Writers in Conversation Vol.5

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Writers in Conversation Vol.5 file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Writers in Conversation Vol.5 book. Happy reading Writers in Conversation Vol.5 Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Writers in Conversation Vol.5 at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Writers in Conversation Vol.5 Pocket Guide.

Good design has a double meaning, aesthetic and ethic. In architecture the two should be united as a single goal that a design process should strive for. Moreover, an architectural product does not only affect its client and architect. On a broader level, architectural products also affect their surrounding environments. In a larger scale, they may even have an effect on the economy and the social and political condition.

We tried to find the answer through a round table discussion by inviting the two groups of architecture professionals in Indonesia: practitioners and academics. What are their thoughts on this matter? Currently, she is developing material for a textbook publisher.

Kanaka is also an avid performer and dance instructor. It is a forum for writing center practitioners everywhere. We welcome articles from writing center consultants and administrators related to training, consulting, labor issues, administration, and writing center news, initiatives, and scholarship. For information about submitting an article or suggesting an idea, please refer to our submissions page. Permission for electronic dissemination of Praxis is granted.

For all other uses of Praxis, prior advance written notice is required. Send inquiries to praxis uwc. Lucas Moira Ozias. Emily Heady Most writing center tutors who work on campuses with substantial numbers of ESL students know that the misunderstandings and confusions that occur in tutorials go well beyond language difficulties. While a Korean student might tend to put verbs at the end of the sentence or omit articles, she might also find herself struggling to speak in her own individual voice—something an American tutor is likely to encourage.

Indeed, many problems faced every day in writing centers can be traced to conflicts that arise when the individualism associated with the ethics, ways of seeing the world, and pedagogical practices that characterize American universities come into conflict with the more communal epistemologies and practices that we often associate with Asian students. The very nature of a writing center tutorial puts pressure on the opposition of Asian collectivism to American individualism, for it asks students—perhaps contradictorily—to collaborate one-on-one.

But if the structure of the tutorial often causes confusion, it also offers an opportunity to. This event in particular, which resonated quite differently for Korean and American students, offered a striking opportunity to explore the political tensions inherent in writing tutoring within a larger, real-life context. Even as the university ostensibly invites group-think and coauthorship, it also privileges the voice of the individual author in the form of a monograph, an original point, or a thesis-driven argument over the voice of the many or even of the few.

Writing centers, then, are caught in a bind, doing collaborative work in an individualist culture. Of international students, over hail from South Korea, and the vast majority of these are in graduate school. We began to address the needs of the Korean students in the usual way—by training tutors to run effective tutorials. In other words, they learned we thought to help ESL students meet the expectations of their academic programs without appropriating or Americanizing their ideas, voices, and selves Severino Finally, tutors spent a good deal of time with some Korean professors at the school learning about how Korean words and sentences are constructed and how Koreans understand gender roles, age relations, manners, educational practices, hand-gestures, and so on.

What was less usual about our early days was our willingness to see the Korean students in situations other than one-on-one tutorials. Initially, we began offering reading groups and conversational English groups, and these shifted the understanding of American-Korean relationships that tutors had gleaned from one-on-one conferences: instead of watching a student from a collective culture struggling to personalize his thoughts, tutors instead saw groups of students constructing their individuality in relation to one another.

Largely because of these groups, the relationships the Koreans and their tutors had already established in writing conferences flourished, and friendships were formed. Under these conditions, our tutors began to theorize the relationship between American and Korean cultures in a much more sophisticated fashion than they had previously.

In fact, one of the tutors remarked that she had been wrong initially about what collective culture meant. At least fifteen Korean students came into the writing center to apologize personally for what Cho had done. One of our tutors, a Korean also named Cho, apologized to all of us and said the he felt particularly to blame because of their shared surname. Our other staff repeatedly informed the Korean students and our fellow GWC employee that we knew they were not responsible for the shootings—a move which came naturally enough to a roomful of Americans but which did little to help the Koreans feel better.

More sophisticated rhetoric was no more effective. One tutor said that he hoped the Koreans would not blame him for everything that Caucasians did, but while the Koreans understood the analogy, they did not find it consoling. If one of them does something bad, that does not matter for the others. Koreans are so different.

  • When Truth Gives Out.
  • Pillow Talk;
  • Related Articles.

