Inkblot Journal

Brought to you by the AUS Writing Center

Women Belong in the Kitchen; Men Belong in the Writing Center

By Jana Elghoraby

Abstract

This research paper discusses the gender dynamics within Middle Eastern writing centers, focusing on the underrepresentation of male tutors at the American University of Sharjah (AUS). The study examines statistical trends, conducts semi-structured interviews with male tutors, and explores the potential repercussions of this gender disparity. The findings reveal a consistent pattern where fewer males at AUS enroll in the prerequisite course for tutoring, resulting in a shortage of male tutors. Beyond numerical representation, the research highlights the perpetuation of gender stereotypes, the potential harm caused by the feminization of the writing center, and the external factors that contribute to this shortage. Counterarguments and potential mitigations are also considered to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the gender imbalance in writing centers. Understanding these gender imbalances are crucial as they may influence the overall writing center experience. Throughout this research paper, I aim to understand the gender landscape within university writing centers across the region, with a specified focus on AUS, as well as suggest solutions for the fostering of inclusivity and diversity.

Keywords: Gender, Stereotypes, Writing Center, Male tutors, Social constructs

Introduction

The writing center is a midwife. You, being the student, are the mother. Your paper is your child and you are amidst its birth procedure. You and the baby are both in critical condition. It is due tonight and you are in pain, both academically and, in the case of this analogy, physically. Whom do you run to? Correct, your midwife; your writing center. The midwife assists you, the mother, in the birth of the baby, your paper. Notice how there is no mention of a single man? That is because during this whole birth procedure, the man waits outside for the news of the baby’s birth. Far away from the delivery room – far away from the writing center (Tipper, 1999). Except, men should be in the writing center as both tutors and tutees. Men belong in the writing center.

In contemporary discourse, the term “gender” encompasses a spectrum of social, psychological, cultural, and behavioral dimensions, defining one’s identity as a man or woman (Merriam-Webster, 2023). This concept has become a focal point of increasing controversy in recent years due to the expectations stemming from each gender. Consequently, it is imperative to understand the intersection of gender and the writing center environment, especially within the Middle Eastern region where a noticeable gender imbalance persists, with females outnumbering their male counterparts. According to Arrand, (n.d), “Peer tutors are considered the most powerful influence in undergraduate education, even more so than advisors and instructors” (para. 5). As such, it is important to guarantee a somewhat equal representation of a range of demographics to ensure a positive writing center experience and foster a community where tutees feel welcome and represented. Therefore, by conducting primary research at university and analyzing secondary sources, I have found that the underrepresentation of male tutors in the Middle East, exemplified by the imbalance at the American University of Sharjah, is a result of implicit societal stereotypes, institutional feminization, and external academic factors.

Exploring the Gender Imbalance: Statistical Insights

A noticeable gender disparity exists within writing centers, with a predominant trend of women opting to become tutors more often than men. This underrepresentation of male tutors is not an isolated phenomenon; it is a pervasive pattern observed in multiple writing centers across the Middle Eastern region. At the American University of Beirut, a mere two out of eight tutors are male (AUB, 2023). This translates to a significant 75% majority of female tutors within the center. A similar trend is observed at the Texas A&M University of Qatar where the writing center houses a total of 29 tutors, 15 females and nine males (Barnawi, 2017). While this numerical difference might seem subtle, it underscores a persistent imbalance in gender representation within the center.

