Shewmake, Jake and Jason Lambert. “The Real (Time) World: Synchronous Communications in the Online Writing Center.” Taking Flight With OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work. Eds. James A. Inman and Donna N. Sewell. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Inc., 2000. 161-170.
These writers conducted research on synchronous online tutoring and found that these sessions were effective in that some students found them less intimidating than f2f tutorials; they encouraged clear, crisp communication; and students were more focused and tended to remain on task. This article is research-based. In contrast to much of the literature that explores the impact of OWLs from the perspective of writing center personnel, this article examines the issue from the point of view of the student.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
OWLs and the Process Model of Writing
Thurber, Jamie. “Synchronous Internet Tutoring: Bridging the Gap in Distance Education.” Taking Flight With OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work. Eds. James A. Inman and Donna N. Sewell. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Inc., 2000. 151-159.
In online tutoring, there is a tendency to focus on the product and on low-level concerns instead of on the writer and the higher level concerns of the writing. To avoid this, emphasis needs to be kept on the process model of writing. This article explores the effect of OWLs on pedagogical concerns and emphasizes the need to maintain the integrity of writing center principles as their services are extended to the Internet.
In online tutoring, there is a tendency to focus on the product and on low-level concerns instead of on the writer and the higher level concerns of the writing. To avoid this, emphasis needs to be kept on the process model of writing. This article explores the effect of OWLs on pedagogical concerns and emphasizes the need to maintain the integrity of writing center principles as their services are extended to the Internet.
Advanatges of Asynchronous Tutoring
Mabrito, Mark. “E-Mail Tutoring and Apprehensive Writers: What Research Tells Us.” Taking Flight With OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work. Eds. James A. Inman and Donna N. Sewell. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Inc., 2000. 141-147.
E-Mail tutoring is potentially advantageous in that it decenters the writing center and promotes collaboration; reduces the hierarchy of authority between tutor and writer; and promotes an environment that benefits those students who suffer from writing apprehension. This writer explores some of the potential benefits of e-mail tutoring. This is in contrast to much of the literature on this subject that tends to focus on the negative aspects of this kind of tutoring.
E-Mail tutoring is potentially advantageous in that it decenters the writing center and promotes collaboration; reduces the hierarchy of authority between tutor and writer; and promotes an environment that benefits those students who suffer from writing apprehension. This writer explores some of the potential benefits of e-mail tutoring. This is in contrast to much of the literature on this subject that tends to focus on the negative aspects of this kind of tutoring.
The Potential of Online Tutoring
Jackson, J. A. “Interfacing the Faceless: Maximizing the advantages of online tutoring.” The Writing Lab Newsletter 25.2 (2000): 1-7. Oct. 2008 .
As yet there is no consensus about the purpose of OWLs. There is general agreement that they are a resource medium but there exists doubts about their potential to become online tutoring sites. As resource mediums, OWLs are just another tool available to writers. However, as tutoring sites, they may profoundly alter the way writing centers operate. Although asynchronous online tutorials have the potential to take the focus away from the writer and place it on the product, they may re-establish many of the characteristics of the f2f tutorial. Online tutorials may alter pedagogy, but at the same time, they still rely on the principles of f2f tutorials. They are beneficial in that: writers are more willing to share their frustrations with writing and in so doing, initialize the reflection process that is so crucial to improving as a writer; they promote writer-centered tutoring for they aid writers in developing critical facilities essential to meaningful revision, a process which may begin even as writers prepare for the tutorial; and they place more responsibility on the writer who is forced to ask questions in the process of articulating his/her needs. Even the challenges for the tutor-the need to maintain an online presence but not become overly and solely directive-can be beneficial by encouraging writer responsibility. The hypermediated online environment is an additional benefit that is unique to the online tutorial. Hyperlinks in the form of pop up screens can be used, along with questioning, to provide information-based direction. If tutors adhere to the principles of f2f tutorials, and successfully balance their active involvement in the tutoring process with the need to ensure that the focus remains on the writer and the process, they will avoid many of the pitfalls of online tutoring. This writer adopts a very optimistic view of online tutoring. While admitting that there are challenges to online tutoring, he shows ways in which these potential disadvantages can be converted into benefits. He implies that, depending on the way in which they are used, OWLs can conform to either the instrumental or substantive view of technology.
