The intents and purposes of the writing center are, for the most part, universal in their agendas, but their methods in administering its assistance must first be crowd-specific, before it can be client-specific.

The techniques and attitudes that the tutor must employ in a high school setting diverge in respect to the methodologies utilized in a college setting. The first, and most apparent of which, is the broad range in age that will be dealt with.

It is, perhaps, not the gaps in age brackets that are significant but the fact that a single year can engender in a person at this age a drastic differentiation from his peers. So it is more that a single year can make a single person completely different than the person he was the year prior.

We must understand this in order to take special care in the attitudes we present to these young people. Since their sense of self is in a changeling state, one misused word or a comment perceived as offensive/condescending can create minor to massive psychological trauma that will reverberate, quite possibly, throughout the rest of their lives. It is, for such possible outcomes, that we must handle high school clientele with "kid gloves" and be sure our speech is plain and when issues of the individual arise we handle them carefully or divert the subject back to the paper; we are not, after all, adolescent psychologists.

Our focus must the student�s work itself, but at the same time we must remember that the work is an extension of the client�s and, thus, deserving of the same "kid glove" care. I have found that it is necessary, for most high school students, especially freshmen, that they ascertain the basic facts of writing. The "higher" artistic form and style will come along of its own accord, but its must first grow out of the seeds of writing principles.

It is, as I have ascertained through my experience with high school freshmen, that they are receptive of things stated as facts: impersonal and removed as they are from the writer. This is why a slightly more directive instruction is needed for the high school student than the college student. The basics, such as parenthetical citation, semicolon use, and other such �mechanics� of writing, can be stated simply as factual details necessary for their successful writing. A directive approach is the only way in which I can see to adequately teach a client how to use proper citation, avoid fragmentary sentences, etc. explaining the process as I show him at the same time.

And this explaining is necessary, though they do not ask for fear or otherwise, they do want, if not need, to know. The developing teenager has entered into a skeptical, sometimes cynical, mindset and is thus not always accepting of things "just because that's the way it is." I have found I am much more affective in teaching a principle when I explain myself. I believe that the "just because" or "I don't have to explain myself" approach is ineffective in the teaching of a client. This way of thinking or teaching averts the "Why is it so?" of the student on the teacher's reasons, even to the point of doubt, rather than on the problem itself.

This strictly tutor-client relationship is established in the same fashion as most teachers have with their students. I do not believe that creating this divide in pedagogical system, where the tutor assumes a peer status or a friend-like demeanor as the discrepancy between these two ways could lead to many issues with the client�s teachers.

Students for the most part understand that they are there to be taught, to be incited to think, that their teacher's are vaults of information who disperse their wealth among the student population. For a non-peer to attempt to assume a peer status is a disingenuous attempt on part of the tutor and the client, as most high school students are incredibly perceptive, can see through this charade. The tutor need not pretend to be what he is not, but this does not mean is to assume the role of the teacher; his authority is by no means parallel. Teachers are the guides along the path, and we are there only to direct those who have strayed off and seek direction back to the path.

This, of course, is not indicative of a passive attitude toward a student's paper. The same here is true of college students: unfeigned interest in the paper itself displays interest in that extension of the client and makes the client feel as though he can actively participate, not fearful of being possibly inadequate. We can most display our welcoming and interested selves through our body language and our facial expressions as we talk through a student's paper.

The questions we ask are an extension of our interest so long as they are not perceived as caustic to the client. We must understand that at this stage in a student's development that, just because they are yet deprived of the language to properly express their ideas, does not mean their ideas are incomprehensible or unfounded. We must admit to the fact that, like a college student, the client has said something he understands, but may not be able to communicate properly that idea to a crowd outside his sphere of social interaction (i.e. his peers). It is for this reason that the client must be aware of his audience, a basic principle to the college student, but an easily overlooked one, by both high school and college student alike.

Though these similarities exist between high school and undergraduate pedagogy, they diverge most drastically in their treatment of the client himself. This "kid glove" approach the client's psyche is necessary in that we do not want to form some complex or psychological trauma in these years that are most susceptible to such things. Our approach must first be group-specific, and then client-specific, with special care given to the developing minds of high schools students.