Praxis 15.2

Peer Observation, Reflection, and Evaluation Practices in the Writing Center • 51! ! striking was the role that genre played in facilitating drew on this genre, it over-determined the sort of and directing GAs’ attempts to both assess and reflect discourse produced at the expense of enabling them on their practice. to learn anything meaningful from the exercise. When In brief, several genres/social actions intersect in the checklist format of the observation format the act of these peer observations. First, the GA’s precedes it, it implicitly conveys a judgmental function performance in the session itself is a secondary genre for the overall comments. Given that this judging intended to facilitate an intervention in and possible function follows a format that looks very much like a revision of the writer’s work. In turn, it draws on criterion-based analytical rubric, those comments several primary speech genres such as those described must address each of the features that appear in the

by Summer Smith in her work on the genre of teacher checklist. Accordingly, this conveys a pedagogical end comments. These speech genres include judging approach to the session that implicitly argues that a genres, reader-response genres, and coaching genres session may be evaluated by its correspondence to its (252-261). Second, written constructive reflection is a textual form—its generic/formal features—rather genre meant to facilitate a self-assessment (as than by the contexts, shared perceptions, and settings described by Smith and Yancey) and a possible that inform it. Further, because the reflection reconsideration of practice (as described by Yancey followed the evaluative-sounding observer comments and Schön). Third, the observation form is a written and the rubric-like checklist, these often drew on what genre intended to mediate a discussion between GA would appear to be a defense genre: a rationale for the and observer that in turn refines the reflection begun decisions made in response to the observer and in in the form. Fourth and finally, the director’s anticipation of the director evaluating that session. evaluation is meant to convey the director’s expectations for and assessment of the GA’s overall Genre, reflection, and observation performance in the center. Of course, many of these The observation checklist and “comments and genres blur into one another, such as the GA’s selfreflection” portion of the form the GAs completed assessment and the director’s evaluation. In other mapped generically onto the criteria Yancey words, these genres often resemble one another or enumerates for reflection—that is, GAs basically hearken to purposes that confuse the rhetors recorded, reviewed, articulated a nascent understanding, operating within them. and ostensibly learned something from the process As such, because each of these genres often that they would apply to future sessions. However, themselves draw on and/or resemble other genres, although they had produced discourse in these they further serve to complicate the participants’ reflections that conforms to the generic features of response(s) to their rhetorical situation(s). For the reflective genre, these reflections did not instance, the observation form draws on several necessarily foster the sorts of social action that secondary written genres—the checklist and notes reflective genres are intended to facilitate. In draw on and resemble both ethnographic field notes particular, the form did not seem to facilitate as well as criteria-based rubrics, and the “Observer constructive reflection if that term is defined as Overall Comments” section clearly resembles the understanding single sessions (or instances of genre of the end comment. In this case, the GAs practice) as part of a larger practice theorized. Nor did the operated within genres they did not feel they knew. form invite the sorts of critical rhetorical moves Given Devitt’s observation about genre repertoires necessary for substantive revision of that and writers drawing on inappropriate genres in practitioner’s guiding assumptions. In short, melding unfamiliar rhetorical situations, it seems that the GAs evaluation and reflective observation was fraught may have drawn on antecedent genres that resembled because they were at cross-purposes: to critically the form and the situation they found themselves in, reassess the basis of one’s practice can be namely that of the criterion-based rubrics and the substantively at odds with justifying one’s competence teacher end comment. to one’s supervisor or community of practice. The Consequently, the observation comments written observation form and process invited observers to by the observers mostly resembled the very rigid form look at the consulting session as a genre in a of the end comment that Smith describes and are thus prescriptive rather than descriptive sense, evaluating susceptible to Smith’s critique of that genre: “The whether or not it met certain generic criteria. And stability of the genre—the very feature that makes end though the form is ostensibly descriptive in some comments recognizable and, perhaps easier to write— sense in that it asks if a particular generic parameter may also reduce the educational effectiveness of the occurred in a session, it is very much prescriptive in comment” (266). Put another way, because the GAs its implicit genre pedagogy, listing features typical to Praxis: A Writing Center Journal • Vol 15, No 2 (2018) www.praxisuwc.com!