Annual Report 2013-2014
The Writing Studio fosters conversation, collaboration, and
critical reflection on writing. Open to all members of Vanderbilt’s scholarly community, the Studio provides opportunities
to receive constructive feedback from trained consultants and
to develop strategies for all stages of the writing process.
1
Table of Contents
3 Appointment Overview
6 Appointment Evaluation Data
7 Course Instruction Collaborations
8 Ongoing Events
9 Special Programs for Graduate Students
10 Alumni Research Project
12 New Initiatives
13 Staffing
The Writing Studio at Vanderbilt University
117 Alumni Hall • 217 Commons Center
2
Appointment Overview
In August 2013, the Writing Studio moved back to Alumni Hall into a newly renovated space. Although the Studio offered weekday
appointments from 9:00am to 5:00pm in its main location, it was required to reduce the number of days per week it held appointments in the Commons Center satellite location from five to three. In both locations combined, writers made 5087 appointments
and kept 4514. Although the number of clients served increased this year to 1957 from last year’s 1929, the number of appointments made and kept this year was slightly lower than last year when 5205 were made and 4659 kept. This is the first year that the
Studio has ever seen a drop in appointments. We attribute our lower appointment number in part to losing high-demand hours in
the Commons Center. This is evidenced by the reduced number of appointments made at the Commons Center (1646 this year as
compared to last’s years 2362).
Appointments Made and Kept for the Past Seven Years
Appointments by College or School
Total Number of Clients
Clients by Rank*
First year 1162
Sophomore 125
Junior 234
Senior 91
Graduate and Professional 329
Faculty 11
* This data reflects the number of individual
students who scheduled appointments.
3
58%
sought help with critical and
argumentative essays
48%
sought help for 100-level
courses
20%
sought help with graduate
coursework and projects
5%
sought help with personal
statements
Most Consulted Subject Areas
1. English
3. HOD
5. Political Science
7. History of Art
9. WGS
2. Philosophy
4. History
6. Sociology
8. MHS
10. Education
Clients made Appointments for Courses in the Following Departments and Programs
Active Citizenship and Leadership
African American & Diaspora Studies
American History
American Studies
Anthropology
Arabic
Art
Astronomy
Bioethics
Biological Sciences
Biomedical Engineering
Cancer Biology
Cell & Developmental Biology
Chemical & Physical Biology
Chemical Engineering
Chemistry
Child Studies
Child Development
Chinese
Civil Engineering
Classical Languages
Classics
Cognitive Studies
Communication Studies
Community Leadership and Development
Computer Science
Divinity
East Asian Studies
Early Childhood Education
Earth and Environmental Science
Economics
Education of the Deaf
Elementary Education
Electrical and Computer Engineering
Engineering Management
English
Environmental Engineering
European Studies
Film Studies
Financial Economics
French
German
Graduate Department of Religion
Greek
Hearing & Speech Sciences
Hebrew
Higher Education Administration
History
History of Art
Honors
Human & Organizational Development
Humanities Education
Interdisciplinary Studies
International Leadership and Policy
Management
Italian
Japanese
Jewish Studies
Latin American Studies
Law
4
Leadership, Policy & Organizations
Managerial Studies
Master of Liberal Arts & Science
Materials Science & Engineering
Mathematics
Mechanical Engineering
Medicine
Medicine, Health & Society
Military Science
Molecular Physiology & Biophysics
Music Composition & Theory
Music Literature
Music Performance
Neuroscience
Nursing
Philosophy
Physics
Political Science
Psychology—A&S
Psychology—Peabody
Public Policy Studies
Religion
Religious Studies
Russian
Secondary Education
Sociology
Spanish & Portuguese
Special Education
Theatre
Women’s & Gender Studies
Graduate Student Appointments
885
Total Students: 329
Total Appointments:
50-MINUTE APPOINTMENTS
Reflections from a Dissertating
PhD Student
The Writing Studio saw a decrease in the number of 50-minute appointments
made by graduate students this year for the first time ever. This decrease
also seems to be partially the result of losing hours at the Commons since
While I had a few appointments with the writing studio
only 97 appointments were made at the Commons by graduate students this during the beginning stages of my dissertation, this spring I
year as opposed to 155 last year.
