Abstracts
Abstract
Students enrolled in asynchronous online courses explore much of the subject matter through computer-mediated discussion. In this context, students must often negotiate complex factors such as the course content, the assignment goals, their audience, disciplinary expectations, and the writing process. Writing Centres offer students support services to help them succeed in these text-heavy courses. Typically, students come to Writing Centres in person for help with their critical reading and writing assignments; however, increasingly, tutors are asked to participate in online settings to assist student learning. A question associated with online tutoring practices is whether students improve their writing skills when they are given the opportunity to get feedback from a tutor and from peers. How can a cooperative, collaborative pedagogical approach to computer-mediated tutoring support students and improve teaching? This paper examines a pedagogical exploration where one tutor interacted asynchronously with students by posting weekly writing activities. Students were asked to respond individually and collaboratively to each activity. I argue that when a tutor in an online course provides feedback, the collaboration creates a new online ecology of reflection and collaboration that may benefit students in their growth as writers. This exploration can be a useful writing pedagogy that can assist instructors by making stronger connections between students’ writing knowledge and writing practices.
Keywords:
- Writing Centres,
- asynchronous online learning,
- writing pedagogy,
- online writing tutorials
Résumé
Les étudiants inscrits à des cours en ligne asynchrones explorent une grande partie du sujet par le biais de discussions assistées par ordinateur. Dans ce contexte, les étudiants doivent souvent négocier des facteurs complexes tels que le contenu du cours, les objectifs du devoir, leur public, les attentes disciplinaires et le processus d'écriture. Les centres d'écriture offrent aux étudiants des services de soutien pour les aider à réussir dans ces cours à forte teneur en texte. En règle générale, les étudiants viennent en personne aux centres d'écriture pour obtenir de l'aide dans leurs travaux critiques de lecture et d'écriture; cependant, de plus en plus, les tuteurs sont invités à participer à des paramètres en ligne pour aider l'apprentissage des élèves. Une question associée aux pratiques de tutorat en ligne est de savoir si les étudiants améliorent leurs compétences en écriture lorsqu'ils ont la possibilité d'obtenir des commentaires d'un tuteur et de leurs pairs. Comment une approche pédagogique coopérative et collaborative du tutorat assisté par ordinateur peut-elle soutenir les étudiants et améliorer l'enseignement? Cet article examine une exploration pédagogique où un tuteur a interagi de manière asynchrone avec les étudiants en affichant des activités d'écriture hebdomadaires. Les élèves ont été invités à répondre individuellement et en collaboration à chaque activité. Je soutiens que lorsqu'un tuteur dans un cours en ligne fournit des commentaires, la collaboration crée une nouvelle écologie en ligne de réflexion et de collaboration qui peut profiter aux étudiants dans leur croissance en tant qu'écrivains. Cette exploration peut être une pédagogie d'écriture utile qui peut aider les instructeurs en établissant des liens plus solides entre les connaissances en écriture des élèves et les pratiques d'écriture.
Mots-clés :
- Centres d'écriture,
- apprentissage en ligne asynchrone,
- pédagogie de l'écriture,
- tutoriels d'écriture en ligne
Appendices
Bibliography
- Aldohon, H. (2021). Writing centre conferences: Tutors’ perceptions and practices. Educational Studies, 47 (5), 554–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1717931.
- Barthomolomae, D. (1986). Inventing the university. Journal of Basic Writing, 5(1), p. 4-23.
- Bizzell, P. (1994). "Contact Zones" and English studies. College English, 163-169. https://doi: 10.2307/378727
- Blackburn, J. B. (2010). Critical digital literacies: Following feminist composition theories into twenty-first century contact zones. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
- Cole, A., Lennon, L., & Weber, N. (2021). Student perceptions of online active learning practices and online learning climate predict online course engagement. Interactive Learning Environments 29(5), p. 866-880. https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619593
- Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) Committee for Best Practices in Online Writing Instruction. (2013). A position statement of principles and example effective practices for online writing instruction (OWI). https://cdn.ncte.org/nctefiles/groups/cccc/owiprinciples.pdf
- Cooper, M. M. (1986). The ecology of writing. College English, 48(4), 364-375.
- Cooper, M. M. (2011). Rhetorical agency as emergent and enacted. College Composition and Communication, 62(3), 420-449.
- Deans, T. (2014). The rhetoric of Jesus writing in the story of the woman accused of adultery (John 7.53-8.11). College Composition and Communication, 65(3), 406-429.
- Denton, K. (2017). Beyond the lore: A case for asynchronous online tutoring research. The writing center journal 36 (2), 175–203.
- Dolmage, J. (2009). Metis, mêtis, mestiza, medusa: Rhetorical bodies across rhetorical traditions. Rhetoric Review, 28(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350190802540690.
- Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale.
- Gillam, K., & Wooden, S. R. (2013). Re-embodying online composition: Ecologies of writing in unreal time and space. Computers and Composition, 30(1), 24–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2012.11.001
- Goggins, S & Xing, W. (2016). Building models explaining student participation behavior in asynchronous online discussion. Computers & Education, 94, 241-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.11.002.
- Government of Ontario. (2020). Education Quality and Accountability Office (EQAO). Standard-Setting Process. https://www.eqao.com/the-assessments/osslt/standard-setting-process.
- Grabe, W. & Kaplan, R. B. (2014). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. Routledge.
- Kapler, R. (2004). Writing with, through, and beyond the text: An ecology of language. Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Keengwe, J., Onchwari, G., & Agamba, J. (2013). Promoting effective e-learning practices through the constructivist pedagogy. Education and Information Technologies, 19(4), 887–898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9260-1.
- Kehrwald, B. (2008). Understanding social presence in text-based online learning environments. Distance Education, 29(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910802004860.
- Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and social learning. McGraw Hill.
- Lim, J. R., Rosenthal, S., Sim, Y. J., Lim, Z., & Oh, K. (2021). Making online learning more satisfying: the effects of online-learning self-efficacy, social presence and content structure. Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 30 (4), p. 543-556. https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1934102
- Lopez, C. A. (2018). Writing center pedagogy rooted in care ethics, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
- McIntyre, K. & Hall, A. (2017). Mapping the landscape of asynchronous and synchronous online services in communication centers. Communication Center Journal, 3(1), 92-103.
- Moussu, L. (2013). Let’s talk! ESL students’ needs and writing centre philosophy. TESL Canadian Journal, 30(2), 55-68.
- Nistor, Nicolae & Neubauer, K. (2010). From participation to dropout: Quantitative participation patterns in online university courses. Computers & Education, 55(2), 663- 672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.026.
- Romano, F. (2019). Grammatical accuracy in EAP writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 41, 100773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100773.
- Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (2014). Smart technology for self-organizing processes. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0001-8
- Stenberg, S. (2013). Composition studies through a feminist lens. Parlor Press.
- Swales, J. (2011). The concept of discourse community. In Wardle, E.A. & Downs, D.P. (Eds.), Writing about writing (466-473). Bedford St. Martin’s.
- Sword, H. (2012). Stylish academic writing. Harvard University Press.
- Thieme, K. A. (2017). Principled uncertainty: Writing studies methods in contexts of indigeneity. College composition and communication, 68 (3), 466–493.
- Veletsianos, G. (2016). Emergence and innovation in digital learning: Foundations and applications. AU Press.
- Vygotsky, L. (1986). In A. Kozulin (Ed. & Trans.), Thought and language. (Rev. ed.). Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.