 |
Investing
in the power of teachers
to improve teaching and learning. |
     |
|
  |
Project
#8 November,
1995 Abstract The Research Project
Description of the Writing Experience Results of the Research Project
This research project investigated the progress in Aboriginal students' writing in three primary classrooms using the writing process as advocated by the Saskatchewan English Language Arts Elementary Curriculum. The results showed that the children involved in the study made satisfactory progress. Interviews done with the children indicated that they viewed themselves as readers and writers; they also understood that writing was a process and not just a single event. As a result, the researchers conclude that the writing process is appropriate for use with Aboriginal children. The research team wishes to acknowledge the following groups and people for their help during the project:
This excerpt from a note was given to us by the proud Mom of Sue, a grade one student, when she was asked how she felt about her child's writing progress. Although Mom was not pleased that Sue was not home, she was pleased about how well Sue could write. Sue was one of the 52 students who took part in the writing research project conducted by four educators in a First Nations elementary school in northwestern Saskatchewan. Three teachers, one from each of grades one, two and three, worked together with a classroom consultant to conduct research that examined the progress of Aboriginal children involved in the writing process in the integrated language arts program. The study examined the processes and products of the program, focussing on the foundational objectives related to writing from the curriculum. Although no attempt was made to establish mechanisms by which improvement in students' writing skills could be measured and linked to the integrated English language arts approach, the researchers were interested in identifying and describing the effects on Aboriginal students of the focus on the writing process in this approach. Relating the Study to Previous Research The new English Language Arts Elementary Curriculum advocates a holistic approach to writing. Writing is viewed as a process of composing meaning that consists of interrelated stages (Calkins 1991, Graves 1978). Children are encouraged to write using their own experiences as the source of ideas (Parry and Hormsby 1988). Mechanics, grammar and spelling are taught within the context of children's writing and not as isolated sub-skills (Clay 1982). However, there is controversy over this holistic philosophy of curriculum in Canada, especially in the media, which frequently call for reversion to a skills-based approach. Many educators (Routman 1988, Calkins 1991) argue that a holistic approach to teaching language arts, properly implemented, can correct the problems inherent in the practices that are being challenged. Furthermore, they argue that it will reduce some of the problems in the struggle for literacy faced by children, particularly those learning English as a second language and those who have learning problems. A holistic approach, according to Froese (1990), is an integrated literature-based, child-centred approach to language learning and teaching that involves children in meaningful communication. It was on the basis of this research on language learning and these theories of how children learn that this project was designed to explore the effects on Aboriginal children of an integrated process approach to writing. Methods Used in Gathering and Analysing Data Samples of children's writing were collected at the beginning, during and at the end of the 1994-95 school year and analysed to determine what the students were and were not able to do, e.g., whether or not all sentences related to the topic. Writings were analysed using a writing checklist that was developed by the researchers. Further information was gathered from anecdotal records, observations, teacher-student conferences, checklists and rating scales, and a student interview at year end. In addition, information was obtained from interviews with parents about their perceptions of their children's writing progress. Grade One Class Summary Over the year there was very noticeable growth in the writing abilities of all the grade one students. The children began the year as non writers, with the majority having no concept that writing could be used as a way of communicating. In the beginning, students spent a lot of time dictating stories and labelling pictures. When the first writing sample was collected during the third week of September, the range in levels of writing was apparent. Six children drew pictures. Five had strings of random letters. Four tried to write a word using invented spelling. Only two tried to write a simple sentence. By mid-year all the children were aware that writing was a way of communicating, even if they were not yet writing independently. Five children were still unable to use invented spelling to write. The majority wrote using a mixture of invented and conventional spelling. By the end of the year, all the children were trying to write. During the year-end interviews, all except two said that they were writers. The children usually got their ideas for writing from the theme being studied at the time. A small number of children tried to organize their writing before they wrote. These students would pick characters and have a solution in mind before they wrote. The children tried to spell the words themselves while writing. The majority used invented spelling but also searched for words they knew were around the room. Early editing was very limited. Students were expected to reread their work. They were encouraged to conference with someone, and many times this step was done together. By mid-year the majority were editing for capitals and periods. However, only the five most confident writers made revisions. Every student had at least one piece of writing each week that they would consider publishing. The most notable change over the year was in the students' writing behaviour. Students moved from being very dependent to writing freely on their own with little input from the teacher. They chose their topics and developed them independently. Their writing changed from mostly patterned sentences to stories. A small number of children added dialogue and conversations. The majority used appropriate titles and story openers. The children became very confident of their ability as writers. They wanted to share their stories by reading them and publishing or displaying them. Visitors to the room were invited by the children to sit and listen to their stories read aloud, or they were asked to read stories that were posted on the bulletin board. Grade Two Class Summary Most students who came into grade two in August understood that writing was a way of communicating. If you could "say something", you could try to write it down. The majority of students wrote patterned sentences. Some students used invented spelling, but most were able to spell the patterned words correctly, e.g., "I like...." Four students started with a patterned sentence then justified their statement, e.g., "I like spaghetti bekus I suc it thru youyr muoth" (I like spakghetti because I suck it through your mouth), or "My favourite food is ice cream it tatis (tasktes) like a ceaic (cake)". Four students wrote patterned sentences using