A student opens a laptop at the writing centre and asks the question tutors hear most near a deadline: can you check my references? The answer in almost every centre's published policy is no and yes. No, the tutor will not correct the list. Yes, the tutor will teach the student to check it, and show why a reference that looks right can still be wrong.
This guide, published by EdCitation for writing centre tutors, peer tutors and learning advisers, sets out what seven named writing centres and services in the US and UK let tutors do with a student's references, what the IWCA and the EWCA say, and what research on tutoring adds, with a session flow and a do and do not table. Pages were read on 2 October 2026.
The tools for a whole session are in EdCitation for tutors and writing centres, and feedback on a draft in feedback against the brief. Here the subject is the references alone, where two free EdCitation tools do the checking, run by the student: Verify references and Cite a source. EdCitation writes no part of anyone's work, so every change to the list stays the student's own.
What can writing tutors help with on references?
Writing tutors can help a student understand how citation works and how to check their own references: what a style asks for, where its rules are published, how to quote, paraphrase and integrate a source, and how to find the problems in a list. The policies agree on that much. They differ on how close to the list itself a tutor may go.
What US writing centres say
George Mason University's Writing Center says that where there are concerns about how and when research is cited, its consultants point them out and explain why thorough citation matters (George Mason University Writing Center, n.d.-a). The University of Colorado Denver (n.d.) Writing Center treats source use, citation and plagiarism concerns as "teachable moments" and teaches quotation, paraphrase, synthesis and citation.
The Purdue Writing Lab calls itself a teaching and learning space, "not an editing service": consultants will not fix a writer's mistakes but will teach the writer to spot them (Purdue University Writing Lab, n.d.-b). The University of Wisconsin–Madison (n.d.) Writing Center does not proofread, which it defines as correcting all the grammar and formatting errors in a piece of writing. A reference list is formatting, so the same line holds for it.
What UK services say
Coventry University's Centre for Academic Writing gives guidance on in-text citations, paraphrasing and reference lists within a student's own assignment, and points students to the course's academic liaison librarian for fuller referencing support (Coventry University, Centre for Academic Writing, n.d.). At the University of York (n.d.), the Writing Centre covers integrating sources while faculty librarians advise on referencing. The University of Worcester's library gives general guidance on how referencing is structured, but says "we can't go through assignments or reference lists and provide detailed support" (University of Worcester Library, 2026).
Where the services disagree
They disagree over the list itself. Coventry's tutors will look at the references in an assignment; Worcester's library will not go through a reference list in detail; York splits sources and referencing between two services. Follow your own centre's rule. Where it is silent, take the stricter reading: teach the pattern on one entry and let the student apply it to the rest.
What may a tutor not do with a student's references?
A tutor may not write, correct or complete a student's references, and may not supply the sources or facts a paper rests on.
- Correcting the list. UW–Madison's definition of proofreading includes formatting errors, and Purdue does not edit. Reformatting a list for the student is both.
- Supplying sources or facts. In the worst-case session Brooks (1991) describes, the tutor supplies factual information, the student adds it, and the paper earns an A while the writer learns little. A source the tutor chose is the same thing.
- Ruling on misconduct. No policy read here asks a tutor to decide whether a list amounts to plagiarism. That belongs to the instructor.
- Helping on an exam without permission. Purdue needs written documentation from the instructor before it gives feedback on a take-home exam (Purdue University Writing Lab, n.d.-a).
What do writing centre policies say about plagiarism?
Writing centre policies treat plagiarism as something to teach, not to police: the tutor explains, the student revises, and any decision about misconduct stays with the instructor. CU Denver says it in one line: "We do not police or enforce plagiarism."
George Mason's policies go further (George Mason University Writing Center, n.d.-a). Consultants generally assume the writing a student brings is their own, do not report suspected plagiarism outside the centre, and share nothing about a session with an instructor without the writer's permission. A consultant may end a session when a paper is clearly not the work of the writer present and the writer resists reworking it.
When a reference may have come from AI
George Mason asks students to bring their instructor's AI policy and say how they used AI; its consultants will not report unauthorised use, but will say it may break the assignment's guidelines (George Mason University Writing Center, n.d.-b). The same page warns that AI "often fabricates facts, sources, and quotations". Walters and Wilder (2023) measured it: of the 636 references in 84 short literature reviews written by ChatGPT, 55% of those from GPT-3.5 and 18% from GPT-4 did not exist. A reference nobody can find is a question to put to the student, not a finding.
What do the IWCA and the EWCA say?
Neither association sets rules for tutors' work on references, so the rules that bind a tutor are local. None of the seven position statements the International Writing Centers Association lists, read on 2 October 2026, is about citation, plagiarism or AI. Two touch practice: two-year college centres "should avoid operating as proofreading services" (International Writing Centers Association, 2007), and secondary school tutors are trained to address revising before editing or proofreading (International Writing Centers Association, 2015).
