ERIC EJ1089112: Peering into the Writing Center: Information Literacy as a Collaborative Conversation

2014·0.31 MB·English

by  ERIC

Volume 8, Issue 1, 2014
TEACHING MATTERS [PERSPECTIVES]
P I W C
EERING NTO THE RITING ENTER
Information literacy as a collaborative conversation
Janelle Zauha
Montana State University, Bozeman

This column focuses on the conceptual and practical aspects of teaching information
literacy. Column co-editors Patrick Ragains and Janelle Zauha write about trends and
issues that have come to our attention, but also solicit contributions to this space. Readers
with ideas for Teaching Matters may contact Patrick Ragains at [email protected], or the
editors of Communications in Information Literacy at [email protected].
1
Zauha, Peering Into the Writing Center Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014
What is your library’s relationship with peer library commons: the writing center. It is
tutoring services on campus? Peaceful co- not unusual today to find academic libraries
existence, détente, or active collaboration? with writing centers or satellites located
Armies of tutors employed through student within their learning commons. Often this
services may routinely use your library as a seems to be primarily a co-location model
convenient place to meet but have no actual (Todorinova, 2010). Visible co-location is
knowledge of your research services, let not a bad thing, of course, but is it
alone the information literacy objectives of sufficient? Close proximity of research and
your instruction program. Without making writing services gives us each more
connections with tutoring services you may visibility. It is convenient for students,
be missing an important opportunity to facilitating easy referral from librarian to
broaden the reach of information literacy tutor and back. It makes available to the
across the curriculum. As models for peer writer and tutor an information and
assisted learning – whether known as technology-rich environment. A common
tutoring, coaching, mentoring, counseling, roof tacitly signals that these services share
or by some other term – proliferate in the certain beliefs and goals; for example, that
academy (Bodemer, in press), it is easier both research and writing are processes
and more important than ever for libraries to helped by designated experts or guides.
collaborate with these programs to ensure
that information literacy instruction is When research and writing services are
included wherever possible. located near each other but are kept entirely
separate, however, the signal is also given
There are many ways to experiment with that both librarians and tutors feel these
incorporating information literacy into peer- processes can and should be carried on in
based learning programs on campus. At the separate spaces, that it is as normal for
most ambitious level, a library might students to move smoothly from the task of
implement its own program to hire, train, research and on to writing as if stepping
and mentor students to serve as peer between two rooms of the house, closing
research guides at a library service point doors as they go. In fact, this visible
and/or as teachers of beginning level separation can be tremendously misleading
research sessions in the classroom. While and even damaging, denying the nonlinear
such library-led programs are time- and interactive natures of both processes. In
consuming, those that are well-planned and “Libraries and Writing centers in
monitored are shown to extend the reach of collaboration: A Basis in theory,” Elmborg
the library’s instruction agenda (Bodemer, (2005) describes the centrality of process to
in press). A less intensive option for both disciplines and claims that, “[t]he
integrating student tutors into our recursiveness in the research/writing process
information literacy agenda while extending is related at least in part to the recurring
impact is for the library to collaborate with interplay between writing and information.
peer tutoring programs already in place on By segregating the research process from
campus, some of which are focused on the writing process, we have obscured this
specific populations such as student athletes fact and thereby impoverished both …” (p.
(Davidson and Peyton, 2007). 11). Seen this way, so much more than
proximal service could and should be
One peer tutoring program with tremendous occurring between research and writing
potential may be as close as your own centers.
2
Zauha, Peering Into the Writing Center Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014
Entering into conversation with the writing information literacy link between writing
center, moving beyond a landlord/tenant and research (White Gamtso et al., 2013).
relationship, is the first step. Understanding
our common goals, characteristics, and In the library science literature, the review
challenges is essential in order to progress article “Working together: Library and
from co-existence to meaningful writing center collaboration” provides a
collaboration that can impact peer assisted good overview of a range of reported
learning. Designating a liaison from the collaborations (Ferer, 2012). Some of the
library to the writing center to begin this most interesting examples include extensive
conversation is necessary, especially if that projects in which the writing center and the
liaison is prepared library act as equal
to explore the partners to mentor
discourse of the TAKE SOME TIME TO GET TO tutors, deliver
“other field” with an KNOW EACH OTHER. PLAN AN information literacy
open mind. One instruction through
INITIAL EVENT THAT INCLUDES
starting point in the programs outside
literature is Centers CASUAL INTERMINGLING OF regular classroom
for Learning: interactions, create
LIBRARIANS, TUTORS, AND
Writing Centers and tutorials, share
Libraries in WRITING CENTER student tutors and
Collaboration ADMINISTRATORS WITH A other personnel,
(Elmborg et al., cross train, and
COMMON GOAL OF HELPING
2005), a book that promote common
gives voice to STUDENTS. goals across
practitioners from campus. These
both fields in a examples emphasize
collection of collaboratively written the need for institutional support at all
chapters posing compelling reasons for levels, careful planning, and extensive
close ties between writing centers and conversation to establish mutual
libraries as well as pragmatic options for understanding necessary for true
establishing those ties. Though nearly 10 partnerships, as well as adequate funding
years old, Centers for Learning is and the time to focus.
completely relevant today. Exploring the
literature of composition studies, rhetoric, The danger of all this reading is that the
and writing centers in databases such as the liaison will be overwhelmed and not know
MLAIB, CompPile, and ERIC will yield where to begin. Finding the resources to
many more articles and highlight key establish a meaningful collaboration with
publications in the discipline. Articles in your writing center, whether you occupy the
The Writing Lab Newsletter, for instance, same building or not, should be centered on
give insight into issues and processes in the local needs, practices, and creative
field, and often address topics specific to serendipity. While impressive and inspiring,
library collaboration, pointing out shared all the examples that Ferer (2012) cites
issues (Nadeau et al., 2000), bridges to be present a pretty daunting list of pre-
built (Elmborg, 2006), the need for breaking requisites for success. Meaningful
