WAC Clearinghouse | Across the Disciplines | Special Issue: Anti-Racist Activism | Review Main Page

---

Power and Cultural Capital in Writing Center Consulting

by J Quaynor

Although it seems like the norm to create a safe space within the bounds of the writing center, there is an issue of ethical obligation when the consultant is confronted with certain scenarios. By this, I mean that when the safe atmosphere of the space can be compromised, how far can the consultant reach before they have violated the line of professionalism, morality, or personal views of the writer? Moreover, does this compel the consultant to speak out more/less than how they would usually see fit? The key term of responsibility seems to be in constant flux when anti-racism is a theme in the writing center.

When addressing anti-racism and the writing center, Harry Denny's sentiments can aid in my ability to articulate this complex situation. In one of his real-life scenarios, he spoke of a female consultant, Allia, who was challenged due to the color of her skin: Black. An international student was assuming that her consultant would be White because they would probably be "better qualified." By examining the racist rhetoric of the student's current events writing sample and the biased environment created, the consultant saw that she needed to regulate the problem before it went any further (Denny, 2010, p. 32). Being able to question, analyze, and construct different additions to this scene can help conceptualize the responsibility of a writing consultant when we are in somewhat similar conditions.

Since the consultant in Denny's scenario was one of high qualification (spent many years as a corporate trainer), she was able to explain to the student the credentials that allowed her to continue to consult the student. Yet, most consultants, such as myself, do not have those credentials. With that in mind, what would be a logical, responsible solution of a writing consultant of color in this setting? Is it even necessary for an individual to cite their credentials in a situation like this? Such a decision often comes back to matters of race. Denny later spoke to Alliawho saw that there were many ways to handle the struggle with the student. There were three basic options that Allia arrived at: calm confrontation, angered confrontation, and nothing (Denny, 37, 2010). Although there could be many variations of these resolutions, it seems easier when speaking of a complex subject to keep it in terms such as these. So, when thinking about the average writing center consultant, the ability to speak about corporate credentials is not an option. However, the way we address the situation can be handled in numerous ways.

The actual tactics that Allia used in the account that Denny reported showed a calm confrontation. She was able to diffuse the situation by using a more soothing tone. She also was able to use clear, factual evidence in this scenario. Another way that this conflict could be handled is through an angered confrontation. Allia could have yelled, cursed, and said things like, "How dare you think that of me!" This type of resolution usually evokes a certain feeling of repulsion or a matched anger from the student. Also, some people are just to argue that this might not be a conducive way to serve the short term goal of getting the writer and consultant to work together harmoniously. Finally, if Allia did nothing, this could put her in the role of a bystander.

This is where dying on the inside starts, from being a bystander. A person is a bystander in situations where corrective actions are possible, but the person chooses to do nothing, thereby condoning or implicitly supporting the oppressive action. Being a bystander is sometimes the easiest solution, but is it what is needed? By this I mean to ask, is being a bystander ever a correct choice? This question, I feel, can be answered by asking another: Will my inactivity harm the anti-racist atmosphere that I am supposed to maintain at all times? By using that question in each instance that you even have an impulse to idly watch the oppressive behavior continue, this could be considered a positive reinforcement for finding the right action to take, no matter the situation. Yet, seeing these choices, is it possible that they may not be available to each consultantat all times? That is to say: Do our options for anti-racist tactics implicitly depend on our race, among other factors?

A certain type of dialectic seems to be at play in determining these choices for consultants at the writing center. In terms of action, some consultants may view the power struggle between the writer and the consultant differently. This, I see, varies upon race of the student and the consultant. In some instances, there is equal say in the session. It almost can resemble a continued synergy. At other times, it seems as though the consultant is dictating the changes that must happen. Last, there is a power dynamic in which the consultant has little to no power. Establishment of this type of scenario may be due to different things (student is not engaged, does not want advice, or is having prejudicial issues), but one of the reasons could be race, like in Denny's account. In situations similar to Allia's, there is an automatic power struggle between the student and consultant. It seems as though at most times whenever humans interact, there will be a struggle to establish dominance within the space. Does a thirty-minute session provide enough time for a writer to reevaluate their biases and perceptions about the consultant and their competency (and vice versa about the writer)? How will the dialectic be resolved without one person having complete virtual power? In other words, how can both parties be viewed with applicable skills in this space?