relied on the Writing Studio for ongoing advice and
support. I met with a graduate student writing consultant
Total Appointments:
Total Students:
every Thursday from February to May. He is also at the
"light at the end of the tunnel" stage of his dissertation, and
it was so helpful to meet with someone outside of my
department who could give me concrete feedback about a
Extended Appointments
chapter that had been plaguing me for months. While
meeting with the consultant, we re-framed an entire
Although the number of 50-minute appointments made by graduate students
chapter, worked on transitions between the two novels that
decreased, the number of extended appointments increased slightly this year
I analyze, and completely re-thought the chapter's
to 202 from last year’s 197. These appointments allowed for ongoing and inintroduction. The result of our sessions is a coherent
depth conversation with the same writing consultant about dissertations,
chapter that I confidently submitted to my dissertation
major area papers, books, and articles.
chair.
683
Extended Appointments:
202
297
Total Students:
32
Reflections from a Master’s Student
This past year I wrote my master’s thesis, and I was grateful to have the
support of the Writing Studio and the extended appointments they offer to
graduate students. From October to February of this past year my
consultant helped me to edit my thesis and refine my writing process in
general. From the beginning I was very active in the sessions. I read sections
of the paper aloud which helped me to realize my own mistakes. My
consultant was also very good at asking reflexive questions at the end of
each section we read, which required me to evaluate the section myself
instead of relying on him to tell me if there were any issues. While at times I
just wanted reassurance that the piece looked good, my consultant’s
approach was more helpful in the long run because it made me take
ownership of my writing and become less afraid of making mistakes. I met
with my consultant for two hour sessions about three times a month. I feel
that the sessions were productive in that I was able to effectively edit my
chapters and meet my deadlines. There were two major areas in which my
consultant helped develop my writing process: helping me format a true
literature review (rather than a list of book reviews) and helping me improve
the clarity and structure of my argument . My consultant also helped me
become more direct and confident in my writing style. Without my
consultant I do not think that the process of writing my thesis would have
been as manageable as it was. In my case, my committee was hands-off in
the writing process until the final draft. Having someone who has experience
writing extended projects and understands the context of my project was a
life saver.
5
Perhaps most useful to me was the ability to bounce ideas
off of an experienced writer and peer who helped me think
through ideas. I know that the time I spent at the Writing
Studio made me more productive as a writer and also
helped me to stop second-guessing my ideas. Most
importantly, having a standing weekly appointment gave
me a short-term goal to meet and a place for trial and error.
My consultant was instrumental in helping me through the
difficult sections of this chapter and also helped me to see
how I needed to use what I had already written in a more
effective way.
After working with the Writing Studio this semester, I wish
that I had set up standing appointments earlier in the
dissertation process. I feel more confident about the
arguments that I make in my writing and more confident
about the material that I submit to a mercurial committee. I
have used the Writing Studio's techniques as I work to finish
my dissertation and now feel that the project's end is in
sight. I enthusiastically recommend the Writing Studio to all
graduate students.
Appointment Evaluation Data
End of Session Surveys
Clients reported satisfaction with their consultants’ capacity to
help them understand the writing process and expectations for
writing in college: “understanding the structure of this assigment,”
“understanding how to write a paper,” “understanding my prof's
expectations,” “understanding why I'm writing this paper,”
“understanding the power of counter argument,” and
“understanding how to best use research evidence.” Clients also
reported leaving feeling encouraged and more confident in their
ability to tackle the writing process from getting started, to revising, even “overcoming my fear of deadlines.”
Ninety-Two percent of Studio clients completed post-session evaluation surveys. These clients gave their consultants high marks,
overwhelmingly agreeing and strongly agreeing that they: were
active participants and did productive work in sessions; became
more aware of their writing processes and ways of developing
those processes; and left sessions with useful options for completing or revising their projects.
