This article outlines the coming of age of writing pedagogy in German institutions of higher education and explores the role of the ‘Hausarbeit’ in contemporary universities. Traditionally, the 6,000-12,000 word Hausarbeit was the mainstay of academic writing in all university courses in the social sciences and humanities in Germany. This assignment was tied into dominant discourse (‘Humboldt discourse’) in which the main point of higher education was to cultivate future independent scholars. Since 1999, the increasing predominance of ‘Bologna discourse’ has led to the radical restructuring of higher education across Europe. This discourse emphasizes internationalization, transferable skills and key competencies, i.e. the point of higher education is not primarily to cultivate independent scholars but flexible, creative and enterprising future professionals. With indications that the Hausarbeit could disappear in the Bologna process, we argue not only that it can be saved but also that it has a significant role to play in developing the new competencies. This will only happen, however, if students receive institutional writing support, and if writing curricula in Germany rise to the new challenges.Key words: writing centres, discourse, Bologna reforms, writing pedagogy, Hausarbeit
Peer tutoring non-native writers seems to pose particular challenges to tutors with regard to the overall goals and principles of peer tutoring that have been expressed in the literature. Principles such as nondirectivity and long-term emphasis on the process quality of writing are often assumed to be in conflict with non-native writers' desire to be actively and directly guided in their process of learning to write in a foreign language. Peer tutoring's appropriateness therefore remains rather controversial within this particular context. In this article we outline the results of an empirical study focusing on the potential, as well as the limitations, of peer tutoring with regard to non-native writers in a German writing center. Using the method of qualitative content analysis designed to achieve a healthy balance between deductive and inductive aspects of empirical research, we ask the open question: 'How do peer tutors deal with nonnative writers?' Results show that the limitations of rigid peer tutoring principles become obvious more quickly with non-native writers. However, peer tutoring with non-native writers reveals larger potential, too, and can offer recommendations for peer tutoring in general.
Writing center directors have to face complex leadership tasks, but often do not have a background in management or administration studies. This study asks how they accomplish this demanding effort. Following a grounded theory approach, 16 writing centers in the USA were visited and expert interviews with the center directors were carried out. In bringing together the emerging concepts of the empirical work with the theoretical framework of the study of institutional work, this article shows that writing center directors transfer the pedagogy of writing centers to their leadership tasks. They use a stance of collaborative learning to deal with the challenges in their everyday work and to institutionalize their writing centers. 2 Further information on the German 'Quality Pact for Teaching' is available at: https://rio.jrc.ec.europa.eu/en/library/quality-pact-teaching
This article claims that working with peer tutors in a writing center can be very valuable for the center's development, if the director and tutors work together according to crucial principles in writing center pedagogy. Based on the example of the writing center at European University Viadrina, this article shows how ideas of autonomy and collaboration, for both writing support and writing center leadership, led to the writing center's growth.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.