Category: Writing Consultants

For Experienced Teachers, How is Teaching Different from Writing Center Consulting?

Jennings Collins and Abigail Anderson – Writing Consultants

Introduction

For those that aren’t aware, all Graduate Teaching Assistants undergo a multi-day training before each semester begins to prepare us for the new responsibility of teaching at the college level. Writing Center consultants go through a more specific orientation where we discuss our process, and the specifics of Writing Center pedagogy. We have a whole class about it, Writing Center Studies (ENGL 604), where we spend the whole semester asking important questions about pedagogy and the development of the Writing Center as a practice.

The unique perspective we both bring to this course, and to our work in the Writing Center overall, is our experiences working in the field of education, specifically early childhood education and secondary education. To borrow a common teacherly phrase, we have different tools in our toolbox than many of our peers, simply as a result of our work experiences and educational backgrounds. Learning how to be Writing Center consultants does not entail gaining the tools needed for the job, but rather learning how to use the tools we already have in a different setting. Alongside this period of adjustment, we also have to learn to balance our schoolwork as graduate students and the mental and emotional labor of our everyday jobs. Though our different backgrounds give us slightly different perspectives, we both try to be conscious, reflective, and constantly improving teachers, regardless of if our students are toddlers or undergraduates.

Reflections from a Middle & Upper Grade Educator (Jennings)

As consultants, we deal with a different workload and are in a different position in the web of university’s instructional design. We arrive somewhere in the middle as tutors. We do not get the opportunity to design the assignment any particular student is working on, or have the knowledge to bring the student towards the destination that someone in a teacher’s position would have designed. So in some scenarios, the consultant is in the awkward position of trying to deduce exactly what the writer’s instructor is asking for by parsing course directions and other course documents. We are still able to discuss writing skills and strategies in a manner that is beneficial to students across curriculum, which is a new angle for someone with an educational background.

The indirect university web also means we see students from a bevy of backgrounds, all with their own educational experiences which informs their own writing. Students have different levels of experience with things like MLA Style and academic research practices, things that we can interrogate during a session as part of getting to know a writer and what they need from a writing center session. One hour we are working with students who have just moved from high school to college working on a 500 word essay about their history with literacy, and the next hour we could be reading a 20 page study of the history of scientific literature around postpartum depression from a doctoral candidate.

I am much more comfortable with the former. In secondary education you are often the one shaping a person’s understanding of the English language as they enter adulthood. If a student is struggling, you have a whole year of lessons, lectures and assignments to reshape them to the best of your ability as an instructor. Often as a writing center consultant, we are asked to meet the writer where they are, and that comes with a new short-term approach to guidance. A student wanting to learn more about writing practices may do so at the Writing Center, but often our focus is directed towards the improvement of a piece, and not the student who wrote it.

Reflections from An Early Childhood Educator (Abigail)

Although my certification is in secondary education, and I student taught eighth graders for a semester during the pandemic, my work experience is mostly in the field of early childhood education. The majority of my childcare work was with two and three-year-olds, so the gap between my old students and my current clients might seem enormous. Certainly, working with young children requires a different form of emotional labor than working with other adults, but helping people is never an emotional-labor-free job. With my transition from teaching preschool to working with undergraduate and graduate students, I’m getting used to the shift in how much I have to do for someone else. My preschoolers required a lot of effort from me to help them manage their emotions, perform simple daily tasks, and grow into little, independent humans. My writers now need help gaining or refining an entirely different set of skills, though they might need just as much emotional support from me as a teacher or mentor in their writing process.

Indeed, my biggest takeaways from working with young children are that no two students learn exactly the same way and that progress is often non-linear. This term, I have seen many writers who come to the Writing Center for help, and sometimes feel discouraged or like they are “a bad writer” because of their past experiences with writing. In these sessions, I try to remind these writers that they are capable of developing their ideas and their skills, and that they have already begun that process by asking for help. It might take a variety of different strategies to learn what works for them, and that can be messy and difficult. However, I also try to emphasize that just because they have not achieved a goal yet, in their writing or in their personal lives, that does not mean they never will. This is a valuable lesson for learners of any age to remember, internalize, and carry with them throughout their education.

The main challenge of this work, for me, has been balancing when to “give people the answer” and when to step back and allow them to learn for themselves. And sometimes that means letting people make mistakes! Part of being an educator, regardless of the age of your students, means recognizing that you do not always have the answers and will not always do everything right. Again, in that way, working with adults is not so different from working with children; sometimes both need you to take a step back so they can learn to fly.

Conclusion

Teaching gave us a unique perspective on the way that the writing center operates, and the myriad of ways that students like us use campus resources. Our time as writing center consultants is a part of our educational journey, just as coming to the Writing Center is for any student. By next year we will be teaching courses as part of our graduate teaching assistantships, putting us at a different part of the institutional web than we are now. The biggest thing we hope to take from this experience is a nuanced perspective on the diversity that this university has in its student body, and how best to meet the needs of each student that comes to us as a part of their own journey.

With Writing Always at the Center (Part II): Reflections on A Dozen Years as Director

Bronwyn T. Williams, Director

Here’s the thing about writing, it is a distinctive medium not just for communicating across space and time, but for connecting human consciousness. When we write, we lay out our thoughts in a way so that someone across the world, or across centuries, can understand our perspectives, our interpretations, our desires. Writing allows us to convey not only the surfaces we can see, but the thoughts and emotions that we hold most central to our lives and identities. Though not everything we write is of equal intensity and meaning, writing is always available to us to make these essential connections. The fact that AI platforms may be able to mimic broadly some writing is beside the point. When we want, when we need, to connect our minds to the minds of others, writing will continue to be there for us, and to matter deeply.

It is this ability to connect human thought, to make meaning, that makes writing the intellectual center of life in the university. Writing that truly asks people to solve problems, create, synthesize, critique, resist, advocate, and connect is writing that makes knowledge. Because humans are meaning-making creatures, we will continue to try to figure out the world around us, and our lives within, and good, thoughtful writing, will continue to be central to that endeavor. All of this is why the University Writing Center, overlooked, underfunded, and often misunderstood, matters so much. For the past twelve years it has been my privilege to serve as director of the University Writing Center. After this spring, however, I will be stepping aside as director and, before I do, I want to take a moment to reflect on why I think the work of the University Writing Center is so important, as well thank the people with whom I have shared in this work.