Lebanese and four Americans—agreed. This still did not help. But he is Korean. It suggests, in short, that the tutorial is itself a culture of individualism, the reading group a culture of community, and so forth. Ede, Lisa S. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, Harris, Muriel. Christina Murphy and Steve Sherwood. Martins, Lunsford, Andrea. Pratt, Mary Louise. Severino, Carol. Shanti Bruce and Ben Rafoth. Staben, Jennifer, and Kathryn Dempsey Nordhaus. Stanley, Karen, ed. Emily Walker Heady holds a Ph. She is at work on a second book project dealing with Victorian assessment practices and the idea of judgment.

Many writing centers try to create a collaborative space free from the hierarchies of knowledge and power that characterize the classroom and the university in general; yet difficult issues concerning authority, hierarchy and cooperation inevitably develop in individual writing consultations and in the larger physical and institutional space of the writing center.

Articles should conform to MLA style. Because Praxis is a Web-based journal, please do not send paper; we do not have the resources to transcribe printed manuscripts. Images should be formatted as jpeg files and sent as attachments. For further information about submitting an article or suggesting an idea, please contact the editors at praxis uwc.

Andrea Gronstal Benton Name: Andrea Gronstal Benton Age: 30 Writing center: University of Wisconsin-Madison Writing Center Size of school: 28, undergraduates Year in school and area of study: Graduate Student in Medieval English Literature Number of years working in writing centers: 7 Job title: Writing Center Instructor Describe the work you do in the writing center: This semester, the bulk of my work is individual consultations with graduate and undergraduate students working on writing assignments for their classes, for applications, or just for their own enrichment as writers.

As new instructors we also had the chance to observe and be observed by more experienced colleagues. Since that first semester, I have participated in monthly staff training meetings and ongoing education sessions that focus on particular kinds of writing application essays, for example, or science writing or common challenges helping multi-language learners or approaching issues of race in Writing Center teaching.

My oddest consultation was one time when one of my regular students asked me to help him analyze his correspondence with a potential love interest and craft his next response! How do you normally start a consultation? My favorite kind of consultation is one where the student gets excited about a new idea or a new strategy for expressing or organizing that idea, one where the student grabs the pencil out of my hand and starts writing furiously and passionately.

My greatest strength as a consultant is my drive to make sure that my students retain agency over their own writing. My greatest weakness is sacrificing my intentions to leave the student in charge when I feel like a student is desperate for any and all help. What I like about working in a writing center is learning all kinds of stuff from each student I meet and each paper I read. This student was not a native English speaker, and he was uncomfortable with the nuances of the rhetorical situation he found. What advice would you give to beginning consultants?

Ask genuine, non-leading questions. Let the student be the expert about his or her writing. What kind of writing do you do? How has working in a writing center affected the way you write? What else do you want to tell us about yourself?

Jane Hirschhorn The university writing center serves students with a diverse range of skill levels, learning styles, and linguistic and cultural backgrounds. The two most diverse groups of students who visit our offices regularly are students for whom English is a second language ESL and students with learning disabilities LD.

This diversity presents itself both in the scope of their needs at all stages of the writing process brainstorming, fluency, sentence structure, organization, grammar, etc. As writing tutors, we accommodate the diverse needs of these two groups by tailoring our tutoring strategies to support them. One strategy might involve spending more tutoring time with each ESL and LD student we serve by scheduling regular weekly meetings with them.

Another strategy could focus on reading comprehension by allowing the student to review a reading assignment along with the tutor before the student begins to write.


Still another strategy could make use of the writing conference as an opportunity for a student to brainstorm orally before beginning to write. Overall, tutors who work with ESL and LD students need to provide more focused and lengthy guided instruction in the areas of fluency, comprehension, organization and rhetorical patterns. These students are still in the process of mastering written English while at the same time learning to write academic papers. In addition, some students are still mastering the concepts behind the fundamental rhetorical conventions of the American academy.

He notes that American rhetorical patterns have been shaped by western culture, politics and values that may be unknown to ESL students. Tutors may need to spend some time explaining and reviewing these rhetorical patterns and conventions in addition to addressing other writing issues.

This issue of providing guided instruction with respect to rhetorical patterns was certainly true in my work with an ESL student as a writing tutor at Mount Ida College, a small liberal arts institution outside Boston. The student, who spent her early years in China, was asked to write an essay describing her desire to pursue a career in the field of criminal justice. Tutors who work with LD students need to be aware of the diverse writing concerns this population faces. It was clear that that she needed focused, guided instruction within the areas of fluency, rhetorical patterns, and organization.