The European Writing Centers Association (n.d.) states a mission, not a code of practice: linking practitioners, promoting European research on writing centres, and supporting peer tutoring. We found no EWCA statement on what tutors may do; its main site was under maintenance when we checked, and the mission is on its older home page.
What does research on writing centre practice say?
Research on writing centre practice supports teaching over fixing, and warns that a tidy reference list can hide the real problem.
Minimalist tutoring
Brooks (1991) made the case that still shapes tutor training: the goal of each session is "learning, not a perfect paper", and "the less we do to the paper, the better." His rules are physical. Sit beside the student, keep the paper nearer to them than to you, keep a pen out of your own hand, and ask questions in place of pointing out errors.
Ownership and agency
Clark and Healy (1996) argued that this non-directive orthodoxy grew partly out of writing centres' wish to defend themselves against charges of plagiarism, and that held as an absolute it serves writers badly. Their replacement question fits references well: "What work has this writer done to produce this result?" For a list, that means asking whether the student found each source, read it and recorded it accurately.
Citation is the surface
Howard et al. (2010) read 18 papers from a required second-year research writing course alongside the sources they cited. None summarised a source. Sixteen contained patchwriting, and 14 attributed information to a source that did not contain it or said something different. Their advice is to look past the citation to whether the student understood the source, which a tutor who only tidies the format would never see.
How do I run a peer tutor referencing session?
Run a referencing session as a short loop: the student checks the list, you read the results together, and the student fixes each kind of problem once with you and the rest alone.
- Start from the brief. Ask which style and how many sources it asks for.
- The student runs the check. On their own device, the student pastes the list into EdCitation's Verify references, free with no account, or uploads the paper so citations are matched to the list.
- Read the verdicts together, starting with "not found" and "check this".
- Ask where each doubtful source came from, and ask the student to open it. A database, a reading list and a chatbot are different answers.
- Let the record settle a wrong detail. The student enters the DOI, title or address in Cite a source and compares the result with their entry.
- Teach one entry, then step back. The student corrects the others while you watch.
- Check one claim against its source. Ask the student to show you where the source says it.
- If a source cannot be produced, say what the course's rules say and send the question to the instructor.
- Record what was covered, not what to write.
Worked example: five references, checked on 2 October 2026
We pasted a five-entry APA 7 list into Verify references, the kind a student writing about tutoring might bring. One entry leaves out an author on purpose; two are real sources outside the DOI registries.
| Entry | What came back | The tutor asks | The student does |
|---|---|---|---|
| Walters and Wilder, with DOI | Verified: "The DOI resolves to this record and the title matches." | Which sentence does it support? | Checks that sentence against the paper |
| Howard and Serviss, third author left out | Check this: "The publisher's record also names Rodrigue, who is not in your entry. Check the authors." | How many authors does the article list? | Adds the third author from the record |
| Clark and Healy, journal with no DOI | Not found: "No publisher's or registry's record matches this reference." | Where did you read it? | Opens it in the journal's archive |
| Brooks, a 1991 newsletter | Not found: "No publisher's or registry's record matches this reference." | Where did you read it? | Opens the newsletter's archived issue |
| George Mason's policy page | Verified: "The page is at this address, and its title matches." | Nothing | Nothing |
The two real sources show why a verdict starts a conversation. Clark and Healy's journal and Brooks's newsletter are outside the registries the check searches, so two real, openly available pieces came back not found, and each student confirms their entry at the source.
For the second entry, the student entered the DOI in Cite a source, which found the Crossref record, flagged no retraction, and returned this APA 7 entry:
Howard, R. M., Serviss, T., & Rodrigue, T. K. (2010). Writing from sources, writing from sentences. Writing & Pedagogy, 2(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v2i2.177
The student, not the tutor, makes the change. How to check a reference is real covers the hand checks behind each verdict.
Do and do not: a table for tutors
Each row pairs what a tutor does with what a tutor leaves alone, with its source.
| Situation | Do | Do not | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| "Can you check my references?" | Teach the student to check them, from one entry | Correct the list for them | UW–Madison; Purdue (n.d.-b) |
| A question about a style | Show where its rules are published | Format every entry | Worcester (2026); Coventry |
| Checking the whole list | Have the student run Verify references | Treat "not found" as proof of invention | Our run, 2 October 2026 |
| A source nobody can find | Ask where it came from and ask to see it | Swap in a source you found | Brooks (1991) |
| A sentence that misreports its source | Ask where the source says it | Rewrite the sentence | Howard et al. (2010) |
| Copied text or missing citations | Explain quotation, paraphrase and citation | Report it or rule on it | CU Denver; George Mason (n.d.-a) |
| AI used on the assignment | Ask for the course's AI policy | Decide it was misconduct | George Mason (n.d.-b) |
| A take-home exam | Ask for the instructor's written permission | Help without it | Purdue (n.d.-a) |
Where does EdCitation fit in a writing centre session?