The Purest Teaching On Campus

The meaningful work in the University Writing Center is grounded in the talent and commitment of its amazing consultants. Though they come here from different backgrounds, and may use a variety of approaches to teaching, it is their commitment to individual, dialogic, and collaborative teaching that has made the Writing Center such rewarding and distinctive place to work. Many writers come to the University Writing Center thinking, or worrying, that what we will do is simply correct mistakes, because far too many faculty and administrators on campus mistake surface correctness for strong writing. Yet, when writers get here, what they find are collaborative conversations with our consultants where they work together to find out what it is the writers truly want to say in their own words, and in the most engaging and persuasive way possible. The approach we use, where we take our time, start with the writer’s concerns first, ask questions, — and don’t grade — makes this some of the purest teaching on campus. When writers leave after an appointment, they leave not only with new strategies for writing, but often with a greater sense of confidence as writers and students. We see these changes in writers’ identities reflected in our exit surveys and hear it in comments as people leave. People who know me have heard me talk about these ideas and experiences before, yet it is the changes in confidence, perceptions of agency, and in true learning that writers find here, that have meant so much to me over the past twelve years.

The other aspect of the work here that I appreciated in our consultants has been the ethos, the disposition they worked hard to take into each appointment. What they did, in appointment after appointment with writers from every college and discipline, and with most kinds of writing on campus, was listen carefully, and respond with respect and care. In short, they treated each writer as a writer, and not simply as a draft to be corrected. They also never lost sight of the fact that writing is deeply connected to issues of identity and power and to teach in a recognition of and response to issues of social justice. It has meant so much to me to work in a setting where the teaching is grounded in theories and practices of hospitality, reciprocity, inclusiveness, and equity. We learned from writers and they learned from us. Too much of education is based in rigid standards and punitive assessments and we have worked not only to provide a different model for teaching and learning here, but to to try to use it when we can as a model for change in the University (And I just published an article about those efforts, if you’re interested). Teaching is an ethical and political project and I’m glad to have been part of what we have been doing here over the years to work to build on student knowledge and for intellectual exploration and knowledge building.

When I started thinking about this blog post I started thinking through some of the numbers that marked the past twelve years. There have been more than 55,000 appointments, more than 150 consultants and staff members who have worked here, more than 120,000 views of our online resources and videos, hundreds of workshops on writing issues, 15 dissertation writing retreats – and this is blog post number 425. Yet what those number really represent to me, what really makes me smile, is all the words, the ideas, the connections, that were started and sustained, because of work through the University Writing Center. It has been impressive, and often moving, to watch and I respect all the work the consultants and the writers have done together

A Place of Collaborative Accomplishments

There are programs and changes that have taken place in the last twelve years that I have helped facilitate and in which I do take some pride. We connected to graduate students, both in appointments and in workshops and dissertation writing retreats in new ways and greatly increased our presence in support of graduate student writing. We started an office down at the Health Sciences Campus and did both tutoring and workshops over the years. We created online resources from Writing FAQs, to videos and to handouts, to oral histories, for UofL writers but available to any writers looking for help. We helped design and move into a new space on the first floor of Ekstrom Library, to a larger, more flexible space that made us much more visible to the University community. And we did our best to try to find ways, despite increasingly shrinking funding, to nurture and support writing on campus and in our community through our writing groups, events such as International Mother Language Day and Open Mic Nights, and our community partnerships with the Western Branch Library and with Family Scholar House. We did our best to try to be a center for all writers

Our Old University Writing Center Space on the Third Floor of Ektrom Library

All those accomplishments I frame with “we” because all the work that has taken place at the University Writing Center has been a collaborative project. It has been my deep good fortune to work with people who committed themselves to this collaborative vision of work, both with writers and with each other. So many people over the years came up with new ideas or showed me new ways to do things. They kept my thinking fresh, challenging it when it needed challenging. And, just as important as anything, they kept their sense of humor and warmth. It made this a fun place to work.

I can’t list all the people who have worked here by name, but know that I am grateful to all of you, learned from all of you. But it is important to thank individually the permanent staff I’ve worked with. At the front desk and running the office, Robin Blackett, Amber Yocum, and Maddy Decker were the calm, friendly, and resourceful people at the front desk who set the tone for everyone who walked through our doors and reassured both anxious writers and weary staff. Also, I have worked with three associate directors, but that title is so misleading. I have enjoyed the great opportunity to have true working partnerships with these good and wise friends, Adam Robinson, Cassie Book, and Annmarie Steffes. All three of them provided the stability and professionalism to keep everything running. There was much more than that, however. They were always coming up with new and important ideas – and kept me from coming up with bad ones – and they were instrumental in shaping the positive and constructive emotional ethos among the consultants on staff. I once said we were co-pilots in all things Writing Center and it has always been true. I owe you all more than I can say.

Moving On and Changing Lives

In my years as director, people often have asked me how work was going. I would tell them that, even though I might be wearying of wading through administrative budget cuts and assorted other drudge, I still looked forward to coming to work each day. When I looked around me in the Writing Center, I would tell them, I see a group of people with a strong sense of community, doing the kind of teaching, learning, and caring that I wish were the model for the whole university. I will miss all of that when the next year comes around. I will miss working with the new group of consultants in the fall. I will miss the moment of a student writer stopping in my office to say that, in her mind, the writing center would be standing next to her when she received her diploma at graduation.

Still, it is healthy for institutions to have different people with different ideas and approaches in charge and the University Writing Center is positioned to have exciting times ahead under the leadership of Tim Johnson and Annmarie Steffes. As for me, I will be continuing to teach and to research and write about students’ experiences of the pandemic, climate change education, and participatory community writing projects. I’ll be around.

At the start of each academic year, when I talk to the new group of writing consultants at our orientation, I tell them about the writers who come to the University Writing Center, often anxious and uncertain, but leave both learning about writing, and feeling a stronger sense of agency and confidence. “Quite often,” I say, “We do change lives.” Certainly my time in the University Writing Center has changed mine. Thank you all.

With Writing Always at the Center: Reflecting on a Year of University Writing Center Accomplishments

Bronwyn T. Williams, Director

Each year at the University Writing Center, in the sweltering last days of August, we welcome a new staff of consultants. And each year each staff has its own personality. Temperaments, personalities, areas of expertise, senses of humor, are individually and delightfully varied from one year to the next. The new consultants arrive at the end of summer with much to learn about teaching writing in a writing center, and with much to teach us through their new ideas and new approaches.

Now, as the dogwood and redbud trees start to light up with blossoms, and the season turns toward the closing of the academic year, it’s always a time at the University Writing Center of wrapping up and reflecting. We’re having our last consultations, finishing our own projects, and talking of plans for the summer. I’ve been watching these cycles as director of the University Writing Center for twelve years now and this time of year once again brings with it a mixture of gratitude, satisfaction, and a touch of weary wistfulness. This year will be the last time these cycles at the University Writing Center will include me as I will be stepping down as director after July (more on that later). Still, the cycles go on and it is indeed time for wrapping up and reflecting.

