I.

II.

Introduction a. Topic (how is this different from the frame?) b. Frame (application, angle, approach, etc.)find your comfort in the frame but get creative c. Research questionshints of a thesis, but avoids answering any questions I seek to understand how teachers in the University Center for Writing based Learning balance their roles as peers, tutors, and teachers and how this is reflected in their Peer Tutoring and teaching philosophies. How do the roles of peer, tutor, and teacher collide, compliment, and contrast, and how does this manifest in tutoring and teaching practices? What can be learned from understanding the ways these genres compare with one another? Context a. Literature reviewwhat has already been said/is being said (provide an overview so people understand where you fit) i. Writing Centers and the Writing Classroom 1. Mark L. Waldos What Should the Relationship between the Writing Center and Writing Program Be? ii. Tutoring versus Teaching, Tutoring and Teaching 1. Renee A. Pistones Writing Center Tutors Have The Luxury To Focus On Individual Student Care Giving As Opposed To Formal Classroom Settings That Are Less Care Centered." 2. Deborah James and Virgina Perdues Teaching in the Center 3. Helen Raines Tutoring and Teaching: Continuum, Dichotomy, or Dialectic? In Tutoring and Teaching: Continuum, Dichotomy, or Dialectic? Helen Howell Raines begins by referencing Stephen Norths description of the conflict between English Departments and the Writing Center and attributes part of the issue to unclear perceptions of the concepts of teachers and tutors. Raines explains, More productive conversation could result when teachers and tutors have clearer concepts of what each does, why, where their roles overlap, converge, or blend, and how they can positively reinforce on another (150). To do so, she advocates for imagining these roles not as points on a continuum or as dichotomies in binary oppositions but rather in dialectical process (150). As she defines, in dialectical process, forces are held in tension by their oppositions, as they slowly embrace elements of the other, ultimately emerging into a new concept (150). Raines acknowledges that some people believe the matter of teaching and tutoring is only semantics, but argues that we shape ourselves by shaping our discourse: and in the words we use to define writing centers as well as in the language others use to define our work, we continue to construct or reconstruct the relationship of teaching to tutoring and the classroom to the writing center (152). b. Definition

i. Genre and Genre Theory In order to understand why I have chosen to perform a genre analysis of teaching and tutoring philosophy statements, it is important to explain genre and genre theory. The definitions of genre and genre theory are crucial for understanding the roles of both philosophy statements, and for understanding why these statements matter in their respective discourse communities. Neither genre is just a predetermined form, and it is important to understand the characteristics of genre that help to determine how these statements are written, read, understood, and shaped within the writing teacher and UCWbL discourse communities. In Explaining Genre Theory Deborah Dean explains genre theory by first drawing on Carolyn R. Millers definition of genres as typified rhetorical actions based in recurrent situations (qtd. in Dean 8). Dean continues, explaining that genres represent all sorts of interactions (some textual and some not), are defined more by situation than form, are both dynamic and flexible, and are more an explanation of social interaction than a classification system (Dean 9). So, genres should not only be understood based on their content and formalthough these do serve as jumping off points for understanding how genres are developed in and respond to rhetorical situations (Dean 8-10). In order to develop a more comprehensive definition of genre, Dean characterizes genres as social, rhetorical, dynamic, historical, cultural, situated, and ideological (Dean 11-19). Genres are social for their meaning is tied to their social context, and they are intertextual or a part of genre networks or chains (Dean 11-2). Genres are rhetorical for they are trying to accomplish something, usually involve more than one participant or audience, and they require their users to choose from options in order to create the most effective product (Dean 13-4). Genres are dynamic because they are shaped by context, and can change their contexts over time and they are historical because they grow out of antecedent genres (Dean 14). Genres are cultural because they serve as stabilizing forces within certain communities, activity systems, contexts and discourse communities, and by using genres we both invoke or reconstruct the values and rhetorical situations within these situations (Dean 16-7). Genres are situated in smaller contexts that they shape and react to, and finally are ideological for the reflect what certain groups believes about the world, and also serve as ways of being, participating in genres involves assuming the ways of thinking that encompass those ways of being (Dean 18). ii. Discourse James Paul Gee explains discourse as a socially accepted association among ways of using language, of thinking, and of acting that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group or social network (Gee 3). As such, a discourse helps to defines ones identity by outlining norms. A discourse can encompass sub-discourses, but for Gees argument it is more important to focus on the idea of a master discourse, or the bigger picture. Thus, a discourse is only consequential when it is