First, I spent time with her working on oral fluency, asking her retell her story in the hope that it would lead to greater written fluency. It did. Next, we talked about how she could describe her fear surrounding the event more fully using synonyms, which would draw her readers more deeply into her story. When we discussed how to revise her story chronologically, I suggested that she include transition words to make the sequence of events more comprehensible and organized for the reader. I know that the additional time I spent with this student contributed to her writing a more fluent, organized and coherent essay in which her ideas were more fully developed.

Jane Hirschhorn with a student Learning disabled students are another population that makes use of the writing center in great numbers. Some students have trouble with fluency and vocabulary, while other face difficulty in varying the types of sentences they write. In addition, they often have difficulty in reading comprehension, which in turn affects their ability to select paper topics that reflect the assignment. It has been long documented that the writing process presents greater challenges for LD students than for their non-LD peers Englert and Thomas.

These difficulties can occur at any stage of the writing process.

About this Journal

Tutors who work with LD students need to be aware of the diverse writing concerns this population faces both with respect to mechanical errors and problems in fluency, coherence and organization. Consequently, tutors need to tailor their strategies by providing focused, guided instruction for LD students in these areas.

She asked me to read a draft of a paper requiring her to describe some aspect of herself. Her draft indeed contained spelling and grammatical errors, but the major problem was in fact a comprehension error: she missed the main idea of the assignment. I suggested that she might need to modify her paper topic, so I asked her a few questions about herself. In the course of our conversation, she told me that she has possessed great physical strength since she was a child. In this case, our conversation and her oral rehearsal allowed the student to express her ideas in order to internalize the.

Tall and soft-spoken, she mentioned several examples of her strength, a source of pride for her during childhood. As she entered late adolescence, however, she became self-conscious of her physical prowess, to the extent that she partially hid it from her male peers. I asked her why, and then her ideas blossomed. She spoke of her fear of not capturing attention of men who would know she was stronger than they were, and we discussed the costs of her deception. For this student, issues of comprehension and fluency were inextricably bound. What helped most for her was a writing conference tailored to help alleviate the above problems and provide an opportunity for her to orally brainstorm ideas for her revised paper topic.

Kimberly Lauffer, citing findings from Graham and Harris, notes that the writing conference plays an important role in guiding students through the writing process. In this case, our conversation and her oral rehearsal allowed the student to express her ideas in order to internalize the metacognitive processes she needed to begin writing.

The discussion, coupled with my guided questions that mimicked a metacognitive process, transformed the quality of her work. She writes: Most learning disabled students need more support and help rather then less. And writing centers can provide that assistance. For these students, writing center professionals need a new picture of the writing conference that includes the writing advisor becoming more directly involved in the process and the product. The writing center must accommodate diversity thoughtfully and strategically with ESL and LD students because they struggle more deeply with the complex process of writing in academic English than their native speaking and non-LD peers.

Shortly after we began working together, I suspected he had learning disabilities based on the difficulties I observed in his reading comprehension and writing after he asked me for assistance in both areas. Before working in higher education, I was a classroom and tutorial teacher in two private high schools for students with learning disabilities, and. Like some of the ESL students I have worked with, this student needed to spend more time before beginning to write.

Consequently, I tailored my work to his needs by spending more time on the pre-writing stages of the writing process in this case reading comprehension and brainstorming than I might with non-LD and non-ESL students. Once I felt he was prepared, the student began work on his rough draft.

Vol. 5 Issue 13 Features

As Neff recommends, I became more directly involved in the prewriting process. It was clear to me that for this reserved student, a standing appointment focused on guided reading tutorials with me, as well as the usual writing conferences, fostered his success in my office and his coursework. Sometimes we focused the majority of a one-hour session discussing and defining the topic headings in his textbooks, relating them to his writing assignments.

The Strategy of Tailoring The writing center must accommodate diversity thoughtfully and strategically with ESL and LD students because they struggle more deeply with the complex process of writing in academic English than their native speaking and non-LD peers. Although these two populations face different challenges from one another in academic writing, my experience has been that they both encounter difficulties in fluency, comprehension, organization, and familiarity with rhetorical conventions which affect their ability to produce organized, coherent text.

The strategies we use to help both populations are tailored to the challenges they present to us in our offices. With the student from China, reviewing rhetorical patterns and focusing on fluency and word choice helped her produce a more comprehensible, organized essay.