Our Ongoing Work in the Writing Center

For all the differences in personality among various University Writing Center staffs from year to year, what is more important is the consistency. What did not change this year was that the consultants in the University Writing Center engaged in the most interdisciplinary, wide-ranging teaching on campus, working with writers from every grade level, every college and from more than 50 different majors.

Whether working with first-year students or doctoral student writers, our writing consultants helped people at every possible stage of their writing processes – from the brainstorming at the start to the polishing at the end. Our consultants are exceptional teachers who never lose sight of the fact that they are working with individual writers, not just responding to the words on a page. Through their work, consultants help writers feel more confident, not just for the moment, but in navigating unfamiliar writing situations in the future. Such work requires that our consultants be good listeners and resourceful teachers. Working collaboratively, patiently, and focusing on learning, not grading, takes time and energy, but such approaches made significant differences in the lives of thousands of UofL writers this year. From our perspective, this individualized, personal teaching is the best way learning happens and it all depends on the talent and commitment of our consultants. I’m so proud of the work they do, every day and every year.

Collaborative, reciprocal learning also requires the contributions and commitments of writers and we are also grateful for the trust placed in us by the writers who bring their work to the University Writing Center. We are always learning from them as they learn from us. I also thank all the faculty and staff who supported our work by recommending us to their students.

This is my last semester as director and I will be writing more about that on this blog next week week. Today, however, I want to focus on this year’s amazing staff and what they’ve accomplished.

Transitions at the University Writing Center

The most important transition at the University Writing Center this year was the arrival of Dr. Annmarie Steffes to the position of Associate Director. In this full-time position she provides the intellectual core and ethical heart of our work. Annmarie came here from a faculty position at the University of Saint Francis in Fort Wayne where she had developed a writing center and made huge contributions to our daily work and long-term planning as soon as she arrived. Annmarie brings to the position energy and innovative ideas that will help move the University Writing Center forward in vital and exciting ways. For example, just since starting her position in September, she has developed a series of workshops for faculty about teaching writing and has many more ideas ahead for how to improve our work as a center of writing on campus.

Dr. Tim Johnson, associate professor of English, will become director starting in July. Tim has exceptional insights into approaches for teaching writing across disciplines and in professions. He’s an exceptional teacher and and insightful researcher. He’s friendly and warm and will help energize and inspire both staff and writers in the years to come.

I am excited to see what innovations and new strategies Annmarie and Tim will bring to the University Writing Center in the future. Writing support and teaching at UofL is in excellent hands.

The Best Writing Center Staff Around

It is also essential to thank the fantastic administrative staff who carried us through this year with calm creativity and good humor. In addition to Annmarie, Maddy Decker, handled the front desk and office managing responsibilities flawlessly and was supported in this work by our undergraduate student workers Katelin Wilkinson and Tera Hathcock. Maddy also coordinated our social media, including this blog, with imagination and wit.

The assistant directors were also indispensable this year. Liz Soule, as Assistant Director for the Writing Center, helped both with mentoring new consultants, but also researched and held workshops to respond to the many questions we received about AI in writing, such as ChatGPT. And Kendyl Harmeling, the Assistant Director for Graduate Student Writing, both facilitated the Faculty and Graduate Student Writing Group and engaged in outreach at the Health Sciences Campus.

All of these people make the Writing Center work, day in and day out, and make it a positive, inclusive, and productive place for the UofL community.

Writing at the Center – Community Writing, Workshops, Writing Groups, and More

Community Writing and the Cotter Cup: Our commitment to writing is not limited to the UofL Campus. Once again we worked closely this year with Western Branch of the Louisville Free Public Library (LFPL). This participatory and collaborative partnership, under the coordination of Assistant Director Liz Soule, is an important part of how we understand writing as transcending communities and boundaries. You can find out more about these community writing projects, including how to get involved with them, on our website. We worked with Western Branch to provide workshops and mentoring. But our primary project for the year was the third annual Cotter Cup K-12 poetry contest. This is the third year we have partnered with restoring the 100-year old tradition of this contest. University Writing Center volunteers met at the Western Branch Library with K-12 writers to brainstorm, draft and revise their poems for the contest. We worked with 30 student writers and the contest winners will be announced later this spring. We’re grateful to the contributions of our volunteers: Liz Soule, Jessica Gottbrath, Clay Arvin, Cassidy Witt, and Dylan Williams.

Writing Groups: We continued our commitment to provide UofL writer with safe, supportive communities where they can write and talk about writing. We continued to facilitate our LGBTQ+, Faculty and Graduate Student, and Creative Writing writing groups. We have always believed that writing, and the confidence to explore new ideas in writing, is a social activity as much as a solitary one. Through our writing groups we want people to be able to gather and learn more about the craft of writing, but also build the confidence that comes from writing in a supportive community.

Writing Events: Once again we hosted or took part in a range of writing-related events, including our Halloween Scary Stories Open Mic Night and a Valentine’s Day Open Mic, both hosted with the Miracle Monocle Literary Magazine. Annmarie also organized our annual celebration of International Mother Language Day. We’re always delighted to celebrate writing of all varieties and hope to continue with more such events in the future.

Dissertation Writing Retreat: In May we will hold our 12^th annual Dissertation Writing Retreat. During the retreat, 14 doctoral writers, from 10 different disciplines, will spend a week writing, talking about dissertation writing strategies, and having daily consultations about their writing. This event is the capstone to each academic year and an important moment for us.

Workshops: This year, Annmarie planned and facilitated a series of workshops for faculty both on issues of using writing effectively in their courses, and also on thoughtful and creative ways to respond to the development and use of more sophisticated AI in writing. We also held our regular workshops on issues of graduate student writing, organized through the Graduate School.

Writing Center Staff Achievements

The University Writing Center is also an active, ongoing site of scholarship about the teaching of writing. Staff from the University Writing Center were engaged in a number of scholarly and creative projects during the past year in rhetoric and composition, literature, and creative writing.

Bronwyn Williams, Director. In terms of writing-center focused research, my article, “Writing Centers, Enclaves, and Creating Spaces of Change Within Universities” has been published in Writing Center Journal

Annmarie Steffes, Associate Director, presented ““Instructor Autonomy: Exploring the Role of OER in Composition Classrooms” at the Conference on College Composition and Communication.

Liz Soule, Assistant Director, will be the Assistant Director of Writing in the College of Business next year. She also held two workshops this spring on ChatGPT and writing and also completed her doctoral exams and will be moving on to writing her dissertation.

Kendyl Harmeling, Assistant Director for Graduate Student Writing, had a book review published in Rhetoric Society Quarterly (in press): “Writing Their Bodies: Restoring Rhetorical Relations at the Carlisle Indian School” By Sarah Klotz. She will be the Assistant Director for the Writing Center next year.