Clients commented that they trusted consultants to assist them
with concerns about argumentation and organization, such as:
“brainstorming and forming the direction for my paper,”
“analyzing evidence,” “articulating my thesis and structuring my
argument,” and “working my big argument clearly throughout the
paper.”
Feedback on how Sessions Improved
Writing Process
“My consultant was extremely helpful and assisted me with developing ways to support my claims with evidence. I was more engaged in
the revision process than ever before and developed skills I will use in
future writing.”
Client Feedback on how Sessions
Improved Writing Projects
“Extraordinarily helpful. Made me much more aware of what/how I
was writing and improved my writing not just on this paper but in
general, can't imagine turning paper in without his comments.”
“My consultant was extremely helpful. Her commentary helped make
a much stronger paper.”
“I like having a sounding board for how to proceed - I wasn't sure
which way to go with the structure of the chapter and my consultant
helped me think through options and come up with a plan.”
“I am inspired and feel empowered to improve my essay by myself.”
“This was helpful not only for this assignment but also for my future
writing, especially because it made me aware of how I process when I
write. Thanks!”
“My consultant was great, knowledgeable. I was feeling a little disillusioned before about the writing process but feel reinvigorated and
excited about my paper's potential.”
“My consultant was awesome. I feel as though I can now strengthen
the paper with the strategies my consultant introduced.”
“Today was really great because it was the first meeting where I felt
like I had a personal statement and not just stories. I feel like I am
figuring out the professional path that I want to take. And I feel very
in control.”
“My consultant was very helpful again. She's very good at listening
and helping me keep my writing my own. I feel much more confident
after every meeting.”
“My consultant offered some of the most helpful feedback on my dissertation abstract that I've heard in weeks—I feel ready to revise
based on her suggestions. Her questions and the session structure
also made me feel like we touched on all my areas of anxiety. She's
amazing!”
End of Year Survey
204 students completed our end-of-year online survey (more than
four times the response received last year).
“My consultant is helping me to stay on track with my dissertation.
We have been working together for a couple of months and his help is
priceless.”
“She was great. She clearly communicated what needed improvement and what made sense, which was especially important as I need
outside readers to understand my specialization.”
73% indicated that they kept 2 or more appointments at the Writing Studio. They selected the following as their top reasons for returning: assistance organizing ideas (78%), scheduling a session as
part of a general revision strategy (72%), and the opportunity to
think through an argument (64%).
“It was lovely—all I really wanted was another set of eyes to look at
my final paper, and my consultant helped me a lot with smoothing
out my argument and flow.”
66.34% agreed that visiting the Writing Studio made them more
inclined to discuss their writing projects with others. Those other
interlocutors prominently included friends (74%) and faculty (58%).
89% reported having recommended the Writing Studio to their
friends.
6
Course Instruction Collaboration
Workshops and Visits
Support for Writing-Intensive Courses
This year the Writing Studio continued to offer script-based
workshops for use in the classroom, with consultants presenting
writing support alongside a course instructor. These workshops
facilitate communication between instructors and their students
about academic writing and the writing process. As the Writing
Studio continues its efforts to serve the needs of all students at
the University, its consultants continue to revise and rethink the
workshop program. In addition to in-class workshops, the Studio
offered short classroom visits to introduce students to Writing
Studio services.
The Writing Studio now offers support to graduate and faculty
instructors of writing-intensive courses. From the more than 100
hours of discussion and collaborations with instructors of writingintensive courses that we conducted in spring 2013, we put together a
carefully-culled digital archive of writing resources that are available
to all instructors of writing-intensive courses. In August and
December, we held training sessions for instructors of First-Year
Writing Seminars (FYWS) in which we explained the requirements of
the FYWS and offered best practices for teaching a content and
writing-intensive course. We also offer one-on-one consultations to
instructors of writing-intensive courses.