The physically strong LD student benefited from a focused, guided writing conference and oral rehearsal so as to clear up comprehension issues and spark the brainstorming process. The student with comprehension and writing difficulties made steady progress by taking advantage of a weekly standing appointment that provided him with focused guided instruction to address his reading and writing concerns. Like a tailor who uses tools and expertise to make a garment fit the unique body proportions of each customer, writing tutors tailor their strategies for each student through the use of the writing conference and their expertise in knowing how to guide and direct students through any stage of this complex process.

Lauffer, Kimberly A. Mount Ida College Library. Newton, MA. Neff, Julie. Barnett, Robert W. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Newcomer, Phyllis L. Writing Across Borders. Wayne Robertson. Finally, the author thanks the students mentioned in this paper as well as the others she has worked with at the Mount Ida College Writing Center. Rusty Carpenter The University of Central Florida UCF has an enrollment of about 47, students across an expansive main campus and a large regional campus system. We have a diverse student population with a variety of needs and expectations. UCF has also embraced diversity by offering new-student orientations in languages other than English.

We often look at diversity in terms of race and ethnicity, and this is a good starting point. However, writing center practitioners must think more openly about diversity to include students with diverse needs—students with disabilities and students with obligations that take them away from the physical space of the university campus place-bound students. Until recently, place-bound students, those who cannot visit the writing center during normal business hours in person, had little access to writing center services other than the resources on our Web site.

These students include those who work during the day, those with children or families, commuters, students taking courses on a regional campus, and students with physical disabilities. As writing center practitioners, we must not only consider diversity in terms of race and culture. We must also consider. We had an established face-to-face writing center, but we only offered consultations to students on our main campus. In addition to what can be accomplished by physical spaces that strive to enhance diversity on campus, like the Barbara Ying Center, the innovative use of technology can enhance diversity initiatives by allowing writing centers to offer services to students in virtual spaces.

We must also consider diversity in terms of physical ability, proximity to resources, and accessibility. Our response to the increasingly diverse and decentralized nature of our university was to expand our services beyond the physical space of our writing center. The following fall, we opened our KnightOWL consultations to the entire student population. We encouraged place-bound students to try these appointments as a substitute for face-to-face f2f consultations, if they were not able to make it to campus. We fostered diversity through KnightOWL, helping students with special needs and unique circumstances through technology.

Writing center practitioners have noted the value of encouraging diversity through OWLs as well. Writing center services should be convenient and efficient for students to use. As writing center practitioners, our goal should be to provide non-traditional and special-needs students with access to writing center resources, including consultations, that match the services available to the traditional student living in a dorm near our office.

Now that KnightOWL is available across thousands of miles and many time zones, we not only promote a supportive and inviting face-to-face culture, but a lively virtual or digital culture as well. KnightOWL is our commitment to diversifying the writing center. We offer diverse services for students with diverse needs.

Filter by:

Allowing us to be more inclusive as a service, KnightOWL reaches out to a wide range of students beyond those living on campus. Moreover, KnightOWL recently spread its wings to Afghanistan, giving a UCF student in the military access to writing center consultations via our synchronous online services. Two years ago, we had no idea that KnightOWL would have such a big impact on our writing center. Diversity in a Digital Culture Technological innovations have allowed us to build an inclusive writing center, one that encourages all students, regardless of place, space, or mobility, to access our services in one form or another.

Our culture is increasingly a digital one. We continue to interconnect ourselves, and physical space has become less critical to our daily work in the writing center. Students schedule appointments online, download handouts from our Web site, watch virtual tours of our writing center, and now even have their consultations online or over the phone.

Dave Healy writes: As the online composition classroom has become more common on college and university campuses, student writers have become increasingly comfortable not only composing and revising but also sending, receiving, and responding to text electronically. As writers have expanded their horizons and their repertoires, writing centers have looked for ways to meet the needs of a new kind of client— one no longer limited by the constraints of face-to-face conferencing.

The increased accessibility that our digital culture offers allows us to reach out to students who would not typically be able to use our resources. Students with families and children, working professionals, commuters, physically challenged students, and students who rely on alternative modes of transportation may find it inconvenient to come to campus to visit the writing center. On the digitized college campus, students can access writing center consultations from any location, as long as they have Internet access and a computer.

