High School to College Writing Centers: It’s All About TransitionColleen Cecil

Freshman Monroe Research 2019

Introduction

In recent years, there has been an exponential growth in high school writing centers.  With

the community that the writing center creates, there will likely be more students entering 4-year

universities with at least a year of experience of tutoring and a plan to continue their work. This

study proposes to analyze the differences between high school and college writing centers

through the use of statistical data from different institutions at differing academic levels in

Virginia as well as pre-existing articles for review.  The goal is to develop a guide for students

entering college with writing center experience from high school. With that in mind, there are

three guiding questions to organize data collection:

1. What are the major differences in terms of expectations in tutoring high school and

college students?

2. How can these differences be used to ease the transition from high school writing center

work to college writing center work?

3. Which areas require additional training, and which reduce the need for training?

Given that there has been an influx of students experienced in writing center work, four-year

universities will be able to and likely will hire students in their first year of attending the

college.  While this is remarkable, the transition to college can be challenging. In fact, the

transition to college writing is frequently mentioned in scholarly articles as well as in casual

conversation. As such there should be a way to use the high school experience, recognize the

need to transition to college writing, but also help expedite the process of helping peers with

their writing. A final thought to consider on the relevance of this project is that it will be adding

to the limited amount of quantitative research into writing center work.  For many years, writing

center research has relied on personal experience and qualitative measurements. By researching

a topic based in statistical fact, I can help in the movement towards numerical data in the writing

center.  

In the three years that I was a tutor at the writing center in my high school, I learned more

about writing, learning, and relationships than I did in all of my other classes. I found a place of

comfort that wished to push the boundaries and develop the best writers out of anyone who

stepped through those doors.

My time in the writing center opened another door for me, for which I am eternally

grateful. Towards the end of my sophomore year, I was lucky enough to be elected as one of the

two peer representatives on the Capital Area Peer Tutoring Association (CAPTA) leadership

board for both my junior and senior years. While I was unaware through my first year on the

board, I was the first junior to be elected to this position and thus the only student to hold the

position for two consecutive years. In this position, I helped to organize and run the annual

conference as well as work specifically on creating peer-run initiatives to connect tutors.

Another essential role that I had was in transitioning the CAPTA from a regional to national

association. CAPTA has changed its name to the Secondary Schools Writing Center Association

(SSWCA) in order to appeal to a broader audience and allow for more inclusivity within the

organization.  

At CAPTA’s, now SSWCA’s, annual conference, students present on research topics that

they have been developing for at least a year.  The presentations range from 20 to 45 minutes in

length and allow for the exchange of ideas across centers. I was able to present four topics over

two years.  The first consisted of how the bond among tutors helps to strengthen the writing

center by making it a more welcoming environment. Another topic I presented was the process

of writing a proposal to be a presenter at this conference.  The third that I did was about the

importance of advertising for the writing center, and how to go about creating these posters or

videos. Finally, I led a tutor leader roundtable which was the most inspiring of the four

presentations that I gave.  Leaning more towards audience participation, this presentation gave

me insight into how other centers are run which helped me in my creating initiatives on the board

of SSWCA.

In my second semester of my first year at the College of William and Mary, I took a

preparatory class to begin work in the college’s Writing Resources Center.  The class themes

revolved around readings central to the main purpose of the writing center as well as educational

chapters from guidebooks on tutoring. From the work that I have done thus far in college, I have

gathered that there is a difference, not in the approach to tutoring, but rather the work that will be

brought to the writing center.  A large portion of this course was focused on the buzz word:

multimodal. With the COLL curriculum at William and Mary, assignments have shifted away

from strictly essay based, opening the door to a new form of tutoring.  

Literature Review

What is the Writing Center?

To some, writing centers are a foreign concept that is not mentioned in daily academic

life frequently. With that said, before I compare the two levels of writing centers, I will begin

with an overview of what the writing center is and is not. "The mission of a college writing

center can be stated simply enough: it is a place where people get together, usually one-to-one,

and talk about writing” (Leahy).  But the process complicates quickly as you consider that

writing is a complex activity, and that tutoring demands high levels of flexibility as not every

writer writes the same (Leahy). With that said, the writing center is a location in an academic

institution that fosters growth through peer tutoring rather than editing.

