Search

In especially the context of a writing centre, learning takes place during, and as part of, the conversations between the writing centre consultant and the student. This interaction is an integral part of writing centre research and is the focus of this largely qualitative study, employing a politeness lens. While there is some research on the politeness strategies employed by writing center consultants, there is very little research on the use of humour and its accompanying laughter to enhance rapport and interaction. The use of humour in the context of a writing centre is particularly relevant especially in light of the power dynamics and 'distance' inherent in the student-consultant relationship. This study therefore analysed a corpus of 10 video-recorded and transcribed writing centre consultations through a politeness lens in an effort to fill this gap. Our findings indicate that humour used positively can have positive effects, bridge the gap and create rapport and solidarity in complex relationships. The analysis also demonstrates how humour and laughter as used in the context of a writing centre consultation enhances interaction, creates a more positive learning environment and lessens the stress and anxiety students generally associate with academic writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The reigning orthodoxy in writing centres has been to avoid directive approaches and embrace non-directive approaches to tutoring. Although since the late 1990s various writing centre scholars have debunked this myth, many guidebooks on tutoring still adhere to it. We believe that theory-led empirical research on tutor approaches and actions is necessary to demonstrate the situation-dependent efficacy of directive approaches and thereby dispel the myth that a peer role is preferred to a teacherly role. This paper starts addressing the need for theory-led empirical research on directiveness by applying theories of linguistic pragmatics to analyse writing centre consultations and assist writing centre tutors to develop a critical awareness of both their actions and students' responses. First, a synopsis is given of how directiveness is portrayed in the writing centre literature. This is followed by an overview of micro- and macro-pragmatic theories on speech acts in linguistics and suggestions on how they may be applied to better understand the role of directiveness in writing centre consultations. Finally, the present research project is described and an analysis of two excerpts (speech events) from a particular consultation is offered as an illustration of the insight offered by pragmatic theories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The reigning orthodoxy in writing centres has been to avoid directive approaches and embrace non-directive approaches to tutoring. Although this ‘myth has been debunked by various writing centre scholars since the late 1990s, many guidebooks on tutoring still adhere to it. We believe that theory-led empirical research on tutor approaches and actions is necessary to demonstrate the situation-dependent efficacy of directive approaches, and thereby dispel the myth that a peer role is preferred to a teacherly role. This paper starts addressing the need for theory-led empirical research on directiveness by applying theories of linguistic pragmatics to analyze writing centre consultations, and assist writing centre tutors to develop a critical awareness of both their actions and students’ responses. First, an overview is given of the description of directiveness in the writing centre literature. This is followed by an overview of micro- and macropragmatic theories on speech acts in linguistics, and suggestions on how they may be applied to better understand the role of directiveness in writing centre consultations. This is followed by an overview of present research project, and an analysis of two excerpts (speech events) from a particular consultation. The article is concluded by a reflection on the findings, and suggestions are made on how to apply them towards improving writing centre pedagogy at the institution where the research was conducted.

In post-apartheid South Africa, writing centres exist in almost every university to address the academic writing needs of students. At Stellenbosch University Writing Lab, writing consultants use collaborative learning and peer feedback in their work with writers in one-to-one consultations. As part of a larger research project about how students in a Health Professions Education Master’s degree responded to different types of feedback, our study focuses on whether the feedback received in a writing consultation compares to, or differs from, the feedback from the class group members. Our findings suggest that in general the students were open to interventions such as writing consultations. Furthermore, peer feedback from both a class group member as well as a writing consultant was experienced as useful. The study further shows that the consultants’ approach to giving feedback was in line with the pedagogy practised in writing centres. The article concludes with measures that were implemented to address uncertainties identified in the study. We recommend that the purpose of consultations be clarified to lecturers, that consultations be integrated in the writing process before the assignment is marked and, to minimise role confusion, that consultants describe to students the way consultations work at the beginning of the consultation.

Learner talk, a neglected area of study in the literature of language advising for second language (L2) learners, deserves more attention. With reference to multiple qualitative sources of data obtained from interviews and tutor-learner recorded conversations, this paper delineates learners' behaviors, strategies and contribution to language learning in tutor-dominant writing consultations. More importantly, it reveals the relationships between self-perception and learning behaviors via learning strategies. Nine native and non-native English-speaking writing tutors and 23 L2 learners from different disciplines participated in the study. Three types of L2 learners and 11 learning strategies were identified and analyzed based on the self-reported data and transcribed conversations. Analysis showed that the identified strategies signify the learners' behaviors and varied degrees of readiness to engage actively in learning by obtaining language input from tutors through some self-initiated acts, demonstrating selfawareness of their problems and establishing rapport with tutors to accomplish the learning task. Implications for teaching and future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the international growth of English-medium education, tertiary institutions are increasingly providing academic support services to L2 students, and thus, the number of writing centers working with L2 student writers has also increased. Writing center practices originated in L1 English educational contexts and their appropriateness for L2 English writers requires examination. This study investigated the effect of writing center consultations on the essay writing skills of L1 Arabic foundation level students at an English-medium university in the Gulf region. Analysis was based on quantitative measures of writing ability of two distinct groups of students: an experimental group who participated in tutoring sessions at the university’s writing center and a control group who did not. Findings indicated that students who participated in writing center consultations scored significantly higher in overall essay writing scores, as well as in two aspects of writing: task fulfilment (that is ideas) and text organization/coherence. These findings contribute to a limited bank of similar empirical studies on effectiveness of writing center sessions on students’ essay writing ability. They also support the case for the expansion of writing center work beyond the domains of predominantly L1 English academic communities.