ENGL300-1: Joselyn Arteaga
ENGL300-2: Adriana Meneghetti
Due by class time on:
The responses by the whole class are due by class time on:
The text you need to read is here.
Eng300-1: Joselyn Arteaga
The article "Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups" emphasizes the differences between two different types of collaboration which can be used by writers or students. According to article Collaboration, is a process writers engage in and teachers facilitate, is firmly entrenched in our thinking about the teaching of writing. Muriel Harris explains that there is two methods to "collaboration" which are collaborative writing and collaborative learning about writing. Collaborative writing, usually refers to two or more authors working together on a text and each having a responsibility to complete it . As for collaborative learning about writing, it's an interaction between a writer and a reader to help the writer with his writing skills. This type of collaboration is used for both writing centers and peer-response . The difference is that peer-response is an informal collaboration which colleagues help one another with their reviews and may be more opinionated than skilled. In writing centers there are tutors who need to be qualified in order to help writers improve their writing.
Informal collaboration is more about fixing written mistakes rather than tutoring which focuses on the writer's writing knowledge. Many instructors like to use peer-responses because although it might not perfect a paper but it allows students to be expose to different writing styles. Also reading their peers draft allows them to be focused on the subject and help improve skills of critical response by this process repetition.
Stephen North highlights the importance in tutoring rather than peer-response. He states that tutoring may help writers deal with anxiety, poor motivation, cultural confusion, ineffective or dysfunctional composing strategies, lack of knowledge, or inability to follow assignment directions. Tutors can also set up sessions for the writer improve a certain writing concerns and improve them. It allows students to ask questions and collaborate to find an effective way to master their writing problems.
Setting an agenda is different between the two types of collaboration. Usually, peer-responses are assigned by the teachers and it's up to the student when they will complete it, using the skills they learnt. As for tutorial it may become difficult because students usually want their papers to be corrected and be done but the tutor may want to focus on certain issues.
The advantage in peer-responses is that it has a better sense of audience and he learns over time to interact and become a good critic. The down side is that peers might not give constructive suggestions and may give negative comments which can lower the writers confidence. In contrast the benefit of going to a writing center is that he can receive one on one help and ask specific questions to approach certain issues. As for the negative side is that students may hear more suggestions rather than answers they anticipated, and student may become frustrated or angry.
By Joselyn Arteaga
___________________________________________
Andrea Dimitroff said...
I feel like writing center tutorials are for more direct writing help, and therefore, should be used less frequently than peer editing. Writing center tutorials provide not only clarity to the writer, but also direct instruction concerning fundamental things (like content, organization, and mechanical elements). Peer editing is less intensive than writing center tutorials.
I also benefit from reading other papers my peers have written about similar topics. Seeing the path they take on their paper in response to a topic inspires me to critical think about my own paper and helps me improve my writing further.
I would prefer peer editing over writing centers for those that do not need clarity or direct instruction. Peer editing is perfect for those that just need advice and a second pair of eyes upon their paper.
I have never gone to a writing center to help me with any of my papers. I do not have anything against it, I just have never gone. I am sure I would benefit from it, but I just have peers edit my papers. I should probably get help from writing centers though because I always seem to do things last minute and if I had someone helping me, I could probably get my work done faster and with ease.
ReplyDeleteI have been to the writing center before and I find it extremely helpful. It is a good resource to use when writing papers in college because you are getting professional feedback about your paper. This is a good tool and I am very thankful that it is available to students here at SIU.
ReplyDeleteI've always used peers to edit my papers. Though sometimes I've been too scared to let some peers read my work, as philosophy can be a brutal field full of interesting but harsh criticism. I really enjoy sending my papers off to friends to read and comment on, as they can provide a fresh perspective on something that I've been working on. I've never used the writing center, but I have had experts read my work, i.e. professors and editors, in order to get feedback and perfect the paper. Peers at conferences area also helpful to provide feedback on the ideas and content of your work.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like to use peer editing a lot, it is very helpful to me to have a fresh set of eyes on my paper. However, I do not feel comfortable going to writing centers because I work better by myself. I usually get embarrassed writing in front of people. I do see the benefit in writing centers though, and would like to give one a try. But, I think i will stick to my peers helping.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there are pros and cons to both peer editing and writing centers. I personally prefer to use professional writing centers over peer editing. I would rather have help along the way then to give a finished product to a friend or peer and have them pick at it and find many problems. I see the benefits in both, I just believe it is a personal preference as to which one is more beneficial.
