Scaffolding reflective pedagogy: How ongoing professional development fosters writer and consultant growth
For the last five years, 95% of post-session surveys rated writers’ experiences at the Workshop as “Excellent” or “Very good.” Such consistent satisfaction—across a breadth of student backgrounds and needs, and with a diverse consulting staff—is no accident but, rather, the outgrowth of a thoughtfully scaffolded professional development (PD) program. Led by the WW’s administrative team (Carolyn Wisniewski and graduate assistant directors), ongoing PD fosters commitment to reflective, writer-centered pedagogy in the Workshop.
Upon joining the WW staff, graduate consultants attend a multi-day orientation, co-consult with seasoned staff, and begin to articulate their developing tutoring philosophy in a written reflection. Undergraduate tutors take WRIT 300: Issues in Tutoring Writing, wherein they co-consult weekly with a mentor and present original writing studies research. The robust staff handbook orients all consultants not only to Workshop logistics and policies but to the disciplinary and theoretical grounding for one-to-one writing instruction.
Each semester, consultants attend at least five of about 10 staff meetings. Standout meetings this year addressed AI in the writing center, navigating boundaries and scaffolding independence in sessions, translingual identities in asynchronous Written Feedback Appointments (WFAs), and leading effective “drop-ins.” While meetings are typically led by admin, consultants, or WW Consultants’ Committee members, guests are invited for special topics; this spring, we welcomed former WW consultant and AD María Carvajal Regidor for a session based on her College English article, “‘I’m a bad writer’: Latina College Students’ Traumatic Literacy Experiences.” Additionally, the admin team offers semesterly training for tutoring in WFAs and satellite locations, and they conduct regular evaluations, observing sessions and debriefing individually with consultants to exchange evolving pedagogical ideas.
From orientation to evaluation, tutors learn to, as one consultant put it, “meet the needs of busy students through free-flowing but carefully structured consultations.” In the “first five” of each 50-minute session, they establish rapport, set session parameters, and learn holistically about the writer’s needs; the “last five” involve wrap-up, final questions, and making a revision plan. Within that, sessions are shaped by flexible, dialogic tutoring strategies that center writer agency.
Even with an established pedagogical approach, however, writing is still “messy and emotional,” as long-time consultant Liz M. described. “Writing is broadly conceived of as this monolithic, stoic thing that only the smartest people do properly,” she explained. PD has given Liz tools to “help writers realize that their reactions to the writing process are entirely normal.” Martha L. echoes this emphasis on motivational scaffolding: “Many writers arrive disheartened by how ‘bad’ they are at writing; learning how to encourage, praise, and validate such writers has been integral within my sessions.”
The Workshop works best when both writer and consultant can grow. As consultant Marina T. reflected, “The consultation isn’t a one-way transaction. Just as I can check in to see how the writer is feeling about their writing, I can also invite [them] to express how they feel about my advice and support, thus improving my own ability to help myself and others.” Ongoing PD is aimed at cultivating exactly this mindset of reflectivity and shared growth. It’s the pedagogical bedrock of the WW, and it’s how we stay relevant — how we continue to satisfy the needs of diverse writers across campus year after year.
By Dani Nutting, Flute Performance and Literature, DMA candidate