Hi Readers,
In my research, I looked at the origins of Writing Centers to learn what worked in the past and what is still used today to establish and sustain a Writing Center ( WC ). As usual, I got more than I bargained for and was introduced to 3 constructions, as outlined by Peter Carino, of WC history: dialectic, evolutionary, and cultural.
The dialectic model is exclusive, like an us-versus-them viewpoint. It presents a WC's history that is full of struggle: identity conflict ( WC as remedial or supplimentary? ), David-and-Goliath complex ( WC as the underdog seeking autonomy from administrative bureaucracy ), middle child syndrome ( WC is ignored and misunderstood ), and others.
The evolutionary model is biased towards the present ( as in the present is much more improved and efficient than the past ). WC history is perceived as linear: starting as a laboratory, accomodating the open admissions policy and the influx of non-traditional students ( veterans, liberated women, immigrants et al ), and reacting to the 1966 Dartmouth Conference ( a shift in pedagogy to student-centered ).
Like Carino, I also noticed the dialectic model used in Judith Summerfield and Muriel Harris's articles. I agree with Carino's cultural model of WC's history that combines "the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the evolutionary and dialectic models" (43).
WC's flexibility allows it to address many concerns, such as remedial and supplimentary. Its philosophy of collaboration doesn't only extend to working with students; it also applies to teaming up with administrators, faculty, staff et al. Articulating WC mission and goals to its community, and being critical of itself and others help Writing Centers to create bridges of understanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment