Writing Center Theory and Practice

In the latter half of the 1990s the digital
image became prevalent, easy to manipulate, and consequently, easy to recontextualize,
meaning that now just about any image is available to any computer user for any occasion. To use Bolter's terminology, the "interpenetration" of textual and pictorial space in digital environments, especially on the Web, has increased
markedly, so that the predominance of the digital image now rivals that of the digital word. Indeed, a number of thinkers have noted the digital image's ascendancy in communicating
information via the computer. But how are we to think about, to analyze the rhetorical dimensions of these images? This essay focuses on using classical rhetoric 'as a way of
thinking about the persuasive power of computer-based images.

This presentation provides an overview of the key features of four popular academic referencing style guides listed on Google Scholar: Harvard, Chicago, APA and MLA. This presentation summarizes the six major scenarios that require an academic reference and explains the rationale for each situation. Discussion aims to simplify the common
elements found in detailed style guides published by post-secondary educational institutions.

*Winner of the 2018 International Writing Centers Association Best Article Award. Disciplinary histories of composition studies argue that the mission of communication programs shifted during World War II: from striving to democratize higher education to promoting uncritical patriotism. Historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) rarely figure into these histories, in part because they seldom appeared in the era’s scholarly publications. Recently digitized African American newspaper archives invite a counter narrative of wartime democratizing pedagogy. Press coverage highlights the Hampton Institute Communications Center, the most widely publicized and politicized site of literacy instruction during the war. The controversy it engendered shows Hampton and other HBCU curricula forwarding wartime literacies that constituted patriotic resistance to Jim Crow segregation.

The issue of writer's block has garnered significant interest in writing center scholarship, and countless identifications, strategies, and coping mechanisms have arisen due to its popularity. However, a cross-generational review of the literature illuminates a sizeable oversight that this paper seeks to address: attention to the proprietary student perspective. Blocking is most often assessed on grounds of reduction, but academic trends toward the narrow and abstract have made field insights increasingly inaccessible to the blocked writer or tutor the solution was designed for. For this, an undergraduate survey was conducted to identify where contemporary student perception stands in relation to preexisting academic investigations. Data evaluation was assessed based on (1) the " fitness " of the relationship between student definition and proposed remedy to blocking, and (2) the linguistic proximity of the definition to blocking's fundamental cognitive roots. Findings were promising: the test population identified the general " home " of blockage and offered relevant strategies that can be bridged with academia's theory-ballasted headway. Strategies were then expanded to address deeper issue pragmatically – with technical enhancements to the most frequent survey responses – and academically – with an emphasis on proprietary student conceptions as the foundation for future research.

In this bibliography, writing center professionals can find studies that examine the effects of mandatory writing-center visits on students in basic writing programs, first-year composition, and writing-intensive courses across the curriculum. To one degree or another, writing-center administrators should find all the entries useful as they develop internal programs or respond to externally imposed mandatory visit policies at their particular institutions. Additionally, other writing-program administrators, such as WAC directors and FYC directors, should find these entries useful as a starting point to foster a successful relationship with writing-center professionals and to help create policies and faculty development activities that might involve mandatory visits.

Das 2013 gegründete fakultätsübergreifende Schreibzentrum an der Technischen Hochschule Nürnberg (TH Nürnberg) gehört zu den wenigen Schreibzentren an Hoch-schulen für angewandte Wissenschaften (HAW) in Deutschland und ist das einzige seiner Art in Bayern. Wie viele Schreibzentren versteht es sich als Ort kollaborativen
Lernens, der die Schreibkompetenz der Studierenden fördern will (vgl. Girgensohn
2012). Dieser Beitrag zeigt, wie das Schreibzentrum dieses Ziel verfolgt und wie es mit lokalen Besonderheiten umgeht.

