Updated: December 4, 2021
Welcome! Use the table of contents to access my seven teaching and learning goals.
Important: I introduce you to my teaching portfolio, along with some information about myself and my teaching and learning statement, at the Digital Teaching Portfolio page.
(I have also written about my journey in literacy in my Digital Literacy Narrative.)
Table of Contents
Engage
Engage with composition and peer-tutoring theories
During my Writing Mentor training (before courses began), I had to write feedback for a few mock students’ discussion board posts. I came into this practice session with a corrective mindset. After all, I have grown up believing that peer tutors were supposed to point out as many corrections as possible. I have also been a perfectionist about spelling and grammar all my life.
I wrote the following corrections in my mock feedback:
- “One more thing, some sentences are stretching on long, like the one beginning with ‘Proponents are actively looking.’ Consider editing long sentences into shorter sentences, which are easier to read.”
- “Also, the last two sentences in your peer response are repetitive, so one of them is enough.”
I admit that I was overwhelmed by the amount of corrections I felt like I had to say. I was silly to project my extensive experiences in professional writing onto the students, who would only be in their first year of school. I felt like those corrections would be more geared towards a fellow writer in my same professional writing field. I wasn’t even thinking clearly about my college audience.
Peter Elbow provided an insightful concept of peer tutoring: “The right or best comment is the one that will help this student on this topic on this draft at this point in the semester–given her character and experience.” My two corrections about sentence structure are not the ideal feedback to provide to an any-major first-year student who would not need such details unless they went into a professional writing career.
Elbow also said that we should “be as strategic as we can: to try to figure out how to spend our efforts in ways most likely to be of use” when providing comments. My students’ time is precious, and so is mine. I would rather have them use it for picking up practical, holistic, and big-picture feedback that they can take outside of the course. It helps me because I can save my energy on the few, most important elements instead of spread it out thinly over all the corrections I can find.
The elements that mattered the most to the students were feedback directly related to their education and project progress. One of my favorite examples comes from the Project 1 Topic Discussion, where students had to write about the public figures that they could potentially write their social media Rhetorical Analysis on.
I skipped any spelling and grammar issues, and instead dived into these important areas:
- I commented on the student’s good choice for their public figure based on their personal experiences.
- I left them with a next important step: schedule the interview with the public figure as soon as possible. Planning ahead with people is relevant in many areas of life, not just an ENG101 project.
- I complimented them on asking their peers questions. After all, one of the key takeaways about writing is to use it to continue meaningful conversations.
I used to think that a tutor had to be the authority figure responsible for pointing out every mistake, regardless of the students’ amount of experience. Now, I like to embrace the word “fellow” in “writing fellow.” I am a fellow writer in the overall writing community with my students and Writing Mentors. In the classroom specifically, it is important to build up empathy by being cognizant of the students’ writing levels. We are fellows, aka friends, helping each other out in the most useful, relevant way possible.
After all, as my internship coordinator, Dr. Michelle Stuckey says, “We have to help them [the students] develop the skills and confidence to do the work of thinking and writing and rewriting themselves.” It’s less about marking up papers and more about directly fostering the students’ writing processes. I was there to help them grow as writers by guiding them through their expression of ideas and intentions in writing form.
Reflect
Reflect on emerging writing fellow practice
A key term I picked up from my ENG101 courses is “metacognition” which means to learn about your learning. It is in the self-reflection process where we can truly absorb rich experiences from the recent past.
Even after a few months being a Writing Mentor, it still felt so surreal to me. Everything seemed so fast. It has come full circle: I’ve been a student in English courses from elementary school to college, and now I was the person in the classroom who sat behind the teacher’s desk instead of the student’s. Instead of writing prompts for the assignments, I let others do it, and I was the one to grade and provide feedback.
I am extraordinarily grateful to have had the opportunity with the ASU Writers’ Studio to be there for the first-year students in their college writing adventure. It was so rewarding to help guide them as they developed their writing skills. I often flashbacked to few years beforehand, when I was one of those students.
I love viewing the students’ work because I learned so much from the topics they chose to wrote about. I reminded my students that I was an ASU student just like them who didn’t even finish their bachelor’s degree studies yet.
In some of my communication with them, I leaned toward a casual tone of voice because I wanted them to see that I wasn’t a authoritative figure but a fellow student and human who wanted to establish an inviting space for discussions and learning. Dr. Stuckey also said that she “want[s the students] to see me as human to feel comfortable talking to me.
