Before and After Becoming a Writing Tutor

Introduction
For the past two and a half years I have been a part of the York Colleges Writing Center
as a Peer Tutor and a Writing Fellow for the basis of writing such as, Writing 101 and 202
Courses. From my time as a tutor, I have realized that my own writing process and habits have
progressed since the first paper I produced years ago. The idea of how my writing changed led
me to believe it correlated with the fact that I was spending hours upon hours tutoring other
students and helping them achieve better papers. The need to figure out the connection between
having better writing habits and becoming a tutor is what started me on this path of research.
I am curious about the topic of how becoming a writing tutor at York College of
Pennsylvanias Writing Center can change a student's writing method and their writing process. I
would like to study and observe the multiple changes between students works from before and
after they become a writing tutor. I am fascinated with the idea that students writing change
from when they first enter college, to after they became writing tutors and learn new and
improved skills on how to write. More specifically, I want to study three tutors papers that work
at the Writing Center and how their writing habits have changed since they became a tutor.
I want to observe if their writing is a direct reflection from the way they tutor other
students to how the tutors write in recent papers. I will explain my results through the lens of
each tutors strengths and weaknesses as to what they mentioned during their interview process.
By using the writing tutors before and after papers I can see how differently their writing
language has changed.
Methods:

I have asked three writing tutors to be participants in my research study by receiving in

total, six different research papers from my three participates. To protect my participants
identity I used an asterisk next to the name to show it is a pseudonym. These papers consist of
one from before they became a tutor and the other paper is after they became a tutor. I did not
give any participant a deadline of when their papers were supposed to be written by. This means
that the before paper could have been written any time during their freshman or sophomore year.
The after paper could have been written any semester after they became a tutor until the
beginning of this research study.
After I received my subjects before papers, I interviewed each tutor. I asked seven
different questions listed in the appendix to gain insight on what I should expect from reading
their research papers. The first half of my proposed primary research such as the interviews will
be conducted on my own in the Schmidt Library. I will also then be analyzing each students
work for different writing strategies along with Lower Order Concerns (LOCs) and Higher Order
Concerns (HOCs). Then I will be comparing the first set of papers to the second set of papers to
see what has changed before and after they became a writing tutor.
Writing Theories
Taken from The Idea of a Writing Center, Stephen North, a writing center director stated
two writing theories, one believed by the directors, the other by the actual tutors, of why students
were referred to the centers. The first theory thought by the directors is the concept of dealing
with grammar and punctuation, which is also considered Lower Order Concerns (LOCs) (435).
This is why I narrowed down my analysis of the before and after papers to focus on comma
usage and sentence level structure. The second theory, believed by the tutors standpoint was
organization and style of the paper being the single most important factor for referral of

students (North, 435). Because of what the tutors thought, I also analyzed Higher Order
Concerns (HOCs) in my subjects before and after papers. For the HOCs I concentrated on, intext citations, incorporating sources into sentences, and overall development of the paper.
All three of my subjects believed that a good method of writing was to read their paper
out loud, yet not all of them actually do it. Stephen North also agreed and added that another peer
should be listening to the student read the paper. This is because by asking a professor,
classmate, or tutor, they would not only listen but draw them out, ask them questions they
would not think to ask themselves and by doing this helps the writing with the final draft
(North, 440). This is what Writing Centers are for, to be listeners for students who need a second
opinion on their paper. Because my subjects practice this method on their own, they are able to
bring it back to the writing center and encourage their tutees to practice it as well.
Elizabeth Wardle had examined writing habits in writing communities through her
article, Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces. This article studied
different rhetorical lenses and was able to show the changes in one particular test subjects habits
when they entered the writing community. Since she used the rhetorical strategy of identity, this
allowed me to connect those ideas to the various reasons of why my subjects chose to become
writing tutors. This showed me how their choices of being writing tutors influenced their
participation in the writing community.
Discussion
Identity
The first question I asked my subjects was to establish their identity within the Writing
Center and writing community at York College. I had asked them each why they wanted to
become a Writing Tutor in the first place and received various answers. Wardle stated that,

