The readings this week provide a spectrum of perspective on the management and attitude towards time. In the Geller piece, time becomes a restraint that the author encourages us to free ourselves from, insisting that a hypersensitivity of time limits will restrict us in our tutoring sessions and detract from what we can provide those we tutor. In the Murray piece, however, he argues that "the brevity of conferences gives them a productive intensity," and he advises against the sense of colloquialism and comfort we have been discussing thusfar throughout the semester.
Do you agree with Geller, that time restraints are extremely limiting, or do you agree with Murray, that the shorter sessions allow for direct focus on the writing, and that casual conversation detracts from the productivity of a session?
All this talk about time management is pertinent to the elephant in the room--drop-in tutoring. Drop-in tutoring may well be one of the most difficult tasks we are to take on in the Writing Center. In Beat (Not) the (Poor) Clock, Geller writes, "By the clock, there may not be enough time for everything we want to do. Conferences are too short to finish all the work we’d like to complete with student writers." How do you think this applies to drop-in sessions? For those of you who have taken drop-in appointments in the writing center, what techniques do you use to stay focussed and productive in the span of fifteen minutes? How do you keep track of time throughout your sessions, both drop-in and appointment? Do you think fifteen minutes is too brief a time period to truly be productive in a tutoring session? Do you think thirty minutes is adequate enough?
I'm going to wimp out on your question if I agree with Geller or Murray. I think that an ideal session leans more towards Geller's ideas with a nod towards Murray's ideas. I agree with Murray that an immersion session is the best way to get the most out of a session however 2 minutes?? That is insanity. In this regard, I think that the idea of using strong focus is the only important detail that came from this reading. Taking strong focus (like an immersion session) into a session that doesn't focus on time rids both the writer and tutor of any anxiety that comes with the clock. Geller talked about taking time for reflection as a tutor as a means of learning from the writer. Reflection doesn't detract from the focus, if anything it immerses both the writer and tutor deeper into the paper. Also, I completely agreed with Geller's point that a tutoring session is like a performance, the time adapts to the event. Being bound by a clock does not mean that there will be more focus or a more efficient use of time. An effective tutoring session has its own natural flow. You take the amount of time you need even if that requires a follow up session. Adapting a tutoring session to the writer's learning style and amount of help they need tends to come pretty naturally for me. Yes, I check the clock when I feel like we've been talking for a while, but if we're running out of time that gives me the opportunity to give the writer a to-do list and suggest a follow up appointment. Ok, so from all of that rambling, what I'm trying to say is that time restraints need not interfere with the effectiveness of a session. Intense focus and adapting the time to the specific session or sessions can and should be mutually exclusive.
ReplyDeleteI haven't had the chance to take any drop-in sessions, but my previous points apply to these shorter sessions. If you can't get through the entire paper, give the writer general guidelines that they can apply on their own time. In my appointments, I rarely check the clock. If I feel like the session is dragging or we've been working for a LONG time, I look but I'm usually too wrapped up with the writer to remember what time it is. And there's the idea of focus! Focus on the writer, not the time. In my sessions, I guess you could say that my body's clock (Geller) takes over. I just kind of know when a session should be wrapping up.
I think that any amount of time, whether it's 15 minutes or an hour, is enough time to give a writer some level of help. In shorter periods of time, that help will be most efficient as a list of guidelines while in longer periods, that help can be a full immersion into the entire paper. Time restraints do not control the focus of a session.
Out of both the readings, I prefer the one by Geller. Still, I find both the articles missing the overall point of a WC tutoring session. I do not think it is appropriate to put a time on a tutoring session. I agree with the idea that time is best measured in events; I feel that if the session is complete, it is complete. This thought of mine causes me some issues. First of all, I am horrible at keeping track of time, but luckily I have students who are worried about time constraints. Often times I find myself going over the time limit or agreeing to an extra session. I have no idea how Murray managed to teach people to conference in less than two minutes. I personally find that disturbing; as a student I wouldn’t want my teacher’s attention for just two minutes.