Zooming into the microcosm of the American University of Sharjah (AUS), a comparable scenario unfolds. At AUS, students must complete a prerequisite course, WRI 221, to become tutors at the writing center. The course is a training ground for students before they can assume their roles as tutors. During the past few years, Spring 2023, Fall 2022, Spring 2022, and Fall 2021, WRI 221 has continually seen more females than males. Statistically, while the classes typically had 13-16 students, only around 2-3 male students were enrolled in each (N. Sandra, Personal Communication, October 27, 2023). A continuation of this trend is evident in the current semester’s WRI 221 course, where none of the 14 enrolled students are male. This consistent outnumbering of female students taking the course consequently contributes to the underrepresentation of males at the writing center. The logical progression is that more females enrolling in the course results in more females securing positions as tutors. Therefore, when studying the reasons behind this discrepancy, it is important to note that there is a direct correlation between the underrepresentation of males enrolled in the WRI 221 course and the number of male tutors hired at the writing center. Additionally, within the current cadre of 30 writing center tutors at AUS, 26 are females comprising 86.7 % of the total, leaving a mere 4 males comprising only 13.3 %. As such, we see a clear imbalance in the ratio of female to male tutors at AUS.

Therefore, I conducted semi-structured interviews with three of the male writing center tutors to gain qualitative insight into their experiences. However, it is important to note that the sample size of three male writing center tutors is not enough to generalize the experiences of all male tutors. This population is from AUS, a private university in the Gulf consisting of 54% female and 46% male, according to statistics on the university website (AUS, 2022). Therefore, this sample is considered under-representative of the UAE or the wider Middle Eastern region. There also may be potential bias from the interviewees themselves. For the interview, I prepared a set of 11 questions asking male tutors about their initial affinity to writing, the motivating factors that propelled them to undertake the course, and their experience being among the relatively few male tutors.

All of the participants mentioned that they initially noticed this gender disparity when taking the WRI 221 course. While they did not perceive it as a hindrance to their confidence as male tutors, they noted its unmistakable presence, prompting some inquiry. The first interviewee recounted an initial shock at discovering that there were only three male students enrolled in the WRI 221 course during his term, leading him to question if he had “mistakenly entered the wrong class” (A. Malik, Personal Communication, November 14, 2023). Another interviewee, who was enrolled in the Fall 2021 session, similarly observed that only two males, including himself, were part of the cohort (K. Jameel, Personal Communication, November 15, 2023).

The gender disparity among tutors at the AUS Writing Center poses potential risks relating to the inadvertent discouragement it may inflict on male tutees. The prevailing numerical imbalance, where female tutors outnumber their male counterparts, creates an environment that might subtly dissuade male students from seeking assistance at the writing center. This unintended consequence could lead to a sense of underrepresentation or discomfort for male tutees, potentially deterring them from accessing writing support resources. Fortunately, upon investigation through the three interviews, AUS appears to have a balance of both male and female tutees. While there does not seem to be explicit discouragement for male tutees utilizing the writing center, the noticeable lack of male tutors could potentially perpetuate gender stereotypes that could negatively influence the tutee-tutor relationship.

Navigating Gender Dynamics in the Writing Center

One reason why fewer males opt for tutoring at the writing center is associated with preconceived gender dynamics both outside and within the institution. In a general Middle-Eastern context, traditional gender roles often prescribe distinct and rigid roles for men and women, dictating their behaviors, responsibilities, and societal contributions (Arijit & Sumit, 2012). According to Eagley (1987), stereotypes perpetuate the notion of “male dominance, associating men with traits such as strength, assertiveness, and leadership, while women are often expected to embody qualities like nurturance, modesty, and submissiveness” (as cited in Arijit & Sumit, 2012, para. 14). These stereotypical expectations are channeled onto children through socializing agents, such as the family, school and media, and continue throughout their adolescent life, shaping their choices and interactions. Therefore, boys are subconsciously channeled into more “masculine” activities. As such, writing becomes an activity reserved for girls.

In correspondence to cultural stereotypes, men and women are allocated different majors and jobs according to the perceived notions attached to their gender. In Arab societies, men and women are thought fit for different duties, and as such, tend to opt for different majors within academic contexts (Arijit & Sumit, 2012). According to Jacobs (1989), differences in workplace activities based on gender are a phenomenon that is observed in the concentration of men and women in distinct occupations (as cited in Arijit & Sumit, 2012). Consequently, terms like “male mechanics” and “female kindergarten teachers” are more prevalent than their reverse counterparts, highlighting societal expectations that certain professions align more closely with specific gender characteristics. According to Assi and Marcati (2020), this pattern is more pronounced in the broader Arab region where women lean towards pursuing arts and educational degrees that may not provide the technical skills necessary for success in technical occupations, whereas men pursue STEM majors.