ReplyDeleteIn this paper the author compares writing centers to peer response groups. He analyzes the different ways that these writing tools collaborate with learning and thinking as writers. When classes peer review everyone benefits because the one reviewing gets to be exposed to different writing styles. However, there is a large chance that many mistakes go unnoticed. With tutoring the tutor hopefully has better knowledge on writing. Plus, the final goal is not only for a better paper, but also to improve writing skills overall. I have peer reviewed a lot and have found that reviewing another persons paper can show me mistakes that I made too. I have never gone to our school's writing center, but want to after reading this analysis.
ReplyDeleteThe topic presented is writing centers vs. peer response groups. I enjoy peer editing and use it quite frequently. Seeing a subject from someone else's point of view often gives me clarity of thought and a different slant on a subject. I do feel that peer editing only works if the peers doing the editing are well versed enough to edit correctly. Writing centers provide professional criticism and offer help in correcting mistakes. I think both are helpful, but because the ultimate goal is to write a good paper, I would think the writing center would offer the best instruction.
ReplyDeleteI feel that peer editing and writing centers can both be an advantage to a writer. Writing centers might have more information to a writer because they might have more knowledge about writing. Peer editing is good also and the writer might feel more comfortable with this because you can get your writing reviewed by someone you know, instead of taking it to a stranger at a writing center and getting embarrassed if you have obvious mistakes. I have done both and peer editing is more comfortable to me because I know the person reviewing my paper. And the writing center was more nerve wrecking because I was taking my paper to a stranger to have he/ she to review it.
ReplyDeleteI have been to the writing center a few times, and I believe I did benefit from it. They read aloud your paper so you can hear the mistakes, which helps. When you read your paper in your head you read what makes sense to you since you wrote it down, but having someone else look at gives a new perspective that can accurately help fix the problems. I believe I benefited from that experience and I try to learn from those mistakes. I also have experienced peer-editing, which I find extremely beneficial. It is beneficial because the peer-editors are around you age which means it’s your grade level. I find reading other people’s paper is also beneficial. I have found mistakes I have made from reading other papers. I also reinforce the rules in my head when I write comments on other papers. I do find that sometimes I try to be nice when I peer edit and not state what I really need to.
ReplyDeleteMuriel Harris, author of "Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups" discuss two types of collaboration used by writers or students. One method to "collaboration" is collaborative writing, refers to two or more authors working together on a text, each responsible for completing it. The second method to "collaboration" is collaborative learning about writing, usually is an interaction between a writer and a reader to help the writer with his/her writing skills.
ReplyDeleteI feel both peer editing and writing centers are both an advantage to a writer. Peer editing not only helps the writer to understand what their peers think, but also for the peer, to be exposed to different writing styles and editing work. A writing center is beneficial for a writer because these are tutors and they will be able to explain why something is wrong.
In the paragraphs, this stuck out to me the most, The advantage in peer-responses is that it has a better sense of audience and he learns over time to interact and become a good critic. The down side is that peers might not give constructive suggestions and may give negative comments which can lower the writers confidence.I believe this is true. In English courses today, when it comes to peer editing, I hate having to put bad comments on a persons page. although it is constructive criticism, I still feel bad.
ReplyDeleteThis article fits our class exactly. I never understood why the studnets had to peer edit. Now I see it's to enhance the student knowledge and be able to spot mistakes. Sometimes the students doesn't really know much and may lead the person paper in the wrong direction. A writing center is much more reliable for a better grade. The people who work there are usually great writers and have no problem spitting issues in writing. I believe that peer editing is a great learning tool, but writing center should be the first option.
ReplyDeleteThis article displays the differences between peer editing and writing centers. Personally, I use the writing center when I want a more professional view of my work, but I definitely do see the benefit of using peer editing during the beginning stages of correcting a paper. My creative writing class uses a workshop to correct every short story and poem each student in our class writes. By the end of the section on short stories I felt I had a much better idea of what was expected in peer editing, not the friendly comments, but the constructive criticism that would make the difference. In this article, author, Muriel Harris, defends the benefits of writing centers, stating that he also works in one. Both sides defended in this article are reliable and valid, and I strongly agree that both writing centers and peer editing can help a student's writing ability.
