[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: e-mail tutoring--reply



Date sent:  3-MAR-1997 10:44:11 

Bobbie has my vote too.  I had just printed outher most recent post for my 
owl file when I saw the message on how fine and instructive her posts are.  
Thanks, Bobbie!
Mary Dossin



>From:	IN%"wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu" 27-FEB-1997 17:39:45.69
>To:	IN%"wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu"  "Multiple recipients of list"
>CC:	
>Subj:	RE: e-mail tutoring--reply
>
>Return-path: <wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu>
>Received: from ttacs6.ttu.edu by SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU (PMDF V5.0-4 #11626)
> id <01IFX3EEMOZK00I52C@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU> for
> dossinmm@SPLAVA.CC.PLATTSBURGH.EDU; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 17:39:43 -0500 (EST)
>Received: by ttacs6.ttu.edu; id AA31037; Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:17:27 -0600
>Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:17:27 -0600
>From: Lynne Belcher <lrbelcher@saumag.edu>
>Subject: Re: e-mail tutoring--reply
>Sender: wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu
>To: Multiple recipients of list <wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu>
>Errors-to: nobody@ttacs6.ttu.edu
>Reply-to: wcenter@ttacs6.ttu.edu
>Message-id: <009B0845.4AF22320.25@saumag.edu>
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>Precedence: bulk
>Originator: wcenter@listserv.ttu.edu
>X-Listprocessor-version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
>
>Bobbie Silk gets my vote for best WCenter posts.  (See below 
>for one example of why, though I still like the post with the 
>gardening analogy.)
>
>Lynne
>lrbelcher@saumag.edu
>
>Bobbie Silk said on Thursday, February 27, 
>
>"David's observation that lack of demand can be instructive 
>raises a number of questions in my mind.  Thank you, David.  
>However, while I'm willing to concede that universities may 
>value the modernist self David describes, I'm inclined to 
>think that even that issue has a pragmatic value and a
>positive as well as negative side in the larger world that we 
>inhabit. 
>
>What I find most productively thought-provoking are the 
>questions about the psychology of the online tutorial.  I 
>agree that it can be a discursive, collaborative space when 
>those values are upheld by the tutor (and, indirectly, the 
>director).  But I'm not sure that the collaborative, possibly 
>multi-vocal quality of online tutoring necessarily contradicts
>single-author assumptions about the final product.  Nor am I 
>sure that single-author-driven students have considered and 
>rejected online tutoring because it is collaborative.  In 
>fact, I wonder if online writing isn't more (instead of less) 
>demanding of a unified, assertive self. 
>
>We often talk about our own experience of email and online 
>writing in terms of creating an identity, asserting a 
>persona.  We assume that "real world" social constraints drop 
>away when our words flicker through optical cables.  We 
>assume that this liberates us.  And perhaps it does indeed
>liberate those of us who are here, those of us having this 
>conversation. 
>
>But what if this very absence of social constructs is 
>intimidating to some people? What if, for some of us, going 
>online is like walking out onto a brightly lit stage in a 
>darkened auditorium? We know the audience is out there--five 
>hundred pairs of lungs drawing breath, five hundred pairs of
>eyes watching us.  And then we have to tap dance our selves 
>into being. 
>
>Even online writing that asks questions requires 
>articulation, a bringing into being through language.  And 
>because it is writing that asks questions about writing, it 
>is inevitably self-reflexive, inevitably drawing attention to 
>itself.  
>
>When we go online, even one-to-one, we reveal ourselves to 
>someone else.  In an online chat-room or MOO, I might be able 
>to mask or choose my identity; but in the tutorial I (the 
>writer seeking help) not only cannot hide, I expose myself to 
>criticism of flaws I do not know are there.  Unlike the face-
>to-face tutorial, I cannot protect my ego with nonchalance
>or seeming disinterest.  In a sense, my ignorance is out of 
>the closet in front of an audience or individual I cannot 
>see. 
>
>In the "discusive space" of the online tutorial, I have to 
>ask questions, seek help openly.  I cannot shift 
>responsibility for exposing my weaknesses to the tutor, who 
>is "supposed" to find what is wrong.  Perhaps in the f2f 
>tutorial we are subtly playing a game of hide and seek in 
>which I--the flawed writer--hide in the text and the tutor 
>must seek me.  Being the one who hides seems much sager than 
>being the one who seeks. 
>
>In the online tutorial the dynamic shifts.  While the tutor 
>and I may seem more equal and unknown to each other, thus 
>opening possiblities of genuine collaboration and dialogue, 
>perhaps in reality we are *less* equal.  I no longer have my 
>golfer's handicap, my extra points for effort and humility. 
>I no longer have the socially-granted controls of engaging 
>the tutor's empathy or expressing (through tone and body 
>language) that I'm still one tough/smart/worthwhile son-of-a-
>gun even though I'm letting the tutor help
>me. 
>
>Maybe where the online help requests come from is less a 
>factor of inside/outside and more a factor of 
>comfort/discomfort--that is, familiarity with the medium and 
>tolerance for lack of control." 
>
>Just speculatin'.              --Bobbie 
>(bsilk@keller.clarke.edu)
>
>
Mary M. Dossin
Claude J. Clark Learning Center
SUNY Plattsburgh
Plattsburgh, NY  12901
518 564-6138
dossinmm@splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu