When my first consultation sent me their paper previous to the consultation, I was relieved. The chance to review a paper and have valid points of revision made the idea of talking with a stranger in an unfamiliar medium more than enough to settle my nerves and pushed me to go above and beyond on my revision notes. I had only gone through the paper once, riddling the margins with suggestions and circling spelling errors, or noting global issues on a separate page. When I had finished, the paper was lined with ink. In my mind, I had revised the paper to match how I would have written it: coherent thought patterns; detailed explanations with supporting detail; strong paragraph structure; and most importantly, a valid, well thought out argument.
…show more content…
When I found a sentence that had this I asked her “is there a mistake here?” I borrowed the techniques I had witnessed in the other observational consultations and had residual expectations from the second participatory consultation. She, however, was an individual and didn’t quite understand why there was a mistake and was unable to correct it on her own.
It was disheartening for me as the consultant that she seemed to just be going through the motions and didn’t need my advice for any more than a grammar check. She also had the stylistic use of putting too many words in her sentence that didn’t quite go to together, trying to convey emphasis for a particular subject. She wasn’t very forthcoming trying to explain what she had meant and I had trouble gauging her meaning from the text. We were both getting a little frustrated that we couldn’t understand each other.
When we had finished reviewing her paper, I tried to reassure her that what she had written had excellent content matter and was well thought out but all she could focus on where the revision notes about obscure meaning or miss-steps in grammar. It was emotionally draining to try and give her techniques to improve her as a writer when it didn’t seem as if she wanted them at all and made the whole process feel
When I found a sentence that had this I asked her “is there a mistake here?” I borrowed the techniques I had witnessed in the other observational consultations and had residual expectations from the second participatory consultation. She, however, was an individual and didn’t quite understand why there was a mistake and was unable to correct it on her own.
It was disheartening for me as the consultant that she seemed to just be going through the motions and didn’t need my advice for any more than a grammar check. She also had the stylistic use of putting too many words in her sentence that didn’t quite go to together, trying to convey emphasis for a particular subject. She wasn’t very forthcoming trying to explain what she had meant and I had trouble gauging her meaning from the text. We were both getting a little frustrated that we couldn’t understand each other.
When we had finished reviewing her paper, I tried to reassure her that what she had written had excellent content matter and was well thought out but all she could focus on where the revision notes about obscure meaning or miss-steps in grammar. It was emotionally draining to try and give her techniques to improve her as a writer when it didn’t seem as if she wanted them at all and made the whole process feel