It is hard for me to believe that I am already halfway through my second semester of sophomore year at the University of Richmond. Semesters have come and gone, and before I can process what is happening around me, it will be September and I will be jet setting to Prague to study abroad for four months.
English 383 has been one of those classes that, when I reflect on 2012 thus far, I feel that I have learned the most. The readings have been provocative and have allowed me to think about writing, both my own and that of my peers, in new ways. But, as I have mentioned previously, I feel that the skills necessary to become the kind of writing consultant that I want to be can really only be taught through practice, not reading. For this reason, I was thrilled to be given the opportunity to read a paper written by a peer and practice what I have read and seen.
Dr. Essid warned me before I read Kelsey’s paper that it was a strong one; he was not joking. The biggest issue I had with Kelsey’s paper was the lack of periods, which turned out to be a computer error and did not take a way from the strength of the writing. I found that the strength of the paper was beneficial for me to practice my commentary, as I had to do particularly close reading to find errors.
One of the issues that I had with Kelsey’s paper was her use of rather long sentences. There were a few times that I found myself reading a sentence two or three times because it was difficult to comprehend all of the information that she was giving to the reader. During our conference, I brought up the issue. Kelsey replied that she has always struggled condensing her sentences, which caused me to think of Bartholomae’s Study of Error. It is important that we as consultants analyze why our peers make the errors that they do so that we can properly address them. Because this issue has been a recurring one for Kelsey, I knew that I would not be able to properly analyze why she struggles with run-on sentences in the amount of time that we had together.
I wrestled with the issue after class that day and during my relaxing spring break. Then, one day, my sixteen-year-old brother came home from school. I asked him how high school was treating him, which caused him to launch into an elaborate explanation about the physics project he was doing for the science fair. Although three years younger than me, my brother is much smarter than I am. That, combined with my total lack of knowledge about physics, meant that I found that my brother was throwing so much information at me at one time that I could not possibly comprehend everything that he was saying. I simply smiled and nodded and when he scurried away from me, I realized the answer to my question about Kelsey. Kelsey is clearly a strong writer and an intelligent person. I believe that these two character traits contribute to her struggle with run-on sentences. I know that Kelsey has a lot to say but, despite the strength of her writing, sometimes gives the reader more information than they can process in one sentence. I suggested to Kelsey that she utilize “craftman’s distance”, followed by a reading of her paper aloud to spot areas where the reader may become confused.
Throughout Kelsey’s paper, I found a grand total of one grammatical error: the issue of colons versus semi-colons. I am familiar with this grammatical point; I find that I often struggle when deciding which is appropriate. Although this was a minor error that only occurred once in the paper, I attempted to think of how I would handle a more serious grammatical issue during a consultation.
I know from my own past grammatical struggles that it is more beneficial to understand grammar than to memorize it. I believe that Glover & Stay say it best: “Through an understanding of grammar, as opposed to rote memorization of forms, students can begin to see connections between grammatical choice and audience, and, more important, they can begin to understand what these choices say about themselves as writers and as human beings” (Glover & Stay 130). This quotation shows that grammar should be more than a list of rules that writers should memorize. It should become a part of their writing “ritual”, as grammar could have an effect on how the reader views the strength of the writer. During conference, I showed Kelsey a Writer’s Web page on colons versus semi-colons. Writer’s Web allows writers to have a reference point that, hopefully, could become a part of their writing ritual. I want to make using Writer’s Web in consultations part of my writing consultant ritual, as I believe it is an important resource that begins integrating grammar into the writing process.
There was one sentence in Kelsey’s paper that immediately brought me to the discussion we had had the class before regarding offensive papers. Kelsey had written that “in today’s society”, midgets are viewed in a humorous light, rather than the supernatural one that they were portrayed in Native American religion. That one sentence quickly reminded me of Gorkemli’s experience with a xenophobic paper. I used Gorkemli’s technique of paraphrasing what was written in the paper in hopes that Kelsey would “[hear] and [become] aware of possible differing reactions” to what she had written (Gorkemli 10). Because she had been quite vocal during our discussion in class two days earlier, Kelsey immediately recognized that her “easy generalization” had led to something that could have been viewed as offensive to the reader.
Although the generalization in Kelsey’s paper could have been viewed as offensive, I was, and this may sound strange, happy that it was in there. I was nervous in class the day before at the thought of being in a consultation with an offensive paper. Dealing with a mildly offensive comment with someone that I knew from class was a perfect first experience. Now, if I was faced with an offensive paper or comment within a paper, I think that I would have a much better idea of how to handle it.
Another reason that I enjoyed this midterm assignment so much is that I was given the opportunity to be consulted by one of my peers. Lauren read a history paper that I had written during my first semester freshman year. I wanted to use this paper because I had written it before I was entirely comfortable with how to write for college. Before class, I was excited to see how Lauren reacted to the paper and what comments she had for me.
Lauren’s style of consulting was to be as warm and encouraging as possible. Her enthusiasm for my writing made the consultation insightful and enjoyable. I admired the way that she integrated so much of what we had learned in class into her comments, but her friendliness and openness were two qualities that really stood out to me during the consultation.
After my consultation with Lauren, I realized that being able to analyze and edit a peer’s paper is only makes up half of the job description of a consultant. The other half is much more personal. We must make the writer feel comfortable, open up to the writer about our own experiences, form a relationship, encourage them, push them…all while showing some amount of restraint. We are peers, not professors.
Now, time is continuing to fly. There are only six weeks left in this semester, which, to me, is mind-blowing. But after this English 383 midterm, I realized exactly how much I have learned thus far. I know that the remaining six weeks will make me feel exponentially more comfortable with my future role as a writing consultant, but I am now confident that I will be able to take the theories of the classroom and put them into practice in the Writing Center.
No comments:
Post a Comment