EdCitation fits the checking half of a reference question, run by the student: it looks every reference up and writes none of them. For that job it is the best free tool we know of, and the run above shows why: it named the author an entry left out, confirmed a web page at its address, and reported a missing article as not found without guessing, all without changing a word of the list.
Verify references accepts a list pasted in or a whole paper. Every entry gets one of three verdicts, verified, "check this" or not found, and a retracted paper is flagged. An entry that could not be checked is reported as could not check, never as not found. Upload the paper instead of the list, and the citations in the text are matched against the list in both directions.
Cite a source starts from whatever the student has to hand (DOI, title, PubMed ID, ISBN or web address) and sets the entry in one of six styles: APA 7, MLA 9, Chicago 18 author-date, Harvard, IEEE or Vancouver. It screens the source for retraction too. For a web page, the details read from the page can be corrected before the entry is built, which hands the student two good questions: who wrote this page, and when?
Both are free on the site with no account. For every reference in a Word file or PDF checked and every citation matched, References from a file gives three checks a month with a free account, or no limit with Pro at $8 a month (plans).
EdCitation stops where a good tutor stops. It writes no sentence and invents no reference, so the student does the work and owns every word, which is why it sits comfortably inside every policy quoted here.
Quick questions
Can a writing tutor check my references?
Usually the tutor will teach you to check them rather than do it for you; Coventry's tutors look at references within an assignment, Worcester's library gives only general guidance. Run EdCitation's free Verify references first and bring the report.
Will a writing centre tutor report plagiarism?
Usually not. George Mason's consultants do not report suspected plagiarism outside the centre, and CU Denver's centre says it does not police plagiarism; both teach citation instead.
Can a peer tutor fix my citations?
No. A peer tutor can explain the rule behind one entry and show you where the style's rules are published; you make the corrections.
Does "not found" mean a reference is fake?
No. It means no publisher's or registry's record matched. In our run a real 1996 journal article came back not found because its journal sits outside the registries.
References
- Brooks, J. (1991). Minimalist tutoring: Making the student do all the work. Writing Lab Newsletter, 15(6), 1–4. https://wacclearinghouse.org/docs/wln/v15/15-6.pdf
- Clark, I. L., & Healy, D. (1996). Are writing centers ethical? WPA: Writing Program Administration, 20(1–2), 32–48. https://associationdatabase.co/archives/20n1-2/20n1-2clark.pdf
- Coventry University, Centre for Academic Writing. (n.d.). Information on CAW's writing support services. CAW LibGuides. https://libguides.coventry.ac.uk/CAWhomepage/CAWServices
- European Writing Centers Association. (n.d.). What is EWCA? https://www.europeanwritingcenters.eu/index.html
- George Mason University Writing Center. (n.d.-a). Appointment policies and restrictions. https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/appointments/policies-and-restrictions
- George Mason University Writing Center. (n.d.-b). AI in Writing Center appointments. https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/appointments/ai-in-writing-center-appointments
- Howard, R. M., Serviss, T., & Rodrigue, T. K. (2010). Writing from sources, writing from sentences. Writing & Pedagogy, 2(2), 177–192. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v2i2.177
- International Writing Centers Association. (2007). Position statement on two-year college writing centers. https://writingcenters.org/resources/Documents/Governance/2007%20IWCA%20PS%20Two%20Year%20Colleges.pdf
- International Writing Centers Association. (2015). Position statement on secondary school writing centers. https://writingcenters.org/resources/Documents/Governance/2015%20IWCA%20PS%20Secondary%20Schools.pdf
- Purdue University Writing Lab. (n.d.-a). Faculty and instructor FAQs. Purdue OWL. https://owl.purdue.edu/writinglab/faculty/faculty_and_instructor_faqs.html
- Purdue University Writing Lab. (n.d.-b). Student client FAQs. Purdue OWL. https://owl.purdue.edu/writinglab/students/student_client_FAQs.html
- University of Colorado Denver, Writing Center. (n.d.). Plagiarism/TurnItIn. https://clas.ucdenver.edu/writing-center/students/plagiarismturnitin
- University of Wisconsin–Madison, The Writing Center. (n.d.). A few things we can't do. https://writing.wisc.edu/aboutus/caveats/
- University of Worcester Library. (2026, July 7). Can you check my work/references before I submit my assignment? Library FAQs. https://libraryfaqs.worc.ac.uk/faq/119126
- University of York. (n.d.). One-to-one appointments. Studying at York. https://www.york.ac.uk/students/studying/skills/community/one-to-ones/
- Walters, W. H., & Wilder, E. I. (2023). Fabrication and errors in the bibliographic citations generated by ChatGPT. Scientific Reports, 13, Article 14045. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-41032-5