2013-2014 Visit Data
29 Faculty Members Scheduled Visits
27 In-Class Workshops
14 Brief Classroom Visits
621 Students Reached
|
Visits by Discipline or Program
American Studies
Anthropology
Art
Economics
Civil Engineering
Creative Writing
English
Germanic & Slavic Languages
Jewish Studies
Math
Medicine, Health, & Society
Philosophy
Political Science
Religious Studies
Sociology
Psychology
Training for Philsophy 100W
As it did last year, the Writing Studio took charge of training and
mentoring graduate students who were and will be teaching
Philosophy 100w. Gary Jaeger followed up with those graduate
students he trained in spring 2013 with a group meeting at the
beginning of the fall semester, optional one-to-one consultations, and
optional classroom observations. He began to train those graduate
students who will be teaching Phil 100w next academic year at four
mandatory writing pedagogy workshops held at the beginning of the
spring 2014 and a follow-up meeting in April.
Training for English Graduate Students
English graduate students participated in fifteen hours of intensive
training during their first year to prepare them to enter the classroom
as instructors in the fall 2014. The Writing Studio required students to
complete sessions on syllabus construction, grading, and pedagogical
techniques for teaching both content and writing skills. Those
preparing to teach English Composition for the first time completed
three hours of hands-on training focused on the specifics of teaching
writing to struggling students. The Writing Studio will continue to
offer training during the Annual English Graduate Student Training
Day, small group discussion, and one-on-one consultation.
“Teaching Writing” Lunchtime Sessions
The Writing Studio collaborated with the Center for Teaching, the
English Language Center, and the Heard Library to host monthly
brown bag lunch sessions meant to appeal to a university-wide
audience. Topics included “Teaching Writing to Large Lecture
Courses,” “Grading Writing Efficiently and Effectively,” and “Using Low
-Stakes Writing to Help Students Learn.”
Course Instruction Collaboration
Graduate writing consultants from the English department
(Andrew Hines, Kathleen DeGuzman, and Stephanie Higgs)
worked with 12 English honors thesis writers in small groups to
facilitate ongoing group work on revision and to help students
offer constructive criticism to each other on their projects.
7
Ongoing Events
Reflections
from a Faculty Participant
Undergraduate Writing
Symposium
This year I served for the second time as a chair of a
panel for the Undergraduate Writing Symposium, which was again
a terrific experience. The three papers on my panel reflected a
range of work in political theory and philosophy, from the history
of political thought, to contemporary analytic political theory, to
critical and queer theory. The student presentations were expertly
done, and the papers spoke to each other in a way that is sometimes missing from even professional academic conferences. Thanks to what was obviously good planning on the part of
the conference organizers, the audience was very responsive and
engaged with the work, which produced a great conversation
among the writers and the symposium attendees. It is always a
pleasure to participate in or attend this event, and the student participants really seem to enjoy the opportunity to share their work
with friends, family, and members of the community.
In collaboration with the Martha River Ingram Commons, the
Writing Studio hosted the sixth annual Symposium on Sunday,
March 30, 2014. This year, more students were nominated than in
any previous year: 180 in total, 99 were nominated by faculty and
81 were self-nominations. After two rounds of blind review, 30
essays were selected for presentation. The event included
remarks from Arts and Science Senior Associate Dean Karen
Campbell and Dean of the Ingram Commons Frank Wcislo, along
with a reception in the Dean of the Commons Residence.
Reflections
from a Student Participant
Participating in the Undergraduate Writing Symposium was an
excellent way to engage with the panel chair and fellow
presenters in scholarly dialogue about my chosen topic. It also
encouraged me to think critically about my own writing with the
idea of presenting it orally rather than just submitting the paper.
The feedback I received at the Symposium not only helped me
explore ideas for further editing my paper, but also inspired me to
eventually look into publishing options for the paper.
- Kara Sherrer
Dinner and a Draft
The Writing Studio continued its Dinner and a Draft
series with four events that brought Vanderbilt students
together with a featured faculty member for dinner
conversation about writing and the writing lives of
students and faculty. Two of these events (one each
semester) were offered in partnership with the Dean of
The Ingram Commons and focused on attracting firstyear students. The remaining events were held in the
Writing Studio’s newly refurbished Alumni Hall facilities
and attracted a wide range of undergraduate and
graduate students, introducing many of them to our new
space. This year the series featured Dennis Dickerson,
History, Kane Jennings, Chemical and Biomolecular
Engineering, Gregory Melchor-Barz, Ethnomusicology,
and Christopher Loss, Leadership, Policy, and
Organizations.
