Coach pointed to sentence structure and attempted to fix ...by asking,
Coach: "What do you want to say here?
Student: (just glanced and nodded at coach)
Coach: "Help? Now you don't need help, write can."
Student: (just starred at paper)
Coach: "This is a period." (She pointed with her finger towards the paper as if giving a directive for the student to write on her own paper.)
Student approved directions given by continuing to look at paper--and lifting her pen then writing corrections as she went along.
Coach: "Did you write this?"
Student: (Student agreeing) "Yea I did."
Coach became extremely comfortable slouching in her seat, and placed elbow on her head, while the student kept reading her already written paper. Student glanced at her, shifting her head from sideways to straight looking for the coach's approval.
Coach: "You're a lot more comfortable with periods now."
Student: "Ha-ha!" (Lets out a burst of laughter)
At this point in the session, both student and coach are truly comfortable with each other; thus meaning they are getting comfortable in their session. It seems as if the student has received other tutoring sessions from this same coach or the relationship was instant. The rapport was more on a friendly basis as if they knew each other years on end.
This session seems way more natural than other sessions I have observed. The student accepts constructive criticism in a plausible, positive manner.
Although the coach keeps correcting her sentence structure and punctuation, the student takes all the advice in stride and even seems very calm and collective.
As the student reads, she starts to fumble with her fingers and pen—pausing and swallowing hard with pursed lips. During this time, the student seems a little worried or eager to finish the session. (It seems like she was uneasy in her chair and kept playing with her pen in hand—maybe wanting to leave the session or had a next appointment.)
The Coach asked the Student a question about what she was writing and her subject matter: "What does he have, A.D.D?" (As in Attention Deficit Disorder, an educative disability most seen in the classroom and diagnosed mostly within public school districts although many clinicians have been the first to advise the parents of their child’s needs.)
This is when student took over the session and answered, "Oh god, he has way more issues than that," (explained subject of her paper) then hurriedly she switched gears (subject of question)— the student lead the session by going back to her paper, and continued reading until the end.
Coach: (just listened and did not interrupt as she read her paper out loud.)
Then, the student fired, "Thank God I fixed it!" the student responded as she shuffled her stapled multi-page paper back to page 1. Student pushed the paper to the side and produced another stapled paper in a matter of seconds.
Coach: "You don't need quotations." Coach started to explain what she needed in her second paper and regain the session back, but student said "Okay" multiple times then shook her head, and said, "Nooo-ohh" various times during the questioning.
Questions fired back and forth but student kept saying "Yeah" as if brushing off the constant inquiries the tutor was making and the student thus ignored her and continued reading her paper.
The student was totally guiding the session at this point: stopping when she chooses and pausing to now ask the coach all the inquisitive queries.
The coach became silent at this point--and merely served as an ear to listen.
Is this what some students want, expect, or need? I was confused or lost in translation.
I feel that at this point in the process, the coach completely lost control of the situation, or is it merely a tutor's move—to allow the student to continue? Maybe? Maybe not? According to McAndrew and Reigstad, this proves a student-centered style of tutoring. (McAndrew & Reigstad 25)
Coach: (Almost jumping out of seat exclaimed) “I see the font here."
Student: "What!?" exclaimed back the student.
Then the student recognized the tutor was supposed to be in control. But it was okay because the coach was using the method where “the tutor listens a great deal, especially early in the session, asks a few questions, and contributes personal recollections and associations to
Coach: "What are you talking about strong women?"
Student: "I'll take this out, I'm not sure."
Coach: "Isn't your subject a man?"
Student: "Yeah, you're right--I wasn't sure where I was going with this?"
3:25 pm
The Coach regained control of the session, and got the session back, as her effective questioning was apparent, and although in the middle of the tutoring process the student took over the session and started to ask all the question, this method still proved effective.
In the end, the student looking almost embarrassed and guilt stricken to have taken control in the middle of the process, having a worried faced with lined lips, and during this time she stood upright in her chair and rotated her eyes back and forth horizontally without looking at the coach while the tutor rubbed her hands together, as to say with her body language let's wrap this up, kid. All the while the coach did not react as if she’d seen this before.
“The writer even determines the direction of the session and initiates movement to each new phase”; especially in a student-centered peer tutoring session. “Student tutorial are conducted informally, with the writer treated as the tutor’s conversational equal.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 26) While the session seems like it went awry, the “open-ended” and “probe-and prompt questions” were made “to draw the writer out” leading the writer “to discuss the piece” [and] “the tutor suggest[ing] strategies for improving her work [next time and beyond.]” (McAndrew and Reigstad 26)
Student: "That's it!"
(Student suddenly responded, while she packed her things and got up to leave.)
Coach: "Again don't be afraid to use periods, I feel that with this paper you took your time." As the coach twisted her chair and spirally sprung from her chair.
Student: (She felt pleased as she broke a smile between her cheeks.)
Student: "Yeah I have to do that and stop not using periods."
Student: "Thank you so much I appreciate it. Have a nice day." (As the student lifted her book bag on her shoulder and sprinted towards the exit door.)
