According
to Bruffee, thinking, conversing, and writing are all irrevocably intertwined;
one cannot learn to think better without first learning to converse better,
which is done by “creating and maintaining the sort of social contexts, the
sorts of community life, that foster the kinds of conversation we value,”
(Bruffee 90). Bruffee claims that writing is essentially a conversation with
oneself made public, an internal thought made external. Therefore, in order to
better one’s writing, one must first better one’s conversation, which often
involves discourse with others.
Enter: the
RWC. The writing center encourages discourse between fellow students, allowing
writers to foster their thinking and conversation in a comfortable setting.
This setting, a community of their peers, is essential for the writers’ ability
to grow their knowledge, by which I mean, working collaboratively with other
students helps develop their language capabilities. If one is capable of having
an external conversation, of developing a vernacular about a subject (in this
case, about writing) and putting this vernacular into external use with a peer,
then one should ideally be able to put that conversation into writing.
The RWC is
also useful as a community for writers because, as a community, the RWC is basically
made up of the intended audience for the writers’ works. By this I mean, a
community is created when a group of people sharing similar intellect, values,
and beliefs come together to share and build knowledge. In general, this same
definition of community can be applied to the audience. In most professional
settings, one is writing with one’s colleagues, the people belonging to the
same professional community as the writer, in mind. As a student, these
colleagues are one’s peers, other fellow students. These are the people that
make up the community that is the RWC. In this way, writers are able to develop
a relationship between both their tutor and their audience, as these two end up
being one and the same.