On Writing
Kara Sherrer– Undergraduate Writing Symposium participant
The On Writing series continued this year with two panel
discussions. The first focused on the publication of a first
book and featured Phil Ackerman-Lieberman, Claire King,
Stan Thangaraj. The second featured Beth Shinn, Richard
Lloyd, and Jen Fay, and they discussed the options for the
dissertation after graduation.
8
Special Programs for Graduate Students
Dissertation Writers Retreat
3MT®
In June the Writing Studio facilitated a five-day retreat, cosponsored by the Office of the Dean of the Graduate School and
hosted by the Center for Teaching. It provided the opportunity for
PhD students from across the University to work productively on
their dissertations. In addition to quiet writing time, the retreat
featured break-out workshops and one-to-one consultations.
Participants reported that they worked harder and longer, learned
new techniques, benefitted from networking with others, and would
recommend the retreat to their colleagues .
Once again the Writing Studio assisted the Graduate Student
Council in preparing for the three-minute thesis competition and
offered a workshop for competitors. Of the workshop attendees
who completed an evaluation, 100% either agreed or strongly
agreed that they learned ways to structure their presentations and
84% either agreed or strongly agreed that the workshop overall was
helpful.
Project Publish
This spring, the Writing Studio facilitated reading groups for the
English department’s Project Publish, a program designed to
encourage third and fourth-year doctoral students to submit a
journal article by the end of the spring semester. Assistant director
John Bradley facilitated workshop discussions with two small
groups, seven graduate students total, each of which met twice.
Participants circulated drafts the week prior, giving each respondent
time to produce written feedback and suggestions for revisions as a
starting place for discussion.
29 applicants
14 participants
Participants hailed from the following departments: GDR (Graduate
Department of Religions), Philosophy, Sociology, PMI (Pathology,
Microbiology, Immunology), History, Physics, HOD (Human and
Organizational Development), Physics, Spanish and Portuguese.
The Writing Studio will host another Retreat this May.
Dissertation and Proposal Workshops
The retreat significantly helped me to “tighten up” my thinking and
writing. Interacting with other dissertation writers helped me not
feel so “alone” and to be aware that my difficulties are shared by
many if not most.
In September, the Writing Studio offered two workshops of interest
to dissertation writers. Topics covered included: analyzing models
of good academic writing, constructing argumentative structure,
revision strategies, and organizing sources. Of workshop attendees
who completed an evaluation, 89% either agreed or strongly agreed
that the workshop was presented effectively and 100% either
agreed or strongly agreed that the workshop overall was helpful.
Attendees reported to have learned the following:
During my writing consultation, it was helpful to have a sounding
board and have someone who doesn’t have an
interested stake in the project, listen thoughtfully and offer
suggestions/general guidance. Also, made me aware of resources
offered by the Writing Studio.
“How to zoom out to see big pictures logically and easily.”
I liked the sense of community even though we were actually each
committed to our own projects. The leaders created an
environment of encouragement and support.
“How to properly write an argument for the dissertation with a
stasis, destabilization, and resolution.”
“The moves made in academic writing, particularly claim evidences
and warrant. Also, how to manage, identify, and judge the
appropriateness of sources.”
Summer 2013 Dissertation Retreat participants
9
Alumni Research Project (Summer 2013)
Last summer, John Bradley conducted a Writing Studio Alumni Research Project, which involved distributing a questionnaire to all former
studio consultants, in order to assess the learning experience of the undergraduate and graduate students who work for us. The questionnaire collected demographic information in addition to asking ten open-ended questions, four of which were paired with questions asking
for numerical rankings. The projected was adapted from the Peer Writing Tutor Alumni: Research Project (PWTARP) template made
available by Bradley Hughes, Paula Gillespie, and Harvey Kail. Below is a selection of data from the project, for which the PWTARP’s published results offer useful context. The full questionnaire and data set can be made available upon request.