ReplyDeleteI personally think that using the writing center is more effective than peer editing in class. I feel that a lot of people really don't take peer editing that serious and some students can believe that they are getting help with their papers when they really are not. Still, some students aren't comfortable enough to go to the writing center and do depend on what little help they get from their peers. Some students really do take the editing seriously and actually help each other.
ReplyDeleteI never been to the writing center before but I should start going because I feel i would benefit from it as a journalism major it would help me become an better writer in which i would need. Instead of just have peer editing from an student because they don't always know everything. I feel they can get lazy and just edit anything on my paper Verses an instructor or someone professionally that knows what they are talking about.
ReplyDeleteI have never been to the writing center before, but realize it is a good thing to start doing. It can help me receive better grades and also improve my writing skills. I have done many peer editing exercises though. I think peer editing is a good thing because it also helps the one doing the editing gain ideas. You may notice something in someone else's work that may have been forgotten in ones own work. The only downside to peer editing is that it is not done on ones own time.
ReplyDeleteI have never been to the writing center. I think the reason I have never been is because it is hard to fit time in to go into my schedule. I do think the writing center is a good thing. I have participated in peer editing. I think that peer editing has benefits but that it also has drawbacks. If students actually do peer editing instead of just brushing it off then it is helpful, however, there are times when peer editors do not do what they are supposed to do. The most helpful peer editing experience I have had was in a creative writing class.
ReplyDeleteWriting Center Tutorial verse Peer editing I would have to agree that the writing center is really the only option. I have taken many English classes that enforced peer editing and I have received almost no benefit. The Writing Center is basically the same as peer editing the only difference is in the Writing Center the people working actually know what they are talking about. I have had students grade papers for me and found no mistakes when I personally knew there were plenty because I never proof read it myself. Why would you take advice from someone that is getting a worse grade in the class you are both in? The writing center is the only place to go if you actually need help.
ReplyDeleteWriting Center Tutorial verse Peer Editing. Personally, I hate peer-editing. Most of the time people give you correction that aren't necessary or they expect you to change your writing style. Neither of these are the point of peer-editing. Also, peer-editing is extremely difficult and frustrating when you are the one editing a horribly written paper, and we've all been there. At the Writing Center, at least there is one on one help. With this you, as the writer, can ask question to better understand why something is wrong or why something should be changed. I'm not saying it isn't helpful to have someone read your paper, but only if they read it to see the basic errors: run-on sentences, choppy writing, or finding unnecessary word usage. I really wish that peer-editing was taken out of English classes all together, since it really doesn't seem to help anyone involved to get a better paper.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups" was very interesting. I learned a lot about peer-editing and actually going to the writing center. I myself have mixed feelings about peer editing. On one hand I believe that it is great to get a second opinion on my own writing from people my own age. It allows me to understand what I can do better in my writing that benefits those in my age group. What I don’t like is the fact that some peer editors may criticize writing due to the topic at hand or based bias opinions on the topic and thus use peer editing as a means to exert their own bias opinion into a paper. I do like the Writing Center however. I feel that the Writing Center is very effective. They don’t present you with opinions they literally just fix your grammar mistakes and only exert opinion when the feel is necessary.
ReplyDeleteI Believe that there are pros and cons to peer review and the writing center. I myself like to go to the writing center because the people there are more studied in grammar and English. Though peer review does work better sometimes because a peer reviewer may be in the same class or has maybe had the same teacher and they may understand the assignment better.
ReplyDeleteI have never been to the writing center because I tend to write my papers last minute. However, I definitely see the advantage of having someone who is very skilled in grammar and English review my work. I have peer edited in a few of my classes and find it helpful to get another person's perspective. They are also able to find mistakes that I carelessly looked over. A disadvantage to a peer editer though is that the person might be careless and not entirely know what they are talking about.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading "Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups" by Muriel Harris, she points out that there are two forms of collaboration. There's the one when you combine products of mulitple authors work, and then there's when you combine the actions between the author and the reader.