Personal growth is highly important to the success of a session in the writing center; thus,

it takes no stretch of the imagination to understand that growth within centers and relationships

between centers is of crucial importance. The study of writing centers fits into a larger academic

discipline that takes on many different names but is frequently referred to as Rhetoric and

Composition (McKinney 7). Research within humanities can be complicated as there are so

many approaches that provide insight, whether it be qualitative or quantitative in nature. That

said, many researchers in this field draw from a tactic called the mixed-method approach which

allows for the use of both types of evidence to be implemented. With that in mind, “qualitative

research is more often employed as the primary or dominant approach in Rhetoric and

Composition because it is better suited to investigate the complex human activities" (McKinney,

11). This preference toward qualitative inspired me towards quantitative as it showed a lack of

crucial representation in this growing field of writing center research.

Some other more specific types of techniques for approaching writing center research

include discourse analysis and survey submission. "For discourse analysis, a researcher starts

with collecting or curating a set of texts with a belief that how speakers and writers use language

is interesting and important for what it might tell us about the relationships of the speakers and

writers involved at both the interpersonal level and the cultural level" (McKinney, 40). Surveys

work in a different way as they draw on personal experience and “test” assumptions to see if

these experiences reflect the larger population. A larger population does not simply mean

national or international as local surveys can be tremendously helpful (McKinney). Writing

center research is fascinating as there are so many levels of human interaction to evaluate.

Positive experience in writing center

As I touched upon in the introduction, writing center work means more than simply

reading over papers. The fulfillment and work involved generates an experience unlike any

other. Jackie Grutsch McKinney mentioned that the writing center creates an atmosphere that

encourages absolute beginners to dive into the work. Or more simply stated “the work of writing

center is more than tutoring” (McKinney, 17).

Transition

The transition from high school to college is widely discussed in terms of independence

and responsibility of students, but another dramatic change students experience is the

expectations of their writing abilities. Many students find themselves struggling to acclimate

themselves to the demands of college writing. While William and Mary does not offer a

stereotypical freshmen writing class, most other schools do require a straight writing class as a

prerequisite for all higher classes. This traditional writing class creates issues for students as it is

a compulsory course taught in isolation from other disciplinary studies, leading the freshmen to

see the course as simply writing to produce writing. Writing is a fundamental skill that elevates

to a higher level if done correctly, but with the social context of this course as a graduation

requirement to be fulfilled stalls the progress that could have been possible.

Another difficulty in transitioning into college level writing is the need to practice

different types of discourse communities. Writing standards are largely cultural and socially

specific, yet beginning writers usually get little instruction in how to study and acquire these

writing practices. It is thus of utmost importance that freshmen are taught a set of tools for

learning these writing standards by analysis in multiple contexts. One context to consider are the

writing skills required for different subject matter. There are also several different types of

knowledge to consider when writing in college, "discourse community knowledge, subject

matter knowledge, genre knowledge, rhetorical knowledge, and writing process knowledge"

(Beaufort). No matter what level or social context of writing development being examined, it is

essential to take into account all of the knowledge concepts embedded (Beaufort)

Writing in college and beyond requires increasingly complex forms of thinking such as

the ability to analyze, compare, synthesize, and evaluate various forms of data. College writing

also challenges students to work with sources in complex ways unheard of in high school

(Beaufort). High school students are accustomed to writing essays and reports, whereas college-

level academic writing takes a more analytical stance in writing forms.

With all this information in mind, it is critical that new tutors in college be taught the tips

and tricks for college writing early so as to allow for an easier transition from tutoring in high

school to tutoring in college. One way that this can be achieved is with the sharing of college

writing assignments and expectations for writing ability with incoming students prior to their

arrival. This method of sharing information between the two levels of academia will allow the

high school writing center staff to prepare students better for college. Thus, building a “well-

trained, experienced writing tutor” (Littleton). Some other ideas for connecting the two levels

include shared training sessions and tutoring workshops, cosponsored writing events and

contests, and observation firsthand of each other’s writing center environment. Dialogue is

essential between secondary schools and colleges to allow for improvements all around

(Littleton). The most crucial benefit to the university level is that they will be getting trained

tutors coming into their writing center.

