The+Self-Reflective+Consultant

The Self-Reflective Consultant Just as important as doing something is examining //how// and //why// we do it. This is especially important when you are involved in someone’s education. You will be asked to reflect on your experiences and practices as a consultant throughout your time in the Writing Center. These reflections will hopefully help you improve your consultation skills and your writing skills. There is always room for improvement.

**Ask yourself…**
Is, or should writing be difficult? Should a consultant enjoy/like/love writing? Are people born writers? Revisit your answers from time to time and see if they change. It’s all right if they do. Your experiences will temper your thoughts, and your ideas will constantly evolve. This is a good thing.
 * New consultants will be asked to do one journal entry per week for their first semester. These can be turned in to Michael or Sarah (or both). You might consider posting your entries to the Wiki discussion board, but this is completely optional.
 * New consultants will be asked to do a Tutoring Self-Assessment after their first session. The Self-Assessment is on page 68 of the Writing Center Consultant Handbook, but you’ll also be emailed a copy to type or print as you please.
 * All consultants are required to make at least two substantive posts to the Wiki discussion board and are encouraged to make more. A discussion topic will be posted weekly by either Michael or Sarah, but consultants are free to post questions/discussion topics whenever they wish. Remember that you can (and should) also reply to other consultants’ posts and comments.
 * You are encouraged to read from the Resources list at the back of this handbook in your down times. You will be required to read four articles mentioned in the handbook. All of the required articles will be given to you, and many of the rest of the print resources will be available in the Center.

**Tutoring Self-Assessment**

 * 1) What type of tutoring when on in the session? (Brainstorming, work on a first draft, final draft, or what?)
 * 2) Was the writer able to articulate the kinds of help he or she needed before the session began? Or during the session?
 * 3) Did you and the writer establish good rapport?
 * 4) What is the proportion of consultant talk? What kind of talking did you do?
 * 5) Interpretive questions?
 * 6) Directive questions?
 * 7) Open-ended questions?
 * 8) Advisory directives?
 * 9) Content-clarifying questions?
 * 10) Opposition-based questions?
 * 11) Other? (What?)
 * 12) Was the writer asking good questions of the text, too?
 * 13) Did you ever find yourself interrupting the writer, or did you listen and then wait a second before joining in?
 * 14) Did you encourage and/or praise the writer’s work?
 * 15) [[image:file:///C:/Users/fox27/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.jpg width="624" height="477"]] Did you allow digressions when appropriate? Were you able to get the discussions back on track? Did you finish the session on time?
 * 16) Was the writer critical of the instructor or the assignment? Grades? What kind of tone did you and the writer set for this discussion?
 * 17) Did the writer try to get you to do something? How did you get around that?
 * 18) Did the writer seem able to step outside the paper and analyze it (the structure, for example, or the audience or the purpose)? Did you model that kind of analysis?
 * 19) Afterward, did you help the writer to see what had gone on in the session? Did you ask what his or her plans were for moving the project forward/
 * 20) What do you think the writer got out of the session?
 * 21) What was most positive for you in the session?
 * 22) What would you do differently if you had more time?

This list of questions is from //The Longman Guide to Peer Tutoring//, by Paula Gillespie and Neal Lerner. See the Resources page.