Enver Thorburn
Dialog Journal
Engl. 222
4-20-04
Khalilah: I’ve thought a lot about what I have to say, and I’ve decided to talk to you all
about setting a moral compass as tutors. In our dialogues about tutoring strategies and methods,
I’ve expressed a certain regard for having principles that fit the tutor’s personality best. For
myself, I try to be straightforward with my writers, and keep the focus on helping them make
progress towards becoming better writers. To do this, I have to rely on my skills in drawing the
student out of their shell, and I’ve found that as I’ve gained experience this has become easier.
For instance, in the beginning I became frustrated at some meetings in which the student seemed
to expect me to give them answers and pick up the pen and edit, and I expressed those
frustrations over the process of tutoring by trying to discuss my problems with other tutors. I’ve
gained some insights which have allowed me to distance myself from the writer without losing
my own voice in the session, and that is really important to me. Which brings me back to my
message, which is to use your own judgement on when to draw the line between meeting the
needs of the student and fulfilling the responsibilities of a tutor. This can be different for
everybody-actually, it must be unique for everyone, which is why it is hard to describe. It is
better to say that our role should always be to serve the writer’s best interests.
Newkirk: My article “The First Five Minutes” discusses the way the first five minutes of
a conference with a writer will shape the entire hour and ultimately a tutor’s working relationship
with the student. I think we should all pay attention to what it says about what we’re going
for…like, for instance, we can all agree that we would rather have the writer do more of the
talking. We don’t want to push our writers, and we can’t expect them to set the agenda in
accordance with our wishes. I believe it is the role of the tutor to listen, and I’m sure Helen Fox
can attest to that; but also we have to guide the sessions and provide them with some shape or
direction, and often times this is our most difficult job. You have to prioritize, certainly, but
being flexible goes hand in hand with the preparation you all are doing as tutors. You all must
have an idea of what I’m saying, because you know what your own strengths are; but you may
have no way of knowing what a student needs, so in a sense you have to get over yourself and be
prepared to delve into new challenges.
Khalilah: I have a question in general about that. I’m always positive when it comes to
sharing my ideas with others, but I’m sometimes unsure of when to offer my own opinion.
Which brings me to my question, which is how do we address the burning problems of a paper
with this open-ended style of conversation that you emphasize, or more specifically how do you
like to meet the needs of an assignment with the overall needs of the writer?
Fox: I think this is a good place for my thoughts on the subject. Newkirk alluded to it,
and I understand you’ve all read my article, “Something Inside is Saying No,” and I want to
address a few things that are discussed in the article, but first I’d also like to respond to
Khalilah’s question. If you are concerned that you haven’t been able to help someone with a
paper when you’ve tried to first attend to these other issues, may I suggest that you think about
why it is you are doing this in the first place. It just isn’t reasonable to expect to get to every
thing in one session, you just can’t. However you choose to prioritize those things is up to you,
but I might add too that it is not entirely in your hands. I think as tutors you must not come into
it with any pre-conceived notions, rather I think it is the job of a tutor to get over themselves, as
it were, and just be available to meet the needs of their tutee.
Joyce: I’ve had some of the same experiences as Khalilah, and to a large extent I share
some of her frustrations. I guess that I’m just new at this, so it’s kinda like not knowing how to
get the best result, you know, just being nervous. Especially with ESL students and writers from
other cultures. I’m always a little bit careful about what I say, like waaay too careful, because I
don’t want them to misconstrue some advice as a negativism. What I am always surprised to see
is the level of response I get from being patient, I mean just by listening to them I can learn so
much about the way they write. I sometimes get overexcited too, and there is so much to say that
I don’t know where to start.
Welch: One of the burning questions we face as tutors is over how we can handle
working with someone with a very different point-of-view. Obviously I’m referring to the
subject discussed in my article “Collaborating with the Enemy”, but I’m also broaching the issue
of how tutors and writers interact in a setting where the common ground is someone else’s ideas.
This limits firstly what the tutor can comment on, for there are some parts of a paper which, in
my perspective, can only be dissected by the writer. I’m getting ahead of myself because I
haven’t even mentioned what I think the real priority is, but I must mention that no matter what
priorities a tutor has, he or she is still going to have to set aside those expectations in order to
initially identify with a writer. In short, this means that you might get an essay from a writer who
has missed all the major points of the argument, failed to properly cite or credit his references,
and written a fairly confusing essay to boot, and you couldn’t begin to fix it unless you first
stepped back from the situation and try to gauge the writer’s perspective on the assignment and
topic. Which is why it is not always essay to know fulfill the responsibilities of your role, and it
often creates conflicts between the writer’s needs and your own ideas, but this is where you must
get over yourself.
Enver: My philosophy is very much in tune with that idea, I try to distance myself in
order to get a clear view of the situation before proceeding, even though I can honestly say that I
have a hard time accomplishing this. I get too excited and end up going way too fast for the
writer to keep pace. But yet I come into each session with a clean slate and try to do the best job
I can. I’ve had sessions where I did all of the talking, others where I just listened. I could go on,
but the point I’m making is that since each session is different from the last, this can be our
biggest advantage and disadvantage. The reasons it can be negative are obvious, but in a more
positive light it can be seen as a way of keeping tutors on their toes. We have to be prepared to
work with so many ranges of students and subjects of all kind, that’s what makes the center so
diverse and such a great place for students. Because of this, balancing our own ideas about
tutoring with the goals of the Center becomes integral to being a tutor, and also because it is
necessary that a tutor’s personal approach meet with the general principles outlined in the
mission statement for the center (which isn’t to say the two can’t coexist.) The level of
cooperation in a student is always important, but it doesn’t change the fact that our role as tutors
is to be there for them. I especially agree with the idea that we cannot be hung up on our own
flaws. I’ve rededicated myself down the line to being the best tutor I know how to, and this
discussion is an important part of that.