Christina Davidson, presented a digital humanities project at the UofL Graduate Student Regional Research Conference (GSRRC). Next year she will be an Assistant Director in the Composition Program.

Braydon Dungan, presented on “American Dreams, Desires, and Deception: Nationalistic Pride and Toxic Heteronormativity in Theodore Roosevelt’s ‘The Strenuous Life'” at the Community in Peril: From Individual Identities to Global Citizenship Conference in Brno, Czech Republic. He also visited Longbranch Elementary School to exemplify how public educators can apply Writing Center techniques to elementary composition curriculum and pedagogy. And he self-published a book of poetry titled Songs for the Public from a Poet Who Can’t Sing.

Katie Fritsche, presented at two conferences, on “Princess Mononoke: Animated Solutions for the Global Climate Crisis”, at The 16th Annual Graduate Student Conference, University of Ottawa, and on “Colliding Forms in Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby and Collin’s The Hunger Games” at The Louisville Conference on Literature & Culture. She also published an article in the St. John’s University Humanities Review titled, “A Freudian Interpretation of Familial Dreams in the Demon Slayer Anime.”

Mahde Hassan served as a Scholastic Awards Juror at SUNY Oneonta for Leatherstocking Writing Project, which is writing contest for secondary students. He also worked as a volunteer with facilitating the Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture

Wendell Hixson chaired a panel at the Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture.

Andrew Messer will be the Assistant Director Creative Writing in the English Department next year.

Elizabeth Pope will have the poem “Coal Camp” published in North Dakota Quarterly. She was also awarded The Annette Allen Poetry Prize sponsored by the UofL Humanities Department and read her work at the Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture.

Charlie Ward, presented “Exploring Gender in Tommy Orange’s There There” at the Louisville Conference on Literature and Culture and “Black Identity and Performance in ‘Sonny’s Blues'” at the Coast-to-Coast 2023 Conference. They also have two poems accepted for publication, “nightmare.” in Printed Zine and “fire” in Louisville Zine.

Yuan Zhao presented at the 2022 International Conference on Romanticism and the16th Graduate Student Regional Research Conference (GSRRC) at University of Louisville. Yuan also completed his MA Culminating Project titled, “Formulaic Writing and Technology in TOEFL: Algorithm in e-rater and White Supremacist Desire.” Yuan will be joining the UofL Rhetoric and Composition PhD program next year.

On behalf of all the University Writing Center staff, thank you again for another fulfilling and exceptional year. We hope to see you back this summer or in the fall.

When Covid-19 can be a Blessing: Empathy and Change in the Writing Center

Mahde Hassan, Writing Consultant

When Covid began a couple of years ago, it seemed to us a curse, but after profound thoughts during the quarantine days, I figured out that it has implicitly taught us how valuable life is. There is not a single country which was not struck by the deadly Covid-19. Countless people died of Covid regardless of age and nationality, which resulted in tremendous panic and anxiety. Despite the huge number of people dying from Covid, we are still alive. Like me, many others would have taken it for granted that we will be living for a long time without being sick and that staying healthy is a right, not a privilege because Covid has made us feel vulnerable. When we regard staying healthy and staying alive as our right, we are less likely to be grateful for our sound health and life to God. Once we fail to realize the value of our life, we barely make the full use of it, being less careful about empathy and kindness.

Panic and anxiety that resulted from the deaths and infections of Covid made us the passengers of the same boat. Deaths and infections caused from the pandemic were not only seen in one single country, but across the globe. We may have been a citizen of one country, but the worrying atmosphere posed by the pandemic made all of us shaky and we all fought together to get over the situation. Because we all at times went through this critical moment, we have learned how to empathize with people around us. Interestingly, when we work with writers at the University Writing Center, we prioritize practicing empathy. As writers go through many stages of writing, they may get stuck, or they might not have any idea of where to begin one project and where to end it. But we patiently try to understand their struggles and offer as much support as we can. Although I knew empathy is one of the factors responsible for making a leader stand out, I would not have felt the need to practice it in real life unless I had experienced such an excruciating situation caused by the pandemic.

Furthermore, the pandemic has brought about a considerable transformation in the ways we approach virtual writing center work. While before the pandemic people including me used to think virtual appointments as the last option which is not so effective, we now regard them as being as productive as in-person appointments. When I needed to book a virtual appointment, I often took it for granted that this was going to be ineffective. On the other hand, in terms of consulting at the Virtual Writing Center, I had no idea of how to make the most out of the virtual appointments. Now that the pandemic made us more exposed to virtual appointments, I have learned how to make live video chat appointments and written feedback sessions more fruitful. In fact, while virtual hours were not filled up quite often prior to the pandemic, the demand for virtual appointments has climbed up significantly resulting in an added number of hours from the University Writing Center. Due to this change, people can still benefit from written feedback even without attending the appointments physically.

On top of that, the pandemic has made us open to change. Those who were used to shopping physically have been accustomed to shopping online. Leaders who tend to think work from home hampers productivity have let their employees work from home. People who found traveling enjoyable found joy in other activities. When it comes to writing, it is beneficial to be open to changes. For instance, I may have written the first draft of a paper and considered it the best and the final draft, having a prejudice that I need not take others feedback to improve it. Nevertheless, in reality, the more we revise and edit, the better we can make the paper. In the process of revision and editing, it is indispensable to accept criticism and constructive feedback. The moment when I can hold a mindset of changing something based on any of consultants’ feedback or simply a friend’s feedback, my paper and writing skills grow quickly. Thus, the pandemic has taught us to be open to changes and it brings out something better mostly.

The pandemic demonstrated that a simple, invisible pandemic can disrupt everything, not just in a single country, but throughout the world. So, NO—we cannot do whatever we want in life: we should care for humanity. We should be cutting off our bad habits and trying to add values to others’ lives by being honest and empathetic. No matter what we have been doing for years, we always have chances to reflect on what we are doing and reconsider what we should do to make the world a better place to live. Unless a global tragedy comes in and disrupts our regular activity, our “devil self” might not have realized that we are sent to this world with a purpose. We cannot randomly do things that can worsen people’s lives and experiences. And when we become more compassionate with our surroundings, it makes an impact. So, when I look back to the Covid-stricken years, I find myself happy thinking about the fact that I learned to appreciate what I have and be more empathetic in life regardless of where I’m working and where I am living. I’m now more open to change, thanks to Covid-19. Covid-19 is an eye-opener for me.

The Importance of Reading the Syllabus and Assignment Sheets

Yuan Zhao, Writing Consultant

Not until recently did I notice that not all the students read emails, people tend to neglect group text messages, and I know most of you will skip this blog post. But please don’t apply such non-reading strategies to your syllabus and assignment sheets. In contrast, I suggest you read the following two types of documents—syllabus and assignment sheets—very closely.

