Preparing writing centers and tutors for literacy mediation for working class campus-staff

Writing centers work with writers; traditionally services have been focused on undergraduates taking composition classes. More recently, centers have started to attract a wider client base including: students taking labs that require writing; graduate students; and ESL students learning the conventions of U.S. communication. There are very few centers, however, which identify themselves as open to working with all members of the campus-community. Michigan Technological University has one such center. In the Michigan Tech writing center, doors are open to “all students, faculty and staff.” While graduate students, post docs, and professors preparing articles for publication have used the center, for the first time in the collective memory of the center UAW staff members requested center appointments in the summer of 2008. These working class employees were in the process of filling out a work related document, the UAW Position Audit, an approximately seven-page form. This form was their one avenue for requesting a review of the job they were doing; the review was the first step in requesting a raise in job level and pay. This study grew out of the realization that implicit literacy expectations between working class United Auto Workers (UAW) staff and professional class staff were complicating the filling out and filing of the position audit form. Professional class supervisors had designed the form as a measure of fairness, in that each UAW employee on campus was responding to the same set of questions about their work. However, the implicit literacy expectations of supervisors were different from those of many of the employees who were to fill out the form. As a result, questions that were meant to be straightforward to answer were in the eyes of the employees filling out the form, complex. Before coming to the writing center UAW staff had spent months writing out responses to the form; they expressed concerns that their responses still would not meet audience expectations. These writers recognized that they did not yet know exactly what the audience was expecting. The results of this study include a framework for planning writing center sessions that facilitate the acquisition of literacy practices which are new to the user. One important realization from this dissertation is that the social nature of literacy must be kept in the forefront when both planning sessions and when educating tutors to lead these sessions. Literacy scholars such as James Paul Gee, Brian Street, and Shirley Brice Heath are used to show that a person can only know those literacy practices that they have previously acquired. In order to acquire new literacy practices, a person must have social opportunities for hands-on practice and mentoring from someone with experience. The writing center can adapt theory and practices from this dissertation that will facilitate sessions for a range of writers wishing to learn “new” literacy practices. This study also calls for specific changes to writing center tutor education.

Nongovernmental organization staff views of global water privatization

More than 1 billion people lack access to clean water and proper sanitation. As part of efforts to solve this problem, there is a growing shift from public to private water management led by The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This shift has inspired much related research. Researchers have assessed water privatization related perceptions of consumers, government officials, and multinational company agents. This thesis presents results of a study of nongovernmental (NGO) staff perceptions of water privatization. Although NGOs are important actors in sustainable water related development through water provision, we have little understanding of their perceptions of water privatization and how it impacts their activities. My goal was to fill this gap. I sampled international and national development NGOs with water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) foci. I conducted 28 interviews between January and June of 2011 with staff in key positions including water policy analysts, program officers, and project coordinators. Their perceptions of water privatization were mixed. I also found that local water privatization in most cases does not influence NGO decisions to conduct projects in a region. I found that development NGO staff base their beliefs about water privatization on a mix of personal experience and media coverage. My findings have important implications for the WASH sector as we work to solve the worsening global water access crisis.