Bridges Too Few

Phillips, Talinn, Candace Stewart, and Robert D. Stewart. “Geography Lessons, Bridge-Building, and Second Language Writers.” WPA 30.1-2 (2006). 83-100. Print.

Talinn, Stewart, and Stewart rely on the metaphor of bridge-building to examine what faculty with limited power over the curriculum in their departments can do to improve instruction of L2 students. In their metaphor, L2 students need numerous bridges in their education, whether to “mainstream” writing courses or courses in other departments across the campus. They recognize, though, that building such bridges, while quite necessary, requires a number of resources that may not be available to all programs and those who may wish to build those bridges may not have the institutional clout to do so. The authors discuss their efforts to create these bridges in spite of such constraints. They note the local nature of their efforts; however, their struggles with lacking resources and power from the institution are a familiar fact of life for many faculty, and their solutions provide some starting points for faculty in similar positions.

The authors all worked in various capacities in their institution’s writing center. For them, this provided a natural locus to begin their bridge building. While separate from the English department, this writing center had a relationship of sorts with the department though that relationship was an “uneven” one, to use their term (91). They also note the interdisciplinary nature of the work in the writing center and its ability “to help move second language writing out of the disciplinary and institutional margins” (89). They recommend using composition pedagogies within the writing center to begin some bridge-building with the English department, making new (and future) faculty aware of the needs and concerns of L2 students, and conducting workshops that include faculty from across the campus.

Overall, their recommendations seemed useful (if occasionally a bit obvious). I did take issue with some elements of one of their examples. In this, they noted the success of one of the writing center’s tutees. This student received competent tutoring twice a week for eleven weeks and was receiving considerable support for her efforts in her class. While certainly a positive and admirable example, it may not be an especially representative one. It did, however, show how the bridge between the writing center and the classroom was an essential part of this student’s success. I did find the workshop they conducted with faculty across campus a potentially useful tool, although they did note its success was partially because of a strong WAC program at their institution, something not all institutions have. This workshop was small but its agenda of addressing faculty experiences and providing them with various strategies seemed an effective way to begin the conversation with faculty in various departments about the needs of L2 students. Certainly, the more faculty know about these needs, the more bridges we can build for our students, giving them greater opportunities for success in writing and communication in other classes.