Identity formation in any new community newcomers have some measure of control in
which they are invested, meaning these tutors were able to determine their own identity based
on how time spent with the writing community (525). For my first participant Sibille, the main
reason why she became a tutor was because she really enjoyed helping people with their writing.
Her freshman year professor was also a huge influence on her identity as a writer and encouraged
her to take the Teaching and Tutoring course offered.
Like Sibille, Anna also wanted to be a tutor because she was interested in helping other
people write better. However, in Annas case her identity shifted as explained by Wardle that,
Participation in new communities requires accepting for oneself identities that are at odds with
the values of other communities to which one belongs to (525). Anna had begun her writing
identity as an English Education major and spent time with that community. However when she
changed to only the English major, her community changed as well, shifting her writing identity.
Angela had a different approach as to why she became a tutor other than wanting to help
students with their writing. Wardle stated that, choices about participation impact newcomers
emerging identities within communities and for Angela, her choice of becoming a tutor to help
her own writing is what sprouted her writing identity in the first place (525). She stated that
writing was a strategy to organize my ideas and thoughts and by becoming a Writing Tutor
would benefit not only other students, but her own writing as well (Angela, March 22).
Authority
Claire Elizabeth OLeary from the Young Scholars in Writing mentioned how creating
authority in the beginning of the writing session is one of the most important aspects a tutor can
achieve with their tutee (62). Having the tutor frame their authority automatically stops the rest
of the session from having the awkwardness of informal conversation between them and their

tutee, which in some cases may be complete strangers. In the formal situation, this characteristic
is the position of authority one participant has relative to the other, although not every tutoring
session is going to be formal, my subjects still keep the authoritative feeling because they are the
tutors fixing someone elses paper (OLeary, 62).
As stated by Steven Corbett, from the Negotiating Pedagogical Authority: The Rhetoric
of Writing Center Tutoring Styles and Methods, the best way to gain authority as a writing tutor
during a session is, from the very start of the conference asking closed or leading questions that
persuasively direct the flow (91). Each of my subjects was trained to become peer tutors and the
first thing they were taught was how to establish rapport with their tutee. This includes asking at
the very beginning of the session exactly what the tutee would like to focus on so that they have
an organizational plan to follow. From the tutors asking their tutees what they would like to
focus on for the session they are allowing the tutees to follow along the conversation. However,
the authority is still there for the tutors because they are the ones setting the conversation
direction and just going along with what the tutees want.
Another way my subjects showed authority was by explaining to their tutees that
although they are tutors, they still make the same mistakes as them. This method of showing
credibility as a tutor but also as a tutee is what KimMarie Cole does from Reflecting on
Process: Building and Tutoring. She states that tutees at her Writing Center are always
reluctant and sometimes embarrassed to share, convinced that their [writing] process is
wrong (3). Yet, Angela, *Sibille, and *Anna have all experienced this at Yorks Writing
Center and the way to show authority is by expressing to their tutees that they have made the
same mistake in their own writings as well. Not only does this tactic show to the tutees that there
is nothing to be ashamed of with their writing but it also helps the tutors pick up on those errors

quicker because they are seeing them more often. This method helps the tutees and tutors
because they are both learning from each other and the tone of the conversation becomes more
calm and relaxed (Cole, 4).
Strengths and Weaknesses
After interviewing *Sibille, her strengths as a writing tutor included grammar and how
she would always proofread her work before handing in the final copy. She also prided herself
with being able to connect her ideas from paragraph to paragraph by using great transitioning
sentences. On the other side, her weaknesses included struggling to develop her ideas more fully.
At times she may find it difficult to brainstorm and actually produce various ideas as well as
finding support to back up those claims and ideas.
After becoming a Writing Tutor *Anna believed her top strengths included,
implementing quotes well and proper transitional sentences. However, some of her old traits
from before becoming a tutor were hard to leave behind and still struggled over not proofread her
papers and would overlook grammar errors. She is most comfortable with MLA format but when
it comes to writing in APA the in-text citations are still hard to follow through on. She stated that
her biggest weakness above all is her misuse of commas.
When it comes to the organization of ideas, Angela mentioned how one of her biggest
strengths was creating sub headings for her papers. With that being said, one of her biggest
weaknesses was adding too many ideas for one topic and not being able to connect them all
together. She also struggled with correcting grammar and working with in-text citations.
Writing Methods
One writing method that Melissa Cheatham, a writing tutor in the Student Learning
Center, uses is outlines. Cheatham uses this method in order to provide students with a space to