For this term, in addition to working at the University Writing Center, I also teach one first-year composition class. This double identity gives me a lens to observe students’ reading behaviors to the abovementioned two documents and the possible inconvenient consequences. When opening a writer’s Writing Center appointment form, I usually see a writing draft uploaded by the writer, but not often do I see the assignment sheet. Even though sometimes, writers copy and paste parts of the assignment requirements to the appointment form, as a Writing Center consultant, I still expect more information relevant to the writing tasks. The in-person consultations are fine, but situations can be less ideal if it is a Virtual Writing Center appointment for written feedback. Without assignment sheets or writing prompts as references, it is hard for Writing Center consultants to decide whether the writing projects address or deviate from the expected topics. In consequence, Writing Center consultants can only pay more attention to local issues, such as the mechanism within paragraphs, transitions, topic sentences, formatting, and language styles, while it is comparatively difficult for them to give feedback on higher-level concerns, such as thesis statements, or whether the organization or evidence employed in the draft address the requirements of the writing task.

In the very first class of the first-year composition courses, I led students to read the syllabus and discuss the assignment sheets. But we all forget things, and forgetting is a process that we need to fight against, so after a few weeks, I did not feel surprised to receive student submissions that failed to meet the requirements of the assignment sheets. Some of them missed the due time without emailing me for an extension; some submitted a Google Doc link while the assignment sheet specifically required a Microsoft Word document; some seldom followed the required MLA or APA styles, collaging the font choice, spacing, margins, and headers/title pages. From their performance, I know they did not revisit the assignment sheets closely before submitting the papers. If students choose not to read the assignment sheets even before the due time of submission, when will they read them?

According to the course description for ENG102, one of the learning outcomes is that students’ writing should “analyze the needs of an audience and the requirements of the assignment or task.” Reading syllabus and assignment sheets closely is one crucial step to approaching that learning outcome. In addition, the first-year composition classrooms might be the first chance (and sometimes, the last chance) for a writing instructor to explain in the most meticulous manner the significance of different writing conventions and how they work in college. It means some instructors teaching intermediate or advanced courses might suppose students know well the basics of academic writing since they have completed the first-year composition courses. However, in some cases, students can fail their expectations. If some do not learn enough composition knowledge, I do hope they at least learn some skills to conduct learning—to know where to look for the assigned composition requirements. In fact, within the syllabus and assignment sheets, we can always find the resources that instruct us on what we should do.

Why Should We Read the Syllabus

A syllabus might be less directly relevant to writing tasks, but it is a framing document for the whole course where we can find detailed information. For example, some instructors allow extensions, while others can be very strict on the time to submit assignments. According to the details in the class policies, students can predict what kind of assignment writing strategies they can employ before submitting their projects. For another example, most syllabi contain a section for assigned reading lists. When reading the class plan and the list of assigned readings, students can notice clues for the course design, and sometimes can get themselves better prepared for the class by reading the materials in advance. In addition to the course policies, some instructors include various university resources in their syllabi, and as far as I know, most students skip reading them. For sure, it is not necessary to read them closely. Just a kind reminder, if you encounter some difficulties and need assistance at the campus, besides using Google or ChatGPT to look for answers, your syllabus often contains more direct answers for what you need.

Why Should We Read Assignment Sheets

If a syllabus provides us with scaffolding instructions on what a course expects us to do, what assignment sheets offer is often something more practical and manageable. For a particular writing task, reading prompts from an assignment sheet can inform a writer what topic they should be attentive to, what arguments they might head to, and what evidence or examples they should prepare. Reading prompts is more like conducting a reading comprehension quiz. Sometimes, highlighting the key phrases in the prompts can be very helpful. From the highlighted keywords, we can always refer to our class readings and see if there are potential connections we can make so that we can transfer them into writing. The assigned reading materials sometimes are great sources when students need to include evidence or examples, and some instructors prefer seeing students doing so. Their preference lies in that instructors know the reading materials well and it is convenient for them to provide more engaging feedback. In addition, if the assignment has some particular formatting requirements, please guarantee your writing project follows them strictly. Prior to reading your writing content, instructors read your paper format first. The formatting details from your writing often lead instructors to take it for granted whether you are serious about your writing. As a side note, you can also find useful information about format editing from the webpage of the University Writing Center, including the most updated MLA, APA, and Chicago styles.

Don’t Read Your Assignment Sheet Alone

Now, I assume you will read your assignment sheet closely, highlighting the keywords and checking the specific formatting requirements. I also understand that after applying the close reading strategies, you might still be confused about the writing tasks. Don’t leave the confusion unresolved before you embark on your writing. In addition to reading alone, you should read your assignment sheets with other people. First and foremost, whenever you find something unclear that needs further explanations in the assignment, you can always make use of instructors’ office hours to raise your concerns. Reading with your instructor who is also the author of the assignment sheet is the most effective approach to untangling the confusion. Second, you can read with your classmates. In fact, when you read the assignment sheets with your peers, you are doing something more than teasing out the requirements of the assignment sheets, since you are working as a literacy community. Since you and your peers know a lot about the course context, when reading the assignment sheets, why don’t you brainstorm for the writing task? Everyone can roughly share their writing purposes, outlines, resources and even discuss some practical writing strategies to address instructors’ expectations for the writing projects. By listening to your peers’ writing plans, you can build and revise your writing plans, too. Finally, you are always more than welcome to read the assignment sheets with the University Writing Center consultants. And I highly suggest you do so when you make an appointment with us. All of the consultants are experienced graduate students and some of us have teaching experience. Based on your verbal descriptions about the project and the written requirements from the assignment sheets, we can offer constructive feedback addressing your project, and hopefully, we can help boost your confidence to help you become a better writer.

Reading syllabi and assignment sheets cultivates important professional reading skills. It is the prerequisite condition to writing, which requires specific responses to meet the requirements of different tasks. The reading activity entails responsibilities as a reader, a communicator, an executor, and a writer. As a responsible reader, you have to read the materials closely; as a reliable communicator, you are expected to talk to different parties to make sure you understand the tasks; as an executor, you have to make decisions on what to write and how to write it; and as a dedicated writer, you compose a writing product as a response to a series of specific requirements. So start your writing by reading the syllabus and assignment sheets.

In Pursuit of Creating a Better World

Mahde Hassan, Writing Consultant

Give me a good writer, I’ll give you a better world. There are people who love writing but there are also people who are reluctant to write much. Those who have not a keen interest in writing can be very good readers and thus find huge enthusiasm in reading and knowing new things, thereby changing perspectives and gaining a positive mindset on things around us. Have you imagined that a good writer could bring about positive changes in society along with making the world better by promoting love, empathy, kindness, and equality?