invented spelling, e.g., "I lk kak kas ets si sw sat" (I like cake cause it is so sweet). Two students still used random strings of letters. By mid-year students' writing had progressed to the level where over half the students wrote from patterned sentences, but more students justified their statements. Although they used invented spelling, their inventions were very close to conventional spelling. Only two students were writing patterned sentences using invented spelling with only the initial consonant and one other sound, e.g., "I am lek the weather is kol and nettwwe" (I like the winter it is cold and snowy). By mid-year as well, half the students were beginning to edit their work. First, they circled the words that they thought were misspelled, then they went to the teacher to find out which words needed to be corrected. The teacher selected commonly used words for the students to correct. If the writing was not to be published, the other misspelled words were ignored. If the writing was to be published, the teacher would give the child the proper spellings before publishing. Students also started checking for the correct use of capitals. Many students were using capitals indiscriminately. During editing, they circled any letter that was incorrectly capitalized, then made changes, leaving capitals in their proper places. Students adopted the use of editing at different paces. By April, three students had started crossing out words and replacing them with the proper word and/or spelling. These students started peer conferencing. By the end of that month, half the class was peer conferencing. In May, students' writing progress accelerated rapidly. Students were editing and publishing. By month end, most were publishing at least one short story a week. Students were writing a rough draft, peer conferencing with two classmates and the teacher, and finally publishing their work. At this point the majority of students were voluntarily writing and appeared very relaxed about the writing process. One student was still very hesitant to write and would only string five or six words together when attempting to write a story. Two students could write but did not usually do so voluntarily. They used invented spellings which were moving toward conventional spelling, e.g., "I Went to track and Feld and I ded roning ten I ded Raning brojop ten ti wos luchtiym ten ahftr it loch tiym" (I went to track and field and I did running then I did running broad jump it was lunch time then after it lunch time). Throughout the year students got their ideas from various sources. At the beginning, many were suggested by the teacher with students being encouraged to write about other things if they wished. Until December, many different forms of writing were taught in mini lessons and modelled by the teacher. Many students copied these forms in their writing. As the year progressed, students were encouraged to use their own initiative in choosing topics. In March, folders with word banks and accompanying pictures were introduced for students to use for ideas. Student use of these folders varied. Some used the words from word banks in their stories, while others just used pictures for ideas. All students became more confident of their abilities as writers. They recognized that by following a process, their writing improved. Only one student did not demonstrate extensive progress over the year. Grade Three Class Summary At the beginning of grade three, students generally understood that writing was used to communicate ideas. By the end of the year, they were aware of their audience and the fact that words could be manipulated and changed to enhance meaning. Students had difficulty getting ideas and deciding what to write. They wanted direction. They frequently used picture prompts for ideas. They tended to relate events from their own experiences. Some less capable writers would draw pictures, then write about the pictures. Writing was a retelling of what was in the pictures. Often the students did not have a direction for their stories. When students used plots from stories, they tended to rewrite the story rather than use the plot to make their own story. For example, one study simply retold Miss Nelson is Missing, changing the name to Mr. Nelson is Missing. She viewed this change as acceptable in creating a different story. The following example demonstrates the change in students' writing behaviour. In August, a student had brought a kitten to school. Students were allowed to interact with the kitten and to talk about it. They were then asked to write about a kitten. It took about ten minutes before the majority of students were writing. Although they were told that they could write anything, they were reluctant to write. They asked such questions as: "What are we supposed to write?" and "How do you spell kitten?". They were informed that spelling at this time was not important and that they should do the best they could. They were still reluctant to spell the words, instead asking their neighbours for the correct spellings. After 30 minutes, when students were asked to share their work, only four students were willing to share. In contrast, by year end, when students were told to write, most began at once. They looked around the room to see what things were on the wall. The class discussed possible ideas and problems that interested them. They were relaxed and willing to write. They did not ask about how to spell words and wrote for a long time without becoming restless. The students did a great deal of re-reading to help them continue on with the story as well as to ensure that the piece made sense. They showed each other what they were writing. Some students still believed that when they got to the end of the page, they were finished their writing. Students were able to manipulate stories they had read. For example, after reading Dennis Lee's poem, Jelly Belly, a student wrote about someone named Jelly and tried to use rhyming words as in the poem. Students tended to write about the themes on which they were working. Some students used story webs to outline their ideas for a story. They would then write a story based on these ideas. By the end of the year, a less capable writer, who used pictures to get ideas, was able to use them to create a story that had a problem with a solution. At the beginning of the school year, students' writings generally consisted of simple sentences. The mechanics of the writing were generally very basic. For example, a student wrote:
Students would repeat the same information to make their stories longer. Most students began their stories using little imagination, e.g., "One day long long ago...". "Once upon a time" was frequently used. Students sometimes had difficulty in sequencing their stories or even staying on topic, as shown in one student's writing:
By the end of the year, this same student was better able to sequence stories, and he wrote:
At this point students generally made events follow more logically from the previous sentence. Initially students did not use the writing process because they did not know what it was. They expected to write only a first draft and believed that if you changed the spelling of the words, you were changing the story. As students were introduced to the writing process, they were given a checklist to help them use the whole process. By the end of the year, students were comfortable using the writing process in their written work. The students believed that all the stories they wrote were good; therefore, they went through the editing process with most of their stories to make books. The students enjoyed the making of books as their finished products. Each child made between five and ten books which were available for the rest of the class to read. Students shared these stories at sharing time. The student-made books were well read by the students in the class. The student writing interviews conducted at the end of the year yielded interesting and important information. All students except two said they were writers. The two exceptions stated that they were not good writers because they could not spell. Five of the students believed that spelling and punctuation were important in being a good writer. The rest said that the writing of stories, the length of stories, or other aspects of the content were important in being a good writer. Many students said that they got their ideas from books. Some believed that they got their ideas from thinking, i.e., "in their heads". Parent Interviews Summary Parent interviews at the end of the project enabled the researchers to get the views of parents. Initially, when parents were asked: "Has your child discussed the writing at school with you?", most responded, "Yes." Only four of the 45 parents who consented to be interviewed stated that their children either would not write or were neutral towards writing. All parents, except two, stated that they were pleased with the amount of writing that their children had done. They talked about some of the writing they had seen during parent-teacher interviews. Most parents felt that their children were doing quite a bit of writing at home. One parent, who said that her son did not write, indicated that he would write little notes when he was going somewhere. All parents were willing to have their children participate in a similar project next year. Results of the Project This study has traced the growth in the development of writing abilities in these children using the writing process as part of the approach to teaching English language arts. At the end of the project, the children in all three classrooms viewed themselves as writers. They were comfortable with the writing process and confident in their ability to write. This attitude contrasts with their attitude at the beginning of the project, when the children in grades two and three were almost totally teacher-oriented, i.e., they wrote for the teacher or to please the teacher rather than themselves. The children became self-oriented and wrote to express ideas that they wished to express. Moreover, all the children loved to share and display their writing. Teachers who participated in the study had the opportunity to examine their beliefs and practices about teaching the writing process. They had the opportunity to reflect upon the results of actions taken during the students' writing time, and to make decisions about changes they will make in future teaching. This was probably the most important outcome of the research from the perspective of the teacher researchers. Over the span of the project, the teachers realized that the collaboration and discussion about the research and the visits to each others' classrooms were the most worthwhile and beneficial parts of the project. Since everyone was involved in the same process, there was a common ground for discussions. The discussions relieved anxieties and helped in planning future activities. Children benefited as teachers changed and modified their teaching methodologies to reflect their professional growth. Recommendations from the Research Based on the amount of writing that was accomplished by students during the study and the development of the children's abilities to use the writing process, the researchers recommend that teachers, especially those teaching Aboriginal students, use the writing process advocated by the English Language Arts Elementary Curriculum. The thematic approach provides a context within which language processes can be taught and used. Themes enable students to interact with and respond to literature, as well as providing opportunities to talk, read, and write. Word charts and poetry also provide vocabulary for children to use in their writing. Many of the children involved in this study did not have ideas and vocabulary for their writing, or a sense of story. They needed to hear and read a great deal of good literature before they could use these elements in their writing. Teachers need to provide this background. Nursery rhymes and fairy tales provide good models, but teachers need access to literature written in different forms, such as travel logs, diaries and letters, to share with the children. A listing of suitable materials would make it easier for teachers to access these resources. Children did better writing when they chose their own topics. Many times their choice of topics evolved from stories or talk related to the theme under study. The writing that students did from prompts did not result in writing that was as good as that done when they had made the selection of the topic. One conclusion that the researchers draw from this experience is that assessments of student writing should be based on writings chosen by the student and/or teachers from the body of work that students have done as part of their usual writing. The summary interview used with students at the end of the year revealed their thoughts about their writing and what they believed a good writer should do. Because of the insight into students' thinking that they provide, the researchers recommend that this type of interview, or something similar, be used. The study confirmed the teacher researchers in their belief that children need interaction with peers and other writers to expand their thinking and writing. The researchers have also become more aware of the value of a support group for teachers who are engaged in implementing the English Language Arts K-5 Curriculum, especially if they have not been using the writing process and/or themes in their classrooms. Principals should encourage peer support groups among teachers, and teacher visitations between classrooms need to be facilitated. It is hoped that the results of this study will be provided to school boards charged with defining the direction of educational programs. The researchers are aware of the ongoing debate about the English Language Arts Curriculum and the resulting reluctance of some teachers to implement. Informed school boards should examine how teachers can be encouraged to move in the direction set out by this curriculum. Research Rationale and Objectives In recent years, language arts instruction has been changing in schools across Saskatchewan because of the implementation of a new English language arts K-5 curriculum. The curriculum recognizes that reading, writing, speaking and listening are interdependent, and many teachers are attempting to incorporate all language modes into language development activities that blend subject areas together. This integration reflects the inclusion of "communication skills" as a Common Essential Learning in all Saskatchewan's K-12 curricula. The goal of the new curriculum is to promote students' learning in all subject areas through improving their language abilities in each subject area (Saskatchewan Learning 1988). Many administrators