work through their ideas and help with the organization of their papers (19). Angela was the
only tutor to state the method of creating an outline was what she learned from becoming a tutor
and brought it back to her own writing. When Cheatham created outlines with the tutee it allows
their ideas to stay on point and not stray from the original thesis of the paper (20). Angela stated
how creating an outline was the easiest way to show key ideas for each paragraph and how to
transition from one idea to the next. Cheatham does something similar by showing tutees guides
for organizing the information in body paragraphs that they can adapt to best fit the needs of
their essays (21). What Angela does is uses each main topic as a body paragraph and then
chooses subtopics to be the back up claims for her information.
The writing method that Sibille used is not to write entirely linearly. She used this
method when she noticed that her writing is at a roadblock and has trouble continuing on with a
specific section. When she tutors she encourages her students to start wherever they are able to,
if they have solid facts about the conclusion to start there and write their papers backwards.
The way this works for Cheatham is that she teaches her tutees that their essays should work
entirely to prove or support the thesis (21). With this, she will have her tutee create their thesis
statement, but then work on another section of the paper instead of finishing the introduction and
going straight into the first body paragraph. Cheatham
From The Trials of Transformation: Revising to Editing by Taureanna Shimp, shared
theories writing methods when it came to editing papers. One theory of Shimps was reading the
paper out loud, which is what *Anna learned from becoming a tutor and also encourages her
tutees to do as well. *Anna believed the method of reading her papers out loud was most
significant because it helps rectifying run-on sentences and spelling errors. Shimp stated when,
Having the student read their paper aloud the pace should be slow and clear, this will help find

errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation (24). Another method *Anna uses is revise revision,
which is when the paper is read backwards to forwards looking at one sentence at a time. Shimp
suggested to his students, It may be helpful to read the paper backwards as well, or point to each
word to check for missing/doubled words (24). To *Anna, this method helped strengthen her
sentence level structure because of having to analyze each sentence instead of by each paragraph.
Results
Before *Sibille
Before Sibille became a Writing Tutor the only research paper she had written was on
Hereward the Wake for her Western Civilizations I course.
LOCs
Under the LOCs portion of her paper her sentence level structure needed more attention.
While reading her paper I realized how often she had run on sentences. This could have been
fixed to help with the overall development of the paper, which also falls under a LOC. One run
on sentence (that I have now turned into a block quote to show how long it is),
Herewards exile occurred when he was about eighteen years of age, his father sought
out King Edward begging for the king to banish Hereward for his rebellious behaviors,
including challenging any and all he knew to be a rival to him in terms of amount of
courage or ability to fight and the unruly company he kept, and for frequently stirring up
sedition and tumult among the people of his father's lands.
Although, there were pauses in the sentence by commas, since there were so many ideas
mentioned it could have been developed into multiple sentences instead.
She also had a few mistakes dealing with grammar under the LOCs. For example, one
sentence misused the passive voice, Either way, Hereward departed from England, but was later

brought back to his home by the news that his family's estates, lands held by Hereward's family
in Warwickshire and Lincolnshire at the time of Edward the Confessor, had been seized by the
Normans.
HOCs
Under the HOCs in her paper she struggled with in-text citations for MLA format. For
example, the way she set up this citation is how almost every single citation was done in the
paper, Not long after Hereward had his men knighted as well. (Head 73-74). She had
misplaced the period before the parenthesis instead of just at the end for a proper citation.
Even though her ideas in each paragraph connected to the rest of the paper, her
development could have been worked on more. There was one paragraph that consisted of two
sentences that seemed out of place from the rest of the paper because the idea in it was not
developed enough to give the reader the most information possible. In the previous paragraph
she was just talking about Hereward transitioning from the leader of the army into a civilian, but
then jumps ahead to his death with no transition, Hereward's life finally ended in peace and he
was buried in the monastery at Crowland beside his wife according to the chronicle of Ingulph,
the Abbot of Crowland. This account indicated that Hereward's death was sometime before 1109,
the date of Ingulph's own death. (Head 34).
After *Sibille
Sibilles after paper was an interdisciplinary research paper on the World of Chocolate.
LOCs
Under the LOCs portion of her paper, she greatly improved upon her sentence level
structure. All of her sentences were filled with the appropriate amount of details and nothing