At the end of every Revision Workshop, which is a type of session where I help the students go over their first drafts of their projects, I asked the participants for their feedback through confidential Airtable survey forms. I wanted to ensure that I was being as helpful as possible. All of the surveyees, whether they joined a live workshop or received asynchronous feedback from me, said that my feedback was helpful, received in a timely manner, and that they would sign up again for a Revision Workshop with me.
Some students left positive text feedback, as well, which is extremely rewarding to me. Their hard work throughout the course and their gratitude for my Revision Workshops mean so much to me. They encourage me to be at their service in the most helpful way possible.
I would like to comment further on the student who commented, “Very respectful and understanding the students problems and thoughts.” I have learned that I don’t want to give constant writing lectures to the students. As a writing fellow, it is my priority to respect the students by empathizing with them as much as I could. During the synchronous Revision Workshops, many of the students freely shared with me their struggles in the course as well as their background in English studies. After knowing these about them, I celebrated their dedication in the course and uplifted them, as all writing fellows should do.
Develop
Develop an approach to facilitating critical feedback
I strive to avoid power imbalance issues between student and teacher (or writing fellow) at all costs. When the teaching figure writes all over a student’s paper, the student no longer feels like it is a product of their creation.
Brannon and Knoblauch suggest that teaching figures should ““relinquish our control of student writing and return it to the writer” (161). In the end, it is the writer who is ultimately in control of their own work. Teaching figures are not in authority, but instead a support team member whose goal is to assist the student with their writing skills.
Here is what I found to be helpful in providing constructive criticism that is both kindhearted and meaningful:
Start feedback with uplifting comments to set the positive tone a digital space where it is difficult to get emotional intent across.
Do not make any direct changes to their work. Adding comments on the side gently encourages the students to consider the feedback.
Tie the feedback to a relevant, meaningful lesson instead of simply make a correction.
Write the feedback with suggestions and open-ended questions, not commands.
Papers scribbled with corrections over a student’s work make the work hard, not smart, Cooper et al. states that “painstakingly correcting every error makes a tutor feel exhausted, while the student who receives the corrected paper feels ashamed” (134). The corrections’ intention, to encourage students to grow as writers, misaligns with their harsh practices. They would likely discourage students from being excited to learn about and practice writing.
I feel a relieving sense of freedom that I don’t have to be the authority figure to meticulously cover the paper with corrections. Instead, I can write encouraging and open-ended comments about the most important elements of the writing. Meanwhile, the students who receive my comments still feel like they are in control of the direction of their paper.
Facilitate
Facilitate dialogue to aid first-year writing students in refining their literacy practices and their writing processes
When I heard that the Writers’ Studio would be using InScribe starting with my first semester as a Writing Mentor, I was excited! InScribe is a study hall where English students from all sections can converge in a community forum. They can start discussions or ask questions about writing or their specific assignments. A common meeting space like InScribe is a prime opportunity to have meaningful writing discussions with students.
As I said in my Digital Literacy Narrative, “At the core of every online space is communication. No matter how different one online platform may be from another, the key is to always be genuinely kind.” Especially in a digital space where emotion and intention are not as clear, I like to express as much goodwill as possible, with a touch of kind : ) emoticons. After all, kindness and a hint of informality can make people on the other side of the screen feel like our digital community is more human (Cooper et al, 130).
With that mindset, I help the students develop their writing skills whenever they have questions.
For example, I have noticed that the moment just before filling out a blank screen seems to be one of the most asked about stages of the writing process. In my response, I express kindness by thanking the student for their question, complete with the : ) emoticon. I involve my lived experiences into the answers because I want to empathize with the student that I, too, have been through the same struggles. My empathy and experiences also give credibility to my suggested solutions. If they worked for me, they may very well work for the students, as well.
Whenever the conversation keeps going, it’s a good sign that people feel like they belong to the community. Their engagement shows their interest in the topic and appreciation for my response.
The student who asked the original question made the first response as shown below. They felt comfortable enough to share how they are feeling in the moment, which means that they trust the people in the community with knowing about it.
Another student wrote the second response that included their perspective to the original prompt about the purpose of the portfolio. This student felt like an important member of the community, hence he contributed to this conversation. I made the final response as holistic about the material and as supportive of the students as possible.
When the students see that they have supportive community members such as a Writing Mentor like myself, they will advance far on their educational writing journey. After all, they have a safer space to ask any questions about writing. Engaging in meaningful conversations is how ideas get shared, which benefits everyone. As someone whose responsibility it is to respond to these discussions, I couldn’t be more happy to be a part of the students’ writing education. Community-building is my passion because members enrich each other’s lives.
Gain
Gain experience in the field of teaching writing
Hosting the Revision Workshops were one of the most rewarding responsibilities. It warmed my heart to meet the students synchronously over Zoom because I get to hear in real time how enthusiastic they are for the community-centric approach to the course.
