Chapter 4 Reflection: Power and Authority in the Writing Center
Now that you’ve considered how language choices—especially indirectness—can affect clarity and student understanding, this reading invites you to reflect more deeply on your role as a tutor. In Power and Authority in Peer Tutoring (2003) Peter Carino explores how peer consultants negotiate power dynamics: how to build trust and collaboration without coming across as either uncertain or overly authoritative.
Summarize the main ideas in Carino’s chapter. Then, reflect on your own instincts: are you concerned about credibility? Do you feel uneasy about possibly sounding too directive? What strategies from Carino might help you strike the right balance?
If you’re turning in a written reflection to your director (yes, for UW), please write a minimum of three paragraphs.
Alex H, on the inherently hierarchical relationship between consultant and writer.
“Becoming a writing consultant can bring lots of new fears. The one I had was being too authoritative. Within peer tutoring, an authoritative relationship between consultant and writer can cause problems (stripping the writer or their voice, taking over the writer’s paper etc.) so it’s recommended to find a balance between non-directive and directive approaches. However, this seems to go against the traditional subject tutoring mentor-student relationship, which is inherently authoritative with a hierarchical understanding that one knows more than the other. As a new consultant, I feared students might see me as superior to them and that any direct advice I’d give might therefore fall short of their expectations and feel inadequate.”