As a University Writing Center consultant at the University of Louisville, I work with writers across many disciplines. In the conference sessions, one of my prime goals is to promote love, empathy, and equality in addition to aid them to be better writers by being welcoming, making them feel comfortable, not being dominant in the conversations and offering them notes on the session.

When a writer walks in an appointment, the first thing I do is that I always try to be welcoming to them. Sometimes I find them from the disciplines I know much about and other times I find them from the disciplines that I am not deeply knowledgeable of. But since I was trained on how to offer feedback on any papers, I don’t hesitate to try to help. I enjoy helping them because I see them being great writers and having an impact on this with their writing skill. Besides that, I let the writers settle in in the first couple of minutes of the appointments without rushing much about the assignment they work on.

In the appointments, I also try to make the writers feel comfortable right from the beginning so that they can inform me of their concerns. For that I prefer asking questions outside the assignments they are working on. Sometimes I ask them “How was the week?”, “How are you?” or simply I ask, “How your semester has been going on so far?”. I also share any interesting memory I have related to their answers and the major they are pursuing. I try to make them feel at home with that kind of attitude.

Most importantly, I love being a good listener rather than talking more or controlling the conversations. Not being dominant in the conversations with the writers allows me to figure out the concerns and struggles they have associated with that assignment or work. Furthermore, I try to make them feel valued and important. It, in turn, brings about surprising benefits to me. Once they feel valued, they never hesitate to share everything they want to know or are confused about. There comes the best opportunity for me to serve them. When I offer insights, I also ask for their opinions time to time instead of talking for a long time at a stretch so that the conferences become engaging. Hence, this mindset helps me enormously to listen to all they might have to say and empathize while offering them suggestions. I not only offer suggestions but also ensure that they understand why and how bringing something new to their paper or taking out something can lead their paper to be a better one. Sometimes, I attempt to keep them motivated by only pointing out what they did amazingly in a paper initially. And listening to them first helps me the most to hear their perspectives and struggles, and thus thinking of improving the paper puts me in their shoes.

Finally, I ensure that they have some notes about our discussion on their way back from the Writing Center. In case the writers start working on the assignment or project a few days after the appointment, they can look back at the suggestions I have made. In that way, they would feel confident with getting started or working further on a paper. Throughout the appointments, I try to spread love, be compassionate and be equal to every writer. My core goal is to help them be better writers, but I also bring those traits into place when running the appointment to promote a better world. If at least some writers out of the hundreds of appointments I am dealing with can pass on the kindness, empathy and love they receive along with capitalizing the skills they grow from the writing center, it is highly likely that the world can change radically. That’s why I believe whatever position we work in, we always have opportunities to promote empathy and kindness. It eventually creates a better world. When I am nice to others in my profession, a message of spreading love, empathy and equality is also conveyed to them implicitly. Once upon a time there were not many technological advancements, but neither were there as many crimes, wars, terrorism attacks and natural disasters as there are now. Hence, I believe each of us needs to be mindful of spreading empathy, equality, and kindness through whatever role we work in to bring back the peace.

Listening to Learn: Tutoring Unfamiliar Writing Genres

Olalekan Adepoju, Assistant Director for Graduate Student Writing

“The job of writing centers is to produce better writers, not better writing.” This assertion by Stephen North is, surely, a familiar maxim to most writing center practitioners. But, has anyone also considered how writers can help writing centers produce better tutors? I believe the goal of every tutor is to develop their tutoring skill using every available means; that is why I think, as consultants, by listening to learn from writers, especially those writing in genres we are unfamiliar with, we have the unique opportunity develop our tutoring skills.

Listening is paramount to the tutorial work we do in the writing center. Generally, the tutor tends to listen to several things during tutoring session: you passively listening to your inner thoughts about the draft and, more importantly, listening to the writer’s comments or questions. Moreover, writing center scholars and practitioners admit that listening is essential to achieving an efficient tutoring in the writing center. They submit that listening is not only a means of developing a tutor’s understanding of the current session but also a means for working from, with, and across differences, becoming increasingly aware of those differences rather than flattening or ignoring them. This submission means that listening is a tool for making tutors become better at their tutoring craft. Hence, tutors interested in advancing their craft must be open and willing to listen to learn (from the writers) specific ways to develop their level of awareness.

In listening to learn, we move beyond attempting to adjust our knowledge of the generic needs of writers, especially when dealing with unfamiliar writing genre, to learning to become more aware of this unfamiliar writing genre in efforts to achieve a successful tutoring session. Listening to learn does not entail knowing (or pretending to know) about the subject matter. Rather, listening to learn helps the tutor to achieve meaningful awareness of subject matter necessary for some sense of comfort during the session. Such subject matter awareness would, for instance, help to clear up certain confusions; move past genre-specific jargons and develop interpretive questions, thereby ensuring that the goals of the tutoring session are efficiently met.

In my work with science writers, for example, I continue to practice the ‘listen-to-learn’ approach because I want to be more aware of the means to navigate the seemingly unfamiliar writing genre. From these writers, I have learned ways to not only guide them effectively during their session but also become a better tutor for future work with scientific or related writing genre. For instance, one of the science writers I work with always provides an overview of their essay using visual aids such as diagrams. My sense is that the writer assumes I’m not a specialist in science-related concepts and describing their work in abstract terms might confuse me, and indirectly lead to a tutoring breakdown. So, to make me aware of the subject matter of their writing project, the writer explained concepts to me with the aid of diagrams. While they do not expect me to become knowledgeable of the topic, by listening to the writer’s explanatory context, this subject-matter awareness afforded me a good level of confidence to meaningfully engage the writer and their writing. Additionally, beyond subject-matter awareness, tutors can also become better tutors by being learning to be interculturally aware, especially when working with multilingual writers. Intercultural awareness helps the tutor become more sensitive to processes, situated contexts, and particular situations that influence what and how a writer writes.

Ultimately, while our goal as writing tutors is to utilize every available strategy to help writers hone their writing ability and become better writers, we should not disregard how writers can make us better tutors. As we prioritize listening to learn about the subject matter of the writer’s writing project or non-writing related information the writer willingly shares with us, we generally become more aware of the best means to approach these seemingly unfamiliar genres of writing.

Wait, How Can I Make the Most of My Group Writing Experience?: Co-Writing About Co-Writing Part 2

This post is the second in a two-part series on co-authorship from different perspectives. In this second post, we’ll discuss ways to use writing center sessions as a model for negotiating the co-writing process and reflect on the experience of co-writing this blog. The first part addressed key cognitive and pedagogical considerations in co-writing projects.

