Abstract

Writing tutors often have very little or no expertise in conventions of engineering writing. In this study, I examine the topics and politeness strategies of tutors' comments, investigating how non-expertise in engineering writing decreases the effectiveness of tutors' interactions with engineering students. I show how the three non-expert tutors gave inappropriate advice and often stated their advice with certainty. I also show how a tutor with expertise in engineering writing gave specific and useful guidance to her tutee and built rapport with him as well. I outline how writing tutors could be trained to help engineering students better.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2004-12-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2004.840485
CompPile
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (7)

  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Written Communication
Show all 7 →
  1. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

References (19) · 4 in this index

  1. 10.1177/0957926599010002005
  2. 10.1080/01421590220125277
  3. Writing Center Journal
  4. Look back and say ‘so what’: The limitations of the generalized tutor
  5. Teacher-student talk in technical writing conferences
    Written Commun.
Show all 19 →
  1. Written Communication
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly
  3. Responding to technical writing
    The Technical Writing Teacher
  4. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
  5. 10.2307/j.ctt46nwx4
  6. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
  7. Harcourt Brace Guide to Peer Tutoring
  8. Technical Editing
  9. 10.4324/9780203783771
  10. Revising Professional Writing in Science and Technology, Business, and the Social Sciences
  11. We … we … we …
    PCS Newsletter
  12. 10.1163/9789004368811_004
  13. 10.1007/BF00627773
  14. Writing Center Journal