Continuing to use Allia's situation, we can analyze the power structure that shifted. Usually when a consultant sits down with a writer, the consultant has preconceived power during the session. However, when Allia was confronted with a blatantly racist situation, the power dynamics automatically altered. Interacting and identifying with a power struggle such as this, it is somewhat obvious that elements like sexuality, religion, and social status are poured into this structure of dominance. Yet, the components that cannot be hidden, such as gender and race, are always at play due to their visibility. This can be seen with Allia's scenario. Since she is a Black female attempting to consult a White, biased international student, she is no longer in power. Even though it is a usual occurrence for the consultant to have more power (able to help edit papers, give weighted feedback, etc.), the power shifts away from Allia due to racial issues. It is easily observed by the way the student disengages from the session that Allia has lost a considerable amount of power. When power is lost on the basis of race, the question is this: what can a consultant do, regardless of race, to gain it back? If not, what other options are available? Is it just a blanketed solution for all, or must it be more complex than that? Perhaps Allia's situation could be viewed in terms of capital to better understand how different types of capital can be at work in a session.

Pierre Bourdieu's Forms of Capital was able to break down the notion of capital into three structures: economic, social, and cultural. First, we must realize, viewing Allia's dilemma, the three types of capital that Bourdieu speaks of are all at play. Although the connection between capital and writing center consultations may seem extreme, Bourdieu's terminology points out an important link between the creation of a power structure and race. In order to better understand how capital functions in this space, it is necessary to briefly define all of these terms. First Bourdieu say that, "Cultural capital can exist in three forms: in the embodied state, i.e. in the form of long-lasting dispositions of the mind and body; in the objectified state, in the form of cultural goods (pictures, books, dictionaries, instruments, machines, etc.), which are the trace or realization of theories or critiques of these theories, problematics, etc.; and in the institutionalized state, a form of objectification which must be set apart because, as will be seen in the case of educational qualifications, it confers entirely original properties on the cultural capital which it is presumed to guarantee" (Bourdieu, 1983, p. 243). Next, social captial can be defined as "the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition" (Bourdieu, 1983, p. 248). In other words, it is "made up of social obligations ('connections'), which is convertible, in certain conditions, into economic capital and may be institutionalized in the form of a title of nobility" (Bourdieu, 1983, p. 243). The economic capital can be used as an understanding of pure monetary holdings that a person or party has.

At the heart of this capital framework is the view of writing centers as service providers. In the context of the writing center, students could see the consultant in terms of capital gains. I say this because some students come to the writing center expecting the atmosphere to be more of a service. In other words, they see this as a mere transaction. Rather than peers coming together and engaging a text and working together, the model is one of a product specialist delivering a service for a customer's needs. In a thirty minute writing center consultation, the economic capital sets the initial stage for interaction. But when differences are noticed by the consultant or the writer, the social and cultural capital become more weighty in the interactions of the session.

On the level of interaction in the space of the consultation, social and cultural capital are what need to be assessed. Since the time spent between the writer and the consultant is short, there are extreme assumptions made in terms of capital during the session. The importance of the idea of capital during these sessions is important because of the faith invested into the consultant. This investment can range from a simple verb usage correction to giving words of advice in their personal lives. Yet, this all depends on how much they can trust their consultant. The amount of trust or faith a writer places in the consultant hinges on the consultant's assumed social and cultural capital, which is often judged on immediate, visible characteristics.

To stay the course of our initial example, Allia was challenged because she did not seem like a person that would be able to consult students about writing. This was directly related to the race of Allia. In this instance her cultural and social capital were immediately in question. The student's "long-lasting disposition" about Allia was built up by representations and depictions of Black Americans in other tangible cultural goods. These depictions (cultural capital) were initially based on the historically restricted social capital for Blacks in America. Thus, the student comes to the table with a strong perception of Allia's cultural and social capital. The idea that a Black female does not have the aptitude to provide this service is based on the idea that Blacks are not an educated race, especially Black women. Moreover, her assumed social capital (or network) is also presumed to be uneducated, since the majority must be Black. The root of these assumptions derives from the prejudice that has been conditioned within the students throughout the course of their lives. Although the elimination of racism cannot happen in a 30-minute session, the deconstruction of some of the ideas of capital, such as the assumed potential resources, can begin to be dismantled, at least within this space.

• "Going There": A Conversation Between Consultants
• Writing as a Vehicle for Learning & Activism
• On Family and Abuse
• A Response to the New Racism (poem)
• Author Profiles

---