down boundaries (Macauley, 2007), and collaboration can grow from small
tutor mentoring processes that make the experiments that move incrementally
3
Zauha, Peering Into the Writing Center Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014
beyond the routine student referrals that After a recent WriteNight event, the tutors
libraries and writing centers make to each were asked to reflect on their experience.
others’ services. Regardless of whether your One tutor wrote a several page essay that
library has the good fortune of housing the uncovered some amazing benefits that I
writing center or some portion of its certainly had not expected as outcomes of
services in the library, there are ways that the evening. Perhaps the most interesting to
you can begin collaborating without me was this tutor’s observation of a
creating an extensive plan from the outset. community of writers that was created
spontaneously that evening. She recalled a
Take some time to get to know each other. group of business majors who, with the
Plan an initial event that includes casual initial assistance of the tutors, gathered at a
intermingling of librarians, tutors, and table and then became a writing group
writing center administrators with a helping and collaborating with each other
common goal of helping students. The beyond the guidance of the tutors. She also
Montana State University Writing Center reflected on the experience of working with
and the Montana State University Library an online student during the event, a session
have been experimenting for the past year she shared with two librarians: “Although I
with a research and writing clinic called did most of the talking, I was accompanied
“WriteNight.” For two hours one or two by two of the librarians, which made for
evenings a semester, several librarians another advantage. Having different
congregate in the library commons with viewpoints on the same problem enabled us
about a dozen tutors and several writing to give better advice to the student without
center administrators to help students with making him feel ganged up on” (Schwaller,
all stages of their writing, from 2013).
brainstorming to citations, including
researching. We are not entirely sure yet This tutor’s reflection also reminds me of
what to make of this event but for the near the ways I would like my own work with
future we plan to continue it, observing, students to change especially with regard to
assessing, and refining it to help identify information literacy. As the world of
best practices for working together. From reference/research librarianship shifts to
my point of view, WriteNight has proven meet changing student needs and
useful for the casual conversation incorporates new technologies and
opportunities it offers, the equal footing it resources, I want to move my practice from
provides for both writing center and library one that prioritizes providing answers and
as we each bring our different areas of teaching information literacy, toward
expertise and concern to the table in conversation as a primary mode of
common service of our students. It makes advancing learning. Elmborg points out that
logical use of the learning commons in the “[c]onversation is at the heart of the
library, “a space designed to provide a learning community, and conversation is at
holistic, interactive, collaborative learning the heart of the process model of instruction,
environment” (Barbour et al., 2009), as well” (Elmborg et al. 2005, p. 12). I want
conducive to the conversations required in to learn from the writing center and its
peer learning activities. Through WriteNight tutors how to shift the work of research
I have learned much more about our tutors librarians away from the fortress of the
and how they work, and I am starting to desk, how to move it out of the kingdom of
think more creatively about my own work. the perfect answer into a conversation
4
Zauha, Peering Into the Writing Center Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014
model that is more dynamic, approachable, information literacy as conversation rather
student-centered. than lesson or turf. Most damaging of all,
we are perpetuating the artificial barriers
Without the advantage of this WriteNight between research and writing across the
experience, without exploring current disciplines. And students and faculty alike
practices in writing center pedagogy or lose out on the potential creative synergies
having conversations with writing center that the collaborative conversation offers.
administrators and tutors, I might have
settled for what I would call my library’s REFERENCES
traditional approach to working with peer
assisted learning groups on campus. Under Barbour, W., Burns L., Hoffmann, D.,
this traditional approach, in order to ensure Klompien, K., Lenker, M. (2009). The
that information literacy be understood and Dynamic duo: Collaboration between
incorporated into the Writing Center’s writing centers and academic libraries.
tutoring program, I would have simply tried LOEX Conference Proceedings 2007. Paper
to teach tutors through lecture and 2. Retrieved from http://
demonstration about our research resources, commons.emich.edu/loexconf2007/2
methods, and librarian expertise so that they
would not spread misinformation about the Bodemer B. B. (in press). They CAN and
library and, heaven forbid, fail to properly they SHOULD: Undergraduates providing
refer students to us. In fact, this was my first peer reference and instruction. College and
approach as I began working with the tutors. Research Libraries. Retrieved from http://
But as my relationship with our writing crl.acrl.org/content/early/2012/11/08/crl12-
center develops, I am learning that if I stop 411.abstract?cited-by=yes&legid=crl;crl12-
assuming that I need to reinforce the 411v1
barriers or differences between our services
and work instead to empower students as Davidson, K. & Peyton, G. (2007). Library
ambassadors of information literacy who outreach to the freshman football recruits
have essential skills and talents that differ and athletic academic tutors at Mississippi
from mine, something much more positive State University. The Reference Librarian,
happens. Real collaboration in peer assisted 47(1), 63-77.
learning promises a much richer experience
for all of us as we form meaningful learning Elmborg, J.K. (2005). Libraries and writing
communities together. centers in collaboration: A Basis in theory.
In J.K. Elmborg & S. Hook (Eds.), Centers
Bodemer (in press) warns, “Academic for learning: Writing centers and libraries
libraries would be remiss in not seeking to in collaboration (pp. 1-20). Chicago:
harness peer learning dynamics to enhance Association of College and Research
student learning and success” (p. 2). If Libraries.
libraries do not take advantage of the real
opportunities for collaboration with writing Elmborg, J. K. (2006). Locating the center:
centers, and by extension with other tutoring Libraries, writing centers, and information
services on campus, we are missing a great literacy. The Writing Lab Newsletter, 30(6),
way to breach the traditional boundaries of 7-11.
both the library and these services. We are
missing an opportunity to explore Elmborg, J.K., & Hook, S. (2005). Centers
5
Zauha, Peering Into the Writing Center Communications in Information Literacy 8(1), 2014
for learning: Writing centers and libraries
in collaboration. Chicago: Association of
College and Research Libraries.