and teachers in Saskatchewan have shown reluctance to implement fully an integrated language arts curriculum. On one hand, some teachers believe in a basal and/or phonics approach, while on the other hand, some teachers have embraced the integrated approach and begun implementation of the new curriculum. There has been considerable debate as to the curriculum's relevance to Aboriginal students specifically. Little knowledge exists about the effects of integrated approaches used with Aboriginal students. The teacher researchers who carried out this study are attempting to implement the philosophy, techniques, strategies and activities, resources and evaluation of the English Language Arts Elementary Curriculum. They are involved in and committed to the change that it advocates. Through this research project, they attempted to explore and describe the effects of the integrated English language arts approach on the writing skills of Aboriginal students as represented by the students in their classrooms. It is expected that the results of their efforts, as documented in this project, will be of interest to all elementary teachers in First Nation schools as an indication of whether or not the direction taken by Saskatchewan Learning is relevant for Aboriginal students. Also, because of the numbers of Aboriginal students who attend public schools in the provincial education system, the results will interest elementary teachers throughout the province. However, the teacher researchers involved in the project realized that the incorporation of reading, writing, speaking and listening makes language arts such an all-encompassing area of study that a research project looking at all aspects would be unworkably broad. In order to make the study manageable, they decided to concentrate on the writing process within the integrated language arts program. Writing is a component of language arts that has only recently received attention equal to that received by reading. The new curriculum advocates taking a holistic approach to writing, which means that writing is viewed as a process of composing meaning. This process consists of stages that are interrelated: prewriting, drafting and postwriting. During the prewriting stage, writers decide on the purpose, audience and content for the writing. They get their ideas from their own backgrounds or from provided experiences with research or discussion. Drafting involves getting their ideas into the form of print, and during this stage, writers are encouraged to write without regard to spelling or mechanics. Postwriting includes reading, proofreading, revising, and editing the draft(s). Revisions clarify meaning or content and make the writing more interesting and easier to understand. Editing, which involves the writer, peers, and the teacher, is used to polish the draft(s) for publication. This stage provides an opportunity to correct, and possibly instruct students in spelling, punctuation, grammar, and handwriting. In this research study, the teacher researchers have assumed that if their students show good progress in writing using the new curriculum's integrated approach focussing on the writing process, then further credence is given to Saskatchewan Education's choice of direction for the English language arts K-5 curriculum. Since these students are Aboriginal, their progress in writing will also indicate the appropriateness of the integrated approach in First Nation schools and other schools serving Aboriginal students. The research was conducted with Aboriginal students in a school on First Nation territory in west central Saskatchewan. The school population was approximately 500 students from nursery school (four year olds) to grade six. The school had four grade one classrooms, four grade two classrooms, and three grade three classrooms. Only one teacher at each grade level was chosen in order to control the scope of the research project. The three teacher researchers volunteered to be part of the project and agreed to use the writing process as advocated by the Saskatchewan English Language Arts K-5 Curriculum. All the researchers were female and non-Aboriginal. All had worked for this First Nation for at least three years. All had a B.Ed. degree with some training pertinent to the research, and the classroom consultant had M.Ed. degrees from Saskatchewan and Oregon focussing on language arts. None had done any type of classroom research before. The research team believed that children must be provided with a suitable school environment if they are to become confident, independent, thoughtful writers who will continue to write after they have left school. Such an environment would provide opportunities for the children to learn how to solve problems and access information. It would encourage children to take risks, make decisions, take ownership and be accountable for their own learning. Opportunities need to be provided for the children to discuss matters and pose questions to themselves, their peers and any adults who come into the classroom. They also need a rich language base to draw on when they write. The three classrooms in which the research was conducted created a suitable learning environment for the students in numerous ways. They enriched the students' language base through daily oral activities that included songs, poetry, finger plays, puppet plays, shared book experiences, read aloud, book sharing in groups and with partners, and silent reading of many kinds of materials. The rooms were made attractive with a variety of changing displays of students' work and teacher-made charts. Most displays changed with the themes that were used in each class to organize and provide coherence for the teaching-learning situation. These classrooms had an abundance of print materials in the form of charts, poems, songs, big books, student-made books, small books for independent reading, and picture story books that the teacher read to the students. All classrooms had a listening centre, a computer centre and learning centres. Methods Used to Gather and Analyse Data In order to determine students' writing progress, samples of their writing were collected in September and analysed to determine what the students were and were not able to do, e.g., whether or not they were able to relate all their sentences to the topic. All the children were given a prompt with which to produce a writing sample at the beginning, middle and end of the year. The prompts were taken from Portfolios and Other Assessments (Jasmin 1993) for grades one, two and three. A sample of writing produced without a prompt was also collected at these times. As well, three writing samples chosen by the student and/or teacher were gathered at the beginning, middle and end of the year. All writing samples were analysed using the writing checklist developed by the researchers (see Appendix A). Other information about writing progress was gathered using anecdotal records of incidents or specific observable behaviours that took place during writing experiences and teacher-student conferences. Also used were student interviews (see Appendix B for the interview questions) and checklists and rating scales from the English language arts curriculum. Reporting of writing progress involved a description of the classrooms and their experiences. Three case studies from each grade level were included to demonstrate the growth of children in the same