Responding to Criticism and Praise of Writing Centers

Reading through some of the highlights of Jane Cogie's article "In Defense of Conference Summaries: Widening the Reach of Writing Center Work," I noticed that there were some points that I agreed with and some points that I disagreed. For example, the idea of conference summaries seems good in theory, but I don't think that tutors should always have to summarize the conference simply because they had a session with a tutee. Sometimes writers, including myself, go to the writing center for brainstorming ideas or simple thesis checks that have nothing to do with an actual draft or concrete piece of writing. I agree with Cogie's idea that information from the writing center to the instructors should be "as limited as possible," because at the end of the day, the whole point of going to the writing center is to get your work evaluated without actually having it formally graded. The writing center, in my opinion, exists as an extension of the writer's mind and desire for external opinion regarding his/her ideas and writing style and function; teachers should be as far-removed from that process as possible. If a writing center can encourage student writers to go and get suggestions or ideas from writing consultants out of their own accord (not forced by their teachers), then it has succeeded.