understood in conjunction with the whole social institution which is made up of people, concrete things like buildings, abstract concepts like values and norms, and also notions of shared history (Gee 4). Gee continues, mapping important qualities of discourse that he explains are more prominent in European social theory than in the United States. There are five: discourses are ideological, discourses are resistant to internal criticism or self-scrutiny, discourse-defined behaviors are established in relation to opposing discourses, discourses push ideas at the expense of other viewpoints (and therefore marginalize values that make up other discourses) and finally discourses are related to social power and hierarchy in society (Gee 4). iii. Discourse Community [Use Swales The Concept of Discourse Community to explain discourse community and how it is related to genre and genre theory] iv. Tutor and Teacher In Defining Ourselves: Do We Really Want to Use the Word Tutor? Lex Runciman interrogates what the word tutor really means, and how that might relate to the role of the tutor within the writing center. As Runciman explains, most people form their first ideas of what the tutor means early on (Runciman 28). For most, the tutors role is understood as the role of the teacher: tutors possess knowledge which students need but do not yet have (Runciman 28). Further, he details that the first emergence of the tutor was not for pedagogical reasons but rather for economic because peer tutors saved people money they would have otherwise needed to spend on developing the education system at large (Runciman 28). Additionally, he notes, peer tutoring preserved the hierarchical model of education, a model which places a knowledgeable teacher on a higher level than ignorant students (Runciman 28). Both of these historic understandings of the tutors role can be problematic in the context of the writing center because some writers have developed similar notions and believe that writing centers can only serve bad writers (Runciman 28). He continues, explaining that in writing centers centers are in place to benefit all writers, and facilitate collaborative activities that are the opposite of hierarchical. Ultimately, he suggests that its necessary to draw attention to the terminology used in the context of the writing center and that defining tutees as writers, and tutors as writing fellows or writing assistants can only help to overturn the assumptions those outside of the writing center may hold. Further, in Peer Tutoring: A Contradiction in Terms? John Trimbur descibes the assumptions first-time tutors have when they begin working at the writing center. As he explains, the mode of production tutors are most familiar with is the traditional academic mode of teaching and learning, a hierarchical structure in which the teacher passes down knowledge to the students and then measures how much the student received (Trimbur 22). So, some tutors get confused when writing center advocate for collaborative learning because it redefines learning as an event produced by the social interaction of the learners (Trimbur 22). No one is an expert, and no one is a noviceat least not in the ways those titles are typically understood

III.

(Trimbur 22). Trimbur continues, explaining that in many cases tutors are successful undergraduates, and strong writers which may accentuate the differences between them and the writers that come into the writing centeror undercut the peer relationship (23). v. Teaching Philosophy Statements In Writing a Statement of Teaching Philosophy: Fashioning a Framework for Your Classroom, Brian P. Coppola suggests, writing a statement of teaching philosophy is a cornerstone of reflective and scholarly practice in teaching and learning because committing ideas to writing requires an added degree of reflection on purpose and intent (Coppola 448). He explains that the teaching philosophy is a defining genre for teachers because it gives you a starting point for examining your teaching practices, allows you to share your ideas with others, and allows you to monitor the progress of your own development as the teacher (Coppola 448). Further, teaching philosophy statements serve as the organizer for a course, teaching practices, and teaching portfolios (Coppola 448). Ultimately, Coppola argues that a teaching philosophy statement should attempt to answer, What does learning mean to you (Coppola 448)? In order for teachers to do so, he identifies four components that should appear in the statement: a theoretical framework for how the learning takes place, instructional goals, a design and implementation plan, and documentation and reflection on prior teaching experiences (448-50). [Include Sokayl and Taylors definition?] A teaching philosophy statement is a systematic and critical rationale that focuses on the important components defining effective teaching and learning in a particular discipline and or institutional context (Sokol and Taylor 84). Primary Research (III-IV may only take five pages) a. Genre Analysis Research Methods I model my genre analysis off a multi-step genre analysis assignment created by Christine Tardy for WRD 209: Genre and Discourse in the spring of 2013. i. Compiling a Corpus I compiled a corpus of ___teaching philosophy and peer writing tutor philosophy statements. I collected them in digital copy, and I also collected the digital portfolios some of the philosophy statements appear in. I narrowed my corpus to just peer writing tutor philosophy statements from tutors in the University Center for Writing based Learning at DePaul. While I tried to collect samples that were similar to one another, I also included ___administrative writing center philosophy statements so I could examine and compare these to the peer writing tutor philosophy statements to better understand what conventions are typical of all writing center philosophy statements. ii. Linguistic Analysis In order to conduct a linguistic analysis, I identified conventional language in each type of statement and then worked to understand why this language is conventional. To do so, I looked at what vocabulary, sentence-level grammar, punctuation, lexico-grammar,