Student: (She felt pleased as she broke a smile between her cheeks.)
Student: "Yeah I have to do that and stop not using periods."
Student: "Thank you so much I appreciate it. Have a nice day." (As the student lifted her book bag on her shoulder and sprinted towards the exit door.)
“Cohen (1994) points out that when students in groups perceive differences in ability among group members, group interaction and activity are adversely affected, with the more competent members of the group dominating the interaction and being more influential in the decision making.” (King 61)
V. Discussion: Taking the three cases and examples in relation to the focus of effective questioning, this explanation entails how the data answer the research question and why questioning proves effective in certain examples in a tutoring session and other not so much—solely based on data. In conjunction with notable author’s research, the point is proven if effective questioning thus proves useful.
V. Discussion: Taking the three cases and examples in relation to the focus of effective questioning, this explanation entails how the data answer the research question and why questioning proves effective in certain examples in a tutoring session and other not so much—solely based on data. In conjunction with notable author’s research, the point is proven if effective questioning thus proves useful.
"A Writing Center
"This scenario is hard to avoid, because it makes everyone involved feel good...That this is bad points out the central difficulty we confront as tutors: we sit down with imperfect papers, but our job is to improve their writers." (Brooks 219) Although in my mind all 3 cases were examples of effective sessions, maybe except for some scenarios in Case 2, because the end result was positive and students were pleased. But what happens to a writing center that is geared to producing better writers and not a "fix-it" shop. We still have not resolved these answers. And with this kind of research; hope that along the way answers will be produced to common questions we all have about the fix it kid, the take-over student, and the complete toe-to-toe pow-wow session where both are equal participants.
"This scenario is hard to avoid, because it makes everyone involved feel good...That this is bad points out the central difficulty we confront as tutors: we sit down with imperfect papers, but our job is to improve their writers." (Brooks 219) Although in my mind all 3 cases were examples of effective sessions, maybe except for some scenarios in Case 2, because the end result was positive and students were pleased. But what happens to a writing center that is geared to producing better writers and not a "fix-it" shop. We still have not resolved these answers. And with this kind of research; hope that along the way answers will be produced to common questions we all have about the fix it kid, the take-over student, and the complete toe-to-toe pow-wow session where both are equal participants.
“Individuals' skill development is guided by others, usually parents, teachers, or more capable peers. In this view, parents, teachers, and others are said to mediate the learning by guiding the participation of the learner. As the individual develops in a particular activity or skill, the mediating other progressively cedes more of the responsibility for managing the activity to the learner. During this "guided
participation" (Rogoff, 1990) the other builds on what the learner already
knows and guides the learning. This process is often referred to as scaffolding.
In this way the learner internalizes or "appropriates" (Rogoff, 1990) knowledge and meanings. The learner not only appropriates the content (knowledge and meanings) involved in an activity, but also gradually internalizes (appropriates) the process (the procedures, skills and strategies) involved.” (King 58)
VI. Conclusion & Recommendations: These final thoughts and recommendations based on the research data, suggests how the case studies apply to inconclusive analysis yet allow to draw conclusions of effective questioning during a tutoring session and with such maybe this research can assist in training other tutors on this subject matter.
This kind of observation might be useful to assist in training workshops for future coaches in a university Writing Center. Just like the data when a writer has no topic, but no draft, and I even can add that my research studies prove that even when if the writer does have a messy draft or a mess of ideas compiled together, the suggestive questioning that McAndrew and Reigstad detailed were open ended conversation that would lead to answers and in turn an effective session. “When a writer has a topic, but no draft [:] Tutor Questions—
What’s the assignment?
Do you have a subject? [If the writer answers “yes,” ask the following questions—]
What do you know about the subject?
What don’t you know about the subject?
How can you look for connections among the tidbits that you already know that might suggest new directions?” (McAndrew & Reigstad 36)
“Although the basic structure of most tutorial session is similar, every encounter with a writer demands an individualized response by the tutor. …By observing and interviewing master tutors at work, Tom Reigstad (1980) has identified three tutoring options: student-centered, collaborative, and teacher-centered.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 25)
Student-centered tutoring as seen in case 3 worked to the writer’s advantage in which the scenario led the writer to believe she was placed as an equal by the coach. In a “student-centered tutoring style…the writer [does] most of the talking and most of the work. The writer even determines the direction of the session and initiates movement to each new phase.” (McAndrew & Reigstad 25) The student seemed like she took over the case study in #3, but it was merely a strategy the tutor used to combat the alter-ego of the student and allow the session to flow smoothly. “The tutor listens a great deal, especially early in the session, asks a few questions, and contributes personal recollections and associations to add to the writer’s discovery and development of the subject” as seen in Case 3, the writer totally is in control, and the data suggests it was all wrong but notable researchers agree that the student’s determination to be in control was acceptable in the session. (McAndrew & Reigstad 26) This session proved to forming a perfect example of a student-centered tutoring session.