Our students are culturally and racially diverse, but they are also linked, integrated, wired, and Internet savvy. Although most of us have our own perceptions and opinions about technology,. Technology, if used with great care and planning, has the ability to unite students. It helps us build diverse networks of people, networks of students. Some of our students would rather use KnightOWL than come in face-to-face. In fact, some students with special needs must visit online or over the phone.

These students motivate us to develop better technological systems and think of new and useful ways to build technology into our programs. Technology has allowed us to build beyond four walls, fostering a culture where all students are welcome. Of course, we must meet the challenge that Judith Kilborn poses when she urges writing center practitioners to meet the growing needs of culturally diverse student populations.

With this, our goal is to offer quality writing resources to a diverse group of students, and technology has allowed us to pursue this worthy goal. As you consider diversity in your own writing center, think about these suggestions: Integrate resources geared specifically toward non-traditional writers into your Web site. Explore options for synchronous online consultations for non-traditional and place-bound students. Consider using multiple lines for scheduled telephone consultations for non-traditional and place-bound students.

Consider developing an online forum where students at your institution, regardless of location, can share information, questions, and ideas. Partner with the student disabilities services center on your campus to verify that your Web resources are compatible with assistive technologies. Advertise writing center consultations through campus diversity groups like the multicultural or multilingual center on your campus, especially on their Web sites if possible. Offer brief e-newsletters for students enrolled in ESL programs and other campus outreach services.

From Dallas to Afghanistan, our virtual doors are always open. To address the needs of our diverse student population, we expanded our virtual space to one that is welcoming regardless of physical location. These virtual environments are inclusive and have helped us reach out to students we once overlooked. Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin.

Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge: MIT P, Center for Multilingual Multicultural Studies. Joan A. Mullin and Ray Wallace. Urbana: NCTE, Healy, Dave. Kilborn, Judith. Negroponte, Nicholas. Being Digital.

Table of Contents Vol - Terralingua

New York: Vintage, Shadle, Mark. James A. Inman and Donna N. Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum, University Writing Center Home. Rusty Carpenter is a Ph. Rusty is mostly interested in the ways in which technology enhances writing center work. History: Gallaudet University has a long history of providing tutorial support to students. In Gallaudet was established by an act of Congress specifically to create a college for deaf and hard of hearing people.

Our most recent history has been one of merging different kinds of instructional support. Sponsoring department, school, or organization: Center for Academic Programs and Student Services Number of consultations in the last year: We served students during fall semester and students during the spring semester, providing a total of 17, hours of service. Square footage: Our main lab is 2, square feet, and our second lab is square feet.

We also use additional classrooms for various evening programs like Study Table, walk-in services, and training. Staff: We have six permanent staff: director, two coordinators, two counselors, and a secretary. The permanent staff is responsible for training, program oversight, and supervising tutors in different academic disciplines. We have approximately 85 tutors and writing advisors and some office support.

Linked Readings

Most of our tutors and writing advisors are students. We also employ about 12 professional tutors. Each tutor and writing advisor is required to complete a hour basic tutor training course taught by the permanent staff. Staff members also teach advanced and master tutor training courses. A good percentage of students that use our services, besides being deaf, also have learning disabilities or are Deafblind or have low vision. Some writing concerns are related to organization, clarity, documentation styles, and grammar.

Money Matters: Our budget is from the University. We occasionally receive internal grants for technology improvement such as web development. Gallaudet has always operated as a bilingual institution where English and American Sign Language ASL were both used in academia, but this has been implied rather than stated. Additionally, instructors of all disciplines can now require that a few course assignments be done using formal ASL prose instead of formal English. Consequently we are implementing a new program called ASL Works! Additionally our Math Works!

Philosophy: Our philosophy is one of service collaboration among students needing academic assistance, students who are trained to become certified tutors, and faculty who help us identify potential tutors as well as provide suggestions for improvement. We strive to provide appropriate tutoring for our students to meet their individual needs in order for them to achieve academically. Of primary importance is to provide a visual learning environment that is designed for deaf and hard-of-hearing learners.

This includes good lighting and desks placed so that tutors and students can interact with no barriers that would impede conversing in ASL. Furthermore, instructional material developed for our web sites cater to visual learners. The services provided to students include tutors, advisors, and the use of technology. Tutors are expected to follow a rigorous training program prior to starting their work as tutors and to earn certification before the end of their first semester of work.