While at their core, the two levels of writing centers are the same, there are many

variables that need to be considered when building the goals of the centers. No matter the level,

direct student-centered services are the most important and immediate functions a center should

provide. In high school however, there is more communication with outside individuals. For

example, more content area instructors will allow center personnel to make in class presentations

in high school then in college. Also, the high school writing center also considers the parents of

the students which is not true in college (Upton).

Training

The training process is the most essential stage in a tutor’s career as it shapes the

philosophy of the tutor. With that in mind, “a tutor training manual might also be viewed as a

kind of master narrative” (Kail). Tutor training is powerful as it transforms a writer to a writing

guide, thus it frequently involves a powerful and transforming rite of passage. The simple act of

being chosen for the writing center uniquely empowers individuals (Kail).

Training can be complicated by the point that exact similarity is not possible as no writer

is the same and not even the same writer is the same with different assignments. Not only do

tutors need to be flexible, they must also focus primarily on directing the student towards the

most important goal in the educational process, the writer’s independence. While accomplishing

all this in a short training period seems nearly impossible, a tutor can learn tips and tricks about

the writing process as they follow the torturous route towards meaning (Kail).

While the tutors are learning about their own writing process, they are guiding others

towards their own. This is a powerful interaction as “the voice of the tutor will become

intertwined with and a vital part of the student's writing process itself" (Kail). This whole process

will ultimately help to humanize both participants and demystify the writing process (Kail). The

writing center tutor will be required to take on so many different roles as they help other students

with their writing. Some of these roles include, “the roles of listener, teacher, coach, counselor,

fellow writer, editor, and critic” (Leahy). Most importantly, tutors learn how to avoid the role of

teacher or of an ally of the student against the instructor and walk the tight line in between

(Leahy). The idea of authority in the writing center is challenging because as instructors and

tutors attempt to dismiss their authority, they define it. "No matter how tutors and instructors

push away the authority, they themselves are products of institutional authority. However,

authority is a prerequisite to the basic core of the writing center: collaborative learning

(Vandenberg).

Some important information covered in a tutor training manual is valuable

interdisciplinary information and strategies and mock tutor dialogue. Most students enter their

role as writing center tutors with a lack of confidence and filled with unwarranted fears. The

one-to-one model takes advantage of the writing process model and has been shown to not only

improve writing but also save time.  If trained correctly, tutors can generate relationships with

tutees based on trust and mutual respect rather than the fear the students typically show towards

composition teachers (Kail). It is thus very important that tutors re-center the writing center as

something personal, social, and cultural (Vandenberg). The next question is then how are tutors

best trained. This is not a simple answer as no theoretical framework can solve all problems, but

there is room for a more robust theory to help all participants (Beaufort).

As was mentioned earlier in the transition section, college writing is heavily context

dependent, whereas high school writing is focused more on a set of general guidelines. If tutors

added to their toolkit the ability to analyze context specific writing content, the tutors could

promote the kind of “learning-how-to-learn skills that all advanced writers need” (Beaufort).

Training manuals play a large role in the transformation process of a tutor. Manuals can provide

greater clarity about successful approaches to instructing writing at a larger than sentence level

structure. Writing is a complicated process that must be done with critical thinking so as to

conceptualize all the different aspects in an intricate set of practices. With the help of books,

instructors can “widen the focus of tutor training from text to context” (Beaufort). This is

essential for creating an atmosphere where tutors will see their work as an ongoing evolving

process which they help define in each session (Vandenberg).

With this set of skills in mind, tutors must then learn how to apply all they learned. In

order to have an effective writing conference, tutors need to become experts in the field

(Vandenberg). Many tutors practice their newly learned skills with practice sessions. With that

said, it is important to recognize that these practical activities are “suspended in a web of

practical activities" (Vandenberg).

All around, there needs to be a balance of textual learning and practical learning to be

most successful in sessions. The end goal of the writing center training process is to produce

effective tutors who know how to engage students in conversation at as many points in their

writing process as possible. Tutors should strive to communicate in a way that the students they

work with will continue to benefit from after they leave the session (Vandenberg).

Methods

Week 1: I contacted 6 public universities in VA: Virginia Polytechnic University,

Christopher Newport University, James Madison University, College of William and Mary,

Virginia Commonwealth University, and Old Dominion University. All six of these school have

a writing center that is run by undergraduate students. This is an important distinction as there is

a substantial number of writing centers run by graduate students which is not beneficial to the

research in this project.  I also contacted 6 high schools in Virginia. Due to my connections with

SSWCA, I found centers from various locations in Virginia to use when I collected my data.

Also, when I selected these centers, I focused on the schools that have a separate writing center

space rather than including the centers that tutor all subjects.  I contacted Herndon High School,

Hayfield Secondary School, West Springfield High School, Stone Bridge High School,

Albemarle High School, and Osbourn High School. In each email I wrote, I attached my survey

which included seven questions on how each center approaches training.

Week 2: I did an in-depth literature review. While this project broaches a new concept

that has not been researched rather intensely, there is still a significant amount of material on

high school writing centers as well as college writing centers.  By evaluating many scholarly

articles discussing the two separately, I hypothesized as to where the difference lies between the

two institutions.  The articles that I looked for specifically answered the question of what a

writing center at each level is. While this is baseline research, in order to truly understand how

the process of training can be changed, one must first understand where the training is at

currently.

Week 3: I did a statistical analysis and interpretation of the data that I collected in my

survey, which I compiled with my literature review to create this final paper.

Results

The compiled results of the surveys are presented with graphics and tables for each question.

Q1 - Which academic level do you work with?

Figure A

Responses by Academic Level (Table)Answer % Count

High School (Secondary School) 37.50% 3

University 62.50% 5

Total 100% 8Figure B

Figures A and B depict the breakdown of responses from directors of high school writing

centers and college writing centers. As can be seen, three high school directors responded, and

five university directors responded.

Q2 - How long is the average session in the writing center for which you work?

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 600

1

2

3

Reported average session time

High school Collegiate

Minutes

Num

ber o

f sch

ools

Figure CSession Length by Academic Level (Table)

Number of InstitutionsMinutes High school Collegiate

101520 225 1 130 1354045 250 25560

Figure DFigures C and D show all the responses to the question on how long the average session

is in each center and is broken down by academic level for ease of analysis.

Q3 - Which age demographic (by academic year) is most frequently seen in the writing center?

Figure E

Most Frequent Academic Year Seen by Academic Level (Table)Question High School (Secondary School) University Total

Freshmen 0.00% 0 100.00% 5 5

Sophomores 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 1

Juniors 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0

Seniors 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 1

Other 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 1Figure F

Figures E and F represents the most frequent academic year seen separated by academic

level. There was an even split in the high school section and a unanimous decision in the

university section.

Q4 - What type of assignment is worked with most frequently

Figure G

Assignment by Academic Level (Table)Question High School (Secondary School) University Total

Essay/Paper 28.57% 2 71.43% 5 7

Creative Writing 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0

PowerPoint/Presentation 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0

Other (personal statement, resume, etc.) 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 1Figure H

Figures G and H depict the most frequent assignments seen in the different academic

levels. Figure G represents visually how the university level is once again unanimous, while the

high school level shows some variation.

Q5 – Rank the order of importance of the following materials for training

Figure ITraining Materials by Academic Level (Table) - High School (Secondary School)# Question 1 2 3 Total

1 Training Guides/Books 33.33% 1 66.67% 2 0.00% 0 3

3 Practice sessions 66.67% 2 33.33% 1 0.00% 0 3

2 Articles about tutoring writing 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 100.00% 3 3Figure J

Figure K

Training Materials by Academic Level (Table) - University# Question 1 2 3 Total

1 Training Guides/Books 40.00% 2 40.00% 2 20.00% 1 5

3 Practice sessions 60.00% 3 40.00% 2 0.00% 0 5

2 Articles about tutoring writing 0.00% 0 20.00% 1 80.00% 4 5Figure L

Figure I and J show the breakdown of training materials by importance in building a

successful tutor for high school centers, and Figures K and L show the same breakdown but for

university centers.

Q6 - How many hours on average do tutors work a week?

Figure MHours per Week by Academic Level (Table)Question High School (Secondary School) University Total

0-2 100.00% 1 0.00% 0 1

2-4 100.00% 2 0.00% 0 2

4-6 0.00% 0 100.00% 3 3

6-8 0.00% 0 100.00% 2 2Figure N

Figures M and N describe the difference between hours worked in the high school writing

center and the college writing center.

