Re: colleague's skepticism

[csjhs@eiu.edu (Jeanne H. Simpson)]

James

While your colleague's remarks did not make me stand up and cheer, I think
he makes one point we should attend to carefully.  He argues sthat the
fact of many writing centers' being staffed with undergraduate tutors is
not evidence that supports the quality of the tutoring occuring.  He is
correct. All that fact does is indicate that this is how a lot of writing
centers are staffed.  There is no inherent proof of quality; a million
people may have a bad idea, and it's still a bad idea.   "Everyone else is
doing it" is an argument that can certainly convince. Administrators tend
to like it. But it is a dangerous argument, one we should be careful about
relying upon.

Please be aware that I am NOT arguing that peer tutors are a bad idea. On
the contrary, I think they are a good idea. But the usefulness of people
like your colleague is that they help us to sharpen our arguments in
support of writing centers.

I think he should be asked why he considers classroom teaching and writing
center tutoring an either/or situation, rather than different and
coordinated approaches to the teaching of writing.

I agree with him that extensive reading of good writing is probably how
manyof us learn.  But it is not the only way.  His experience is his
experience. To generalize on that basis is certain fallacious thikning.

I also wnder how many writing centers he has experience of. He writes as
if he has studied and surveyed them extensively.  Has he? Has he worked in
one? Has he ever been tutored by a trained tutor?  What, other than
impression, is the basis of his assertions?

Jeanne Simpson
csjhs@eiu.edu