This training and certification ensures that services are provided on a more professional level and that our tutors practice ethical conduct in their work with the students. What else should people know about your center? We are proud of our tutors who train hard and learn to work with students from a variety of backgrounds and cultures and communication styles, many of whom are deaf and have additional learning challenges. Praxis tackles diversity in the writing center This issue of Praxis explores diversity in the writing center.

Our Focus section begins with a challenge to writing centers to fulfill this role. Sarah Dees, Beth Godbee, and Moira Ozias urge writing center directors and staff to talk about systematic racism without slipping into distracting discussions about language difference. Andrew Rihn, in a similar vein, discusses the importance of raising questions of racial inequality during consultations, even or, perhaps, especially in non-diverse universities.

Writing about a very diverse educational setting, Mirriam Lephalala and Cathy Pienaar examine the contribution writing centers can make to the huge task of educating large numbers of low-income students in post-Apartheid South Africa. Finally, Janet M. Lucas and Jane Hirschhorn each consider the challenges of tutoring ESL students: Lucas writes about the large number of ESL students seeking nursing degrees; and Hirschhorn considers the similar approaches that have worked in tutoring ESL and learning-disabled students.

Contributors to our Columns, Consulting, and Training sections consider diversity in a variety of different ways, including, but not restricted to, the usual focus on race and ethnicity in such conversations. In our Consulting section, Sayantani Dasgupta relates her experiences as an international student working as a consultant in a Midwestern U.

Rusty Carpenter furthers our understanding of what counts as diversity and how writing centers can nurture it through his discussion, in our Training section, of how the virtual space of the internet offers inclusion to place-bound students who cannot visit writing centers during regular business hours. Finally, in Columns, our research group at the University of Texas at Austin University asks how writing centers might better accommodate male consultees when research indicates that women are statistically more likely to visit the University Writing Center.

Louise had gone back to school when her children were grown. She had a proposal to put together, for a research project. I knew how to help her. I have some model proposals, from this same program. Much writing center work deals with genre. We can think of genre in a more or less static way, as texts that conform to certain patterns. We can easily describe the textual features of so-called genre literature, such as the nurse novel. They all tell essentially the same story. Nurse loves doctor, doctor appears not to love nurse, nurse and doctor overcome obstacle together, wedding.

Or take a genre closer to hand, the freshman English essay: some kind of argument, developed in paragraphs, with an underlined thesis statement, topic sentences, and a grand and hasty conclusion. Much of our work with novice writers involves making the requirements of the genre clear. We can also think of genre in a more dynamic way that encompasses not just the features of the text, but also its function in a social world. Carolyn Miller explains genre as that aspect of situated communication that is capable of reproduction, that can be manifested in more than one situation, more than one concrete space-time.

The freshman English paper not only displays an argument, but is also an attempt by the writer to play a certain role of academic insider. It needed also to be a signal to the department that oversees our capstone project: here is a student who can use the language of the research proposal. Thus we can put our stamp on her trip to Brazil, which has become not just a trip to see her daughter, but also a scholarly endeavor.

Many students had come to me with similar writing problems, and I had dealt with them in similar ways many times, successfully. This was a patterned interaction, with a familiar set of moves. Let me show you. The student tutors quite patiently did what they were used to doing: one would reverse outline what Louise had already written; another tutor would talk to her for a long time and sketch out an outline of what Louise might write.

Writers in Conversation with Claire Fuller

I had her train on DragonSpeak with another student, so she could talk her papers instead of type. No matter what, the papers she came up with jumped around so much, with incomplete sentences and flashes of thought, that they were more or less incoherent. We worked together to revise them.

She might or might not identify a main idea, but she was always quickly onto something else, and something else again. Her revisions were complete reworkings of the original paper, making a second, also incoherent version. Of course, it is not only our readership that matters to us. The process of working with like-minded peers is at the very core of what we do.

I am thrilled to announce that together with our undergraduate law journal partners from 10 universities including UPenn, Dartmouth, Williams, UToronto, and McGill across the U. Stay tuned to our Facebook page for more information. As always, I would like to end my Letter by thanking our faculty advisor, Prof. Amanda Hollis-Brusky, for her continued guidance. Our journal is certainly also indebted to the Salvatori Center for its support over the years, and of course, to all of our readers, partners, alumni, prospective members, and other supporters.

If you enjoy reading our articles and would like to share your own writing, keep in mind that the CJLPP always welcomes submissions to our blog and future print editions.