Response To North's Essay

I actually got into this paper, and was pretty passionate about what I was saying, so I'd like to share it.

Andrew Fleming

WRIT240—Professor Liptak

Response Paper “Idea of a Writing Center” by Stephen North

Stephen M. North’s “The Idea of a Writing Center” was a very enlightening read for me. I think the primary reason I found it so compelling was the fact that it dismissed many misconceptions I had about writing centers and their purposes. I was always under the impression that writing centers were supposed to serve as a place to get your papers “corrected”. North clearly becomes infuriated anytime he hears of a writing center being equated to this sort of “fix-up” shop for writers. Rather, North asks, even implores, his audience to view writing centers as “an institutional response to all writers’ need for a personal auditor—a teacher, a classmate, a roommate, an editor—who would not only listen but draw them out, ask them questions they would not think to ask themselves.”

After reading this essay, I wholeheartedly agree with North’s philosophy about writing centers. In my eyes, it is not a writing center’s job to simply pick papers apart with red pens, and then call the next innocent student in for the “slaughter”. This approach often leaves writers disheartened and unmotivated, and it fails to promote growth. Instead, it simply defines the “rules and regulations” of writing, and points out a writer’s failures to adhere the curriculum.

Rather, I, like North, feel that writing centers should assist writers in their personal writing processes. By having a tutor ask questions, the writer may find new direction and inspiration. Also, this method allows for writers to feel more engaged in their personal writing and editing process. It is a far more constructive approach to writing as a process, and encourages writers to utilize writing centers through positive inducement, rather than negative inducement.

However, even this approach has its flaws. These flaws can be attributed to what I feel is a “totalitarian” mentality that is not restricted just to English, but is interdisciplinary. That is, that even in the “open-minded” environment one finds in a writing center, the ideas and thoughts generated in an effort to foster a writer’s work will be dominated by the “rules and regulations” of institutional English. For example, a writer may bring an essay assignment to a tutor at the writing center. While that tutor may help the writer under the conventions of North’s “new writing center” philosophy, the assistance they provide that writer will be adhering to guidelines that will satisfy the requirements of a given curriculum. It is my belief that, inevitably, most tutors will give advice that will improve a writer’s chances of receiving a “good grade”, whether they are conscious of it or not.

While I completely agree with North’s philosophy of how a writing center should work, I am skeptical that this philosophy can ever be implemented in its purest form. Nevertheless, “The Idea of a Writing Center” provided me with useful insight that positively enhanced my personal view of writing centers. It is my hope that English and writing centers, can progress beyond the institutional confines of what defines a paper as “good or bad”, and embrace a philosophy that appeals to enhancing creativity and personality in writing.