Left: Brice Montgomery, Writing Consultant; Right: Kylee Auten, Writing Consultant

Group writing is present in all levels of the academic community. There are informal co-writing opportunities, like a group chat that helps you better understand your discussion board post, but there are also the formal, much more nerve-wracking co-writing projects that, as we discussed last week, cause frustration and anger despite their benefits. Perhaps establishing productive group dynamics is the most harrowing aspect of a co-written project. Each participant will have to put forth their contributions and then, together, the group will have to decide in which direction they will take the piece. Both before the project begins and throughout the duration of the writing process, collaborators will have to manage and negotiate workloads and responsibilities that allow each party to reach their goals. A writing center appointment is kind of like that, too, in that the writer and the consultant have to balance their contributions in order to meet their goals. There is (hopefully) mutual effort and negotiation in every writing center appointment. In this post, we are going to explore facets of writing center practices that correlate to group writing. To do so, we’ll reflect on our own experience writing this series of blog posts.

Negotiating Boundaries

One thing that has to be negotiated in every writing center consultation, whether overtly or not, is the role each person will play in the consultation. The writer and the consultant must work together to determine who is responsible for what during the appointment. This is rarely an explicit process, but it will become clear throughout the session that each person takes on certain tasks. Likewise, co-authors must agree on their responsibilities regarding their project, but these roles do not always have to be as clearly defined as they are in a writing center session. For example, when writing this blog series, we did not set strict tasks other than taking on the main responsibility for one post and providing in-depth feedback and revisions for the other post. Other than that, we wanted to remain flexible when it came to “assigning” roles. For instance, one role co-writers might want to establish is a dedicated note taker, but we found it more productive to both take notes since we tended to pick up on different ideas during our meetings. Additionally, we both performed research related to the project, and we both had an active role in developing the outline and structure for the blog posts. This fluidity and casualness that we established may not be possible for every group writing project (for sure, I’m almost certain these blurred boundaries could complicate an actual writing center session), but as long as the boundaries, or lack of boundaries, are negotiated and agreed upon by all parties, then the work should be smooth sailing.

Maintaining Ownership

Ownership is a tricky thing in a collaborative writing project. In writing center appointments, consultants always aim to provide helpful feedback without pushing the writer to make unwanted changes–we want to ensure writers maintain ownership of their document. A co-authored project, however, does not have the same clean break between who is in charge of the piece. Each person contributing to the project should have a vested interest in the process, content, and product. Yet, even when all parties are invested in the project, there can still be some tension, or at least misunderstanding. For this project, ownership became tricky when we were dividing the workload. Together, we separated our content into two complementary posts, but then we had to decide who would write the first draft of each post. When Brice suggested we each “write a draft,” Kylee thought he meant we would each write a draft of both posts, but that’s because she worked under the assumption that we held dual ownership over the whole project. Brice, on the other hand, had perceived that we were individually taking ownership over one half of the project. Besides this breakdown in communication, we did feel like we had equal control over the project when it came to making suggestions or revisions to the other person’s writing. Without this shared sense of ownership, we would not have learned as much from this writing process.

Instruction and Feedback

As co-authors, you have to be willing to learn from each other. John Hedgecock, in his book chapter “Reflections of Coauthorship and the Professional Dialogue: Risks and Rewards,” encourages those interested in co-authoring to partner with someone whose skills will balance and complement your own (114). This is true, as well, of writing center appointments, because successful sessions also rely on complementary skills and knowledge. For instance, consultants should know the mechanics for how to write an argumentative essay, but they rely on writers to bring the content knowledge needed to successfully make their argument. So, in a way, there is mutual instruction and feedback happening in every appointment; the consultant instructs the writer on writing practices while the writer instructs the consultant on content. In co-authorship, there may be less instruction on practical writing topics, but each person is going to have different knowledge to add to the project, which they will inevitably have to teach to their partner. We each had two different takeaways regarding what we had learned from each other. For Brice, he learned about accountability from Kylee, as she regularly reached out to make sure the project was still moving forward. Kylee, having no experience with co-writing, though, gained practical knowledge from Brice about the best way to approach our drafting phase.

Establishing Trust

Trust may be the toughest thing to manage in both writing center appointments and co-writing projects. In a writing center consultation, writers have to trust the consultants are giving them accurate, helpful information that will make their writing and their writing process better. Consultants, on the other hand, have to trust writers are engaged with the project and are invested in implementing the strategies discussed during the session. A writing partnership, likewise, must be formed by people who trust their co-author’s advice and know they are both equally interested and invested in the project For us, we felt confident taking on a co-authored project because we had multiple, informal and formal opportunities to work with each other’s individual writing assignments. Additionally, we had previously met for a writing center appointment over one of Kylee’s class assignments, so we were familiar with how our dynamic would play out. We knew, through experience, that we could trust the other to provide honest, productive feedback, even when it meant taking our ideas in a new, unexpected direction.

Conclusion

Like we said last week, group projects probably aren’t going away anytime soon. We hope, though, that this two-part blog series has provided tools and frameworks to help make future co-writing experiences more fulfilling and productive. Focus on what can be gained from the process, not just the project. Chances are, each member in a co-writing project might feel some hesitancy or discomfort, but rely on establishing healthy boundaries, take ownership of the project, delight in the new information being learned, and find trustworthy people to collaborate with.

Works Cited

Hedgecock, John. “Reflections of Coauthorship and the Professional Dialogue: Risks and Rewards.” Writing for Scholarly Publication: Behind the Scenes in Language Education, edited by Christine Pearson Casanave and Stephanie Vandrick, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003, pp. 113-127.

You May Hate It, But There’s a Reason for All This: Co-Writing about Co-Writing Part 1

This post is the first in a two-part series on co-authorship from different perspectives. In this first post, we’ll discuss key cognitive and pedagogical considerations in co-writing projects. The second part will both address ways to use writing center sessions as a model for negotiating the co-writing process and reflect on the experience of co-writing this blog.

From right to left: Brice Montgomery, Writing Consultant; and
Kylee Auten, Writing Consultant

Ah, the dreaded group project, known for its ubiquity and the frustration it inspires. Few assignments elicit opinions as strong as those which require co-writing, but through this post, we’ll argue that the severity of those opinions—while perhaps not unavoidable—can be softened by recognizing features of co-writing projects.

To go about this task, we have opted to get a little meta in our approach and co-write about co-authorship. Using both external research and the lessons learned from our experience, we hope to shed some light on several considerations to keep in mind when approaching a co-authoring project, whether you are a student, instructor, or potential co-writer.

1. Co-authoring is valuable. No, really!

First, it’s necessary to answer the question on every student’s mind—“Is there even a point to all of this?” Research suggests the answer is yes, and not just because it makes grading easier for a TA.