Writing center self-access libraries have a firm place in North American and non-North American contexts, as do the composition-related materials therein, i.e., rhetorics (e.g., anthologies of paragraphs and essays); however, as the literature has historically shown, when choosing texts for library shelves, readability needs to be considered. Traditionally, the readability of rhetorics has been explored through single-step quantitative approaches that employ readability formulae (e.g., the Lexile readability formula). These formulae have been praised for their ability to effectively measure two variables (i.e., semantic and syntactic difficulty) but have been criticized because they do not explore the many other features that influence text difficulty. To embrace the strengths and address the weaknesses of these formulae, this paper suggests a two-step hybrid method: (a) a quantitative evaluation of texts and students’ reading levels via Lexile measures and (b) a qualitative exploration of the features that the Lexile formula does not explore (i.e., via a checklist). To provide a checklist for this procedure, this sequential mixed methods study explored what features not considered by the Lexile readability formula affect the reading experiences of students when reading exemplars from rhetorics. The study found that 14 features beyond the two measured by the Lexile readability formula influence users’ difficulty with the material. This paper also discusses the relevance of the study to the field and poses suggestions for future study.
Keywords: Writing Center Administration, Lexile, Readability, Rhetorics, Self-access

Las tutorías entre pares son una comprobada estrategia que beneficia tanto al que recibe tutoría como al tutor, debido a que es un sistema de apoyo recíproco en el que el estudiante que asiste se siente más motivado para interactuar que con un profesor. Aunque actualmente las condiciones de enseñanza han privilegiado un aprendizaje menos interactivo, las tutorías de escritura entre pares son un espacio favorable para desarrollar habilidades de escritura académica, por tanto están mediadas por intereses y necesidades reales que son apoyadas por un par. Los beneficios se dan en ambas vías porque el tutor también aprende para enseñar. La Pontificia Universidad Javeriana Cali ha implementado esta estrategia a partir de los writing centers de universidades norteamericanas, con un éxito creciente en toda la comunidad académica. El Centro de escritura javeriano se propone mejorar las destrezas de escritura de todos los miembros de su comunidad, para lo cual se apoya en el trabajo de los tutores de escritura. Cuenta con más de dos años de experiencia y un equipo de trabajo conformado por talentosos estudiantes de todas las disciplinas, que son formados para desempeñar esta labor. Esta formación comprende, entre otros, el proceso de escritura, pues las tutorías se ofrecen en todas las etapas del proceso, para lo cual es necesario que los tutores comprendan a cabalidad lo que ocurre en su propio proceso de escritura. Las tutorías entre pares son un espacio amigable y tranquilo en el que los estudiantes se sienten en confianza para contar sus dificultades de escritura, y a partir de esto los tutores les ayudan a descubrir y desarrollar sus propias estrategias, en lugar de hacer clones de su propio proceso. Una sesión de tutoría es básicamente una conversación sobre escritura, haciendo notorios los aspectos positivos y reforzando aquellos que necesitan más elaboración.

Writing centers (WCs) occupy a “middle ground” between professors and pupils – instructional sites that aren’t classrooms, operating via individualized sessions in which student writers and tutors collaboratively address writers’ specific projects and/or concerns. These tutors are often students, too, inhabiting middle-ground identities themselves as student-educators. However, I argue that peer WC tutors identifying with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder—an under-accounted for population—occupy a special kind of middle space. Grounded in a review of contemporary scholarship in critical disability, WC, and rhetorical studies, this project contends that while ADHD peer tutors’ roles necessitate both rhetorical skill and recognition thereof, the legacy of ableism in higher education nonetheless marginalizes ADHD students (including peer tutors).

While universities today often enroll numerous disabled students, ideas about model scholars do not account for the hyperactive, distraction-inclined, impulsive, and/or oftentimes over- or under-stimulated minds of ADHD individuals. ADHD tutors’ “disabled” faculties complicate their inclusion and capacity to participate as expected in WC work and academia. They need to be able to help others “make sense” (in writing and as writers) as quasi-representatives for institutions in which they themselves aren’t rightfully included. The same institutionally-acknowledged ability to “make sense” that lands one the WC job is a standard against which ADHD individuals are often deemed incompetent, incomprehensible, and somehow unworthy of inclusion. Furthermore, while the writing center is seemingly well-suited for ADHD academics, given the individualized nature of each tutorial session, Center administrators’ and writers’ expectations could present difficulties for them instead. It is clear through these early findings that additional research about the lived experiences of ADHD WC tutors is needed. This project additionally proposes an upcoming qualitative study of undergraduate and graduate peer tutors.

La historia y evolución de los centros y programas de escritura en la educación superior ha sido un tema ampliamente tratado, y gran cantidad de la literatura al res-pecto deja en evidencia sus prácticas más comunes. No obstante, poca mención se ha hecho a la comprensión lectora como parte integral de los asuntos que atañen a que estos espacios, aunque de unos años hacia acá ha comenzado a haber un asomo de interés. De cara a ello, en este texto se propone reflexionar sobre la importancia de que estos espacios incluyan en sus prácticas y servicios el desarrollo de la competencia lectora, concibiendo esta como indispensable en la construcción de una adecuada competencia comunicativa y apoyo a la alfabetización académica. Adicionalmente, dejar en evidencia que, aprovechando las características de estos lugares, desde la puesta en práctica de una comprensión lectora se promueva la autonomía dentro de la formación académica en géneros discursivos. Palabras clave: comprensión de lectura; educación superior; alfabetización académica; escritura académica; aprendizaje autodirigido.

בשנת 2011 הופיעה פרופ' תמר רוס בפני תלמידי החוג למחשבת ישראל שבאוניברסיטה העברית והרצתה על דרכה כחוקרת ואשת רוח. תיאורה האינטלקטואלי והקיומי היה מפעים כיוון שהוא איפשר להשקיף על דרכי השתלשלותו וצמיחתו של המחקר האקדמי במדעי היהדות בפרט ומדעי הרוח בכלל.  להלן אנסה למנף את מהלך מחשבתה ולתעלו לתיאור שתי טענות: [1] חיוניות הכרת הזיקה שבין החוקר, זהותו ומחקרו [2] הלאקונה בידיעת ובהבנת מושא המחקר עת המחקר מרוכז רק בבחינת תיאוריות מופשטות (ורבאליות או טקסטואליות) של מושא המחקר. דיון זה יוביל אותנו לעסוק בשאלה מהו 'ידע' ומהי 'ידיעה' ומה התנאים ההכרחיים לרכישתה.

No proofreading is one of the major policies of the university writing center. The no proofreading policy is oriented from the process-oriented writing instruction that is represented with the non-directive, student-centered approach. However, for L2 students who are not familiar with the process-oriented instruction due to different social and educational backgrounds and seek immediate help to improve their writing, the university writing center does not provide the needed help to improve the L2 students' writing. For them, the Center's instructional policy is not just ineffective but also incomprehensible as well. In this regard, the discrepancy of L2 students' expectations about the work of the writing tutorial and the instructional philosophy of the university writing center becomes a major obstacle of the work of the writing tutorial with L2 writers. Thus, this study investigates how L2 writers experience the writing instruction of the Center and what happens in their first encounter with the work of the tutorial. By examining their talk in the writing tutorial and their experience of writing instruction in the writing center, this study aims to show how their different expectations of the writing instruction are played out and shaped for the work of the writing tutorial.

Los centros de escritura son una forma de trabajo colaborativo para el desarrollo de habilidades de escritura, especialmente en la universidad. Fueron creados en universidades norteamericanas, pero en la actualidad se encuentran en casi todo el mundo. El artículo muestra la evolución histórica que los centros han tenido desde su aparición en otras regiones, para llegar a la situación actual de estos, en particular en Estados Unidos. En Latinoamérica se han empezado a establecer algunos centros de escritura, sobre todo en los últimos cinco años, con enfoques diversos, como es su naturaleza. Se presenta la evolución, hasta el momento, de los centros de escritura de la región, comparando las razones que han generado su aparición con las que lo hicieron en Norteamérica y la situación actual de ambos. El artículo intenta una aproximación a un concepto de centros de escritura y a la noción de tutorías entre pares, corazón de estos centros. Como conclusión no definitiva ―porque la historia se está escribiendo―, al final se ofrecen algunas reflexiones prospectivas sobre lo que esta forma de enseñanza puede implicar para el desarrollo de la educación superior de la región latinoamericana. Si bien hay un desarrollo, este todavía está en su etapa de consolidación, por lo que están dadas todas las posibilidades de generar una comunidad académica alrededor de estos centros.