Because I had never hosted teaching workshops before, I asked the instructor I was working with in ENG101 and one of the senior writing mentors, to meet up with me over Zoom so they could share their tips. Both of them recommended that I should try to prompt my students to actively discuss about their paper.
Richard Beach, in particular, said that the early stages of assessment are where the students should speak about their paper’s main idea and thesis (57-58). These are the two factors that drive the heart of the paper. Having the students describe them to me is their chance to explain where they are going with their paper so that I can get a better idea of how to guide them throughout the Revision Workshop. In other words, I would be nudging the students into surfacing their intentions to encourage more critical thinking. If those intentions are not clear, then I can offer them ways to make them more specific (Beach 60-61).
I truly enjoyed this approach of introducing students into the Revision Workshops because they feel that they have a strong voice and that their thoughts and opinions matter. I am not the authoritative figure who talks over one. I am just a discussion facilitator with some suggestions along the way. It is necessary to have the students and mentor to share exchanges back and forth equally. This first impression makes them feel more comfortable to discuss their writing with me.
These workshops are my opportunity to get to know more about the student. Their papers include a short reflection about their experience working on the project and a self-assessment form that highlights what they know so far about their draft. During my live Revision Workshops, the students often tell me how much experience they have with writing and where they currently stand, which helps me tailor my guidance in a way that is most relevant to them.
One of my Revision Workshops began with interesting discussions so early in the session thanks to the prompts I raised about their thesis statements and intended audience. At first, they seemed uncertain when answering, but the more that they spoke, the more that they clarified each of these factors. The very act of talking out loud can help clarify our ideas, and that was exactly what happened here. By the end of their answers, they already had a much better idea of their thesis statements and audience than when they first began speaking. I didn’t even do any of the talking until after they finished sharing their answers. The content of my talks were suggestions on specifying the thesis statements and audience to stay consistent with the goals of that specific project assignment.
That Revision Workshop had two students for a total of three participants, which aligns with Alyssa-Rae Hug’s strategy of inviting several voices to a discussion about their writing (5). By having two other people in a conversation instead of just one, it sends the message to an individual that no one person is authority. Revision Workshops aren’t a lecture, but a discussion between peers and their mentor. I was so pleased to see that in the Revision Workshop I hosted, the students were offering suggestions to each other so that my suggestions weren’t the only available ones to consider.
I wanted the students to be in charge of the direction of the workshop, as well. So I encouraged them to ask me any questions they had. I told them, “We can focus on the aspects of your paper that you would like help on.” In that three-person Revision Workshop I hosted, we ended up covering many aspects per the students’ requests. For example, Project 1 of ENG101 is a rhetorical analysis of a social media account. They asked me for examples of the four rhetorical concepts, such as kairos (timeliness) which I then explained to them.
Afterward, they brainstormed right on the spot and came up with their own examples of kairos that I would never have thought of. In other words, my teachings led them to think creatively about how they wished to move forward with their project. I was happy to see how involved and energetic they were throughout the Revision Workshop.
Assess
Assess learning and evaluate instructional practices
I was grateful for the Writers’ Studio rubric, which was concerned with only completion (were all prompts addressed and required components included?), timeliness (was the assignment turned in on time?), and consideration of feedback left on previous assignments (if applicable). It was not a traditional rubric that seeks to nitpick on every single aspect of writing. This holistic rubric encouraged practicing the work and putting the best effort without expecting perfection, which placed fewer pressures on the student. But it also placed fewer pressures on me! I just needed to see that the student competed all assignment requirements, put in their best effort, turn in the work on time, and use previous feedback to demonstrate their learning. I didn’t have to concern myself with the small stuff, such as spelling and grammar errors.
During my weekly meetings with the ENG101 course instructor, I asked them about assessing the students with fair scores and providing quality feedback. They were also willing to look at my grades and feedback before placing them in the gradebook. So, each time I finished grading all students’ work in an assignment, I turned in an Airtable form with the students’ grades and feedback. They would look over them and offer suggestions.
Here are the lessons I have learned from my instructor:
- Grading students, especially if doing so for the first time, is difficult. After all, now I was responsible for the students’ official grades! But with my instructor’s guidance, I grew more comfortable with grading students based on their work quality and circumstances.
- Speaking of circumstances, it is important to be lenient and empathetic towards students who are going through them. Some students messaged me about being late due to a situation out of their control. I empathized with them because life is so uncertain, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of their courtesy to be transparent with me, I showed my appreciation by granting them leniency for their late work.