Additionally, a male tutor at AUS revealed to me through our semi-structured interview that before joining the writing center, he had the perception that “women are just better at writing and communicating” (J. Qasim, Personal Communication, November 22, 2023). Additionally, a 2019 UNESCO analysis observes the demographics of graduates from tertiary education systems in three Middle Eastern countries: the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. The study concludes that while 76% of males in the UAE were enrolled in either engineering or business programs, only 3% studied education or humanities. This trend continues for the three countries, with women having a higher percentage than men in education programs while men are more in STEM majors (UNESCO, 2019). This broad societal trajectory is mirrored within the writing center where men avoid becoming tutors since it is a more feminine contribution.

It is crucial to acknowledge that societal stereotypes associated with men can act as barriers, deterring their presence in the writing center. Nevertheless, even when men navigate beyond these social challenges, they encounter preconceived stereotypes within the center itself, influencing their relationship with tutees. It is true, as Enouch (2006) suggests, that “stereotypes can hinder a collaborative relationship and cause conflict in the writing center” (para. 19). Therefore, we must examine the influence these stereotypes have on both the tutee and the tutor.

Traditional gender norms, often unconsciously applied, may influence how tutors are perceived and, in turn, how they interact with tutees. Hunzer (1997) indicates that tutees may subconsciously anticipate certain traits based on the gender of their tutors. Hunzer’s study reveals the perception that female tutors are expected to be “caring, supportive, deferent, and self-expressive,” while male tutors are expected to embody characteristics like being “assertive, directive, and task-centered;” therefore, reinforcing the already existing gender stereotypes (p. 5). In practice, an informal study conducted by Rhodes in 2019 finds that “29% of female-female interactions were labeled as personal,” underscoring the intertwining of personal dynamics within the professional context of the writing center (p. 3). Female tutors often found themselves in the role of facilitators, taking a more active role in guiding the conversation, while male tutors displayed a “tendency to resist suggestions and avoid taking a subordinate position” (Rhodes, 2019, p.3). Due to this pre-existing expectation that women should be less outspoken and men should be more assertive, stereotypical gender roles might impede the allocation of power (Enouch, 2006). This unequal distribution of power may hinder the effectiveness of a tutor towards their tutee, creating a hierarchical relationship between the two where male tutors may feel less inclined to serve as “peers” towards a female tutee, making them more of an authoritative figure. Therefore, this hinders the male tutor’s experience and may be one of the reasons they choose to stay away from the writing center.

Additionally, Rhodes (2019) calculated that 86% of both tutors and writers acknowledge that sessions would differ with different individuals. For example, following the stereotype that men are “more rational,” and women are “more sentimental” are examples of expected roles. Both the tutee and the tutor may encounter stereotypes about one another, which can lead to conflicting emotions. When a male tutor gives a female tutee feedback on her work, the male tutor could anticipate an emotional response from the female tutee. The male tutee may reject the views of a female tutor if he thinks the tutor is emotional rather than rational (Enouch, 2006). In light of this observation, the underrepresentation of male tutors in the writing center may lead to a pattern wherein male tutees are inclined to seek assistance only from male tutors, despite their shortage. A predicament arises when the number of male tutors falls short of meeting this expectation.

The Feminization of the Writing Center

In addition to allocated gender roles, some workplaces have become female-dominated. This is due to the overstimulation of feminism and women’s leadership (Birnbaum, 1995). Therefore, certain workplaces adopted a more feminine culture which inadvertently contributed to an environment that is perceived as more aligned with stereotypically feminine attributes, potentially influencing the lower participation of males (Birnbaum, 1995). As such, the gender disparities in societal roles, as previously discussed, are commonly cited as the reason for the concentration of women in the teaching profession (Carroll et al., 2018). Since the teaching profession has become primarily female-oriented, the writing center has consequently become a more “feminized” institution (Birnbaum, 1995). Therefore, a second reason as to why male students avoid becoming writing center tutors lies in the feminization of the writing center.

