Tuesday, January 5, 2010
Lunsford Reading Response
Lunsford's essay confirms what I think about collaborative learning and how I would like to approach peer tutoring. In her first model, which places the control in the hands of the teacher or tutor, it seems to be too similar to a normal classroom setup. A student being directed by their tutor with little to no input of their own will not excel in the way that we would like them to. On the other hand, the second model where the power was placed with the student does not seem to be practical either. If the student has control of the learning situation, then what is the point of having the tutor there? A tutor's knowledge and expertise is the reason why said student would attend a peer tutoring session. I, therefore, agree with Lunsford's third model which she has picked as the most productive. In this model, control of the collaboration is placed in the "negotiating group." This levels the playing field for the student, but also allows the tutor to use their skills and fulfill their purpose. In our peer tutoring sessions today, I think my partners and I best represented this third model. When Maggie tutored me, we discussed my paper and the issues we found as a group, and then came to a decision of how to fix them together. Tutoring Pete was a similar situation for me, because I found where I thought he could improve his paper and together we solved them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with what you said about the negotiation model. I wrote about that too, but in a slightly different way. Since we actually practiced peer tutoring yesterday it puts these articles in a new perspective for us.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the negotiation model is the most affective when it comes to peer tutoring. If the tutor tries to assume all power, there is bound to be a slight tinge of rebellion from he peer who is seeking help. Because we are dealing with a peer to peer interaction, and not a student to teacher relationship, the power must be evenly distributed. Not only is this the dynamic with the least amount of rebellion or resentment, it is also the scenario which is most beneficial to the student trying to approve their paper. This is because if they play a part in fixing errors, they will have a better understanding of what they were doing wrong and are more likely to be able to diagnose these issues themselves next time. This model is both empowering to the student and beneficial towards their lone editing techniques, This type of tutoring is bound to help them as a writer in both the present and the future. I also liked how you tied your own experiences into this post in order to reiterate the effectiveness of this tutoring model. Good job tying it into a real life tutoring situation.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I have to admit a certain admiration for what Garrett calls the "Garret Center" (Emily's second model). Lunsford, in my view, seems to reduce the tutor's role here to that of the cheerleader: "The tutor or teacher listens, voices encouragement, and essentially serves as validation" for the writer's work.
ReplyDeleteI think there's more going on than (mere) validation. There is or at least can be a powerful creative energy that develops when writers search for and find (or nearly find) a tone and a style that suits their purposes and wants. Of course, often times, this means abandoning academic conventions of formal writing and writing in idiosyncratic ways.
I would agree that a truly collaborative "negotiating group" leads to a higher level of achievement, but I am always aware that each of us have personalities (egos?) that move us to be greater or lesser participants in the group at different times. This can interfere with the group's work if not moderated by the group, or a facilitator identified by the group. Maturity and practice, however, leads the group to accept, and then value, the occasions when individuals step up or step back in their roles, depending on their perception of the value of their leadership at that point. Such groups can achieve great leaps of progress as the best knowledge of each member is invited when needed.
ReplyDelete