The Introduction begins with the consensus that writing pedagogy in India is grappling with its own identity within university ecosystems. It is currently at a stage in Indian higher education that is marked by failures and relentless trials. The Introduction argues that this failure could be productive of forging new pathways best suited for the multilingual nature of the Indian classroom. It emphasizes on writing as a process and not just as a product, and how such process-oriented approach towards writing can make use of lived or peripheral languages in the process of producing the final product in Standard English prose. It pays close attention to some of recent proposals of the National Education Policy 2020 in this regard. The Introduction is also consistent with the existing literature on writing pedagogy based on care. However, it is cautious in treading this path of care as it notes that care must move beyond the discourse of ‘sickness’ and ‘remedy’ for those who lack proficiency in English. Instead, it proposes that these centres could emerge as an emancipatory antidote to a collective sickness of putting pen to paper: a struggle shared by all, regardless of socio-economic statuses. In the final section, the Introduction proposes a pedagogy that can be built through a commitment to affirmative action policies in private universities. Through references to Ambedkar’s statements during the debates on linguistic states and Hany Babu M.T. 's proposal on bilingual education, it contends that English could be an equidistant language from all the other languages in the classroom and live a life of objective reasoning in that space. It also contends that we must imagine the multidisciplinary writing centre as a space that is equidistant from specific disciplinary regimes of writing and knowledge production to make the project of the writing centre truly emancipatory.

The writing center is a common form of academic writing support in Canadian and American universities (Moussu & David, 2015). With its non-proofreading policy, some scholars have indicated the service may be less effective for international students who require more explicit assistance on surface-level features in their academic writing (Harris & Silva, 1993; Myers, 2003). However, these discussions often omit or insufficiently address international graduate students as a unique population (Phillips, 2013). To address this gap, this paper presents results from two complementary case studies involving the use of writing centers by three second language (L2) Chinese graduate students (two PhD and one master’s) at a research-intensive Canadian university. Drawing on a second language socialization theoretical framework (Duff, 2007; Zuengler & Cole, 2005), we examine the role of the university’s writing center in the participants’ enculturation into academic discourses, practices, identities, and communities. Data indicate that international graduate students spend considerable time and effort seeking out writing support to improve academic practices. Only the master’s student was able to make full use of the writing center tutorials due to her strategic socialization of the tutor. Implications are provided to minimize student burden and maximize specialized writing support for L2 graduate students.

La P.U.J Cali ha reconocido la importancia de la lectura y la escritura como actividades que favorecen la construcción del conocimiento. Considerando el impacto logrado por los Writing Centers, y luego de visitar algunos de ellos en Estados Unidos, surge la propuesta de la creación de un Centro de Escritura en esta institución, pionero en Colombia y uno de los primeros en Latinoamérica.
El Centro de encuentra en etapa de implementación y abrirá sus puertas en los próximos días. Se han investigado diferentes modelos que se utilizan, buscando definir uno que se adopte a la realidad de nuestros estudiantes. Trabajaremos con estudiantes de pregrado, que comenzarán a formarse como tutores y ofrecerán un acompañamiento a sus pares en las diferentes etapas del proceso de escritura.
El acompañamiento se oficializará a través de un soporte presencial por parte de los tutores, quienes harán la orientación de la escritura en tareas específicas, y un soporte virtual, en el que se contará con un centro de recursos virtual que se constituirá en una herramienta pedagógica de apoyo para las actividades presenciales.
Para lograr un verdadero impacto en las prácticas académicas en todas las disciplinas de nuestra institución, se ofrecerá un apoyo permanente a los docentes, en el que se brinden lineamientos prácticos y específicos que redunden en el mejoramiento de su actividad en el aula en todo lo relacionado con la escritura académica, siguiendo el enfoque de escritura en las disciplinas.
Este centro busca enmarcarse dentro de una política institucional en la que se reconozca el papel de la P.U.J. como institución formadora de sujetos lectores y escritores, asumiendo la universidad su responsabilidad institucional frente a esos procesos.
Así, buscamos incidir en la creación de una “cultura académica” en toda la comunidad universitaria, que se concrete en las prácticas académicas de todos sus miembros.