To understand the feminization of the writing center, we must look back at its history. The writing center is not an isolated, self-contained organization that exists outside of society. This means that the concentration of women and the underrepresentation of men in the writing center cannot be attributed to the defense that suggests women are naturally inclined to this kind of employment. Rather, through contextualizing the gender dynamics of the writing center, a comprehensive socio-political perspective on “women’s work” comes to light (Zeiner-Morrish, 2020). According to Waller (2002), “universities began to recognize writing centers (or clinics, as they were often called at the time) as a place to ‘clean up’ their work, seeing it less as a learning environment, and more as a “fix-it” shop” (as cited in Zeiner-Morrish, 2020, p.2). As such, the perception of the writing center being a so-called “fix-it” shop has devalued its real purpose, further labeling the tutor’s job as “women’s work.” According to Zeiner-Morrish (2020), “women’s work” is distinct from “real” work in a number of ways. First, it is frequently unpaid for tutors, free for students, and accessible to everyone, which makes working at the writing center seem like a more voluntary rather than paid job. Much like domestic household chores, tutoring at the writing center becomes a more woman-oriented job.

Second, writing centers have become more feminized because the idea of care, which is an important part of learning and academia, has been stigmatized by misogynistic values to be more related to womanhood. The “collaborative and supportive” medium of the writing center led to their characterization as feminine spaces where “women’s work” as opposed to “real work” is done (Resnick, n.d). The writing center is viewed to be carrying out “something like the caregiving service of the academic community” (Trachsel 1995, para.27), associating the dynamic with words such as “motherly” and “nurturing” (Resnick, n.d). In fact, Formo and Welsh (1994) state that the most “common metaphor used in describing writing instructors is that of mother” (p. 5). As such, in a society where toxic masculinity continues to prevail through the ongoing traditional stereotypes, men tend to stay away from “women’s work” (Zeiner-Morrish, 2020). That is, in this case, the writing center. Put simply, since the writing center is free, accessible to everyone, and was previously used for editing student papers, it is seen as a place where women should undergo unpaid domestic-like labor, and so, fewer men opt for tutoring.

Although the sources attesting to the mere “feminization” of the writing center are considered outdated, many of the concepts still affect our writing centers today. Through the prior feminization of the writing center, it has become an inherent perception that females are more suited as tutors, which accordingly makes the selection process more female-centric (Birnbaum, n.d). This further pushes men away from tutoring. As Birnbaum (n.d) suggests, there is a potential influence of stereotypically feminine tutoring approaches in the selection process for tutors as she expresses concerns about the fact that most of her tutors are women. For example, the strategy of being “non-directive” (Truesdell, 2007) during sessions stereotypically corresponds to gender dynamics where, as mentioned before, women are more submissive and are therefore more likely to submit to a more “minimalist” tutoring strategy where the “tutee does most of the work” (Brooks, 1991). Hence, whether intentional or not, writing center instructors may lean towards hiring female tutors by establishing criteria aligned with gender-related attributes that are perceived as more accessible to women. With the selection process leaning towards a more feminine-based criteria, the potential for men to opt for tutoring is even more hindered.

Additionally, men may avoid the writing center for reasons contributing to gender-driven patterns in writing center usage where the tutors, being predominantly female, consequently attract more female tutees (Pedretti & Jewell, 2020). Given the prevalent perception of writing centers as “feminized places,” the tendency for writing centers to have a higher representation of female tutors can infer that the “utilization of writing centers is, to some extent, influenced by the perceived gender affinity” (Tipper, 1999, p. 33). This affinity is because women may be more inclined to seek assistance in the writing center, desiring to work with female tutors. That is, more female tutees wanting to seek help from female tutors may put male tutors out of business. Therefore, pushing men further away from tutoring. However, the extent to which this is prevalent in our modern writing centers is unknown.

