Confronting Student Misconduct at the Writing Center

Jessica Kovalick
Morgan Haley
Marissa DuBois

Following the global pandemic, many of our colleagues at our university’s writing center sought out ways to combat the increasing isolation. Our casual, personal conversations often strayed from academic discussions in a determined attempt at human connection through virtual capacities. It was from these conversations that we started to recognize a cautionary pattern was taking place: that student misconduct was finding new ways to occur during one-on-one virtual consultations. 

Before social distancing, the physical writing center had provided a level of Foucauldian protection. Students were surrounded by other consultations, faculty had their office doors open, and the typical presence that accompanied a bustling college campus. Albeit the convenience of an online virtual writing center, there also came the ability for students to take advantage of one-on-one consultations with their tutor. It was just you. And them. 

Now that we had recognized a problem, we were trying to determine a plan for an effective and ethical solution. We needed to work with campus and federal policy, while equally combatting an unprecedented crisis. Student misconduct is a difficult topic to discuss for any college department, let alone a student service that relies on participation and retention for funding to continue its important work. Many of the tutors we worked with were unsure of how to approach this problem. Some even shrugged off their uncomfortable interactions, thinking they would never come in contact with the student again—so, why bother? From our own orientation experience, we couldn’t recall a training dedicated to student misconduct in the context of the virtual writing center. This not only made it difficult to solve, but some could not even recognize it happening, let alone properly name, define, or respond to it. Many of the policies placed full responsibility on the tutor to garner control of the session and to handle the uncomfortable interactions, which we started to realize was easier said than done. None of these policies considered the dimensions of our tutoring sessions. They did not consider the linguistic differences, the language barriers, the identities of the tutor and writer, and the power dynamics that came with it. 

At the time of this disturbing discovery, our directors had assigned a semester-long inquiry project. Everyone was asked to place the writing center beneath the examination of a critical eye and evaluate it for opportunities for improvement. So, as tutors who cared about the safety and well-being of our community, we launched our project.

Due to the nuanced situation, there wasn’t much literature on the subject, to begin with. However, we were able to find sources that focused on power dynamics, campus reporting protocols, tutor and student agency, writer identity, and intersectionality. In 2019, Nadler wrote an article titled, “Sexual Harassment, Dirty Underwear, and Coffee Bar Hipsters: Welcome to the Virtual Writing Center”, he notes, “the current disciplinary landscape has largely yet to fuse the personal with the academic in terms of sexual harassment. If you search for “sexual harassment” in the archives of College Composition and Communication, fewer than a dozen hits will appear…” (para. 9). We were treading in rarely explored territory. Following our findings, we proposed different possible solutions that would further collaborative efforts and work for a center that was online or on campus. 

With the implementation of a student-facing policy, students would need to sign an acknowledgement covering both student and tutor rights before being allowed to schedule appointments. Students would be required to agree to a set code of conduct upon checking into the writing center or would be given access to these policies within the emails sent for virtual consultations. This has the added effect of removing the full responsibility from the tutor for responding to these incidents and would remind the student that, despite logging on from their bedroom, they were still expected to adhere to the student rules of conduct as if they had walked onto the campus.

Training modules and video demos would inform tutors of the resources and support available to them by the university. All tutors need to be made aware of what constitutes Title IX infractions in addition to the language used by their universities in addressing student misconduct. Additional training and video demonstrations that cover potential student misconduct scenarios would help tutors feel more prepared when faced with one of the situations that occurred within their own writing center. A common occurrence heard from our colleagues was that they simply froze when confronted with instances of misconduct due to the uncertainty about how to remove themselves from the situation. These new training modules and demonstrations would help prevent new tutors from being placed in similar situations without previous support.

The behavior log is one of our most important suggestions for writing centers to take. Many students within our own writing center are “frequent fliers” who continuously return to work with different tutors. While we wish to improve student retention, it can be worrying when a student displays distressing behaviors or actions. The behavior log would provide a record of student incidents so recurring issues from particular sessions can be monitored for student and writer safety. The behavior log also places a level of accountability on the writing center directors to keep track of returning students who may have displayed misconduct in one session, but not another. This log has a greater state of permanence for incoming tutors cycling through the writing center.

When it comes to implementing solutions to misconduct in the writing center, a student-facing policy paired with training could tackle the issue on both fronts. Our plan of action is not only proactive to prevent student misconduct but also educates tutors in a way that empowers them to recognize and report misconduct, far beyond their college experience. While the abrupt move to online tutoring didn’t come without a new set of challenges, the movement did expose long-living issues that had already been present. These solutions could be universally implemented and refined to meet the individual needs of any writing center.

Work Cited

Nadler, Robby. “Sexual Harassment, Dirty Underwear, and Coffee Bar Hipsters: Welcome to the Virtual Writing Center.” The Peer Review, Vol 3, No.1, 2019. https://thepeerreview-iwca.org/issues/redefining-welcome/sexual-harassment-dirty-underwear-and-coffee-bar-hipsters-welcome-to-the-virtual-writing-center/

About the Authors

Jessica Kovalick is a graduate student at the University of Central Florida in the MA Rhetoric and Composition program. Her research interests include fandom studies, identity, and space exploration. Right now, Jessica is analyzing the Star Wars fandom through a counterstory framework in hopes of fostering a diverse, more inclusive community for a galaxy far, far away. When there was not a global pandemic, Jessica enjoyed large social gatherings and traveling internationally. 

Morgan Haley is a graduate student attending the University of Central Florida in the MA Rhetoric and Composition program. Her research interests include disability rhetoric and copyright law. Currently, Morgan is working on a research paper discussing copyright law in how it relates to fanfiction writing. In her free time, Morgan enjoys writing short stories and exploring natural springs.

 

 

 

Marissa DuBois is a graduate student at the University of Central Florida in the MA Rhetoric and Composition program. Her research interests include writing studies, material rhetoric, and trauma studies. Previously, she has published academic work with the UCF undergraduate journal Convergence. In her downtime, Marissa enjoys trying out new baking recipes and developing her fiction podcast.