Vanderbilt Writing Studio
Response Rate
PWTARP
62% (50 distributed to complete alumni
list, 31 completed)
85.% (148 distributed to representative
sample of alumni spread over three decades from writing centers at three institutions, 128 completed)
Age Range (Avg.)
(40%-48% considering partial or selective
responses to open-ended questions)
23 – 40 (27.86)
Gender
59% Female, 41% Male
59% Female, 41% Male
# of Semesters
as Consultants
Range: 1 – 8 semesters
Range: 1 – 6 semesters
Average: 3.33 semesters
90.47% of undergraduate consultants had
pursued or were pursing advanced degrees
Average: 2.84 semesters
66.1% of undergraduate consultants had
pursued or were pursing advanced degree
Advanced Degrees Sought
22 – 77 (32.3)
Vanderbilt Respondents by Year Graduated
Vanderbilt Respondents by Educational Level
2006 (1), ‘07 (3), ‘09 (7), ‘10 (5), ‘11 (6), ‘12 (8)
Undergraduates (20), Graduates (10), Both (1)
Occupations Reported by Former Vanderbilt Writing Studio Consultants
Attorneys (or law students) (6)
Academic librarian
Professors or lecturers (6)
Information specialist
Editors (4)
Project manager in healthcare information technology
Medical students (3)
Marketing and client services assistant
Graduate Students (History, Education, Composition and Rhetoric) (3)
Business owner/ Martial arts instructor
High school teachers (2)
Presidential Management Fellow
Freelance writer & curriculum designer
Analyst at a private bank
Comparison of Numerical Scores: Vanderbilt Writing Studio and PWTARP
Question 13: Would you rate the importance of your training and/or experience as a consultant in the interviewing or hiring process for your first job
or your acceptance to graduate school? (1= not influential; 5=very influential)
Question 16: Based on your reflection in the previous question, how would
you rank the importance for your occupation of the skills, qualities, or values you developed as a writing consultant? (1=unimportant; 5=highly important)
Question 18: Based on your reflection in the previous question, how would
you rank the extent to which your writing been influenced by your training
and/or work as a writing consultant? (1= not influential; 5=very influential)
Question 20: Would you please rate the importance of your Writing Studio
training and experience as you developed as a university student?
(1=unimportant; 5=highly important)
10
Vanderbilt Writing Studio
PWTARP
3.79 (24)
3.73 (99)
4.67 (24)
4.39 (102)
4.09 (22)
4.32 (103)
4.57 (23)
4.48 (102)
Alumni Research Project (continued)
Key Patterns from the Open-Ended Responses (Representative Samples)
A New Relationship to Writing
Skills, Values, and Abilities Vital in their Professions
“I don't think I actually understood the process of writing until I
“Though I worked in the Writing Studio for only a semester, it
worked as a peer consultant at the Writing Studio.”
has continued to shape my professional and writerly life in ways
“My work greatly influenced my own academic writing, particu-
larly during the revision and invention stages of the writing process. I don't think I really understood what revision was until I
began working at the Studio. […] I came to recognize that revi-
that few other experiences have. When in doubt, I always come
back to an article, consulting experience, or writing strategy
that I can trace back to that semester.”
“I am able to revise my own work to a level where partners often
sion is really 75% of the process, that it involves the critical eval- let me send final work product to a client with minimal or no
uation of one's own ideas. That's another great epiphany that
further editing. I can also review the work of my secretary, par-
came out of my work: writing is thinking, not something to be
alegal, and student associates quickly and effectively. That is a
done post-thought. Revision is a process of change and devel-
skill I will need as I advance in my career and begin reviewing
opment, and I fully appreciate that now.”
work of junior attorneys.”