External Factors Affecting the Underrepresentation of Male Tutors

Although males are intrinsically told to stay away from the writing center in many ways, male students may also be affected by external factors such as role models, professor recommendations, and course selections. Not having enough male role models in the teaching and writing profession may be one of the reasons male students avoid tutoring at the center. To investigate further, during the interviews with three of the male writing center tutors at AUS, I asked them the question: “Who do you consider to be your role model when it comes to writing/ tutoring?” Notably, one of the male fourth-year students who had been tutoring at the center for five semesters mentioned that “when first joining the writing center, there was a senior tutor to whom [he] looked up to” (J. Qasim, Personal Communication, November 22, 2023). The interviewee goes on to say that “having him as a role model helped shape what [he] identified a ‘good’ tutor to be and inspired [him] to be better.” Additionally, the second tutor said, “my passion for writing, peer-collaborating, and tutoring originated from my high school teachers, of which some were male” (K. Jameel, Personal Communication, November 15, 2023). Drawing from these responses, I find that having a role model from the same gender to look up to, both within and outside the writing center, can make a major difference in shaping one’s perceptions and enhancing performance. The lack of role models may push men away from the writing center, especially because it is considered a more feminine job.

While there seems to be no literature directly linking the importance of same-gender role models for writing center tutors, an understanding of role modeling within an educational context could provide insights that could be applied to the writing center. In a study conducted on school students, Carrington et al. (2008) concluded that “increasing the availability of male role models to children… may help break down enduring gender stereotypes” (p. 6). The researchers found that although students did not explicitly reference their teachers’ gender when reasoning why they considered them role models, a pattern emerged in their choices; a significant majority of participants tended to select teachers who were of the same gender as themselves (Carrington et al., 2008). This finding suggests that there appears to be an underlying inclination among students to gravitate towards same-gender figures when identifying individuals they admire and consider as role models. Seeing that the writing center, as previously discussed, is stigmatized to be a “feminine” place, having a male role model for a male student is especially crucial when it comes to tutor selection. Thus, it is important to have male tutors in the writing center to whom students can look up to, and it is equally as important to have role models to whom the male writing center tutors themselves can look up to.

Furthermore, throughout three of my interviews with AUS male tutors at the writing center, I noticed a recurring trend where all of them mentioned that their interest in becoming tutors stemmed from their writing professor’s recommendations. An example is a senior tutor presently active at the writing center who initially did not harbor a particular interest in writing since he is majoring in engineering. However, a writing professor recommended he transition into tutoring and, over time, he found himself drawn to the role and ultimately developed a genuine liking for tutoring (J. Qasim, Personal Communication, November 22, 2023). Therefore, it is important for professors to recommend their deserving male students to take the WRI 221 prerequisite course. In addition, male students may refrain from tutoring at the writing center because of the course selection dynamics at AUS. During the interview, one of the tutors recognized the correspondence between students enrolled in STEM and students opting for writing center tutoring. The tutor stated that “[s]ince STEM is predominantly male and arts and humanities are predominantly female, this naturally mirrors itself at the writing center” (K. Jameel, Personal Communication, November 15, 2023). According to Jameel, WRI 221 used to count as a free elective and STEM students (of which the majority is male) may not want to use up their credits on another writing course. Therefore, external factors play a role in stopping male students from joining the writing center.

Men Do Not Belong In the Writing Center

On the contrary, an opposing opinion may argue that writing centers are places for females rather than males. An inherent perception that women are more suited for the writing center is due to biological determinism and brain structure. In her article “Real Men Don’t Do Writing Centers,” Tipper (1999) claims that men have a less developed area called the “corpus callosum” which “connects the two halves of the brain, and through it we do the processing for verbal skills – reading and writing – and for relational skills” (para.1). Meaning that while some men may enjoy reading, writing and tutoring, they will never reach full potential as tutors due to biological setbacks as compared to females. Therefore, women are biologically more competent as tutors at the writing center.