As yet there is no consensus about the purpose of OWLs. There is general agreement that they are a resource medium but there exists doubts about their potential to become online tutoring sites. As resource mediums, OWLs are just another tool available to writers. However, as tutoring sites, they may profoundly alter the way writing centers operate. Although asynchronous online tutorials have the potential to take the focus away from the writer and place it on the product, they may re-establish many of the characteristics of the f2f tutorial. Online tutorials may alter pedagogy, but at the same time, they still rely on the principles of f2f tutorials. They are beneficial in that: writers are more willing to share their frustrations with writing and in so doing, initialize the reflection process that is so crucial to improving as a writer; they promote writer-centered tutoring for they aid writers in developing critical facilities essential to meaningful revision, a process which may begin even as writers prepare for the tutorial; and they place more responsibility on the writer who is forced to ask questions in the process of articulating his/her needs. Even the challenges for the tutor-the need to maintain an online presence but not become overly and solely directive-can be beneficial by encouraging writer responsibility. The hypermediated online environment is an additional benefit that is unique to the online tutorial. Hyperlinks in the form of pop up screens can be used, along with questioning, to provide information-based direction. If tutors adhere to the principles of f2f tutorials, and successfully balance their active involvement in the tutoring process with the need to ensure that the focus remains on the writer and the process, they will avoid many of the pitfalls of online tutoring. This writer adopts a very optimistic view of online tutoring. While admitting that there are challenges to online tutoring, he shows ways in which these potential disadvantages can be converted into benefits. He implies that, depending on the way in which they are used, OWLs can conform to either the instrumental or substantive view of technology.
The Web-based Environment and Online Tutoring
Hewett, Beth L. “How Do You Feel? Attitudes About Tutoring Online.” Praxis 1.2 (2004): 5 pp. Oct. 2008.
The main rhetorical principles of f2f tutorials, such as that of content, organization and audience, do not change with the use of online tutorials. The difference between online and f2f tutorials lies in the fact that online tutorials introduce a new channel or medium of communication, that is, the web-based environment. Online consultants need to make choices about the extent to which this web-based environment can be used to enhance learning. This article stresses the need to make use of the possibilities provided by the communication context in which online tutorials occur. The writer seems to imply that OWLs can function as both a resource medium and as tutoring centers.
The main rhetorical principles of f2f tutorials, such as that of content, organization and audience, do not change with the use of online tutorials. The difference between online and f2f tutorials lies in the fact that online tutorials introduce a new channel or medium of communication, that is, the web-based environment. Online consultants need to make choices about the extent to which this web-based environment can be used to enhance learning. This article stresses the need to make use of the possibilities provided by the communication context in which online tutorials occur. The writer seems to imply that OWLs can function as both a resource medium and as tutoring centers.
OWLs, Collaboration and Community
Godbee, Beth. “Community Building in Online Writing Centers.” Praxis 2.2 (2005): 5 pp. Oct. 2008.
Online tutorials can only strengthen writing center activities if they facilitate the growth of community. This can be done by exploiting their potential for networking and using tutoring practices that promote collaboration. Such communities promote democracy in education for they are more inclusive. They reduce the golf between the production and consumption of texts in that the interactive, dynamic nature of online texts encourages readers to be a part of their creation. They also allow students to see that writing is a social and community activity that fosters collaboration. OWLs also eliminate the historical debate over writing center location by decentralizing them. Conferences are not purely instrumental for they do not simply re-produce the f2f tutorial. Synchronous online tutorials provide a hypermediated environment that encourages collaboration. There is a need to take full advantage of this collaborative environment and move from the one to one model that limits interaction towards a collaborative model that incorporates work-shopping and small group sessions. Online tutorials also reduce the view that power is focused in the tutor. They also force writers to become more aware of the writing process in that they must write online. This writer adopts a very positive view of online tutorials. In contrast to other writers who argue that the online tutorial undermines collaboration that is so important to writing center tutoring, she explores the way in which online tutorials can promote and enhance collaboration. She also extends the notion of collaboration, which has been primarily viewed as collaboration between tutor and student, to include the idea of community collaboration. In so doing, she seems to hold an instrumental theory of technology.
