Carolyn Wisniewski
Writing center tutorial modalities have proliferated in recent years, yet research has not kept pace. Students’ experiences in online writing tutorials remain understudied (Denton, 2017; Hewett & DePew, 2015). Better understanding students’ experiences across session modalities is critical to achieving an inclusive and accessible writing center (Martinez & Olsen, 2015). This study used a mixed-methods, comparative design to determine how students selected, experienced, and perceived the accessibility of synchronous online, in-person, and asynchronous modalities. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of 138 surveys and 22 interviews indicated students perceived each modality to provide effective writing support. They report selecting tutorial modality based on convenience and communication preferences, as well as cognitive, affective, and linguistic factors. Students perceived the writing center to be accessible due to the availability of multiple tutorial modalities; however, they raised concerns about lack of appointment availability and the online consultation interface. By centering students’ perspectives, this study debunks longstanding assumptions about the inferiority of online tutorials and reinforces the imperative to offer multiple modalities, including asynchronous options. It also reminds us that we cannot take students’ perceptions of accessibility for granted. Writing center administrators have an ethical responsibility to listen to our students as we design and refine the services intended for them.