However, the claim that men are inherently less equipped for verbal and relational skills due to a “less developed corpus callosum” oversimplifies the complexity of cognitive processes (Tipper, 1999, p. 34). According to Allen (2018), the brain’s structure is highly intricate, and intelligence is shaped by various factors beyond a singular anatomical feature. Relying on such biological determinism neglects the considerable variability within both genders. Furthermore, biological determinism is a contested and debated concept in scientific and philosophical circles, with many scholars emphasizing the role of environment, culture, and individual experiences in shaping cognitive abilities (Allen, 2018). Therefore, it would be overly simplistic to generalize the efficacy of men in tutoring and writing solely based on biological factors.

Solutions and Recommendations

When addressing the solutions that could be applied to the Writing Center at AUS to potentially increase the presence of male tutors, it is important to recognize that addressing intrinsic factors necessitates a long-term perspective. These intrinsic issues may take years, if not decades, to gradually shift. Therefore, while I will indeed explore longitudinal solutions, the primary emphasis will be on promptly improving external factors to enhance the immediate writing center experience. Some external factors that could be manipulated to achieve quicker solutions in welcoming male students as tutors at the writing center includes increasing professor recommendations. Eventually, the increased presence of male tutors will allow a more gender neutral criteria for tutor selections. As discussed in previous arguments, fostering a more welcoming environment for males by making sure there are enough role models in the writing department at AUS could also help increase their presence at the writing center. For example, as part of my primary research, I also sent out a survey of five questions to the University of Sharjah to gain insight about the dynamic of their writing center. According to their response, their writing center tutors are professors and instructors who volunteer to help out, and they volunteer according to their schedule. Out of eight tutors, the demographics are balanced with four females and four males (UOS, Personal Communication, November 13, 2023). This presence of male professors at the center could influence the greater presence of male students. Therefore, it is important that students and tutors have both male and female representation.

A less feminized perception of the writing center may help reduce its stigmatization as a place for “women’s work,” ultimately bringing in more male tutors (Zeiner-Morrish, 2020). Shiffmann’s (1995) views writing centers as “underrated leaders” in “providing a liberatory environment for developing writers,” which intersects “the highest goals of both composition and feminist pedagogy” (p. 5). As such, the feminization of the writing center due to its dominating female presence serves less as a place for “women’s work” and more as an institutional fight for feminism (Zeiner-Morrish, 2020). According to Resnick (n.d,) this transforms the description of writing centers from “feminized to feminist,” arguing that the center can become a place of social justice (Traschel, 1995). This shift encourages the center to be a space where individuals, regardless of gender, can engage in collaborative, empowering, and transformative learning experiences.

Conclusion

In this paper, I argue that within contemporary gender discourse, the writing center environment at AUS reflects a gender imbalance, with female tutors outnumbering their male counterparts. Through primary research and secondary sources, I have found that the underrepresentation of male tutors in the American University of Sharjah Writing Center is a result of implicit societal stereotypes, institutional feminization, and external academic factors. By examining the broader societal context, I identified how traditional gender norms contribute to the underrepresentation of male tutors, with an emphasis on the perpetuation of certain majors and occupations as gender-specific. In navigating gender constructs within the writing center, it becomes evident that stereotypes associated with each gender manifest themselves within the center, influencing the tutor-tutee relationship. Additionally, the feminization of the writing center, stemming from historical contexts and socio-political perspectives, serves as a crucial aspect influencing gender dynamics. A limitation to this research paper is that some of the sources are outdated since the topic has not been discussed during the past few years. Nevertheless, it is crucial to recognize that the underlying concepts persist and continue to shape contemporary practices. These enduring ideas have influenced some of the strategies and approaches we employ today. Another limitation to this paper is the small sample size used for primary research and the potential bias from interviewees. Therefore, in future research, more male tutors should be interviewed from different universities and writing centers to make the data more generalizable and reliable. The numerical incongruity, where female tutors dominate, creates an environment that may subtly dissuade male students from seeking assistance, leading to feelings of underrepresentation. Despite the apparent balance in the ratio of male to female tutees, the lack of male tutors could perpetuate gender stereotypes, influencing the tutee-tutor relationship. Therefore, we need male tutors in the writing center; we need male tutors in the delivery room.