ReplyDeleteI am well aware that we do not have all the time in the world for one individual, but I do not feel well immersed in a writer’s work in just five minutes. I like to converse and discuss, which explains why I am always running over time. I understand the importance of diving into a piece, but at the same time I think the person is what is most important during the session. There are times where I know time is of the utmost importance; this is usually made clear by the students who are rushing to finalize their paper before they have to turn it in the next morning. There are other times though where students are looking for assurance and guidance in their writing process, which requires time.
Whether it is 15 or 30 minutes, technically, that is enough time to run a productive tutoring session. But, the issue lies in the definition of productivity. I personally think I am being productive when I get the writer to express their wants and goals of their assignment, thus resulting in a full session of just conversation. Others would argue that productivity is getting through the paper and making all the appropriate suggestions and changes. I hate having to look at my watch or glance at the wall clock, because the student sees these signs as possible impatience or annoyance. I am not wanting to finish the session, like they perceive, it’s just we are on a schedule. I know for some students the assigned time is enough, but obviously there are other students who desire more time. I want to be all the help I can, is that not the job of a tutor?
There is a fine line between the rules of the WC and the mission of our service. We are hired to serve every student, but at the same time we are expected to follow the constraints to “better serve” other employees and students. Time is a confusing concept in session scenarios, so as many might have noticed, I ignore it. The students usually tell me when time is done, or they are satisfied. If not, well the other tutors point out my time and would prefer it if I end the session rather quickly. Either way, I do not want to be responsible for neglecting a student who wants to measure time through the events of the session or by the hands on the clock.
I think it's interesting, Maitri, that you'd ask about drop-in time restraints, because I think that time becomes your enemy if you let it. Obviously, this is easier said than done, because as of now, drop-in tutoring is pretty frightening to me. However, I do think that drop-in tutoring is really about time management and, ultimately, how confident you are about tutoring and feeling out your student's particular needs. Earlier today, Crystal was telling me that she had recently observed some of the more experienced tutors during drop-in sessions, and she said that what she noticed was that each of the effective drop-in tutors were able to prioritize themselves well. More specifically, they were able to tackle more than one issue at once. She explained how one of the tutors she observed went through and highlighted sections in his student's essay throughout the course of the session and, if they ran out of time, he would say something like "the sections I highlighted are sections that have X issue and need to be given a second look." I think that doing something along those lines can be extremely helpful to a drop-in student, especially because many of the drop-ins are students who just need someone to point them in the right direction (as opposed to appointment students who generally need a little more attention). Also, we shouldn't forget the (now overly emphasized fact) that if a student can leave the Writing Center having learned something, then the session was effective.
ReplyDeleteWhile I am by no means an expert in the area of drop-in tutoring, from my experience, there are a few things that I've noticed that I could have done to condition myself better for "the situation."
1. As I mentioned earlier, I think multitasking is essential when it comes to drop-in sessions. That is to say that it is important for us to be able to look at, for example, grammar AND structure at the same time to avoid wasting time by having to read through the student's essay more than once.
2. Practice. The more we avoid a drop-in situation, the less comfortable we'll be in it. I have decided to make more of a point to step up when I'm not doing anything to practice my drop-in abilities.
3. I think that it is more important in a drop-in session than in an appointment to identify your student's learning style and personality. For instance, today I took a drop-in appointment with a girl who I felt honestly had no idea what I was talking about the whole session. I think that if I had slowed down, taken a deep breath, and gotten to know her a little better, the session would have been more effective overall. Again, this situation resonates with what I said earlier about time being your enemy if you let it.
4. Pick one thing to focus on and stick to it. While some people will have more than one "problem" with their essay, it is utterly impossible to tackle everything in fifteen minutes. Today in the same session that I explained above, I found myself jumping back and forth between grammar and organization, and I think that really confused my student.
Anyway, I agree with Brenna and I would say that any time a student can have a session an effective tutor is better than nothing. However, I think that in a drop-in session, the tutor needs to take more of an initiative to get a session started and on track than in an appointment situation, simply because of the time restraint.
