ABSTRACT
In his introduction to Writing Centers: Theory and Administration, arguably the first collection of essays devoted to writing center research and scholarship, Thorn Hawkins (1984) predicts a bright future for writing center research, given its “superb position to make discoveries about language development and composition,” and its “fertile ground for study” (xiv). Approximately 13 years later, Christina Murphy (1997), one of the leading writing center scholars during the intervening years, pronounced this promise unfulfilled and lamented the “absolute bankruptcy of writing center scholarship at the moment” in her remarks at the Third Annual Conference of the National Writing Center Association. Whether one disagrees or agrees with Murphy’s assessment, one must admit she raised unsettling and important questions for the writing center community. How do we account for her and others’ disillusionment with the state of writing center scholarship? What counts as “good” or worthwhile research and by what criteria do we make such judgments? What role has research played in defining our professional identity? Whose interests are served? Although it is beyond the scope of this chapter to address all of these questions, I aim to begin a much-needed conversation about writing center research by investigating writing center talk about research for what it reveals about our conceptualizations of research. Specifically, I analyze early essays that focus on the subject of writing center research to determine their ways of representing the writing center as a site for research, the exigencies and agendas for writing center research, the activity of research itself, and writing center professionals as researchers.