IV.

rhetorical appeals, style features and visuals are typical in these statements. Similarly, I also examined the digital portfolios some of these statements appear in and worked to understand how the language typical of the portfolios is (or is not) reflected in the philosophy statements. Ultimately, I looked for patterns in the language used in both statements and then tried to understand how and why these patterns exist while meditating on the ideological, historical, and cultural characteristics of the genre. iii. Move Analysis [Might need to define move above?] For the move analysis I looked at the moves most frequently made in each genre. I examined what each part of the philosophy statements was trying to accomplish, and how each part transitioned to the next. iv. Context Analysis For my context analysis I zoned in on how the genres are social and rhetorical actions by looking into how the genres are used by their respective discourse communities. I looked at who uses and writes the genres, when they use and write the genres, why they use and write the genres, and what purposes the genres serve. I also examined the genre users and writers, and worked to understand how their roles shape, and are shaped by the genres. Part of this process included looking into the process of writing these genresultimately trying to figure out what is at stake with these genres and their weight within their respective discourse communities. v. Network Analysis For my network analysis, I examined the ways teaching and tutoring philosophy statements interact with other genres. I examined the ways these genres interact with genres outside of the digital portfolios, but also within them, and tried to develop and understanding of which genres the statements draw from and shape most. vi. Critical Analysis While performing a critical analysis I sought to understand how the tutoring and teaching philosophy statement participants are oriented. More specifically, I looked at the ways the genres distribute power, and the ideologies at play in the genres. b. Genre Analysis Research Findings i. Linguistic Analysis ii. Move Analysis iii. Context Analysis iv. Network Analysis v. Critical Analysis Conclusion a. Summary b. Point towards the limitations c. Point towards future research

Works Cited Coppola, Brian P. "Writing A Statement Of Teaching Philosophy." Journal Of College Science Teaching 31.7 (2002): 448. Education Research Complete. Web. 10 Oct. 2013. Dean, Deborah. "Explaining Genre Theory." Genre Theory: Teaching, Writing, and Being. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2008. Pistone, Renee A. "Writing Center Tutors Have The Luxury To Focus On Individual Student Care Giving As Opposed To Formal Classroom Settings That Are Less Care Centered." English Language Teaching 3.2 (2010): 10-12. Education Research Complete. Web. 11 . 2013 Raines, Helen Howell. Tutoring and Teaching: Continuum, Dichotomy, or Dialectic? Writing Center Journal 14.2 (1994): 150-63. Education Research Complete. Web. 09 Oct. 2013. Runciman, Lex. "Defining Ourselves: Do We Really Want to Use the Word Tutor?" Writing Center Journal 11.1 (1990): 27-35. Education Research Complete. Web. 09 Oct. 2013. Trimbur, John. "Peer Tutoring: A Contradiction in Terms?" Writing Center Journal. 7.2 (1987): 21-39. ERIC. Web. 11 Oct. 2013. Waldo, Mark L. What Should the Relationship between the Writing Center and Writing Program Be? Writing Center Journal. 11.1 (1990): 73-81. Education Research Complete. Web. 06 Oct. 2013.