This is Part Two of a post appeared on UCWbLing on 04/25/2022
Something I really struggled with when I first started working as a peer tutor was knowing how to help EAL writers meet assignment requirements that are based on U.S. writing conventions while respecting their linguistic background.
Tutors can address instances where a writer is not adhering to the U.S. academic writing conventions by asking the writer how they’ve been taught to structure essays. They can explain that U.S. conventions are standard in this country but aren’t “better” or “more correct” than the conventions of other cultures. This can allow the writer to meet their professor’s expectations while keeping them from feeling like their previous writing knowledge is invalid and keeping in line with the UCWbL’s core value of diversity.
Examples of how to talk about structure to a writer who doesn’t have a thesis statement in an argumentative essay:
- “Can you talk through the structure of your essay ? How does each part relate to your main argument?
- “Can you point out where your main argument is?”
- “The instructions from your professor ask for a thesis statement. Can you tell me what you know about them?”
Examples of how to present U.S. writing conventions while valuing linguistic diversity:
- “It’s a U.S. academic writing convention to have a one-sentence summary of your main argument at the end of your first paragraph, which is what a thesis statement is. You might want to add one to meet your professor’s requirements. Is this something you’d like to try?”
- “Having a thesis statement is a U.S. academic writing convention, so if you’re writing an academic paper for an American audience, it might clarify your main point to add one. Do you want to work on adding a thesis?”
Additionally, knowing that culture often influences what one considers to be polite behavior, tutors are encouraged to not make assumptions or judgements about a writer’s attitude based on body language or other nonverbal cues that are not universal.
Since culture can also mean writers have expectations of Writing Center services that differ from what we actually offer means tutors may want to explicitly clarify their role as collaborators opposed to personal editors and why we tutor in this way (including citing the UCWbL’s core value of collaboration, core belief #4: collaboration among peers is an especially effective mode of learning, and core practice #4: collaboratively set an agenda to guide your work).
Examples of how to clarify tutors’ roles as collaborators and not personal editors:
- “My job is to give you general feedback instead of just making edits to your paper so you’ll be able to apply these comments to your future papers.”
- “I try to keep my appointments collaborative because I want this paper to be true to your ideas and voice. If I just made a bunch of edits to it, it might not sound like you’re the writer anymore.”
Something, though, I still find challenging is handling instances where I notice higher-order concerns but the writer I’m working with insists on focusing on grammar. Harris and Silva state, “ESL writers…have a tendency to want to know [grammatical] rules…[and] often come to the writing center seeking an editor…but tutors should be firm about dealing with rhetorical matters before linguistic ones” (531), suggesting tutors hold firm to adhering to the Hierarchy of Concerns.
Tutors can address the difference between the writer’s expectations of the tutor and the tutor’s actual role if the writer is insistent on the tutor correcting all of their grammatical errors.
Harris and Silva suggest that “another way that tutors can deal with students’ insistence on having all errors corrected is to explain the role of a tutor…We need to explicitly state that tutors are supposed to be educators, not personal editors” (531).
However, to prevent writers from feeling like their grammatical concerns are being ignored, “writing centre tutors could…offer…self-editing techniques (e.g., keeping a list of difficult phrasal verbs that are commonly used, or making a list of errors/problems that recur in their texts) and suggesting language-learning foci that would be relevant to content (e.g., purpose and structure of a thesis statement, organization and development of arguments, focused introductions and conclusions)” (Moussu 62).
In other words, tutors should follow the Hierarchy of Concerns while still ensuring the writer feels like their questions about grammar are being addressed. This can be done through abiding by UCWbL core practice #7: provide generalizable and transferable feedback and core practice #9: provide resources that build on or augment your own expertise.
Additionally, tutors are encouraged to examine if they have any of the habits of treating EAL and non-EAL writers differently that were observed in the Thonus study and whether these are conscious decisions to benefit the writer or due to unconscious assumptions.
Examples of how to handle appointments where the writer insists on focusing on grammar, but you notice higher-order concerns:
- “I know that you wanted feedback on grammar, but before we get to that, I noticed some other things that I think will make a bigger difference to your paper. Do you want to talk about those suggestions I have first?”
- “I have some suggestions about the organization of your idea that I think might be helpful to talk about before we discuss grammar like you wanted to. I wouldn’t want to talk about the grammar of specific sentences and then end up suggesting that you get rid of those sentences altogether to help with organization.”
- “I noticed some comma splices in your essay, and I think instead of talking about every time you have a comma splice in your paper, it would be more efficient to talk about what comma splices are, how to recognize them in your writing, and how to generally edit them. What do you think about this plan?”
Tutors will almost certainly encounter EAL writers during their appointments at the Writing Center and can feel more confident with them through understanding the cultural influences that may have an effect on writers’ writing style, behaviors, and expectations of the Writing Center, unconscious differences in approach they may have towards EAL writer appointments, and potential ways to address writers’ fixation on grammar when there are higher-order concerns in their writing.
While the scholarship I referenced focused on tutoring non-native English speakers and this blog post was about tutoring EAL writers, many of these tips can also be applied to tutoring native English speakers and monolingual writers.
I hope this gave you some insight as to how common concerns that come up in appointments with EAL writers can be addressed and gives you some things to think about for your next appointment with a multilingual writer!
Works Cited
Bell, Diana Calhoun, and Madeline Youmans. “Politeness and Praise: Rhetorical Issues in ESL (L2) Writing Center Conferences.” The Writing Center Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, 2006, pp. 31-47.
Harris, Muriel, and Tony Silva. “Tutoring ESL Students: Issues and Options.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 44, no. 4, 1993, pp. 525-537.
Moussu, Lucie. “Let’s Talk! ESL Students’ Needs and Writing Centre Philosophy.” TESL Canada Journal, vol. 30, no. 2, 2013, pp. 55-68.
Thonus, Terese. “What Are the Differences? Tutor Interactions With First- and Second-Language Writers.” Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 13, 2004, pp. 227-242.