Angela Cutolo
Sheila Hakner, Ed.D.
St. John’s University, Jamaica, NY

Abstract

This article describes the efforts of the Intensive English Program (IEP) to help the newly established St. John’s University Writing Center meet the needs of ESL students. Because the Writing Center Director and staff knew very little about IEP students, a training session was conducted to discuss ESL students’ writing strengths and weaknesses as well as the role of the tutor. After attending a one-to-one tutoring session, IEP students were required to provide written feedback on tutor attitude, behavior, skill as well as providing general comments. As a result of the cooperative efforts of the IEP, the Writing Center staff, and the IEP students, recommendations were developed to improve the Writing Center’s effectiveness. In reading about the IEP experience at St. John’s University, other intensive English programs can have a better understanding of how a writing center can serve the needs of ESL students.

Background

A writing center was initiated in the Spring of 1998 at St. John’s University to serve all students, ESL students included. In order to discuss ESL students’ writing needs, a meeting was held with the Writing Center Director. As a result, a training session was organized to clear up some misconceptions the tutors had concerning the writing ability of ESL students. Sample student sentences, compositions, and the required ESL grammar books were provided to serve as a basis for discussion of ESL needs. The discussion revealed the tutors’ lack of experience and knowledge of this special group.

Training Session

Misconceptions:

• Tutors were surprised at the level and types of grammatical errors; they thought they would be dealing with the writing process, organization, and style.
• Tutors were unaware of the individual variety and complexity of ESL writing errors. Tutors expected to refer the students to a handout of the most common errors.
• Tutors who had studied a foreign language believed that they could practice by conducting the session in the student’s native language.

Clarifications and Suggestions:

In general, tutors knew virtually nothing about the University’s ESL program and ESL writing needs. Therefore, these specific points needed to be made:

ESL students come from a variety of backgrounds. Not all are on the undergraduate level; some have advanced university degrees from their own country. Some are American high school graduates; others are refugees, residents or foreign students. Tutors need to know that ESL students are not a homogeneous population.

The University’s ESL testing, placement, and exit procedures were explained. Writing is an important component of the ESL program and students must demonstrate a certain level of proficiency through an exit essay exam. Essays are evaluated based on students’ control of basic sentence structure, which includes basic verb tenses, verb tense consistency, subject-verb agreement, appropriate choice of words and word forms and word order. In addition, basic organization which includes writing a thesis statement and providing sufficient supporting details is also considered. Consequently, the Writing Center tutors can play an important role in helping students sharpen and improve their editing skills.

An approach to error correction was demonstrated to help tutors make the session more student centered. For example, by asking students to identify the verb in the sentence, the student may discover that his sentence is missing a verb. By asking if the action is happening now or in the past, the student may realize that the verb tense is incorrect. In other words, students should be encouraged to find their own errors. Errors, wherever possible, should not be pinpointed by the tutors. Allowing sufficient time for students to self-correct was also emphasized. In addition, it was pointed out that ESL students might find the error but not know how to correct it. In that case, the tutor would have to provide explanation.

To utilize the tutoring session most efficiently, tutors were advised to concentrate on repeated errors and significant errors that interfere with meaning. For example, the misuse of verb tenses, transition words coordinating conjunctions, or incorrect word order are more serious errors than a missing or incorrect article.

Findings

• Although students were required to utilize the Writing Center at least once, only 14 out of the 26 students (54%) attended.
• Although the students were strongly encouraged to go to the Writing Center on a regular basis, not one of the 14 returned a second time.
• Feedback was collected about tutor attitude, behavior, skill and unexpected benefits of the Center. 64% of the students gave positive feedback, 21% negative, and 14% mixed.

Positive Comments:

“She was a very kind and friendly person. Moreover, she had a good patience. When I asked her some questions, she listened carefully and she gave me all questions I asked. She explained to me very clear and easier to understand her an explanation.”

“She was very helpful and carefull.”

“I think Robert and Melissa were very kindness, they tried to do their best to advice for me. It was very helpful.”

“ She gave me written information of what a thesis is, how to develop your thesis which is the most important thing. They also gave me written information of what an argument is and techniques to write about an argument.”

“She said this sentence was correct but redundant, so it was not necssary. Then she showed me how to change that. I relized that I learned a lot of good ideas from her.”

“I learn to not employ a word two times and give to my sentences a better look.”

“He made me use the dictionary and was very concerned of my work.”

“It is not only learning how to write the composition but I also have a good conversation with her. I speak English to her and sometimes I make mistake.”

“I think it is a good opportunities for me to speak English with a native American and improve my writing skill.”

Negative Comments:

“Even though I made an appointment with them, I had to wait for 10 minutes. After ten minutes’ waiting, there was a careless tutor. She didn’t check much my errors. She didn’t see my papers carefully. I didn’t feel so good. I won’t go there again.

“She didn’t tell me about my problem. She just corrected it.”

“She speaks unclear if she could speak clearly it is more useful for writing center.”

“She talked to fast, so I couldn’t understand all of her words.”

Recommendations:

• If Writing Center attendance is not a course requirement, students feel it is not important and do not go.
• Attendance needs to be verified and students need to be held accountable.
• For more useful feedback, a formal questionnaire analyzing the experience should be developed so that ESL students can identify and focus on their writing needs.
• In general, tutors are not aware of ESL writing problems, and a training session is required.
• The training session should include actual ESL compositions and paragraphs for hands-on practice in error correction.
• Tutors need to be told that they should not simply correct the errors. Students need to be guided in finding and correcting their own errors.
• Tutors should observe an ESL writing class to familiarize themselves with classroom techniques and strategies.
• Tutors need to be made aware of ESL students’ listening and speaking difficulties. Tutors may need to slow down their rate of speech and use simpler vocabulary.
• Feedback should be shared with the Writing Center as a cooperative effort to improve its effectiveness.

Conclusion

The authors were surprised to find that the ESL Program was an almost unknown entity to the Writing Center tutors. Therefore, the training session was essential and needs to be continued and expanded. The cooperative efforts between the Writing Center and the ESL Program resulted in mutual benefits. The Writing Center staff was more attuned to ESL student needs and so better able to serve their clients. The one-to-one tutoring filled an important gap in our ESL program.

Dr. Sheila Hakner is Assistant Director of the Intensive English Program (IEP) at St. John’s University. Her research interests include ESL testing, alternative assessment, and teacher training.

Angela Cutolo is an English Language Specialist in the IEP at St. John’s, a position which incorporates both teaching and administrative responsibilities. Her interests focus on reading and writing skills development for ESL students as well as ESL materials development.

Both Dr. Hakner and Angela Cutolo have co-authored numerous articles concerning IEP issues within a university setting. Their most recent publication is Writing Tasks, an ESL writing workbook for intermediate advanced level students (Whittier, 1998).