ReplyDeleteWhen peer editing, the reader is able to get a better understanding of what is being writen. Whether it be their own work or the work of someone else. That type of collaboration is key when understanding literature. That is the kind of collaboration that only you can understand by yourself.
I have never been to the writing center before, but I plan on doing so in the future. As far as peer editing goes, I tend to greatly dislike it, because most of the time the input that is received is vague and not helpful. There have been times when I have received helpful feedback, but more times than not this is not the case. Sometimes small careless mistakes are found that I may not have found, but large order concerns are usually passed up, which is frustrating to me, since I tend to try to be a better peer-editor.
ReplyDeleteI have greatly benefited from attending the writing center, as well as having someone edit my work. They are both very beneficial in improving a writer’s work. For instance, peer editing is advantageous for writers who are unsure about their writing purpose. Peer editing can, however, be problematic, especially when there is a variety in writing levels (i.e. a weaker writer may be overwhelmed when proofreading a stronger writer's paper, or a stronger writer may be excessively critical when proofreading a weaker writer’s paper). Therefore, teacher supervision should be present when peer editing is occurring because a teacher can understand and respond to various levels of writing. Writing center tutorials, however, offer far more thorough, extensive help in writing; it generally is not used nearly as often as a medium, such as peer editing. Writing center tutorials provide both only clarity and direct instruction for a writer. Furthermore, the writing center tutorials offer further assistance with fundamentals (i.e. content, organization, grammar, punctuation, and other mechanical elements), whereas peer editing is less rigorous, or more basic. Nevertheless, both of these tutorials offer constructive criticism for writers (of all levels) with their written works.
ReplyDeleteI have never gone to a writing center and I do not think I will because it is entirely too public and I work much better on my own than in groups. This is why I am a huge fan of peer editing because it is a good way to have your paper revised without as much hassle of going to the writing center. Although, the quality of your peer editor matters alot and has to be taken into account.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading "Collaboration: Writing Center Tutorials vs. Peer-Response Groups" by Muriel Harris, two forms of collaboration are noted. With peer collaboration and tutoring as a form of collaboration, the comparisons between the two are stated. The differences of the two are actually worth understanding, in order for a writer to obtain the best possible outcome for his or her works. Tutors are trained to specifically find faults and provide incentives of replacement, whereas collaboration between peers focusing on the writer understanding the viewpoint of the reader and enhancing his or her awareness of what his or her readers may or may not be interested in, in regards to his or her work. I view both collaborations as key to making a perfect work of literature.
ReplyDeleteI believe that peer editing is can be confusing and very unhelpful. Writing tutors are helpful for the grammatical mechanics of a paper,but in collaboration with peer editing both can be equally helpful.Peer editing can help with the content of the paper. I always had little to no help with peer editing.
ReplyDeletepeer editing and writing centers can both be an advantage to a writer. Writing centers might have more information to a writer because they might have more knowledge about writing.In Peer-Response Groups the reader is able to get a better understanding of what is being writen. Whether it be their own work or the work of someone else. That type of collaboration is key when understanding literature.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I realized that I have benefited from both tutoring and response groups. Peer editing and writing centers both use collaboration and both are beneficial. Both are similar but have some differences as well.
ReplyDeleteCollaboration is a process writers engage in and teachers facilitate. It is firmly enriched in our thinking about teaching and writing. Tutoring and response groups use collaboration as a powerful learning tool and both are needed because they both have different underlying goals.
Collaborative writing is writing that involves two or more writers working together to produce a joint product. Collabrative learning involves interaction between writer and reader to help the writer improve her own abilities and produce his or her own text.
Both of these have underling goals. These goals include improving critical thinking, organization, and appropriateness of writing, improving usage, increasing the amount of revision and reducing apprehension.
I can see that there is a benefit of using peer edits and writing centers. I also know there if the peer reviewer is forced to edit someone else s paper and they don't know or care about all the grammar mistakes then it does not help the writer.
ReplyDeleteWriting centers and peer editing are subjects within the world of writing that are both very helpful tools. I personally have never been to a writing center, because my writing has always been my strongest suit in education and mainly I feel better about working on my own time and comfort level. Peer editing is something that I do enjoy utilizing. It is very helpful to get the editing eyes of people who are involved in the same studies. The only concern for that would be students who are not too concerned with helping you fix a paper.
ReplyDelete