Ferer, E. (2012). Working together: Library
and writing center collaboration. Reference
Services Review, 40(4), 543-557.

Maccauley, W.J., Jr. (2007). “The (writing)
center that I cannot find/is known to my
unconscious mind”: Rupturing the
boundaries of a writing center. The Writing
Lab Newsletter, 31(5), 1-4.

Nadeau, J. & Kennedy, K. (2000). We’ve
got friends in textual places: The Writing
center and the campus library. The Writing
Lab Newsletter, 25(4), 4-6.

Schwaller, E.J. (2013). My experience with
write night. Unpublished manuscript.

Todorinova, L. (2010). “Writing center and
library collaboration: A telephone survey of
academic libraries.” Academic Services
Faculty and Staff Publications. Paper 56.
Retrieved from http://
scholarcommons.usf.edu/tlas_pub/56

White Gamtso, C., Blair Vogt, R., Chartier,
N., Fensom, G., Glisson, N., Jefferson, J., et
al. (2013). Research mentoring: Expanding
the role of writing tutors. The Writing Lab
Newsletter, 38(1-2), 10-13.

Communications in Information Literacy publishes invited editorial content, including reviews of books and
other media, interviews with select figures in the information literacy community, and guest editorial and
opinion.

If you are interested in contributing editorial content to the journal, please inquire with the Editors
([email protected]).
6