Online tutorials can only strengthen writing center activities if they facilitate the growth of community. This can be done by exploiting their potential for networking and using tutoring practices that promote collaboration. Such communities promote democracy in education for they are more inclusive. They reduce the golf between the production and consumption of texts in that the interactive, dynamic nature of online texts encourages readers to be a part of their creation. They also allow students to see that writing is a social and community activity that fosters collaboration. OWLs also eliminate the historical debate over writing center location by decentralizing them. Conferences are not purely instrumental for they do not simply re-produce the f2f tutorial. Synchronous online tutorials provide a hypermediated environment that encourages collaboration. There is a need to take full advantage of this collaborative environment and move from the one to one model that limits interaction towards a collaborative model that incorporates work-shopping and small group sessions. Online tutorials also reduce the view that power is focused in the tutor. They also force writers to become more aware of the writing process in that they must write online. This writer adopts a very positive view of online tutorials. In contrast to other writers who argue that the online tutorial undermines collaboration that is so important to writing center tutoring, she explores the way in which online tutorials can promote and enhance collaboration. She also extends the notion of collaboration, which has been primarily viewed as collaboration between tutor and student, to include the idea of community collaboration. In so doing, she seems to hold an instrumental theory of technology.
The Benefits of Online Tutoring
English, Joel A. “Putting the OO in MOO: Employing Environmental Interaction.” Taking Flight With OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work. Eds. James A. Inman and Donna N. Sewell. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Inc., 2000. 171-179.
Online tutoring may encourage students to reflect more on the tutor’s advice which may in turn lead to greater reflection on their own writing. They may also encourage students to reflect metacognitively on their writing processes. The writer seems to hold a substantive view of technology but in contrast to much of the literature that focuses on the negative effect of the technology, he explores the potential benefits of online tutoring.
Online tutoring may encourage students to reflect more on the tutor’s advice which may in turn lead to greater reflection on their own writing. They may also encourage students to reflect metacognitively on their writing processes. The writer seems to hold a substantive view of technology but in contrast to much of the literature that focuses on the negative effect of the technology, he explores the potential benefits of online tutoring.
Synchronous Versus Asynchronous Online Tutoring
Castner, Joanna. “The Asynchronous, Online Writing Session: A Two-Way Stab in the Dark?” Taking Flight With OWLs: Examining Electronic Writing Center Work. Eds. James A. Inman and Donna N. Sewell. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Inc., 2000. 119-128.
Some asynchronous e-mail tutoring may undermine the ability to foster dialogue and collaboration which are fundamental principles of the social constructionist theory upon which writing center work is based. These tutorials may hinder the development of genuine understanding between consultant and writer that is more readily developed in f2f tutorials. They can also foster the view that writing centers are places of remediation. Synchronous tutoring may better support writing center pedagogy and should be privileged over asynchronous e-mail tutoring which should only be used as a last resort. This writer holds a substantive view of technology and is in favor of simulating the f2f as much as possible to ensure that writing center pedagogy is upheld.
Some asynchronous e-mail tutoring may undermine the ability to foster dialogue and collaboration which are fundamental principles of the social constructionist theory upon which writing center work is based. These tutorials may hinder the development of genuine understanding between consultant and writer that is more readily developed in f2f tutorials. They can also foster the view that writing centers are places of remediation. Synchronous tutoring may better support writing center pedagogy and should be privileged over asynchronous e-mail tutoring which should only be used as a last resort. This writer holds a substantive view of technology and is in favor of simulating the f2f as much as possible to ensure that writing center pedagogy is upheld.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
