On Monday, April 8th, Rebecca Shields (SSWCA Southwest Regional Representative) hosted a digital roundtable for tutors called “From Presentation to Publication”. Their conversation addressed the process of transforming an SSWCA conference presentation into an article for the Journal of Peer Tutoring in Secondary Schools and featured Stanford OHS student tutors Benjamin Klieger and Keshav Narang who describe their own process of transforming their presentation titled “Leveraging Data to Create An Inclusive Center: What Happens When Writing at the Center is Not at the Writing Center?” into a forthcoming JPTSS article titled “Learning Beyond the Center: A Case Study on Leveraging Data About Informal Learning to Create an Inclusive and Accessible Academic Center”. Writing center directors are welcome to share the slides from this digital roundtable with their tutors.
The following is a transcription of their discussion:
Rebecca Shields: To begin, can you tell us about your conference presentation? What issue did it address?
Benjamin and Keshav: Our presentation discussed our research examining the dynamics and motivations behind informal learning at our school in order to build a more accessible writing center. Our initial motivation came from the observation that many peer tutoring interactions occurred over an informal chat platform, Skype, rather than our formally adopted platform, WCONLINE. We found that 95% of peer tutors felt that Skype was an effective tutoring platform despite lacking appointment-booking and built-in document whiteboard features. Through further research, we realized it was Skype’s very informality that made it appealing for students, especially for shorter questions. This allowed us to generate recommendations for the writing center which were later adopted like offering approachable office-hours style workshops available to all students.
Rebecca Shields: What motivated you to write an article for JTPSS?
Benjamin and Keshav: After our presentation, we were inspired to share our experience to help other writing centers conduct similar research to improve outcomes for students. The article provided a format to expand upon our process and findings.
Rebecca Shields: How did you determine where and how to begin the process?
Benjamin and Keshav: We determined where and how to begin the process from the guidance we received from our writing center staff. Their initial observations and motivations to improve the writing center provided a starting point for our research. We then examined existing data and collected new data, including the expressed experiences of peer tutors and students, with guidance from our statistics and data science teachers. From this data we formed hypotheses, which we validated by interviewing students, examining closely shared peer tutor experiences, and searching for existing research on learning dynamics.
Rebecca Shields: How did you divide the writing between the two of you (and work to ensure it is consistent in style and voice)?
Benjamin and Keshav: We collaborated frequently together over call while writing the essay. We decided on the structure first, then divided the sections in order based upon which we felt we could individually best fill. Then, we both read over, provided feedback upon, and wrote direct revisions on each section the other person drafted. This allowed us to have a consistent style and voice through close collaboration and communication over our shared vision.
Amber Jensen, JPTSS Editor: At the time you began writing the article, what portion of the work was already completed via the presentation?
Benjamin and Keshav: About 70% of the work was completed via the presentation because we spent months conducting research and preparing our findings for the presentation. The article provided space to expand upon our process and findings, but we did not need to generate much new content, as we had already prepared background, data, and conclusions sections for our presentation.
Rebecca Shields: Did your completed article follow the same organization as your presentation?
Benjamin and Keshav: Generally, yes. Our article and presentation both started with an introduction to our school and a statement of the “problem” we noticed from existing data. We then covered the various surveys we designed to better understand our school’s learning environment and concluded with our findings and how they relate to existing research. Our main differences reflected the distinct natures of the two pieces of media: our presentation was able to incorporate several interactive sections, and the article was our most comprehensive report, containing all of the content that we presented in our one-hour presentation and more.
Rebecca Shields: What challenges did you encounter along the way?
Benjamin and Keshav: Our writing center’s director and instructors were very supportive in helping to distribute the various surveys we created. Our primary challenges revolved around making meaningful and generalizable conclusions from survey data. We wanted to find useful insights while adhering to strong scientific practices. In our presentation and article, we strived to clearly distinguish our conclusions from verbatim quotes found in our surveys, and we also consulted our school’s statistics and data science instructor while designing our surveys to limit bias in our wording and review the validity of our work.
Rebecca Shields: Are there particular tips you might offer those starting this process, especially if they are doing so in collaboration with another student author?
Benjamin and Keshav: As this process will take time, consistent communication and mutual excitement for the project will be helpful while planning your next steps and shaping the trajectory of your research. Hearing as many perspectives as possible (e.g. students, tutors, teachers, writing center instructors, etc.) is also an excellent way to simultaneously collect data and enhance your understanding of your school’s learning ecosystem. Our journey on this project was really enjoyable, and we hope it will be for you too!