Q7 - What are the top three things tutors focus on in a session?Main Concerns by Academic Level - High School (Secondary School)

Figure O

Main Concerns by Academic Level - University

Figure P

Main Concerns by Academic Level

High School University BothFrequency Main Concerns Frequency Main Concerns Frequency Main Concerns

2 organization 2 organization 4 organization2 client 2 assignment 4 client

2 ideas 2 concerns 4 ideas1 relationship 2 student 3 clarity1 cohesiveness 2 clarity 2 encouraging1 encouraging 2 client 2 assignment1 conventions 2 ideas 2 answering1 answering 1 understands 2 concerns1 academic 1 encouraging 2 student1 writer's 1 development 1 cohesiveness1 session 1 completely 1 relationship1 serving 1 questions 1 understands1 message 1 Structure 1 conventions1 clarity 1 statement 1 development1 forming 1 answering 1 completely1 prompt 1 argument 1 statement1 model 1 client's 1 structure1 piece 1 possible 1 questions1 lead 1 Building 1 building1 role 1 writing 1 client's1 flow 1 Whether 1 argument

1 Purpose 1 possible1 rapport 1 writer's1 thesis 1 academic1 engage 1 rapport1 essay 1 writing1 Focus 1 whether

1 message1 forming1 serving1 session1 purpose1 engage1 thesis1 prompt1 essay1 model1 piece1 focus1 flow1 role

1 lead

Figure Q

Figures O, P, and Q offer different visuals for a qualitative question on main concerns of

tutors in a session. Figures O and P take a more visual approach whereas Figure Q gives

numbers to support the other figures.

Discussion

There are seven questions that I will be analyzing in this section. The first is

“which academic level do you work with?” I used this as the baseline for the rest of the

questions. When I went into my research, I had hoped for responses from all of the 12

institutions but only received 8. This limits my scope a little, but still provides enough evidence

to hypothesize for the larger population. Figures A and B shows that 3 high schools and 5

universities responded. The remainder of the discussion is based upon the responses from these

8 institutions.

The next question is “how long is the average session in the writing center for which you

work?” This was a very important question in the survey as it was one of the more noticeable

differences I saw when I went from tutoring in high school to tutoring in college. The average

session length for high schools is 21.67 minutes long and the average session length for colleges

is 40.88. This is a significant difference as session length in college is almost double that of

high school. In that sense, it is highly important that when training incoming experienced tutors

in college writing centers that they be taught specifically how to lengthen their sessions.

Question three is “which age demographic (by academic year) is most frequently seen in

the writing center?” I was most surprised by the responses to this as I anticipated that both high

school and college centers would see mostly Freshmen. In Figure E, it can be seen that there was

no specific academic year seen more frequently in high school centers as there was an even split

between sophomores, seniors, and others. Another intriguing response was that someone

responded with other. While I did send the survey to one secondary school instead of high

school, I did not expect the middle schoolers to be the most frequent visitors to the writing

center. I was not, however, surprised that every university responded with freshmen being the

most frequent clients in their center. The transition into college level writing is difficult and

leads students to search out support early. With that in mind, it is also very important that

incoming experienced tutors to be briefed on their own transition into college writing.

The next question is “what type of assignment is worked with most frequently?” In

Figure G it can be noted that two thirds of the high school responses were for essay and one third

was for other (personal statement, resume, etc.). It can also be noted that all colleges revealed

that they saw more essays than any other type of project. While it came as no shock that essays

were the majority for both academic levels, I had expected to see more diversity in college

centers. During my training process for the writing resources center at the College of William

and Mary, we spent a good amount of time discussing how to work with multimodal projects.

The results from this survey point towards the emphasis of training remaining on essays rather

than other forms of communication.

For the fifth question of my survey, instructors were asked to “rank the order of

importance of the following materials for training” and were provided with the responses

“training guides/books, articles about tutoring writing, and practice sessions”. This type of

question does not generate concrete statistical data; however, I was interested to see if there were

any dramatic differences between the training material of high school and college centers. In

Figure I you can see that every responder put articles about tutoring writing as the third choice.

In Figure K it is also evident that articles about tutoring writing tend to be of less importance.