Improved Analytical Abilities
Greater Sense of Connection with their Education
“The most significant skill I gleaned from my work at the Writ-
“I learned the value of dialogue and discourse in teaching and
ing Studio was an ability to evaluate and synthesize arguments.
learning. […] I realized how much there is to learn from peer
[…] by viewing literally hundreds of papers -- hundreds of ap-
tutoring and discussion with a ‘more knowledgeable other’ that
proaches -- during my time as a consultant, I gained an appreci-
students might miss out on from just a class lecture. I learned
ation for the many possible routes we can take as writers to es-
the value of collaborating with other tutors to learn more about
tablishing an effective argumentative stance. My own argumen- what we do and how to do it better. Being a peer consultant
tative writing, and indeed my ability to read others' arguments
wasn't just about sharing what I knew with others. I think I
critically, has benefited tremendously from the consultation
learned more about the writing and learning process from the
work I did at the Writing Studio.”
spirit of inquiry at the Writing Studio.”
“I would have made adequate, even good academic arguments
“Many of the things that have stuck with me came from the
in my papers, even had I not worked at the Studio. But I never
discussions I had with the staff and with other consultants, both
would have made great arguments because I wouldn't truly un-
during meetings and during free-time at the Studio. In many
derstand what makes a great argument. I didn't learn that in any ways, my time at the Studio was the most ‘intellectual’ part of
of my many English classes, nor did I learn it in my social science my time as an undergraduate at Vanderbilt.”
classes. I learned it at the Studio.”
Improved Ability to Listen and Respond to Others
Professionally and Personally
“Much of consultant work involved doing more listening than talking in order
to gain a greater understanding of the writer's ideas. Therefore, I would consider the greatest value I developed through working at The Writing Studio is
learning how to be a better listener and to actively care about others'
thoughts.”
“I do think that the improvement in listening skills and in my empathy that
resulted from my consulting work has improved my social relationships.”
11
New Initiatives
Peabody Writing Fellow
Undergraduate Research and Conference Presentation
As we did last year, the Writing Studio employed a fellow funded
by the Peabody College of Education and Human Development. In
addition to holding one-on-one appointments for 15 hours per
week throughout the year and mentoring a group of
undergraduate writing consultants, the fellow conducted a survey
about the use of the Writing Studio among Peabody
undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. The survey found
that more than half of Peabody undergraduates use the Writing
Studio and 75% of Peabody faculty encourages this, while fewer
than 30% of Peabody graduate students use our services. In
response to this survey, the Peabody Fellow began a marketing
campaign aimed at increasing undergraduate and graduate
student knowledge of Writing Studio services. The Peabody
Fellow used the results of the survey to lead a staff meeting to
train consultants on different strategies for helping Peabody
students in Writing Studio consultations.
During the fall semester, three undergraduate consultants, Gabriel
Lazarus, David Shuck, and Liz DeAngelo, collaborated on a research
project, the results of which they presented together in November on a
panel at the National Conference for Peer Tutors of Writing in Tampa,
Florida. In their presentation, “What the Body Says: The Importance of
Body Language in Writing Consultations,” Liz, Gabriel, and David
applied research on body language and non-verbal communication to
clips they chose from the Writing Studio’s archive of video recorded
consultation sessions in order to make recommendations for writing
studio practice.
Henrietta Morgan Memorial Award for First-Year Writers
This year, for the first time, the annual Henrietta Morgan Memorial
Jane Hirtle, 2013-2014 Peabody Fellow
Award competition for first-year writers was conducted under the
Writing Studio’s auspices. Established by William Morgan in memory
Professional Conferences
In March, the Association of Tutoring Professionals held their biannual conference in Nashville. Gary Jaeger delivered a
presentation on how to train tutors to deploy academic argument
in writing consultations. John Bradley presented on the results of
the Writing Studio’s alumni research project from summer 2013,
explaining its adaptation from writing center scholars Hughes,
of his wife, the award goes to the first-year student who submits the
best sample of original writing. The names of first, second, and thirdplace winners appear in the commencement program and receive
$200, $150, or $100, respectively. This spring the competition received
105 submissions, which were judged in a blind review by a committee
of five writing instructors: John Bradley, Elizabeth Covington, Jane
Wanninger, Donika Ross, and Kathleen DeGuzman.
