Part Two: A Community of Practice—At a Military Academy? Fostering the Synergetic Spirit for Writing Center Work with Undergraduate Consultants

Image by Free-Photos from Pixabay

Vittoria S. Rubino, Ph.D.
Senior Postgraduate Writing Fellow
U.S. Military Academy-West Point

As I reach ever closer to the end of my time with the West Point Writing Program at the United States Military Academy, I return to these questions: what is it about this particular program, within this particular context, that cultivates a kind of shared enthusiasm for learning composition pedagogy, the synergetic spirit for writing center work found amid even its junior members? What does it take for an undergraduate writing fellow, one imbued with confidence, agency, and professionalism, to happen? My goal in asking these question is to distill the essence of how, even at a military academy, one could foster a genuine community of practice among a team of consultants—especially the undergraduate ones.

During my time at the Academy, I observed several sustainable professional development opportunities for undergraduate consultants. My first conclusion here was, the Cadet Writing Fellows in this program are agenic, perhaps, because of their participation in their professional development, through the development of a common framework for writing center work in the aforementioned gateway seminar all Cadet Writing Fellows at the U.S. Military Academy need to take, the administrator’s encouragement to pay particular attention to the “lived” moments of their writing center work through routines of observation and reflective practice, their freedom of choice in the purposes or areas for research and pedagogy, their presentations of said-research and engagement with new learning at regional and national conferences, their creation of original writing resources for the center, or their opportunities to “buy in” and specialize in leadership roles in the center (e.g. Cadet in Charge, Humanities Lead, Scholarship Officer, Operations Officer, etc). R. Mark Hall (2011) explains that the ability to engage in professional develop opportunities:

encourages writing assistants to adopt an inquiry stance toward writing center practice. Such a stance involves relentless questioning, asking why, wondering, researching, generating alternatives, testing, reviewing, and revising options . . . to examine both what we do and the rules and reasoning - the habits of mind - that determine what we do. (84-5)

The conditions of a program set the interaction through the leadership’s expectations, disciplinary knowledge, and socialization of that knowledge. For these Cadet Writing Fellows, their experiences are dynamic, especially because they are able to continually compare and revise their perspectives and strategies. Whereas reflective, independent work is critical to metacognitive thinking, collaboration and communal work is equally—if not more—important. 

Both within the seminar and the writing center, Cadet Writing Fellows are encouraged by the more senior consultants and administrators to engage with not only the reading materials but one another (e.g. informal and formal observations, ongoing conversations about theory and practice). The productive tension that is sometimes formed by sharing disparate strategies and philosophies is a form of participation in creating new knowledge that may not happen with isolated moments of reflection. Some writing centers, in lieu of having a seminar, have consultants working on reflective writing shared only with the director; however, the challenge is, as Hall duly notes, the audience for a consultant’s reflective writing is relatively narrow, and without theoretical and/or collaborative contributions, continued learning and growth can only be fostered in a limited way. Specifically, he argues, “What's more, underlying reflection is the assumption that one has an informed critical framework already in place for thinking about tutoring practice” (82). This is a fair point, which is why consultant professional development in the form of collaboration alongside specialized knowledge seems to be more transformative, more non-transactional, at least in my experiences, because it provides a sort of “after-life” to the theoretical which empowers and professionalizes undergraduate consultants. 

These Cadet Writing Fellows seem to feel energized, as novices learning the field, to ask burning questions and uncover nuanced possibilities by comparing their practices to the peers, seeking the pedagogical advice of those more experienced, and in their own research and practice. More importantly, their learning and ongoing development is fostered by administrators who are sincerely invested in their growth.

Recently, I worked with a new undergraduate writing consultant on a response paper for her gateway seminar. She came prepared with some brainstorming she had done about an initial reading for the seminar on the Burkean Parlor. She was focused on the inherent problems of invoking the Burkean Parlor metaphor when working with undergraduate writers. Together, we considered the matter from multiple perspectives. She gave, and I took. I took, and she gave. We elaborated the point until we felt satisfied with the results of our conversation, which were sprawled across several pieces of scrap paper on the table between us. Our own conversation, in a way, brought the very metaphor to life. After a deep breath, we planned for next steps—scholars it might be helpful for her to consider in her future research, and where their opinions might fit into her own argument. Several months later, when she was in the process of revising the final product, she wrote me a note which read, “A conversation we had in the writing center was in many ways the inspiration behind this paper. It prompted me to consider the role of conversation in the writing process, and it has really changed the way I approach my own sessions.”

What this scene illustrates, to me, is that even at the beginning of her academic career, even within this specific context, the Cadet Writing Fellow knew she had the ability to confront the norm, and she sought the help of a ‘specialist’ in her very own writing center to do so.  Challenging the status quo, questioning traditions, crosstalk— none of these things seem natural at a military academy. And yet, most, if not all of the Cadet Writing Fellows I have worked with over the years, have developed the confidence and skills in collaboration needed to question and produce their own scholarship.

Works cited

Fontaine, Sheryl. “Teaching with the Beginner's Mind: Notes from My Karate Journal.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 54, no. 2, 2002, pp. 208-221. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1512146

Geller, Anne et al. The Everyday Writing Center: A Community of Practice. Utah State UP, 2007.

Hall, R. Mark. “Theory In/To Practice: Using Dialogic Reflection to Develop a Writing Center Community of Practice.” Writing Center Journal, vol. 31, no. 1, 2011, https://www.jstor.org/stable/43442358

Macauley, William. “Insiders, Outsiders, and Straddlers: A New Writing Fellows Program in Theory, Context, and Practice.” Praxis, vol. 12, no. 1, 2014, http://www.praxisuwc.com/macauley-121

Nordstrom, Georganne. “A Practitioner’s Inquiry into Professionalization: When We Does Not Equal Collaboration.” Praxis, vol. 17, no. 1, 2019, http://www.praxisuwc.com/171-nordstrum.

Wegner, Etienne. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge UP, 1998.