Myers 1

Michael Myers
Dr. Mary Tripp
Writing Center Seminar
11 October 2015
Whats in a Word: The Practice of Comprehension in the Writing Center
Tutors often begin sessions with the suggestion to read aloud. Students usually comply,
either by understanding the benefits with or without tutor help, or through an obligation
unavoidably generated by the writing centers academic atmosphere, and the expectations that
can result from it. However, when a student, as this one, responds with the words You can read
it they are likely communicating something else to the tutor, something fundamental to their
identity as a learner. Handing the paper off may be a sign of simple nerves, but it may also be a
signpost to a lack of confidence in the paper resulting from an incomplete assignment
comprehension, which it was in this case. Through questioning, the student revealed the gap
which stinted their assignment comprehensionthe definition of the word analyze. Both
modeling and wait time were effective at advancing the students ability to perform under
guidance, but by continuously revolving around yet never addressing the true gap in their
practicable knowledge, the student remained confused on the essentials of their task.
The concept at work here is what Bakhtin calls implicit knowing when he differentiates
between explicit knowing, which reflects a communitys traditions or expectations, and implicit
knowing, which reflects how individuals meet those expectations (qtd in Dean 28). The tutee
knew the existence of explicit knowledge, but to an epistemically paralyzing effect could not
gather implicit knowledge from it. They revealed this fact by a simple statement: I know what
the assignment says, I just dont know what to do. In addition, the tutor responded with

Myers 2

agreement, acknowledging that the assignment took the students implicit knowledge for granted
by stating Yeah, I saw that; its very vague. The student understood the words before them but
could not comprehend their task, and the tutor perceived this.
The rapport which followed established the tutors necessary directness over the session.
The tutee knew there was something expected of them (explicit knowledge) but did not know
how to act (implicit). In this small sample, the tutee lacks the language to express their concern
and the tutor responds:
W (writer): It says I have to analyze not summarize what, I mean, how
C (consultant): It means you cant just say what happened, you have to analyze it.
W: right.
The tutor then proceeded to model what they meant, something which the tutee seemed to need,
as they had no idea what the product should look like despite the fact that they had already
written a paper. However, the model dealt only with the procedure of the analysis task, and not
its essential concept.
C: Look, just just kind of look at the book and pick up terms they would use to
analyze.
W: Okay.
The problem of comprehension could not be addressed so long as the tutor continued to use the
problem wordanalyzein their descriptions of the task. Perhaps the tutor was not entirely
clear on how to explain that term, however, the discourse which could have resulted from both of
them learning how to vocalize something which both the tutor and professor were taking for
granted in this instance, could have initiated the comprehension the tutee required. The modeling
techniques employed by the tutor were valid and somewhat helpful, but they amounted to little
more than a grocery list for someone who desperately needed a recipe.

Myers 3

Accentuating this fact, the tutor frequently said near the end of the session, Dont you
want to write that down? Normally, applying a concept integrates it into a practicable
knowledge; the valued practice effectively restates Bakhtins concept of implicit knowing.
However, in this case the tutee struggled to know what to write, parroting the tutors words with
such phrases as Analyze more and Be sure to use evidence. Both of these sound like
promising notes, but just before the session ended, the tutee asked earnestly, Wait, so Im a
little um, confused. How do I, exactly use evidence? The tutors explanation again used the
word analyze. Even by the end, none of the procedures proffered could integrate themselves
into task comprehensionwithout the definitional superstructure, all those procedures were as
her teachers assignment, a heap of building materials without a form or plan.
None of the tutors practices were invalid or even ineffectiveby modeling how analysis
could be applied to this situation the student got a glimmer of the task before them. However, by
focusing on explicit knowledge without addressing the gap in the students comprehensionthe
definition and application of the word analyze and how it differs from summarizethe
students identity as a learner became essentially inert. An alternative would have been to focus
the session entirely on how they understood the term analyze and how it could be applied. A
paragraph from the quotations handout could have been used as sample analysis material, i.e., the
student could have read it and then been tasked with writing a one-sentence summary and a onesentence analysis. This technique could have prompted productive questioning from the tutor,
such as What is their purpose in saying this? or What can you conclude from it? Together
they could have discovered and modeled what analyze actually looks like. Without a practiced
form of the term to emulate, the student was distracted by the assignments other parameters
andespeciallythe paper they had already written. By acknowledging the gap in their

Myers 4

knowledge out of context of the assignment but in the context of practicing analysis, the
legitimate steps taken by the tutor may not have seemed so fruitless.

Works Cited
Dean, Deborah. Genre Theory: Teaching, Writing, and Being. Urbana, Ill.: National Council of
Teachers of English, 2008. Print.