Gillespie, and Kail’s Peer Writing Tutor Alumni Research Project in
2014 Morgan Award Winners
order to encourage discussion of such surveys as a useful addition
1st Place: Marissa Davis “Franny and Zooey” (poem)
to any tutorial program’s assessment toolkit.
2nd Place: Claire Anderson “Abraham Lincoln: The Man and the
Additionally, the Writing Studio hosted a reception and campus
Myth” (essay)
tour for the participants of the Conference.
3rd Place: Kelsey Quigley “Dress Yourself ” (essay)
12
Staffing 2013-2014
Full Time Staff
Hours and Locations
Gary Jaeger, Director
John Bradley, Assistant Director
Elizabeth Covington, Assistant Director
Kristen Sullivan, Administrative Assistant I
Alumni Hall 117: Monday-Friday 9 AM– 5 PM
Commons Center 217: Sunday– Tuesday 1 PM– 10 PM
Graduate Fellows
Jeffrey Shenton, Arts & Science Writing Fellow
Rebecca Tuvel, Philosophy
Andrew Hines, English
Kathleen DeGuzman, English
Jane Hirtle, Peabody
PhD/Masters
Megan Minarich, English
Lesa Brown, Engineering
Matthew Cutler, Masters of Education
Sophia Gayek, Cell and Developmental Biology
Lara Giordano, Philosophy
Stephanie Higgs, English
Frances Kolb, History
Matt Owen, History
MFA
Alicia Brandewie, Poetry
Anders Carlson-Wee, Poetry
Anna Silverstein, Fiction
Laura Birdsall, Fiction
Simon Han, Fiction
Simone Wolff, Poetry
Undergraduate Consultants
Dave Brinkman, Psychology and Communication Studies
Elizabeth DeAngelo, English, History and Classical Studies
Ashwini Joshi, Biological Sciences
Gregory Kyle, English and Neuroscience
Ben Shane, Asian Studies
Gabriel Lazarus, Philosophy and Economics
David Shuck, Philosophy
Leah Spann, English
Kara Sherrer, English and Corporate Communications
Stacy Yanofsky, Neuroscience
Nicholas Logan, Philosophy and Psychology
Daniel King, English
Selden Hunnicut, Latin American Studies
Clerks
Staff Training and Professional Development
In addition to intensive training in August, consultants participated
in weekly staff meetings designed to extend their training throughout the academic year. Weekly meetings covered a wide range of
topics, including: discipline- or genre-specific sessions (e.g. philosophy papers, poetry explications, writing in the social sciences, and
NSF grants), multi-disciplinary issues (e.g. negotiating instructor
comments, using style guides), and consultation skills development.
As in past years, undergraduate consultants were mentored by
graduate students, and all consultants engaged in several rounds of
observation conducted both by their peers and directors.
Undergraduate Recruitment
In January, the Studio carried out a wide-ranging publicity campaign
for new undergraduate writing consultants. Efforts included flyers
posted in academic buildings and residence halls, table tents
throughout the Writing Studio, and emails broadly distributed to
faculty and students. Studio staff also held two evening informational sessions, attended by 24 students (the majority of whom ultimately applied), to answer questions about the application process
and the position itself.
The Studio received 36 applications, its largest pool of undergraduate applications to date. After interviewing 13 candidates, the directors extended offers to 6, all of whom accepted.
The incoming cohort of undergraduate consultants includes 3 rising
sophomores, 2 rising juniors, and 1 rising senior. Their majors include Anthropology; Cognitive Studies; English; Medicine, Health,
and Society; Music; and undeclared.
Graduate Consultant Recruitment
Once again, the Writing Studio worked with the Graduate Student
Council and the Graduate Development Network to recruit graduate
consultants for academic year 2014-2015. Eighteen graduate students applied for fellow and consultant positions. Graduate Students from the following departments will be working at the Writing
Studio during academic year 2014-2015: Teaching and Learning, Sociology, History, Developmental Psychology, Philosophy, Material
Science, and English.
Yolanda Norton, Graduate Department of Religion
Bridgett Green, Graduate Department of Religion
Paige Regan, Peabody College
Courtney Bryant, Graduate Department of Religion
13
14