Clinging to the Ought and Should

Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Most writing tutors embrace a universal ideal: tutors adopt practices and techniques with the intention to help a writer become a better writer.  Intentionally or not, peer tutors sometimes extend the chain of logic that a better writer will become a better thinker and therefore will be a better self. The promotion of “better,” ideally and in theory, would then hypothetically flow into other areas of academic well-being for the student mentee. While writing tutors consistently employ ideals of betterment in their tutoring practice, the standard instructional focus of clinging to the ought and should fails to encourage an in-the-moment adaptational response that is, at times, necessary to implement in order to maximize academic success on behalf of the student.   

As writing tutors, we work to de-emphasize power differentiations, de-stigmatize tutoring, and embody the role of “reader.”  At the same time, we must reject notions of “editor” or “grammarian,” in order to instill and nurture a sense of agency for our fellow writer. Peer tutors must mentally adapt to a one-size-does not-fit-all tutoring approach, for varied demographics, while practicing within the boundaries and limitations of what is expected in and from our tutoring sessions.  

Being a course-embedded writing tutor allows me to familiarize myself with students and their work in a multifaceted and dynamic way. I am able to acquaint myself with the skills and interests of the student mentee over a period of seven and a half weeks.  Course-embedded writing tutors are expected to prepare a lot, and in great length. In our program, in order to prioritize the students’ academic needs, we read the student’s rough draft, their self-assessment, and review any or all academic concerns the student holds prior to meeting with them. At the very least, both the peer tutor and student mentee have the same end goal for a session: success for that student, defined by the students’ particular requests for help with their writing. Most course-embedded writing tutors in our program agree that preparing is necessary to facilitate an effective tutoring session with this end goal. However, what we often overlook is not the necessity of preparation, but the formation of premature expectation that tutors and students craft prior to any tutoring session, embedded within the preparation process a peer-tutor practices.   

In my particular peer tutor practice, I facilitate online synchronous workshops that offer instant, in-the-moment recognition of the reality a student mentee is currently navigating. At times tutoring students in synchronous online workshops lends itself to anomalies. Sometimes a student mentee will quietly apologize for their children making noise in the background, as if this were something that embarrasses them. Other times student mentees interweave personal stories explaining their choice to write about the subject material they selected as a topic for their paper. I once hosted a workshop session with a student mentee who was walking around Target to maintain internet connection because wildfires in California disrupted the WIFI at her apartment complex. These moments do not embody or require traditional or standard instructional practice and response. Instead, these moments demand apt flexibility in approach and in-the -moment adaptation in order to prioritize the needs of the student.  

Unexpectedly, the student in Target did not have her paper or self-assessment to reference, and therefore could not point to the specific areas she wanted help with. She was flustered by the wildfires, and although she was technically present for our tutoring session, it would be reasonable to suggest she had other things on her mind. So how did I respond? I re-oriented my approach. She guided our dialogue, interweaving non-academic elements—discussing moments of frustration with Target’s WIFI or mentioning concerns with what the wildfires could mean for her and others. In conversation, I would attend to her immediate frustrations or concerns by listening and empathizing. When appropriate, I re-directed the dialogue to focus on matters of writing because the goal of the tutoring session had not changed. I wanted to help her successfully meet her writing goals. As the tutoring session progressed, the dialogue shifted and incorporated more questions she had about how to better her thesis or organize her thoughts in a more succinct manner. I believe this shift occurred in part because I met the student mentee where she needed to be met at the beginning of our tutoring session, or in the moment. Although this is not what a traditional tutoring session would look like, I still believe it was a successful one.  

 The crafted, premature expectation embedded in the process of preparation leads us—tutors—to believe we know how a tutoring session should and will go, solely because we have planned for the session. These beliefs are compounded by constructs that tell us what a successful tutoring session should and will look like. If a tutoring session departs from a preconceived expectation, consciously or not, the tutor often begins to cling to the ought and/or should. Our focus of attention tends to shift to what should have happened instead of allowing ourselves to focus on what is happening.  

Peer tutors prepare and plan for what the session should look like in order for the student-mentee to successfully reach their writing goals. If the tutoring session deviates from expectation there is small allowance made for the idea of flexibility because institutional norms and standard traditional academic practices limit how we relate to our student mentee. Because peer tutors typically do not account for the unexpected in preparation, a paradox in and of itself, we resort to teaching or abiding by standard instructional methods if a session deviates from the plan. A peer tutor relies on the structural or concrete guidelines of “right” and “wrong” engrained in what we were taught to do in response to unfamiliarity by our academic institutions. This minimizes a peer tutors’ ability to effectively meet the needs of our student mentees and speaks to the perpetuation of rigidity in standard and conventional pedagogical practices celebrated in academia.  

 If a session differs from our expectation of what an effective tutoring session looks like, we tend to overlook how to best help the student in the moment. Our sense of focus has shifted. We attend to internal thoughts or feelings about how the session should have gone, and then resort to a standard method of instruction to regain semblance of control in that moment. Limitations instilled by these instructional boundaries can lead us overlook the necessity of re-orienting a peer tutor approach. In order to maximize academic success for the student mentee, standard instructional practices need to allow for flexibility in the moment and focus less on the ought and should. From the outset, tutoring sessions in our practice embrace non-traditional components, and although preparing for the unknown is a paradox, what we can do is become more aware of our expectations, crafted within our preparation process, and learn to embrace the moment. This is how we prioritize the needs of the student.  

Editor’s Note: an earlier version of this writing appeared on The Dangling Modifier. The author has published this revised version with the permission of the editors.

 Author Bio 

Alessandra Hickman is an undergraduate student at Arizona State University studying Business Communication and English. She is a course-embedded writing tutor in the Writers’ Studio. Her future includes the study of law, and in her free time she advocates on behalf of the autistic community.