about her paper seemed short and choppy like it did before. She did not have any run on
sentences as she did in her before paper and there was no need for any block quotes either.
Another thing she improved upon was the correct usage of the oxford comma. For
example, she used to place commas in random places through out the sentence but instead used it
for listing three or more items. She used it as such, In addition to the genetic approaches being
taken, the simple approach is to use fertilizers, fungicides, and pesticides.
HOCs
Each time she used in-text citations for MLA format is was correct this time, In the
Mayan, Mixtec, and Aztec stories of creation, "cacao appears as one of the first foods, as a
sacred tree, and as an offering between the gods" (Dreiss, 9). She addressed the authors last
name, comma, then the page number and was consistent throughout her entire paper. She also
used better transition statements before the quote instead of just using the quote as its own
sentence how she used to in her before paper.
I can assume that the method she used was the one she stated before by not writing
linearly because there are still some sections that go into more depth in details than other
paragraphs. From those paragraphs, I can tell she probably wrote first because she had enough
solid information for it to be descriptive enough, which also leads into how her development of
her paper was well thought out.
Before *Anna
Annas before research paper was on Neurological disorders such as Alien Hand
Syndrome (AHS).
LOCS

The beginning sentence of her research paper exemplifies a LOC, which was one of her
weaknesses of misusing commas. For example, Neurological disorders are hard to identify and
handle, because of where they reside, in the brain her comma usage was out of place and
unnecessary each time. Anna also had trouble with her sentence level structure and developing
her ideas fully in each sentence. Even though her sentence, AHS is present in the brain
explains where AHS is present, it is still short and choppy. This idea wasnt entirely developed
fully because the next sentence could have been added to the previous one instead of making it a
choppy sentence.
HOCS
Her in-text citations for MLA format were presented incorrectly each time, She had
been paralyzed on one side of her body due to a stroke, but found that her left hand caused her
trouble after she recovered and gained mobility of her left side. (Mirra and Bush). Each time she
cited a quote she would place the period before and after the parenthesis and completely neglect
the page numbers for MLA formatting.
Even though Anna mentioned one of her strengths was incorporating sources, there could
have been more development in the sentence before she brought in the source. For example, her
sentence does not introduce the author or where the source is from, Alien hand syndrome ...has
also been documented in individuals with brain tumors, neurodegeneration, infectious processes,
and even following strokes. (Mirra and Bush).
*Anna After
Annas after research paper was on the Urban Legend: The Devil Tree, which was a
creative nonfiction research paper.
LOCs

I can assume that *Anna used the method of reading out loud because her paper is free
from all spelling and grammar errors. She also properly used commas for example, There was a
large branch on The Devil Tree that hung parallel to the ground, which was called as the hanging
branch. The last thing she struggled with was sentence level structure, which she also improved
greatly on because there were absolutely no short and choppy sentences. Her sentences were
more developed and in turn, helped the overall development of her paper succeed as well.
HOCs
*Anna was able to fix both of the HOCs she struggled with most, which was in-text
citation, and implementing quotes into a sentence. Her citation was done correctly for MLA
format with the authors last name, comma, and then the page number. She introduced the
sentence with a brief explanation explaining the quote, There is now a chain link fence around
the tree, In 2009, the owners of the property wrapped a chain-link fence around the base of the
tree, that has not deterred souvenir hunters who are brave --or perhaps foolish--enough to try to
cut off a branch as a souvenir (Martinelli, 130).
Angela Before
Angelas before research paper was on the Staphylococcus aureus bacterium case
study.
LOCs
For Angela one of her LOCs was either neglecting to add commas or placing them
incorrectly. For example, the placement of an unnecessary comma was shown between MRSA
and was, Another blood test taken forty days later showed a positive test for MRSA, which
meant the MRSA, was nonsusceptible to daptomycin. Then she neglected to add a comma
between such as and doxycycline to show what antibiotics were included for the case study,

