Understandings of the Role of the One-to-One Writing Tutor in a U.K. University Writing Centre: Multiple Perspectives

Abstract

This article presents findings from a study of a U.K. university writing centre regarding understandings of tutor roles, involving 33 Chinese international students, 11 writing tutors, and the centre director. The research used interviews and audio-recorded consultations as data to analyze and explore participants’ beliefs and understandings. The most common roles associated with tutors were proofreader, coach, commentator, counsellor, ally, and teacher. Mismatches were found in understandings of the proofreader role and counsellor role when comparing students’ views, tutors’ views, and the writing centre policy. Policy recommendations are made in light of the findings regarding how writing centres frame the tutor’s role and the function of writing consultations, in terms of (1) interrogating traditional conceptualizations of tutor role, (2) disseminating the centre’s aims to the student population and to the wider university, (3) expanding the centre’s activity across the university, and (4) strengthening tutor training and development.

Reconceptualizing the Teaching of the Five-Paragraph Essay Through Concept-Based Language Instruction to English as a Second Language Writers

“…In addition, based on the dialectical relationship between conceptual understanding and learners' writing competence revealed in this study, I suggest a linguistically responsive approach to writing instruction that provides abundant linguistic support and acknowledges and leverages learners' linguistic diversity. This study advocates for the pedagogical discussion that calls for renewed attention to language support in L2 writing and tutoring contexts for academic purposes, which are currently dominated by a philosophy that focuses on higherorder concerns (e.g., content, organization, purpose) over the lower-order concerns (various levels of language, mechanics, and punctuation) in L2 writing (Ferris & Eckstein, 2020;Liu & Harwood, 2022). L2 Journal Vol.…”

Türki̇ye'deki̇ Bi̇r İngi̇li̇zce Öğreti̇m Programinda Tez Yazma Süreci̇ni̇n İncelenmesi̇: Danişman Desteği̇ Ve Güç İli̇şki̇leri̇

“…The findings in our study highlighted the crucial role of supervisors in completing a thesis study from the perspectives of the supervisees. In the literature as well, this central role was emphasised by many studies on thesis writing, and similar attributes were defined for supervisors (Fitria, 2022;Liu and Harwood, 2022;White, 1998;Wisker et al, 2003;Zhang and Hyland, 2021). Fitria (2022), in this sense, found the supervisor as the primarily responsible figure for guiding students to write acceptable theses while Zhang and Hyland (2021) suggested that the process of supervision itself was decisive for students to get the sense of producing knowledge in their subject fields.…”

“…Regarding the impact of the supervisor, supervision accommodates power that directly influences the quality of the thesis product and the successful completion of it (Chang, 2007;Frischer and Larsson, 2000;Zhang and Hyland, 2021). With this regard, the roles of a supervisor were specified as "team leader, project manager, writing mentor, wordsmith, and editor" (White, 1998:229) while Liu and Harwood (2022) found that proofreader, coach, commentator, counsellor, ally, and teacher were the common roles associated with supervisors. Zhang and Hyland (2021), on the other hand, highlighted that supervisors can be negotiators, collaborators, and facilitators providing advice and giving students the freedom to reflect on their own ideas.…”

Lecturer, Language Tutor, and Student Perspectives on the Ethics of the Proofreading of Student Writing

“…Alternatively, some universities offer a free in-house proofreading service, such as the one in the University of Essex’s sociology department described in Harwood et al (2009). Furthermore, although classic university writing center policy debars proofreading (see North, 1984), some writing centers offer it in some form (see Liu & Harwood, 2022a, 2022b). Students may additionally access proofreading from friends, peers, and relatives, or use one of the many paid-for proofreading services available online.…”

“…Focusing squarely on the student writing context, there have been investigations of the work of commercial proofreading agencies, the knowledge and competence of proofreaders, and the types of (frequently unethical) intervention requests students make of proofreaders (Lines, 2016). And there have been investigations located in university writing centers, which traditionally claim to eschew proofreading (see Brooks, 1991;North, 1984), to determine the extent to which writing center tutors do or should in fact proofread (Clark & Healy, 2008;Eckstein, 2013;LaClare & Franz, 2013;Mack, 2014;Moussu, 2013;Moussu & David, 2015;Liu & Harwood, 2022a, 2022b.…”