grade who were at three different levels of writing ability, namely low, mid-range or high in comparison to other writers in the room. In this project, analysis and reporting focussed on the foundational objectives from the curriculum related to writing. Additional information was obtained from the students' parents by means of an interview (see Appendix E for the interview questions). The consultant, in collaboration with the Cree-speaking school-based truant officer, had met with the parents at the beginning of the study in order to give them information and obtain their consent for their children's involvement in the project. In the spring, the consultant and truant officer interviewed the parents to get their perceptions of their children's writing and their opinions of the success of the writing process in the integrated language arts program. The researchers designed their study to meet the Ethics and Standards Guidelines set out by the McDowell Foundation. Each of the three teachers participating in the study was made aware of these guidelines. Permission to conduct the study in the school was received from the appropriate authorities. Permission to use children's writing for research purposes was obtained from the parents or guardians in September after the project had been explained to them. An explanation of how the writing would be used was part of the information given about the project. Parents were assured that the writing samples were not intended to prove or disprove the intelligence or abilities of their children. In reporting the research, pseudonyms were used for all children who participated in the study. Problems or Limitations in the Research The teacher researchers had some difficulty in coping with a qualitative study. They understood that progress in writing must be viewed through the development of the writing process rather than as a race in which all students start from the same point and some can be seen to move further ahead than others. They were apprehensive that others would belittle progress made by students that they considered to be very great. Initially a great amount of time was spent trying to decide how to assess the writing. The assessment tools that the researchers had planned to use did not satisfy their requirements and did not allow us to look at growth in writing ability from the beginning of grade one to grade three. Finally they constructed their own checklist for all teachers to use in making appropriate assessments. Another problem was encountered with their use of prompts taken from Jasmin (1993) to generate writing samples that could be prepared. As the students' writing was analysed, it became apparent that the writing generated by these prompts was not as good as the students' other writing. Finally, the teacher researchers recognized that in a qualitative study, individual researchers have values and views that may colour the results of the research. For example, in this study which looks at student progress in writing, the grade one teacher found that she tended to emphasize good beginnings, a problem and a solution; the grade two teacher emphasized structure and mechanics; and the grade three teacher focussed on the writing process itself. These differences in emphasis made it more difficult to make cross-grade comparisons of students' writing progress. Description of the Writing Experience In order to give an adequate snapshot of writing progress, the data has been presented in three parallel sections. Each grade is discussed separately using the following headings: 1) the classroom environment and writing activities, 2) case studies, and 3) an overview of the grade's experience. The original children's writing was not included in the discussions because of extensive editing that was done on various pieces or the size of the children's handwriting. Grade One The Classroom Environment and Writing Activities The grade one classroom had 17 students of mixed ability, with two of the children having limited oral English language skills. The daily activities for this classroom were planned around themes that integrated the subject areas and most were carried out in small groups or with partners. The activities included the performance of songs, poems or chants, which were written out and displayed in pocket charts or on chart paper so that the children could go up and read or sing them with their friends. Many hands-on or manipulative activities were designed for each theme. Children's literature related to the theme was read aloud by the teacher. Later in the year, stories were often read to the group by one of the students. Each day an agenda was posted giving children choices of the activities that they might do. For example, the agenda might include three reading, two writing and two art activities and two experiments. Children chose one or more from each category, checking off completed activities. The order and choice of activities was theirs. They also had the choice of doing the activities cooperatively or by themselves. The room was arranged to accommodate many group activities and explorations. Children moved and worked freely around the room. It was common to see small groups or pairs working together under tables and desks, in corners or in the hallways. Students were encouraged to work cooperatively in a job-sharing fashion. Learning involved a great deal of peer coaching and tutoring. Desks were placed together to encourage student conversation about work tasks. Print materials in a variety of forms were displayed throughout the classroom. There was always a bulletin board display where children found vocabulary relevant to the theme being studied. There was a growing alphabetized list of commonly used words posted in the room. Children could use these lists to locate words they were not confident enough to spell on their own. They could ask a friend for help to articulate the words so they could hear the sounds in them. At the beginning of the year, words and sounds were taught in the context of poems, chants and songs. The new skills were then emphasized in any reading or writing until most of the children were hearing and using them. Then a new sound or word was introduced. Beginning writing was usually patterned after a familiar story, song or poem. As the children became more independent, they started to explore other forms of writing, such as letters, short stories, booklets, large class books, songs and raps. The most common form of writing that they used was the short story. Some of their stories lent themselves to illustrated books, which were published. The children learned about story elements during story time through story mapping and discussions. The children picked out who was in the story, what the problem was, and how the problem was solved. Later they examined story openers and story climaxes. As these story elements were discussed, children were encouraged to use them in their own writing. Before they wrote, the children were taught to think about or organize their writing. For example, if they were writing a fictional story, they would choose a character(s), problem, and a solution before they began the writing. Their stories might change as they wrote. Sometimes they thought of a better plot line as they wrote the story. They were encouraged to make changes as they progressed in writing skill in order to better their stories. Conferencing was an important part of postwriting in grade one. Children read their stories to someone and got feedback. Sometimes they chose to read their stories to the whole class. Usually the conferences were with an adult in the room. The main goal of the conferencing was to ensure children could read what they wrote. At the beginning of the year, the adult wrote a translation of the story to facilitate a later check of the spelling. The checklist in Appendix G summarizes where students in the grade one class stood in the development of their writing behaviours and their use of the writing process at the end of the school year. The checklist in Appendix F gives similar information at the beginning, middle and end of the school year for the three students involved in the case studies that follow. Case Studies