While I agree with Murray that much can be accomplished in a short amount of time if the time pressure is used as fuel for “productive intensity,” I think that he presents this idea in a rather extreme manner. Geller incorporates the idea of productive intensity, but does so in a much more balanced and logical way. Although Geller does focus on restrictions created by time, he also mentions the concept of “rapid cognition,” the idea that practice allows tutors to learn to make quick decisions on what needs to be done in a session; this connects quite directly with Murray’s idea of “productive intensity.” I think that by acknowledging how time can lead to constraints, Geller aims to increase our awareness of falling into such traps; he is demonstrating how we can use time “restrictions” to our advantage, as Murray suggests. Even though I’m more in agreement with Geller, I think Murray’s overall point that time constraints don’t have to be overpowering is valid, it's just exaggerated in a way that almost comes across as unrealistic. I don’t think that casual conversation detracts from the productivity of a session because some sessions may not turn out to be effective at all if the writer is not feeling comfortable to begin with. Taking at least a bit of time to establish a connection with the writer, or even just to make the writer feel at ease, opens up the potential for a deeper discussion in a way that a colder, more robotic session (that is, a session without any casual or introductory conversation) would not.
ReplyDeleteEven though we can’t finish “all the work we’d like to complete with student writers” in a time-limited session, I think that we still fulfill our job duties by focusing on a major goal (or a few major goals) of the student; we are still helping the student overcome a writing obstacle and become a better writer. I think our job is well done if we are giving the student a more solid grasp on even one writing issue (if that is all the session permits), rather than giving them a weak skim over a number of issues without allowing the student to firmly grasp any (just to try to get through "all the work we'd like to complete"). The student is leaving one step further in their writing journey.
In the few drop-in sessions that I have done, I encouraged the students to get as specific as possible with their goals for the session so that their needs would be addressed as fully as possible in the session. For instance, if they had a major concern with grammar, I asked them what kinds of grammar issues they usually had trouble with or if there were any specific areas of the paper they wanted to focus on for the discussion of grammar. This acted as a magnifying glass for both of us, giving us a more precise perception of the agenda and allowing us to utilize our time most effectively. We focused on general patterns within the category of their concern and made a list of common patterns and broad points to consider with respect to their goals, so they could focus on these in their revision process and in a future tutoring session.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteDuring appointments, I try to avoid looking at the clock if possible because it can break the flow of thought or decrease momentum. However, I do sometimes glance at the time upon completion of one of the goals on our agenda list to make sure we have time to address the other items and to take a moment to consider whether or not the student’s goals have shifted mid-session, which sometimes happens. I really like Brenna's comment that “You take the amount of time you need even if that requires a follow up session.” I think that captures how the journey of the writer is one that is always continuing, and every session is one part of that larger scheme. This helps to free us from limitations of the clock. Although the fifteen minute drop-ins can feel more hurried in comparison to the thirty minute appointments, I don’t think fifteen minutes is too short a time to be productive. Accomplishing one of the writer’s major goals in more detail in a fifteen minute session or accomplishing several of the writer’s major goals in a more generalized manner in a thirty minute session can each be productive. It can also work in reverse, with a shorter session accomplishing goals more generally and a longer session digging deeper. Either way, fifteen minutes can still contribute to the growth of the writer. This sort of reminds me of studying for exams; even after days of studying, a bit of rushed, refreshment studying right before the exam often pressures me into grasping and remembering details in a way that more relaxed studying does not. I think even the potential pressure of a shorter fifteen minute time period can be transformed into an energetic boost. Still, I would prefer to have more time with all students rather than less. In the cases where I deeply connect with the student, I wish I had an hour to talk with them, but time constraints are inevitable, so it’s just a matter of learning to use them to our benefit, turning any possible pressure into productivity.
I'm going to sit in the middle of these two pieces here and say that time in a session is not necessarily limiting but essential to keep the session on track, and that our "colloquialism" is really essential to establishing a comfortable and productive session.
ReplyDeleteNow, I don't have a hypersensitivity to time-- I check my watch every few minutes just to ensure that we're staying on track. If we're on the first of four pages still after 17 minutes, there's probably a way I should revise *my* way of tutoring/collaboration so that we can move on faster.
I don't think the time restraints of drop-in tutoring or appointments are very limiting at all. If 15 minutes doesn't seem enough for us to run an ESL student through an 8-page grammatical odyssey, we can just recommend them to go schedule a full-on, 30 minute appointment. In the same vein as Brenna's idea, you really shouldn't worry about time, because you should give the student as much time as they need. If that means extending a drop-in session because the WC is EMPTY, than it's all good. During rush weeks (finals?), perhaps I could see time being more of a stressor. But as a general rule, if you don't *worry* about the time, but use it as a marking guideline, you should be fine!