Another thing I noted was that high schools tended more towards practice sessions whereas

colleges put more emphasis on training guides. These differences can show that incoming

experienced tutors will need more training with guidebooks and less training with practice

sessions.

The next question is “how many hours on average do tutors work a week?” In Figures M

and N it is incredibly clear that there exists a difference between high school and college tutors.

This was not surprising to me as I also experienced an increase in hours when I shifted from high

school tutoring to college tutoring. All of the high school responses were under 4 hours and all

of the college responses were over 4 hours. Due to this increase in session length and session

frequency, the struggles of emotional labor will likely increase. Thus, incoming experienced

tutors can be eased into working in their college writing centers by doing more reading and

preparation for the emotionally draining part of tutoring.

Finally, question seven is “what are the top three things tutors focus on in a session?”

This data was a little harder to interpret as there were no numbers to compare. I decided to make

a word cloud to organize the most frequent answers to the question. In Figures O and P it is

clear that the main focus of a tutoring session revolves around organization and the assignment.

Due to there being no real difference in focus between the two levels, experienced tutors likely

need less training on what consists of a tutoring session.

My survey points towards improvements that can be made in the training process for

those who have already been involved in writing center work. There can be less time spent on

what a session consists of and multimodal work. There can also be an increased focus on the

transition into college writing and how to handle the emotional labor that is their job.

Conclusion

Through my personal experience, literature review, and survey results, I have discovered

the importance of tutor training in writing center work. From the literature review, I gathered

that there are many different techniques used to train writing center tutors, however, the main

three are with training manuals, practice sessions, and articles about tutoring writing. With that

in mind, I went into my survey with a goal of learning where the true differences lie between

high school and collegiate writing centers so as to implement the training techniques differently.

The main differences noted in my survey are the average session length and the average

hours worked per week. There also existed differences in how training materials were utilized,

but every institution had a very similar main focus. These observations beg the question: what

does this all mean? Very simply, the Virginia schools I talked to are very organized in their tutor

training process, but there is frequent overlap between the training of high school tutors and

collegiate tutors. Therefore, there needs to be a separate path for those who already have

experience to be able to create more effective sessions rather than keeping them stagnant in their

work from high school. Some potential changes could be a book for incoming tutors to read that

is specifically designed to differentiate the experience they will have in college to the one they

had in their high school writing centers, or workshops for experienced tutors to discuss the

emotional labor of writing center work.

Future Work

My research was done on a relatively small scale and thus has much room for growth. If

I were to continue my research in this project, I would send out surveys to a larger population

and allow for more time for them to respond due to the sheer difficulty of cold emailing.

Another interesting approach I could use would be talking to students who have experienced

both and investigate whether they discovered any differences. All in all, I hope to be able to

continue writing center research as there is a tremendous amount of information that has not

been tapped yet.

Works Cited

Grutsch McKinney, Jackie. Strategies for Writing Center Research. Parlor Press, 2015.

Kail, Harvey. "SEPARATION, INITIATION, AND RETURN: Tutor Training Manuals and

Writing Center Lore." Center Will Hold, edited by MICHAEL A. PEMBERTON and

JOYCE KINKEAD, University Press of Colorado, Logan, Utah, 2003, pp. 74–95.

JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46nxnq.8.

Leahy, Richard. "What the College Writing Center Is—and Isn't." College Teaching, vol. 38, no.

2, 1990, pp. 43–48. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27558391.

Littleton, Chad Eric. "Creating Connections between Secondary and College Writing Centers."

The Clearing House, vol. 80, no. 2, 2006, pp. 77–78. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/30182158.

"THE QUESTION OF UNIVERSITY WRITING INSTRUCTION." College Writing and

Beyond: A New Framework for University Writing Instruction, by ANNE BEAUFORT,

University Press of Colorado, 2007, pp. 5–27. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt4cgnk0.5.

Upton, James. "The High School Writing Center: The Once and Future Services." The Writing

Center Journal, vol. 11, no. 1, 1990, pp. 67–71. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43442596.

Vandenberg, Peter. "Lessons of Inscription: Tutor Training and the 'Professional Conversation.'"

The Writing Center Journal, vol. 19, no. 2, 1999, pp. 59–83. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/43442837.