Overview of the Grade One Experience There has been very noticeable growth in the writing abilities of all the grade one students. The children came into the class as non-writers. The majority had no concept that they could use writing as a way of communicating. In the beginning, they spent a lot of time dictating stories and labelling pictures. During the writing activity using the first prompt in the third week of September, the spread in students' levels of writing ability was already apparent. Six children drew pictures. Five had strings of random letters. Four tried to write a word using invented spelling. Only two tried to write a simple sentence. By mid-year all the children were aware that writing was a way of communicating, even if they were not yet writing independently. Five children were still unable to use invented spelling to write. The majority were writing using a mixture of invented and conventional spelling. By the end of the year, all the children were trying to write. All except two said they were writers in the year-end interview. The children usually got their ideas for writing from the theme being studied at the time. Their use of this particular source was due to the students' high level of interest in the literature and discussion in the classroom that related to the theme. A small number of children tried to organize their writing before they wrote. In organizing it, they would pick a character and problem and have a solution in mind before they wrote. The children tried to spell the words themselves by writing. The majority used invented spelling but also searched for words they knew were around the room. Early editing was very limited. Everyone was expected to reread her or his work, and students were encouraged to conference with someone. Many times these two steps were done together. By mid-year, the majority were editing for capitals and periods. However, only the five most confident writers made revisions. The most noticeable change over the year was in the students' writing behaviour. Students moved from being very dependent to writing freely on their own with little input from the teacher. They chose their topics and developed them independently. Their writing changed from mostly patterned sentences to stories. A small number of children added dialogue and conversations. The majority used appropriate titles and story openers. The children became very confident in their ability as writers. They wanted to share their stories by reading them and publishing and displaying them. All the children had at least one piece a week they would consider publishing. Visitors to the room were invited by the children to sit and listen to their stories read aloud, or they were asked to read stories that the children had written and posted on the bulletin board. The Classroom Environment and Writing Activities The grade two classroom had twelve boys and five girls. Six of the children had repeated at least one grade. The high number of boys influenced the teaching style and the physical setting of the class. The classroom was varied regularly during writing activities, with the children sometimes seated individually and sometimes grouped so that two or three rows were seated side by side. Groupings could be random or chosen by the teacher. The students were encouraged to write in a risk-free environment in which all writing was valued. The environment included a variety of print materials. Words and ideas for writing were found throughout the room. Students could get words from lists on the walls, other students, word banks and a word book. They got ideas from each other, personal experiences, past literary experiences, idea banks, classroom discussions, writing prompts, teacher prompts, or the themes being explored in the classroom. Journal writing was introduced the first day of the school year, and the students wrote in their journals daily. Although, at the beginning of the year, students were encouraged to write freely about whatever they wished, most preferred to use a journal format, centering their work on personal life experiences. As their writing progressed, they were encouraged to write about more than just their daily experiences in the journals, e.g., to start stories. Various writing prompts, brainstorming, theme topics and idea banks were used to expand the students' thinking and writing. In December, the journals were removed from the students' writing folders in order to stress other types of writing and encourage reluctant writers to use them. At the end of January, the journals were put back into the writing folders, but by this time, most students were confident enough writers that they did not rely on journal-writing. Instead, they used journals only when they had a personal experience they wanted to record. Mini-lessons were taught based on identified student needs. At the beginning of the year, these needs included letter sound relationships, and later they shifted to content. New forms of writing were introduced in formal lessons, and the students were encouraged to use such forms as notes, messages, friendly letters, free verse and patterned poetry, chants, songs, pattern books, predictable books, fictional and non-fictional stories, and a simple research paper. After most forms of writing had been formally taught, the students chose what to write. Most wrote stories, although some ventured into poetry and some included songs and chants in their stories, similar to those of Robert Munsch, one of the authors studied. Teacher modelling was used constantly to show ways in which writing could be improved using steps in the writing process, i.e., editing, revising and publishing. The teacher also demonstrated reading and writing strategies and pointed out spelling patterns, sound-symbol relationships and phonic principles in familiar poetry. Posted print materials included labels, instructions for classroom routines, word lists, and webs that students generated around particular themes or topics. The teacher also obtained reference materials and modelled their use. Although conventional spelling was not stressed, the teacher taught the students how to approximate the spelling of words during the creation of rough drafts, then, where and how to get the conventional spelling for the final copy. If the students used words repetitively in their journals, they were taught and expected to use the conventional spelling. Sight words, familiar words and any words that could be found in the room (i.e., theme words) were also expected to be spelled correctly by most students. A similar approach was used for students' sentence development. The