Die Arbeit in Schreibzentren zeichnet sich in Bezug auf den Kompetenzzugewinn dadurch aus, dass sich beide Seiten weiterentwickeln – die Ratsuchenden und die Tutor*innen. Bisher gab es keine empirische Studie, die die Kompetenzentwicklung bei Schreib-Peer-Tutor*innen im deutschsprachigen Raum untersuchte. Dieser Beitrag präsentiert ausgewählte Ergebnisse des Forschungsprojekts "Ehemalige Schreib-Peer-Tutor*innen", das durch das Schreibzentrum
der TH Nürnberg durchgeführt wurde. 103 ehemalige Schreib-Peer-Tutor*innen von Schreibzentren in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz beantworteten einen Online-Fragebogen dazu, welche Kompetenzen sie durch Ausbildung und Tätigkeit für ihr weiteres Leben mitgenommen haben. Die Befragung wurde an die Methodik der US-amerikanischen Studie Peer Writing Tutor Alumni Research Project von 2010 und 2015 angelehnt.

Peer tutoring was first introduced in the Western world, where education systems are quite
different from the East. While peer tutoring has brought much success as an alternative to
educational instruction in the West, it is still in the process of being introduced in the East. As
Japanese universities begin to use peer tutoring, we must search for methods that fit the unique
Japanese education system, in which social hierarchy plays an important role. This essay will
share some preliminary observations on how cultural and systemic aspects of the Japanese
education system may impact peer tutoring in Japanese universities. It will first explore multiple
definitions on peer tutoring, before analyzing the Japanese education system and social
hierarchies. Finally, the essay will provide a case study on a writing center in a Westernized
prefectural university in Japan and discuss further research options.

Las tutorías son la forma de acompañar de modo individual el desarrollo de la escritura académica en los centros de escritura. Aunque se trata de un dispositivo diferente al de la clase, comparte las características del discurso pedagógico. Este artículo busca develar la forma en que las tutorías se configuran como un tipo de discurso pedagógico. Para ello, se analizan fragmentos de tutorías entre pares siguiendo lineamientos de análisis del discurso y del marco teórico de Mackiewicz y Thompson. Los resultados no solo corroboran las categorías del marco teórico, sino que evidencian la construcción de identidad, autoridad e institucionalidad por medio de este dispositivo. Se demuestra el rol que el análisis del discurso puede desempeñar en la formación de tutores para aprender e investigar su práctica.

Debates over the limitations of interventionist and minimalist tutoring pedagogies risk creating a false-dichotomy. This false-dichotomy distracts a Writing Center’s efforts of fostering core values of centership, agency, and creativity. While worrying about aligning tutoring praxis with the rules, principles, and guidelines of either of these mainstream pedagogies, tutors make secondary their relationships with writers. While both interventionism and minimalism are argued to produce a Writing Center pedagogy which does not maintain core Writing Center values, minimalism is the more popular, dominant practice of the two, so the primary critique of this thesis is of a minimalist pedagogy. Minimalism makes these detrimental assumptions of its writers: i. an expectation of writing skill which is not had by the writer, and ii. the writer’s work is theirs entirely, and any intervention made by a tutor is a violation of academic integrity as well as an affront to the authorial autonomy of the writer. This thesis presents a response to the false- dichotomy between interventionist and minimalist Writing Center pedagogies: a Writing Center pedagogy rooted in care ethics. It argues that care ethics provides a better foundation for a Writing Center pedagogy in terms of its ability to avoid making detrimental assumptions of autonomy of a writer, to maintain core values of a Writing Center, and its ability to handle morally complex relationships.

