Example of Article Summary & Analysis

[Maureen McBride]

Here is an example of a summary and analysis. Let me know if you have questions.

 

Maureen McBride

NNWP Summer Invitational

Article Summary & Analysis

 

Hawthorne, J. (1999, April). “We don’t proofread here”: Re-visioning the writing center to better meet student needs. Writing Lab Newsletter, 23(8), 1-7.

 

Summary

In her article, “’We don’t proofread here’: Re-visioning the Writing Center to Better Meet Student Needs,” Joan Hawthorne (1999) reflects on a common writing center model that discounts the value of directive tutoring and denies proofreading as an acceptable writing center strategy. She compares writing center consultations to student-teacher conferences, and points out that the strategies we write out on paper are often not applicable to the situations we actually encounter. Hawthorne references the oft-cited North and Brooks, who are proponents of non-directive tutoring and avoidance of “fix-it” strategies. Hawthorne counters these theories with her experiences in writing centers and the subtle shifts in language that she implemented at her university in North Dakota. When students initially came to Hawthorne’s writing center, the staff was instructed to tell students that they did not proofread, which was often interpreted as a “no.” Hawthorne asked her staff to shift their responses, to a “yes, we can review your paper together” response. Hawthorne rationalized this change based on her observations that most students who request proofreading do not have the language to explain what they need. She provides several specific case studies, including an ELL student, a group of finance students, and a particular student hoped to improve his grades through his writing center visits. Hawthorne notes the need for writing center directors to understand how these issues impact tutor training and the flexibility that is required of effective writing consultants. She provides some specific training materials and explains how she uses them. Hawthorne concludes that while setting a goal of improving the writer is valuable, the student’s paper, the product, is an excellent vehicle and that it deserves to be included in writing center goals.

Analysis

Hawthorne’s article offers insight to the difficult balance that writing center directors struggle with, non-directive versus directive, or even student-centered versus pedagogically rigid tutoring philosophies. This is an issue that I constantly struggle with, especially since the University of Nevada, Reno’s writing center is now funded almost exclusively through student fees. I ask myself the same questions that Hawthorne asks about how we can help students without doing the work for them. The reflective tone and insights included in this article make it easy to read. I, too, have noticed that many students who say they want someone to proofread their paper may actually want help with development or organization or help integrating sources. When a writing center says “we don’t proofread,” students feel turned away and that their requests are not valued and makes the likelihood of them asking for writing help again minimal. I have even experienced a student who visits the writing center to work on his English pronunciation. Some people may claim that is not within the scope of a writing center, but as I have worked with this student, it has become clear that developing his understanding of the English language, both written and oral, is helping him to be a more effective communicator in English. Hawthorne points out that directors need to take their reflections on purpose and directive/non-directive tutoring back into their centers to define the goals and develop the training programs for writing consultants. Her suggestion that flexibility is crucial is one that I have aligned myself with more and more. Hawthorne believes that writing centers should be a place for all writers to discuss all aspects of writing, and I would agree.

 

 

[Lucy Elise Peters]

Thanks Maureen, this is a great example.  --Lucy