I completely agree with Jenny that there need not be a split between 'writing centres' and an academic literacies approach.  We run
study support (which is essentially the same as writing centres) with an underpinning philosophy that comes from academic literacies.
We encourage dialogue between study support tutors and other academic staff, and study support tutors encourage students to see writing
as context specific and to encourage students to clarify with other academic staff what is required.   We also do staff development on
these issues.  There is a surprisingly large number of staff who still think that there is only one true way to write a dissertation
(for example)  and that everyone else is just wrong.  Bringing groups of staff from different disciplines together can therefore lead to
interesting discussions!

Re Jenny's question about students who cannot put together a coherent report or essay, I feel reasonably comfortable if the student is
dyslexic- the solution there is some form of accommodated asssessment where the student reaches the learning outcomes by alternative
means e.g. viva, presentation etc.  This seems to me to be 'reasonable adjustment' under the DDA.  I am more worried about international
students who get to final year with English that is not good enough - this is a major problem in Art and Design where they have been
accepted in the first place on the strength of their portfolios and a 'lenient' approach has been taken to their IELTS score.  The 'on
the ground' strategies, such as getting a native speaker to help you, do not sit comfortably with current concerns about plagiarism.
I'd be really interested in the comments of others on this.

Margo

Jennifer Moon wrote:

> When I kicked off this thread of discussion and mentioned
> the development of writing centres, I did not see a writing
> centre as a purveyor of the skills approach only and
> therefore I do not (in response to Cal's note) see a
> dichotomy between the academic literacies work and the
> writing centre approach.  A strong argument for a
> comprehensive writing centre is, in my mind, the chance it
> gives us to work with academic staff and students.  I
> totally agree with Cal that academic staff do not
> necessarily know how to guide students in their learning to
> write. This is well documented in the literature. Staff are
> often reported to be able to point out the better of two
> essays, but not to be able to advise students on the
> features of a good essay. I suspect that this issue also
> underlies the widespread reluctance to provide students
> with examples of good and poor writing....it involves a job
> that many staff do not actually feel competent to do!!  (I
> am not convinced by the arguments that 'students will only
> copy' or 'students will think that there is only one way to
> write an essay').
>
> A writing centre might provide a relatively small
> 'remedial' type of service to students in dire need - and
> work with students with specific needs in writing, but do a
> lot more working with staff and in the development of
> materials that support the learning to write initiative
> within disciplines.
>
> The development of a writing centre carries implicit
> messages too as to the fundamental importance of writing
> to progress and progression in higher education.
>
> A somewhat related point is a question that arose in
> external examining activities recently: should a UK student
> be able to graduate with a Batchelor's degree if she cannot
> write a reasonably coherent essay or report, with
> reasonable English? I recognise, of course,  that this is
> impossible for some dyslexic students - and that matter
> complicates any responses.
>
> Jenny Moon
>
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 11:10:05 -0000 "Weatherald, Cal"
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I fully agree with Margo about the lack of consensus. As regards responses, there appear to be 2 alternative schools of thoughts.
> > One advocates the setting up of central Writing Centres, an attractive idea. The other, as here, connects with the interesting
> > work of Lillis, Lucy Rai etc emerging from a history of TESOL and adult literacy teaching, which recommends a 'social practice'
> > approach, embedding writing development in dialogue between the tutor and the student and relating it to the specific demands of
> > the discipline. There are issues in both cases of resources and expertise.
> >
> > Another point about writing demands: for many degree courses, there are professional as well as academic demands on student
> > writing. We have been working with staff and students on our Social Work degree in response to issues raised by students
> > themselves approaching the Education Guidance Service for help with writing placement reports. Last year, we piloted a short
> > course for a group of students experiencing these difficulties, focussing specifically on language structure, vocabulary and
> > style. This was in effect tailored to the group of students and held on SW premises at a time to fit in with the course
> > time-table. A member of the EG Service staff led the group, using the students' work and social work texts as materials. Feedback
> > was very positive and we are repeating it this year, funded by the Faculty itself following acceptance of the evaluation report.
> >
> > An integrated approach is popular with students, and has a higher level of success in attracting students who for reasons of time,
> > convenience or confidence, do not approach central services. But there are two key challenges:
> > 1. How to sustain this level of funding for a relatively small group of students (although it could be argued that failure would
> > be more expensive!)
> > 2. If we are to integrate writing skills development fully within courses, how to finding subject staff with a knowledge of
> > language and confidence in teaching it. My experience (just noticed today that this is borne out in 'Eats Shoots and Leaves') is
> > that staff who have not done English beyond GCSE/O level, and are below the age of 50, have not themselves ever learned about
> > English structure and language patterns, so feel very unconfident in teaching it. I would be very interested to hear from
> > colleagues who can hopefully refute this perception!
> > The alternative, of course, is to employ we specialists. But there are not enough of us....
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Cal W
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Cal Weatherald
> > Education Adviser
> > Sheffield Hallam University Education Guidance Service
> > Student Services Centre
> > Level 5 Owen Building
> > Sheffield Hallam University
> > Howard Street
> > SHEFFIELD
> > S1 1WB
> >
> > Tel        0114 225 3743
> > Fax       0114 225 2161
> > E mail   [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Margo Blythman
> > Sent: 17 February 2005 12:09
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Mapping the LD 'picture' update
> >
> >
> > Jenny and others
> >
> > This is a very useful for list but what I would like to add is the idea of context.  My experience delivering Study Support is
> > that there is rarely a consensus across subjects about writing (a bit of a minefield for students who work across subjects).
> >
> > For me the starting point is to get staff to clarify what they want - it is often tacit.  I attach a handout I produced ( heavily
> > based on US WID ideas - Joan Mullin etc and influenced by Academic Literacies - Lea, Ivanic, Scott, Lillis etc ) addressed to
> > staff to help them clarify their writing demands.
> >
> > Margo
> >
> > Jennifer Moon wrote:
> >
> > > Dear John and LDHEN,
> > > I have been mapping the skills of writing for an undergraduate
> > > student.  I would be interested in any additions to this list.  Look
> > > at the amount that students need to know!  Why is it that we do not go
> > > the way of Writing Centres in the UK - and properly teaching writing?
> > > It would help on the widening participation side, I think,
> > > without being 'remedial'.
> > >
> > > cheers   Jenny
> > >
> > > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 11:56:04 -0000
> > > John Hilsdon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Dear All
> > > >
> > > > Further to my previous message about updating our database and
> > > > mapping a picture of what we do/offer in Learning Development type
> > > > services, Ann Barlow at the Centre for Continuing Education,
> > > > University of Manchester has very kindly offered to take this task
> > > > on.  If anyone else wants to bid for the role too, please let me
> > > > know.  If no one else offers within a week, I reckon we should
> > > > assume Ann is doing it!
> > > >
> > > > In the meantime, do have a look at the Excel file (location in my
> > > > previous message) and see if you would be interested in updating or
> > > > submitting information to go on there.  I'm also interested in how
> > > > we might present this information in others ways .. to a wider
> > > > forum? ... to reach other parts of the HE community? ... what do
> > > > others think?
> > > >
> > > > John
> > > >
> > > > John Hilsdon
> > > > Co-ordinator, Learning Development
> > > > University of Plymouth
> > > > Drake Circus
> > > > Plymouth
> > > > PL4 8AA
> > > >
> > > > 01752 232276
> > > >
> > > > [log in to unmask]
> > > > http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/pages/view.asp?page=8099
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------
> > > Dr Jennifer Moon, Learning and Teaching Support Centre,, Queen's Bdg,
> > > University of Exeter Ex4 4QH 01392-264505
> > >
> > >   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >                             Name: ESCWriting issues.doc
> > >    ESCWriting issues.doc    Type: WINWORD File (Application/msword)
> > >                         Encoding: base64
>
> ----------------------
> Dr Jennifer Moon, Learning and Teaching Support Centre,,
> Queen's Bdg, University of Exeter Ex4 4QH
> 01392-264505