Could you check my grammar? The forbidden request in the university writing center

Abstract

Along with the shift of the literacy education, the university writing center has evolved in its philosophy for writing instruction from a mechanical, error-correcting service to a collaborative process. From this pedagogical shift of writing instruction, proofreading has been prohibited from the services that the writing center can provide. Despite the policy, however, the proofreading request is still one of the most frequent requests that the tutor receives. Especially for L2 writers who have learned English grammar as explicit rules through exams, the 'no proofreading policy' of the writing center is not only ineffective but also incomprehensible. In this regard, this study investigates how L2 writers ask for proofreading and how the L1 tutor works with the forbidden request in a way that the center can provide. This study aims to understand the work of the writing tutorial and the philosophy of the writing instruction of the university writing center.

‘Tutoring Is Not Proofreading’. Exploring the Perceptions of Writing Tutors at University Writing Centres, Saudi Arabia: An Exploratory Study

“…Many L2 writers experience difficulties in writing and need personalised help that exceeds the limits of classroom instruction (Kim, 2018). Writing centres, for instance, provide personalised assistance that can remedy writing difficulties.…”

“…As a result, a non-proofreading policy has been introduced in many writing centres across the US and Canada to maintain the writing centres' core practice of assisting students. The policy was established due to a shift in instructional pedagogy from a product-focused one to a writing-process approach (Kim, 2018). Such policies have been widely adopted to regulate the type of help administered while prioritising content, including arguments over surface features such as grammar (Winder et al, 2016).…”

“…In investigating tutorials with NNESs, researchers have noted that tutoring NNESs in writing centres can be challenging and called for understanding the work of writing centre tutorials to help students improve their writing skills (Kim, 2018;Thonus, 1993). In a similar vein, Ronesi (2009) indicated that although the number of writing centres outside the US has increased, tutors' work in international writing centres remains controversial.…”

“…One possible reason for this according to Ronesi is that tutors' practices vary to meet the unique linguistic and cultural needs of local individuals. However, little research has been conducted to date that studies writing centres in non-native English contexts (Bakkar, 2019;Kim, 2018;Lee, 2014;McHarg, 2013;Ronesi, 2009). Therefore, this research was conducted to addresses the ongoing controversy between the current ESL pedagogical practices and the core theoretical foundations of writing centres.…”

“…Researchers have noted some challenges in tutoring NNESs because many writing centres espouse North's (1984) philosophy that the primary goal of writing centres is to produce better writers, not better texts (Kim, 2018;Williams, 2004). This policy has led many writing centres specifically in native English environments to stress that the role of a tutor is not to proofread tutees' papers but instead to help student writers learn how to improve their writing in a non-directive manner that addresses students' concerns (Kim 2018;Okuda & Anderson, 2018). The claim that tutors in international writing centres outside the US, especially in the Middle East, struggle in their instructional pedagogy prompted the current study's objective of examining how writing tutors in Saudi Arabia perceive their role (Kim, 2018;Lee, 2014;Ronesi, 2009).…”