- Scores should only be deducted if there is a significant component missing. (For example, some questions were left unanswered). Otherwise, top scores should be given to their work, even with some imperfections such as formatting or spelling mistakes. After all, this class embraced progress over perfection. If we see the students doing their best effort, we should reward them for that.
I really liked using Airtable to enter the students’ grades and feedback. The layout was very clear and easy to see, as shown in the below screenshots. I could use a dropdown feature to pick the scores per criteria and type in my feedback in a large text box.
Beforehand, I was using Google Sheets, but I found the interface to be clunky and inconvenient. That’s how I stumbled upon the legendary database management tool, Airtable, and haven’t looked back ever since.
As far as feedback went, I tried to be as specific as possible. I wanted to ensure when I told a student that they did an excellent job or needed improvement in an area, I pulled examples from their written work to support my feedback. That way, they knew what to continue doing or improve on in their future assignments.
Apply
Apply strategies for creating interest, motivating students, promoting participation, and enhancing student performance
I am a creative, so I was thrilled that one of my Writing Mentor responsibilities was creating teaching resources for the students. Long before it was time to release the resources into the class, I was already brainstorming ways to create the most fascinating and fun resources that students could hopefully relate to.
The Writers’ Studio courses teach students the importance of multimodality in their writing projects. And while attending the Writing Mentor Committee meetings, which is where writing mentors come together to discuss plans for improving the mentorship work, I got inspired by one of the senior writing mentors enthusiasm for delivering material in a creative format. So, I decided to exemplify the value of multimodality by making my resource into a video format with my voiceover and face, which I believed would make learning the material more dynamic and captivating.
In ENG101, the first project is a rhetorical analysis of a public figure’s social media account. Students had to pull example content from that account and explain how it appeals to an audience using pathos, kairos, ethos, and logos. I thought that I was in the perfect position as a Writing Mentor to teach students how a figure posts content with rhetorical appeal. After all, I have been a figure, known as a blue penguin named Tech70 with the Twitter handle @Tech70CP, in the Club Penguin community for nearly a decade and somehow, I now have over 3,000 followers. I had plenty of exciting social media content that used the four rhetorical concepts.
Seeing that the video, as of November 2021, has accumulated over 130 views within just two months, it seems that many students have chosen to watch it. I consider the large participation rate of students with this resource to be a big success! One of the writing mentors told me that they and their instructor thought it was a very interesting way to learn about the rhetorical concepts, so they ended up using it in their course section. Even the Writers’ Studio coordinator, John Buckley, included this video in a resources list within the InScribe forums.
Students in the InScribe forums told me that the resource has really helped them. For example, this student asked for more explanation on kairos. Through my video, I shared a few examples, such as a screenshot of an online event. I explained that I had to post that screenshot during the beginning of the event when people were the most interested in it.
I also tried to post often to the Canvas announcements in case students didn’t read them all. In marketing, a call-to-action is a behavior that the marketer includes in their content so that their audience can take a next step with them. I tried to include many call-to-actions in my announcements. Each announcement encouraged the students to participate in the course so that they could make the most of the time in the course improving their performance. For example, I always posted an announcement on the day that an assignment was due as a gentle reminder to turn it in. I also sent several announcements about the upcoming Revision Workshops, which helped increase the number of student signups (versus the previous term when I announced the Revision Workshops only one or twice, and barely anybody signed up). Finally, in many of the announcements, I reminded students that they had a whole writing community to join in the InScribe forums at any time so that they could ask questions and join discussions with many other writing students.
Important: I introduce you to my teaching portfolio, along with some information about myself and my teaching and learning statement, at the Digital Teaching Portfolio page.
(I have also written about my journey in literacy in my Digital Literacy Narrative.)
Works Cited
Beach, Richard. “Demonstrating Techniques for Assessing Writing in the Writing Conference.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 37, no. 1, National Council of Teachers of English, 1986, pp. 56–65, https://doi.org/10.2307/357382.
Brannon, Lil, and C. H. Knoblauch. “On Students’ Rights to Their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 33, no. 2, National Council of Teachers of English, 1982, pp. 157–66, https://doi.org/10.2307/357623.
Cooper et al. “Protocols and Process in Online Tutoring.” Pp. 129-139.
Elbow, Peter. “About Responding to Student Writing.”
Hug, Alyssa-Rae. “Two’s Company, Three’s a Conversation: A Study of Dialogue Among a Professor, a Peer-Writing Fellow, and Undergraduates Around Feedback and Writing.” Praxis: A Writing Center Journal, vol. 11, no. 1. The University of Texas at Austin, 2013, pp. 1-7.