References

Allen, G. (2018). Biological Determinism. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/biological-determinism

American University of Beirut. Meet Our Tutors. (N.D.) https://www.aub.edu.lb/fas/writing_center/Pages/meet-our-tutors.aspx

Arrand, K. (n.d.). Peer Tutoring – Journal of Pedagogic Development | University of Bedfordshire, 4. https://www.beds.ac.uk/jpd/volume-4-issue-1/peer-tutoring

Assi, R., & Marcati, C. (n.d.). Women at work in the Middle. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Featured%20Insights/Middle%20East%20and%20Africa/Women%20at%20work%20in%20the%20Middle%20East/Women-at-work-in-the-Middle-East.pdf

Barnawi, O. Z. (2018). Writing centers in the higher education landscape of the Arabian Gulf. Springer International Publishing.

Birnbaum, Lisa. C. (1995). “Toward a Gender-Balanced Staff in the Writing Center.” The Writing Lab Newsletter 19.8: 6-7.

Carrington, B., Tymms, P., & Merrell, C. (2008). Role Models, School Improvement and the ’Gender Gap’—Do Men Bring out the Best in Boys and Women the Best in Girls? British Educational Research Journal, 34(3), 315–327. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40375493

Carroll, D., Parasnis. J., & Tani, M. (2021). Why do women become teachers while men don’t?. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy. 21. 10.1515/bejeap-2020-0236.

Enoch, C. L. (n.d). The Writing Center as a Burkean Parlor: The Influence of Gender and the Dual Engines of Power: Collaboration and Conflict. California State University. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4013&context=etd-project

Waller, S. (2002). A Brief History of University Writing Centers: Variety and Diversity. NewFoundations. http://www.newfoundations.com/History/WritingCtr.html#Development

Zeiner-Morrish, O. (2020). Writing centers: Feminized or feminist spaces? Trincoll. https://www.trincoll.edu/writing-center/wp-content/uploads/sites/38/2021/05/Writing-Centers-Feminized-or-Feminist-Spaces-Olivia-Zeiner-Morrish.pdf

Appendix

University of Sharjah Survey:

  • Do you normally hire students at the writing center? No
  • If so, are they undergrad or masters students? N/A
  • Is your writing center staff balanced in regards to gender? Currently, only instructors volunteer in the Writing Center, and the staff is balanced.
  • Do you mind sharing general statistics about how many writing center tutors you have, and how many of them are male? Depending on the semester we can have between 6 to 10 tutors. Right now, we have 8 – 4 men and 4 women.
  • If the statistics show the dominance of one particular gender, why do you think that is the case? If there is a gender imbalance, it’s mainly because of the tutors’ schedules.

Interview Questions:

  • Can you introduce yourself, your academic background, and your experience as a writing center tutor at AUS?
  • How did you become interested in working at the writing center as a tutor?
  • Did you have any doubts when first joining the center?
  • If so, what were these doubts?
  • Do you encounter any recurring challenges as a writing center tutor?
  • When taking the 221 class would you say it was balanced in terms of gender
  • Of-course you are very valuable being one of the few male tutors at the center? How does it feel?
  • In your personal opinion, why is there an imbalance in the number of males to female tutors?
  • How does the gender distribution of the students you tutor typically compare, with regard to male and female tutees?
  • Do you think your gender plays a role in how students perceive you as a writing center tutor?
  • Is there anything else you’d like to add?