Writing and teaching have this in common – popular images of each foreground isolation and art and obscure community and craft. These images play a role in shaping writing instruction in the public schools, particularly influencing the status of community among writers in a classroom. While there has long been advocacy for a move toward including collaboration in writing classes through peer and student–teacher conferencing, and more recently for collaboration in teachers‘ professional lives, through peer mentoring and study, the strength of the image of teachers and writers working at their art in isolation stands against these reform efforts. As a first step in reclaiming the grade school classroom as a site of genuine writing instruction, the role of isolation as a presence in the schools – in writing instruction, as a management strategy, as a narrative of the working lives of teachers and writers – should be examined and challenged.

paper, I explore Kroll’s semi - conspiratorial suggestion that ‘we have accepted the role of double agents embedded in the system’ (2010). You, of cou rse, understand that we are the writers who teach and/or teachers who write who are likely to be reading TEXT and attending AAWP. You/we have triple agency too, making you/us researcher - writers, researcher - teachers and other hyphenates. And if Writing prog rams are indeed as ‘strange’ or ‘uneasy bedfellows’ (Kroll 1999) with literary studies as creative and exegetical texts once were, then, in what bed are we embedded? Is it in Kroll’s (2010) interstitial space or is it within Dawson’s (2005) writerly ‘garre t’ within the ivory tower populated by evolved ‘literary intellectuals’? I have interviewed ten practitioners who participate in teaching and researching within the spectrum of programs within the writing discipline to uncover the rich, globally nomadic na ture of those who sleep towards, but seldom completely on, the writing side of the bed. This paper analyses responses thematically within a framework allowing for my own subjective, reflexive narrative as a multiple agent (teacher, writer, researcher, ling uist). I move on to examine what Richardson (2000) called ‘creative analytic practices’ and suggest that these offer a space for double/triple/multiple agents, occupying a range of spaces between literary studies and writing. I use discourse analysis to c onsider articles from writing journals written in the deliberately subversive and vitally interpenetrative spirit of multiple agency. In addition to Jeri Kroll (2010), who openly leaves traces of her literary studies back - story to enrich her research, thes e include texts by Marianne Grey (2009) and Julia Colyar (2009). These works are multi - literate, rigorous, process - oriented records of nomadic trajectories and learning journeys. They also rearrange the symptoms of conventional academic text generation to become post - modern, interstitial, hybrids of ‘creative analytic practices’. This is one hybrid form for the double/triple/multiple agents of the 2010s to continue to take to bed.

This study explores L2 (second language) students’ experience with the writing tutorial in a university writing center. University writing centers were initiated to provide writing instruction to L1 (first, native language) students and have since developed to enhance their writing ability for academic purposes. With the shift of the concept of literacy in the U.S, the focus of writing instruction in the writing center has moved from focusing on the rules of grammar and punctuation in order to “make better writing”, to a collaborative pedagogy aiming to “make better writers” (North, 1984). However, as international students are increasing in the American university, their concerns for writing in English as L2 writers seem to have some conflict between the writing center’s philosophy of writing instruction and the expectation that the international students have to fulfill their own needs to improve their writing ability. This study, in this light, was conducted to gain a better understanding of the work of writing centers with L2 students in terms of how the tutor and the L2 students interact with each other during the tutorial, focusing on issues and elements that inhibit the L2 students from improving their English writing ability. From the perspective of social constructionism, this study is framed by the notion of instruction as a conversational accomplishment, and learning in this view occurs as a social process mediated through interaction. With a particular focus on analyzing the talk and interaction transcribed form videoed tutorials and interviews with tutors and tutees, this study aims to examine the nature of L2 learners’ writing practices occurring in the one-to-one writing tutorials with the tutors and to provide a comprehensive vignette of experiences of L2 writers in the writing center.