checklist in Appendix I summarizes where students in the grade two class stood in the development of their writing behaviours and their use of the writing process at the end of the school year. The checklist in Appendix H gives similar information at the beginning, middle and end of the school year for the three students involved in the case studies that follow. Case Studies 1. Conrad. Conrad was an immature student when he came to grade two. He brought toys to play with during class. When these were taken away, he would play with his hands, pencil or anything else. He had an extremely short attention span. He had a difficult time staying on task during class discussions and activities. Conrad seldom completed any work unless he was constantly monitored and reminded to do so. At the beginning of the year, Conrad wrote short sentences using sight words he knew. Often Conrad's paper contained more doodling and drawing than actual writing. For example, in his journal, he wrote "I Liek my tehr" (I like my teacher). It would take him thirty minutes to write this much. As the year progressed, Conrad wrote longer sentences. He used more descriptive words in his writing, although he continued to doodle:
Conrad had an excellent imagination. By December he had progressed enough to begin writing his ideas without vocalizing them before writing. The only editing he did was with the teacher. He wrote the following Christmas story:
By mid-year, Conrad began to attempt to edit his papers. He started to proofread his work and find his mistakes. He did not have the patience to correct all of them. In February he wrote the following (the underlining is his):
Conrad continued to write longer stories that were based on something he had seen or done. He often added an imaginative twist to his stories to make them fictional. His spelling improved very little, but he started trying to edit his stories. He would spend days editing them himself, then another period or two getting a classmate to edit them, and then another two days trying to correct his mistakes. Conrad did not want to edit his work with the teacher until he had done all he could by himself. Usually he would lose interest in the story before completing the editing, leave it partly edited, and start another one. His April story demonstrates the writing that resulted (the underlining represents his editing):
Conrad continued to write very interesting stories but needed to improve his spelling and grammar. Orally he could edit his work, but he did not want to correct his errors on paper. He wrote about events chronologically. He seldom used periods, substituting for them larger spaces between the words, as in the writing that he did for the May prompt:
Conrad communicated well orally. He had a fantastic imagination, loved to make up stories, and loved to write about things that happened to him. He was not sure he was a writer because he said he could not spell "good enough". He said that if he could spell better, then his writing would improve. He stated his best writing was in his journal because "it is cool it is the best". Conrad said he taught himself how to write, and when he can't spell a word, he tries to sound it out and thinks hard; if he can't get it, then he asks the teacher. 2.Nancy. Nancy was a very shy, quiet girl at the beginning of the year. She could read and write fairly well but lacked confidence. She was aware that writing was a way of communicating ideas. She was comfortable and relaxed if she could write about personal experiences and use words that were familiar to her. She often used patterned sentences. When she came to the end of a line her sentence was done, whether the thought was complete or not. Although sentence sense was evident in her work, she did not use proper capitals and seldom put in a period, e.g.:
Nancy used words she felt safe using, i.e., words that could be found in the room, on a paper, or in the word book. In November, Nancy moved from the simple patterned sentences to long run-on sentences. She connected her sentences with "and" , as shown in the following entry in her November journal: "today I am Going to my friends BiRthDay Party up the hill and we are going to eat cake and Go to the Movies and Going to have fun and...." By February, there was noticeable growth in her vocabulary. Her rough copies had few spelling errors. She edited her work for spelling and unnecessary capitals; and she also eliminated some of her "and"s to make shorter sentences:
Nancy's rough copies at the end of March contained more compound sentences and fewer that were run-on. She used more words that she didn't know how to spell. During editing she would correct her spelling and put in periods:
By May, Nancy appeared more confident in her writing as she did not hesitate to sit down and write; for example, she wrote for the May prompt the following:
Nancy had to be encouraged to write an imaginary story. Although she began one, she seldom finished it. When she wrote a story based on her personal experiences or her family's life, however, she completed the rough draft and did simple editing, even if she did not publish the story. Nancy stated that she is a good writer and expressed the opinion that you have to know lots of stories to be a good writer. Nancy got her ideas for writing from home and from the themes discussed in the class. 3.Kent. Kent was able to write when he came into the classroom. In his August journal he wrote: "My mom woke me up in the morning I walsht my face eat my seerel." He had an extensive vocabulary and sentence sense. Although he often used sentence fragments, he would add in the words he missed when he reread his work. He knew the conventional spelling for most of the words he needed. If he couldn't spell the word, his invented spelling could be deciphered. For the September prompt, he wrote:
Kent liked to use his own ideas for writing. While many of the other students needed formats and ideas or patterned sentences to help them begin writing, Kent would complete the assignment using few or none of the ideas gained from the prewriting discussion. For example, in November, students were asked to write a friendly letter to the person who was coming for their report card. The class collaboratively wrote a letter that students could copy. Kent wrote a friendly letter, but other than the date, greeting and salutation, he used his own ideas:
Kent started self-editing by mid-year. First, he circled incorrectly used upper case letters and underlined spelling mistakes. Although he corrected his mistakes, he seldom bothered to recopy the story and publish it; rather he would start a new one. His imagination and story sense had developed, as shown by this story:
By mid-March, Kent started to publish his work. He would write, self-edit, get two classmates to peer edit and then bring his work for teacher editing. By this time, there were few errors. He continued to progress in self-editing. When Kent wrote, he made spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. However, when editing, he could find and correct them. Kent added to his piece by writing the new word vertically into the space where it should have been. His vocabulary grew as his writing improved. He wrote words that he wanted to use and checked the spelling during editing. When Kent could not spell a word, he tried to sound it out, asked a friend, looked in his word book, or asked the teacher.
