In the first part of this post I
outlined part of a new approach that we’re taking at the UWC Writing Centre
towards the initial training of peer writing tutors. I described briefly using
a PLA approach called the River of Life, the aim of which was to get the new
and returning tutors to get to know one another, and chiefly to bring the
tutors’ own experiences and knowledge into the training space, to open up a
more open and interactive training environment.
The second PLA technique we used
was Matrix ranking. The idea behind this technique is to get groups of people
to collaboratively draw up a list of qualities or items that correspond to an
issue they need to think about. These get written down in a vertical column.
The facilitator then gets the group to come up with criteria for choosing
between the different criteria or items they have come up with. These are
written along the top in a horizontal column and a grid gets drawn up. The
group then gets to cast votes, using beans or buttons as counters for what is
most to least important or valuable to them, and the criteria or items are
ranked. The idea, essentially, is to collectively share knowledge and ideas,
and to give groups an opportunity to defend their choices to one another and to
try and persuade the other groups members to choose along with them (Rowley
1999). We simplified this activity by removing the horizontal column, but the
essence remained – the collective sharing of knowledge and ideas, and the group
discussing and voting on the most to least important criteria or items. The
issues we spoke about were the characteristics of a successful peer writing
tutors and successful writing tutorials – this session led on from the first
session in which we drew Rivers of Life and then, using a Think-Pair-Share
activity, discussed three readings we regard as fairly foundational in terms of
giving us a framework and a shared language for our work with student-writers.
Thus we had some of the theoretical foundation in place and this activity was
designed to extend and deepen that earlier conversation we started by creating
a more practical application.
The tutors got themselves into
three groups and discussed amongst themselves the characteristics of successful
tutors and tutorials, and came up with eight characteristics per issue, per
group. These they then voted on and ranked them, and presented their matrices
to the whole group. I wandered around and listened in on their discussions and
voting and gave advice and guidance where needed. I then took all the matrices home and
collated them – pulling all the similar characteristics together and creating a
collective list of characteristics that reflected what they had written, presented
and what I had overheard during facilitation. We now have two collaboratively
designed and debated matrices that, very simply, represent what we, as a team,
consider to be good practice. This is informed by the experiences of the
returning tutors, the ideas and input of the new tutors, and all the tutors
drawing on the relevant theory they have read. The matrices are here.
Following this session, on the
second day of training, the tutors received simple scenarios and were divided
into pairs and small groups. They then devised 5 minute role-plays for the
whole group, being as creative as they wanted to be and bringing in their own
experiences with students to add colour and life to the scenario. These were
videotaped and then discussed with tutors giving one another feedback and then
the facilitator stepping in, consolidating and adding relevant points where
necessary. This role-playing has been a part of training since 2011, but every
year we challenge ourselves to be more creative and make this a more
informative, rewarding and fun experience for all the tutors. For the newer
tutors the role plays provide a small insight into some of what can happen in a
tutorial, so that they go into their first encounters with students a little
more prepared. An example of one of the scenarios:
One-on-one:
tutor has not read the draft – it’s just the first part of an essay, an intro
and a couple of paragraphs and the student says they are stuck and don’t know
what to write next; tutor uses questions to get the student talking about the
task and their ideas and what research they need to do and how or why they have
to do research before they can keep writing
The feedback on the interactivity
of the revised and renewed tutorial programme was very positive.
‘The role plays were refreshing –
quite a hands on experience of what transpires during consultations.’
‘Very empowering and exposure to the
actual tutorial sessions. More
reflective and engaging. More enriching
to personal development.’
‘Today’s session has been productive
in that new and old tutors shared very varied but good experiences. A good building block for 2013 tutoring.’
‘Provided opportunity for students to
share their ideas, experiences and goals.’
As a result of the feedback, and my own
experience of working in these newer and more engaged and interactive ways with
the tutors, I feel that making the tutor training more collaborative, and also
more up to the tutors themselves in as far as leading their own discussions and
contributing so much of their own experiences, ideas and expertise made these
the most enjoyable and informative, and also empowering tutor training workshops
we have had thus far. I am encouraged by how well it went, and also by how we,
through our own support of one another and mutual teaching and learning in our
ongoing training, are extending what we do with student-writers into our own
training space and taking on the issues of empowerment, collaboration,
friendliness and peer-ness in new ways.
Reference:
Rowley, John. 1999. Tips for
trainers: matrix ranking of PRA tools. Available online at: http:// http://www.participatorytraining.co.uk/Tipsfortrainers.pdf.