Patients who have an MRSA infection are usually treated with similar antibiotics as were used
in the case study such as doxycycline and clindamycin.
Her other LOCs were sentence level structure in which she had short and choppy
sentences that she would use as a conclusion sentence for paragraphs. For example, when
describing two side effects in previous sentences she ends the paragraph by stating, Both of
these were caused by the MRSA. The development of the sentence was not fully there or the
sentence in general was not needed to conclude the paragraph since both effects were already
mentioned as causes from MRSA. She could have expanded by re-explaining what the two side
effects were to make it a better conclusion sentence.
HOCs
In her beginning paragraph one of the HOCs is in-text citation in which her sentence
neglects to have any references at the end but she directly quotes from an article,
Staphylococcus aureus is First case report of vancomycin-intermediate sequence type 72
Staphylococcus aureus with nonsusceptibility to daptomycin. This quote also hit upon another
HOC of incorporating sources into a sentence. There was absolutely no lead in about the author
or source in which she attainted her information from. This would make it to the top of the HOC
list to fix during a tutoring session particularly because there was no citation at the end as well.
Her second HOC was overall development of the paper in which not all of her ideas were
smoothly transitions from one paragraph to the next. Her second to last paragraph consisted of
one third of the page with more than one idea wrapped up into it. She explained at first how
Staphylococcus aureus is a problem in the healthcare system but then went on to explain in the
same paragraph how common the MRSA infection was, which are two different diseases. Her
conclusion paragraph was especially not developed well enough since it turned out to be only

one sentence, While antibiotic resistance to certain drugs may be inevitable health care
providers and communities need to follow guidelines and try to keep the spread of these
infections under control.
Angela After
Angelas after research paper was in APA format on the American Citizenship Signature
Assignment: The Fight for Equality for African Americans and American Women.
LOCs
The first LOC in Angelas paper that she struggled with before was placing commas
unnecessarily. However, in her first sentence she properly uses the oxford comma, As a woman
who lives in American today, I am truly lucky to have the liberties, rights, and opportunities I
have. The other LOC she needed correcting was her sentence level structure, however, in this
paper I could not find one short and choppy sentence. Each sentence was filled with enough
information for the reader to understand the ideas put into each paragraph.
HOCs
Angelas paper had improved greatly when it came to proper citation and implementing
quotes into a sentence. Since her citation was done correctly for APA format with authors last
name, comma, and then the year the article was published, she did not need to familiarize the
reader with the author in the beginning of the sentence. For example, she introduced the quote
with her own words and gave enough background information needed for the reader, They
stated what they felt the government has taken away from them, He has withheld from her
rights which are given to the most ignorant and degraded men (Stanton, 1984).
The other HOC she struggled with was development of her paper and how she tended to
only write one-worded paragraphs. I can assume that Angela used the method of creating an

outline before she began to write because each paragraph was fully developed surrounded by one
idea with various details from sources to back up her claim. In fact, her closing paragraph was
the strongest paragraph she had wrapping up her main ideas and restating her thesis.
Future Research
One aspect I did not have enough time to research was actually observing my subjects
during a tutoring session. I would not have observed them for interaction with their tutee, but
instead to see the methods they used to tutor each student and if I could find it present in their
own writings. That is why I asked during my interview what their most commonly used method
was that they acquired from the Writing Center and if they thought it was present in their papers.
However, time constraints did not allow me to meet with them each individually again and there
was no guarantee they would have a tutee signed up for the allotted time slot.
I also could have looked into if there was a correlation between when they took the
Writing 290 training course to become a tutor and what methods they learned to tutor. This could
have changed my results when looking for specific HOCs and LOCs because their writing
methods might have differed depending on what they were taught during different semesters the
course was offered.
Through my findings and results I would like to mention how the distinct progression
between the before and after papers was strictly correlated to the fact that my subjects were
writing tutors. There are multiple variables that could have been the reason in which my subjects
writing progressed. This is another aspect that could be used for future research by studying the
different variables that went into my subjects progression. My subjects progression could have
been a result of the other writing courses they were taking since their majors were either
Professional Writing or English Literary Studies.