I don't think 15 minutes is too brief to have a productive session, because any form of learning is productive, in my opinion. If a student approaches drop-in with a 6+ page paper and expects to get it fully looked over, they are probably sorely mistaken-- especially if we're busy. They'll definitely get some of their organization looked at, their thesis refined, but maybe all of their "grammar" won't get looked over-- it's a good thing to keep an agenda (mentally) and check your progress periodically throughout the session to ensure that you're working efficiently enough to create a productive, collaborative environment.
I'll start out by saying that I am an incredibly slow tutor. Like you, Revae, I find myself going over the 30 minute limit a lot, which is bad. I've been lucky in that none of my unintentionally longer appointments have cut into any others, but it's still something I need to address. And it's not that I don't check the clock enough (and subsequently lose track of time), because I do...probably more than I should. I think my problem is that I get so wrapped up in helping the writer make their essay 100% perfect, I either forget that our sessions have a time limit, or I subconsciously decide that 30 minutes is a stupid deadline.
ReplyDeleteAs with all of you above, I think both Murray and Geller raise important points. Ideally, we could have untimed sessions with students and work with them until both they and we felt as though everything had been addressed. Unfortunately, that could in many cases take up a significant amount of time and while I hate to say it, in reality...we're on a tight schedule. We have limits for a reason, and dislike them though I might, they're practical and useful. We get too many writers in the center for us to spend a significant amount of time with each, so providing limited “time-slots” seems logical.
If done properly, however, I think both 30 minutes and 15 minutes are adequate time-limits for sessions. Each offers something unique and worthwhile. 30 minute sessions allow us more time to really connect with the writer and their work, which I think all or most of us find beneficial to the overall session. “Casual conversations”, while perhaps detrimental to the session if taken too far, can definitely serve the overall purpose of our tutoring if utilized appropriately. All conversation connects us with the writer, and subsequently their work; so despite the fact that non-paper related talk might seem to be unrelated to our actual tutoring, I've never found that it is.
While I definitely still have a long way to go with improving my 30 minutes sessions, I'm somewhat excited to start drop-in. Sure, they'll be a challenge, but they'll give us access to a whole new world of writers. We'll be able to help even more people! And, in the end, isn't that what we're really here for?
Time can change me. But you can’t trace time...strange fascinations...fascinat-...um,
ReplyDeleteI would agree with Geller, that time restraints put the focus on efficiency––not on exploration, where it should be. It’s like the business example that the authors bring up: measuring time and productivity merely by the number of claims in a day. This has the potential to take away the human aspect of things. In the same manner, last week if you all remember, one of our high school friends from the “WRIGHT Place” (still love that name!) said that their coordinator actually told them “get ‘em in, get ‘em out.” Now, I can understand the need to be time-effective and cost-effective in both workplace and writing center. However, I agree with Geller that to make (mechanical or “fungible”) time our king is not necessarily the way to achieve our goal of making better writers.
To be honest, my schedule is more ruled by body time or epochal time than I’d like. I made the firm resolution to get up at 6:30 am this morning, in order to get some reading done. I awoke at the crack of 8:30 to my roommate turning off my alarm clock––again. Now this, you might say, is just laziness. But it is also a testament to how we need to be realistic and take physical and emotional needs into account. The flow of an appointment, body language, the feeling of “being on the same page,” the “aha!” moments, are all strictly human activities and capabilities that oftentimes do not fit neatly within mechanical time. But they are so necessary to good appointments! I would hate to pass one of these things up because I was too focused on the clock.
So I guess that balance is key, as well as good judgement of the situation. Our perspective of time should be based on the writer’s needs. For drop-in appointments, which I’ve had limited experience with, I think we should focus more on the clock, and on one specific important issue. Still, this shouldn’t come at the expense of the welcoming and supportive atmosphere the writing center claims to provide. I would not go as far as Murray does––90-seconds with a stopwatch (which would be the LAST object I’d want on my desk during an appointment), but I do agree with the author in regards to productivity. We can have a productive conference, no matter how much time we have with a student, as long as our focus is in the right place––on the student.