Nine issues that capture the dynamics of the international students’ interaction with Writing Center tutors emerged from the analysis of the corpus of data: six originate with the student as the tutee and the remaining three focus on issues that originate with the tutor. The nine issues are placed within three themes: language and culture, understanding of academic writing in English, and understanding the Writing Center’s pedagogy for instruction. The issues and themes identified from the findings suggest that there is a clear gap between the tutor and the tutee in their ‘Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)’ of writing instruction and neither the tutor nor the tutee are positioned to easily overcome the mismatch. The gap occurs from the different expectations of writing instruction from the tutor, supported by the writing center’s institutional history and philosophy and the student who comes to the Center with an established agenda based on their needs and judgments for their writing. This gap causes an inevitable tension between the quick-fix desire of the L2 clients and the long-term development philosophy of the L1 tutors. A key factor to fill the gap and to be satisfied with each other for the work of the tutorial seems to be the extent to which L2 writers are motivated to return to the writing center. When L2 learners can form an ongoing relationship with the tutor, instead of just having a one-time encounter, they may become better equipped to work with and not against the tutor. The tutor then can be positioned to understand the L2 learners’ backgrounds and needs, which could possibly result in a more productive interaction and collaboration for writing instruction. This shift can begin with a more flexible approach that makes allowances for L2 tutees to make their initial experience at a writing center positive in nature to create a suitable zone of proximal development within the tutorial. To summarize, this study was designed to seek an understanding of the nature of L2 writers’ writing practices and their tutorial experiences in the university writing center. By identifying themes and issues from the analysis of the tutor-tutee interactions, interviews, and ethnographic data from the writing center, this study shed light on L2 learners’ tutorial experiences and contributed to the growing body of empirical studies of L2 writer’s writing practice in their talk-in-interaction during the one-to-one, face-to-face tutorials.

This course introduces the practice of, and theory behind, tutoring writing. Broadly, this course has two main objectives, each of which have a few sub-goals of their own. Firstly, it seeks to help you find the best way of being a writing coach that works with your personality by giving you strategies for responding to different styles of writing, different personalities, and sundry scenarios in which students visit the Write Place. Secondly, the course will help you not just do the work but to think metacognitively about it: that is, reflecting on what you do in a session, why you do it, and whether you are employing the most effective strategies at a given time. To that end, we will consider broader context of the history of writing centers (here and elsewhere) and the research-based theories for how to collaborate with others to improve their writing. In the end, this course will not only help you in your duties as a student-associate at the Write Place, but will arm you with a vocabulary that will help you explain to others— including future employers—the value of what you are doing in this position.

This essay considers the question of transfer in relation to processes of remediation. In particular, we explore the interrelationships between transfer and new media in multiliteracy center contexts. Drawing on a case study of an undergraduate student named Sophie, we offer a multidimensional approach called adaptive remediation that helps composers develop meta-awareness about how they might use and reshape prior composing knowledge and available semiotic resources in ways to suit media affordances and their rhetorical objectives in processes of remediation. Specifically, we propose four dimensions of adaptive remediation, including charting, inventorying, coordinating, and literacy linking. Our hope is that adaptive remediation will prepare multiliteracy center directors and consultants to help students transfer knowledge across media and, in the process, make rhetorically sound decisions about how to adapt and reuse literacies, skills, and ideas in a variety of contexts. Published by Elsevier Inc.

With Whitleaf Editing, writers of all genre and all levels can get high-quality proofreading, editing, and content review of their work. Provided by Kathryn Lichti-Harriman, PhD in Anthropology, Whiteleaf Editing’s services help everyone whether you are a student writing for a tutor, scholar preparing a journal article, or fiction author wanting to share the worlds in their mind with a wide readership.

When I work with writers I ensure each and every one receives individual attention as well as complete confidentiality of their work. The integrity of ideas and the integrity of authorship is at the heart of Whiteleaf Editing, so you can be assured that you will receive the best possible service at a fair rate.

This paper reimagines writing center labor's place within the university's production of knowledge after neoliberalism. This positioning of writing center labor reveals parallels and affinities with the "feminized" characteristics of service sector labor, a type of work which has proliferated after deindustrialization. While I explore dimensions of writing center work that this positioning reveals, important limits to these parallels emerge, and within and beyond these descriptive limits I advocate redefinitions of writing center labor. Accordingly, I assert that this work escapes economic measure while embodying an ethos that is antithetical to the neoliberal imaginary's individualist assumptions. The constantly shifting, emergent identities of students and tutors, alongside the writing center's activation of the feminist care ethic through social production, are what characterize this challenge to forces shaping the university in the context of neoliberalism. Abstract Keywords Writing Centers | Neoliberalism | Service Sector | Affective Labor | Knowledge Production