James Reither and Douglas Vipond found that collaborative writing is a complex social process, and beyond the surface-level act of writing something down, it offers a unique form of “knowledge making,” positioning collaborative texts not as a product, but as a testament to the collaborative process. Unfortunately, despite other research indicating similar values, the average instructor may be hard-pressed to explain why they use group writing projects. For frustrated students, vague discourse on the importance of collaboration may not feel like sufficient justification for these exercises. Thankfully, there are several other reasons to value the practice.

2. The co-authoring process is procedurally different from a solo write.

During the process of writing this blog, we found that co-writing is anything but linear. Even though we chose this project of our own volition, the initial enthusiasm waned, and early meetings resulted in a great deal of work from Kylee and a few stray sentences from Brice. The project moved forward in fits and starts, and it became clear that the effort would be weighted towards planning and revision, with the initial draft quickly becoming an afterthought. Suffice it to say, our anecdotal experience suggests co-writing requires a different set of metacognitive skills, and research agrees.

Helen Dale found that in student co-authoring assignments, the additional input from peers created a kind of feedback loop that eliminated the archetypical brainstorm-draft-edit process. Projects also had more logical structures because it was necessary for co-writers to plan in detail before beginning, simply to maintain coherence. Ultimately, co-writing can be a more extensive and intensive writing process, but it has the potential to transform what ends up on the page.

3. Collaboration succeeds when collaboration is the point.

Louth et al. compared both student scores and attitudes on individual papers and collaborative papers in a college freshman English course, and while they found no statistically significant difference between the scores, there was a markedly positive difference in attitude, with collaborative groups being more satisfied than their individual counterparts. The authors suggest that dissatisfaction arises when collaboration is elevated as a pedagogical value rather than a theoretical one; it works when the focus is on what is gained through the collaborative process.

In the case of this blog project, is the writing inherently better? Not necessarily, but it did push our approach in directions that might otherwise have gone unexplored. In the early stages, we riffed and asked each other questions about possible ways to broach the subject of co-authoring, and we challenged each other’s expectations about the goals and parameters of the project. For example, the initial draft of this post was specifically directed towards instructors planning co-writing assignments, but Kylee wisely pointed out that it was too narrow of a focus to be very helpful, and it negated the relevance of our own co-writing process. By shifting our attention to more general principles, the post opened out into something more accessible for different types of readers.

4. Successful collaboration as a learning process may largely be a matter of personality.

If you’re one of the many individuals who resents collaborative writing, fret not—research indicates that group work will not be universally beneficial or enjoyable for everyone. Utilizing attachment theory, Shiri Lavy studied whether there was a correlation between personality types and performance in group projects. While it’s difficult to say how metacognitively beneficial the practice was, Lavy found that students’ self-reported satisfaction was influenced by their attachment style, with anxious and avoidant students both expressing dissatisfaction with group work compared to individual work, despite performing well. Some people just won’t enjoy collaboration, and that’s okay.

Ultimately, group projects aren’t going anywhere, and while it may seem reductive to point out that co-writing may not be for everyone, recognizing that reality may help reluctant co-authors re-evaluate their approach.

Check back next week for a deep dive into the lessons we learned by co-writing as well as how writing center sessions can model the skills necessary to be effective co-authors.

Works Cited

Dale, Helen. “The Influence of Co-Authoring on the Writing Process.” Journal of Teaching Writing, vol. 15, no. 1, 1996, pp. 65-79, https://journals.iupui.edu/index.php/teachingwriting/article/view/1194/1154.

Lavy, Shiri. “Who Benefits from Group Work in Higher Education? An Attachment Theory Perspective.” Higher Education, vol. 73, no. 2, 2017, pp. 175-187, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26447599.

Louth, Richard, et al. “The Effects of Collaborative Writing Techniques on Freshmen Writing and Attitudes.” The Journal of Experimental Education, vol. 61, no. 3, 1993, pp. 215-224, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/20152373.

Reither, James, and Douglas Vipond. “Writing as Collaboration.” College English, vol. 51, no. 8, 1989, pp. 855-867, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/378091.

For The Love of Writing

Michael Benjamin, Assistant Director and Writing Consultant

It’s not lost on me that this is being posted on Valentine’s Day, 2022. So I’m going to try and stick to the day’s theme: love.

Love is hard. Complex. It’s a feeling, sure, but it’s also an action. These days I’ve been conceptualizing love within the framework of care. Caring about ourselves, our dearest ones, our community, our larger world. Care can be shooting a text to a friend you haven’t heard from in a week or two or volunteering at the local community literacy center. Care takes energy but is always worth it even though it usually comes with little to no reward. In an affective economy, care is a currency. Tying love and care together begins to make visible all of the little acts we do. It pushes us to be thoughtful and reflective and, frankly, better people.

I realize this probably feels like it’s going off of the rails, but please bear with me.

I think I can speak for everyone at the writing center. We care about writing at the here because we care about our UofL community. And we know that we have a unique opportunity to spread the joy of a love for writing.

Here’s a quick story: it was my first month of my undergraduate career and I’d gotten a lower grade than desired on an assignment. I went to the writing center, not really knowing what to expect, hoping that I’d come back with a better text to bump my grade up. What I got was an experience that has powered my academic career for the past decade. My consultant smiled at me and told me Play with your writing. Find the joy in it. Keep caring and putting love into it. That experience was so transformative for me that seven months later I was working in that writing center. I’m sure it has something to do with my pedagogical ethos, too. That consultant cared about me, showed a love for her work and writing and the writers she worked with in a way that was so infectious and powerful that I needed to take action, to pass it along.

I write this as a call for all of us to radiate that love and care throughout our worlds. I also write this as a way to urge us to use the written word as a means of care.

Next week, we are hosting an event for International Mother Language Day. I’m excited to see y’all UofL community members show a love for writing through all of these guest blog posts written in your mother tongues. I’m even more excited to fill out these notecards for recent immigrants and refugees. Handwritten letters of simple words of encouragement are an act of care. Taking the time out of your day, in the middle of what has been a brutal semester, to stop and focus writing something for someone you don’t know in your best handwriting won’t show up on your CV or transcript, but it’s a loving act that can have a world of meaning. I’m personally excited for our little writing center community to show love to all of the multilinguists and polyglots amongst us.

I know today is viewed as a day or romantic love. A day you spend with your partner, showing them how much you appreciate them. I implore you to show that care to everyone. What if you jotted a little note of appreciation for the wait staff at the restaurant? Sent a couple coworkers/colleagues/classmates a small compliment? Took 10 minutes to yourself to journal what and who you love and care for? Care for you? What if you went completely old school and snail mailed your folks? Words are powerful and cost nothing. Write them. Share them. Care for and with them.