In Case #2, the Pow-Wow confrontation falls directly under the collaborative tutoring style that McAndrew and Reignstad rave about: Where the tutor constantly “maintains a flexible posture. The tutor encourages the writer, often with [the same] open-ended and probe-and-prompt questions [seen in student-centered tutoring (case 3) yet] as a consequence, the relationship between tutor and writer changes from teacher-student to converser-converser several times during the tutorial.”(McAndrew & Reignstad 26) This makes the second case a clear collaborative effort.
The fix-it kid in Case Study 1 shows that “teacher-centered” tutoring strategies do work if the finalized product will have productive results. “Adopting a teacher-centered tutoring style that is direct and that sets the tutor up as an authority and expert” proves that the methodology adopted by McAndrew and Reignstad works to promote effectiveness in a tutoring process between coach and student or tutor and writer. Having the possibility of adopting any given strategies within the various styles of tutoring, allows the coach to place the query the student any manner possible and switch gears to achieve an end result. (McAndrew & Reignstad 26)
“Cognitive partnerships between peers tend to be more egalitarian—more status-free; and cognition is distributed more evenly. Rather than the more expert individual guiding the learning and the less expert one appropriating knowledge and skills, peer partners engage in mutual appropriation. Because both partners have some expertise that they mutually appropriate, and they share the cognitive demands of the learning task, there is reciprocity in their interaction and activity.” (King 59) That is why in all three cases the process seems more familiar than most educational interactions.
Appropriation of questioning in a peer tutorship environment is more frequent and thus more educative method of producing better writers in any prestigious university such as Kean University
“Further, when one partner responds to the other, that response is dependent on the partner's question or comment; and is often framed by that question or comment. At the same time, that response may prompt to a great extent the next question or comment made. A partner's comments, questions and responses are not only dependent on those of the other partner, they are also dependent on the learning task at hand—the material being learned, the problem being solved, or the issue being discussed—and the learners' developing understanding.” (King 59)
Being counterproductive in its natural state, now I truly see why the writing center is such an integral part of Kean University. If everyone was able to observe what my eyes seen, everyone would partake in a writing session with a peer tutor. Many because of ego, embarrassment, or both never attend tutoring labs or accept learning from student coaches. But what I experienced will further my personal aptitude, develop my writing skills, and I’ve learned how I can be a better peer tutor/motivator. “When there is such reciprocity and interdependence in the transactions between
learning partners, and between those partners and the task, the process
of thinking and learning can be said to be "transactive" in nature.” (King 59)
Through this research, an analysis has been made of the different approaches to how to write a paper, and rhetorical analysis of that paper has enhanced my motivation to conduct other research on the subject and increased curiosity of writing centers not just at Kean but other universities and colleges nationwide. Because we want to be the best at Kean University
Furthermore, “a very real concern that often arises in peer-mediated learning is that for learners, who are real peers— that is, they are not only the same age, but also relatively equivalent in ability—there may be a paucity of expertise to appropriate. It may be hard to mediate another's learning when you are not any more knowledgeable yourself. Consequently, when same-ability peers are involved, classroom peer learning activities are usually restricted to lower-level learning: mutual comprehension checking and mutual rehearsal of facts and concepts.” (King 60) And this is the only part of my research that is inconclusive, because as peers we can only teach what we either already know or what we have been taught, and with our peers taking the same or higher level courses in the same content area, there is so much inquisition we can accumulate and counter-act with our questioning. The bargaining chip is not that our coaches are not well versed in the English language nor is the training an issue. But what the case studies are missing are more knowledgeable “[p]eer-mediated
activities [which] support higher-level learning include collaborative inquiry, negotiation and construction of new knowledge, and joint problem-solving [;]” thus allowing a more productive and effective peer tutoring session. (King 60)
Final thoughts on the subject matter are that tutors need to be trained as Munger, Rubenstein, Burow, and Clark mention that coaches are “paraprofessionals” and “learning to be a good tutor [not only] requires a self-examination [but] … [a] professional training beyond that which had been customarily provided…Successful writing conferences do not simply “happen”…they occur because tutors have become experts in the field.” (Munger, Rubenstein, and Burow 2)
VII. Works Cited
Shaw, Jessica D.Medfield High School Medfield , Mass.
McAndrew, Donald A. and Thomas J. Reigstad. Tutoring Writing: A Practical Guide for Conferences. Work Used: Chapter 6: p. 42-69; Chapter 4: p.21-30.Portsmouth , New Hampshire
Shaw, Jessica D.
McAndrew, Donald A. and Thomas J. Reigstad. Tutoring Writing: A Practical Guide for Conferences. Work Used: Chapter 6: p. 42-69; Chapter 4: p.21-30.
King, Alison. Transactive Peer Tutoring: Distributing Cognition and Metacognition: Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1998. p. 57-74. Electronic article.
Munger, Roger H. (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY), Ilene Rubenstein and Edna Burow (California State University, Northridge, Northridge, CA), The Writing Lab Newsletter: Observation, inter-action, and reflection: The foundation for tutor training. Volume 21, Number 4, December, 1996. p. 1-5
Fanning, Patricia. Stonehill College Easton , Mass.
http://www.dictionary.com/. Web. The meaning of Methodology.