References
Cheatham, Melissa, Improving the Writer, Not Just the Grammar. Writing from the Center 1
(2012): n. pag. Print.
Cole, KimMarie. Reflecting on Process: Building and Tutoring. Writing Center University of
Wisconsin-Madison (2014).
Corbett, Steven J. "Negotiating Pedagogical Authority: The Rhetoric Of Writing Center Tutoring
Styles And Methods." Rhetoric Review 32.1 (2013): 81-98. Academic Search Complete.
Web. 10 Apr. 2016.
North, Stephen M. "The Idea of a Writing Center." National Council of Teachers of English 46.5
(1984): 433-46. Print.
OLeary, Claire Elizabeth. Its Not What You Say, But How You Say it [and to Whom]:
Accommodating Gender in the Writing Conference. Young Scholars in Writing. 60-72.
Print.
Shimp, Taureanna. The Trials of Transformation: Revising to Editing. Writing from the Center
1 (2012): n. pag. Print.
Wardle, Elizabeth. "Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces."
Enculturation 5.2 (2004).

Appendix
Interview Questions:
1. Why did you become a writing tutor?
2. What are the top three strengths and weaknesses you have in your writing?
3. What method do you see yourself teaching to other students that you picked up from the
Writing Center and have brought back to your own writing?
4. How does teaching writing to other students impact your own writing?
5. How do you change as a writer as you make the transition from a student to a tutor?
6. How do you believe the Writing Center in general has changed your writing process and
habits after becoming a writing tutor?
7. What do you notice in your writing now that was not present from when you first started
writing papers in college?

Dear Participant,
I am Professional Writing major at York College of Pennsylvania, conducting research for my
Senior Seminar class with Dr. Kerrie Carsey.
You are invited to participate in a research study to see how students writing changes before and
after they become a writing tutor in the Writing Center. I will ask you to provide me with two of
you own written papers. The first paper will be from your first or second year at college. The
second will be the most recent paper you wrote, after becoming a writing tutor. I will then
contact you and ask to observe one of your tutoring sessions strictly to understand the methods
you use to tutor other students. By doing this I can analyze different methods you use on other
students, to see if those methods are shown in either the before and after papers. Your name will
remain anonymous the entire time and your tutees name will not even be mentioned. I will
assign a pseudonym to protect your identity. After I have analyzed the before and after papers
while taking into account the methods you taught and might have used in your papers, I will then
contact you again to arrange an oral interview. This interview would last approximately 30-40
minutes of your time and acts as a debriefing on your tutoring session and the changes you feel
have come to your writing. None of your instructions and/or Writing Center admin will see the
results of this research and will not know whether or not you participate.
Your participation is voluntary and you may withdraw from the session at any time or decline to
answer any questions that make you uncomfortable. You will not be asked to do anything that
exposes you to risks. The benefit of my study is to help us understand how students writing
habits and writing processes can change after becoming a writing tutor.
At the end of the study, I will make the general results available to you. By doing this, you may
learn how your writing now, compares to how it was before you became a tutor. The generalized
results will be presented at the Senior Seminar poster presentations at the end of the semester.

If you have further questions about the study, please contact myself, Nicole Di Lillo at
Ndilillo@ycp.edu or Kerrie Carsey at kcarsey@ycp.edu. If you have questions about your rights
as a research participant, please contact Carl Seaquist, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, at
cseaquis@ycp.edu or 717-815-2084.
Thank you for your participation. I am very grateful for your help and hope that this will be an
interesting experience for you. You may keep this portion of the page.
Cut at the line, keep the top section and return the bottom section.
I agree to participate in the study of how becoming a writing tutor can change writing habits. I
also agree to voice recordings during interviews, being observed during a tutoring session, and
parting with two different writing pieces. I understand my participation is voluntary and that my
name will not be associated with my responses. By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18
years or older and that I agreed to it.
Participants signature ______________________________ Date: __________