Kent said he was a good writer because he liked his stories and because he was "passing". He said that in order to be a good writer, you have to try hard, think and help people. Kent stated that he learned how to write by copying the ABC's and words. He improved his writing by editing it. Overview of the Grade Two Experience Most students who came into grade two in August understood that writing was a means of communicating. If you could "say something", you could try to write it down. As the year progressed, the students became more proficient at committing to paper exactly what they wanted to say. They became aware that there was a process to follow when writing, and as they became familiar with this process, their writing improved. At the beginning of the year, the majority of the students wrote patterned sentences. Some students used invented spelling, but most were able to spell the patterned words like "I like..." correctly. Four students started their sentences using a patterned sentence but justified their statements, e.g., "I like spaghetti beckus I suc it thru youyr muoth" or "My favourite food is ice cream it tatis like a ceaic" (it tastes like a cake). Students wrote patterned sentences using invented spelling, e.g., "I lk kak kas ets si sw sat" (I like cake cause it is so sweet). Two students still used random strings of letters. By mid-year, student writing had progressed to the level where over half the students wrote from patterned sentences, but more students justified their statements. Although they used invented spellings, these were very close to conventional spelling. Only two students were writing patterned sentences, using invented spelling with only the initial consonant and one other sound, e.g., "I am lek the weather is kol and nettwwe" (I like the winter it is cold and snowy). As well, half the students were beginning to edit their work. First, they underlined and/or circled the words that they thought were misspelled, then they would go to the teacher to find out which words needed to be corrected. The teacher selected commonly used words for the students to correct. If the writing was not to be published, the other misspelled words were ignored. If the writing was to be published, the teacher would give the child the proper spellings before publishing. Students also started checking for correctly used capitals. During editing, they would circle any letter that was incorrectly capitalized. They would make changes, leaving capitals in their proper places. Students adopted editing at different paces. By April, three students started crossing out words and replacing them with the proper words and/or spellings. These students started peer conferencing. By the end of the month, half the class was peer conferencing. Student writing progress accelerated rapidly in May. Students were editing and publishing. By the end of the month, most were publishing at least one story a week, and a few were publishing up to four stories. Students were writing a rough draft, peer conferencing with two classmates and the teacher, and finally publishing their work. At this point, the majority of students were writing voluntarily and were very relaxed about the writing process. One student was still very hesitant to write and would only string together five or six words when attempting to write a story. Two students could write, although they did not usually write voluntarily. These two used invented spellings that were moving towards conventional spelling, as demonstrated below:
Throughout the year, students got their ideas from various sources. At the beginning, many were teacher suggested, and students were encouraged to write about other things if they wished. Until December, may different forms of writing were taught in mini-lessons and modelled by the teachers. Many students copied these forms in their writing. As the year progressed, students were encouraged to use their own initiative in choosing topics. In March, folders with word banks and accompanying pictures were introduced for students to use for ideas. Student use of these folders varied. Some would use the words from the word banks in their stories while others would just use the pictures for ideas. All students became more confident in their abilities as writers. They recognized that by following through a process, their writing improved. They could see that improvement for themselves. Only one student did not demonstrate extensive progress over the year. The Classroom Environment and Writing Activities The grade three classroom had 16 children with different levels of ability (for the last month and a half, there were 19 students). Five of these children had repeated a grade. Students were put into groups of four which were changed a few times throughout the year. Each group had a designated leader who was in charge of getting the supplies or required materials. The classroom was organized to promote independence, co-operation and sharing. Students were encouraged to work to their capabilities, and their self-esteem was maintained. Opportunities were provided for student growth and choice. Students were reading, writing, listening and sharing every day. Every morning the teacher wrote the activities for the day on a chart and discussed these activities with the students. Students chose which ones they would do and the order in which they would do them. They could work on activities individually, with a partner or in a group. The teacher constantly monitored, supported, encouraged and observed students as they worked. The teacher taught mini-lessons to the whole group, as well as lessons to small groups and lessons to individuals as required. Cards related to the themes, student work, word lists, response questions, and other writings were displayed on the walls. There was a great deal of classroom activity with students working on different activities at a number of locations throughout the classroom. Students often discussed activities with each other or gave each other advice about them. Writing was approached as purposeful communication, i.e., students were writing to convey information. Writing was viewed as part of the communication process requiring the integration of reading, speaking and listening. Since students decided what they would write about, their writing was student-directed rather than teacher-directed. Students were taught to use the writing process using a check list to help them identify the required steps and activities. Pens of different colours were used to help the teacher identify who made changes to their writing and what those changes were. A blue pen was used for revising, a black pen for self-editing, and a red pen for peer editing. Students were encouraged to write about what they knew or what interested them. Their draft writings were kept in a duo-tang. When drafts were completed, students found a partner to help them revise their work. Editing consisted of circling spelling mistakes and putting in punctuation. Students were encouraged to find errors and to try correcting them. If they were not able to do so, the teacher would circle the spelling mistake and the student would find the correct spelling. A friend did peer editing. The time during the final editing, done by the student and the teacher, was used for a conference concerning content, grammar, spelling or punctuation mistakes, focussing on only a few areas at a time. The student made a good copy, often in book form. Students were given opportunities to write down their thoughts and ideas in social studies, mathematics, and science and in personal journal and learning logs. They got their writing ideas from stories, either read themselves or read to them by the teacher, or from themes, discussions, pictures, experiences, story webs, and self-generated topics. As students wrote, they were encouraged to use invented spelling and cross out mistakes rather than use an eraser so that the teacher could see what processes were being used. Prewriting activities were done by the whole group, e.g., brainstorming beginnings, better words, feeling words, character description words, possible topics, and problems for stories. Mini-lessons on writing mechanics were taught as the need arose and focussed on how to rise, story problems and solutions, good beginnings, story maps, and structuring the beginning, middle and end of stories. Often these lessons required students to look at their own stories or the stories of published authors. Students used a number of different forms of writing, including stories, compare/contrast pieces, research, descriptive writing, poetry and letters. They wrote about what they learned during the week, how they got the answers in math, and what they would do in different situations. The checklist in Appendix K summarizes where students in the grade three class stood in the development of their writing behaviours and their use of the writing process at the end of the school year. The checklist in Appendix J gives similar information at the beginning, middle and end of the school year for the three students involved in the case studies that follow. Case Studies 1.Merv. When Merv started grade three, he was an immature student, e.g., he sucked his thumb and still does on occasion. Easily distracted, he often watched other students in the classroom and frequently needed to be asked to return to work. At the beginning of the year, he read orally during silent reading time. He had to be encouraged to get a book and read. He had difficulty with such tasks as completing a story map of "Sleeping Ugly" even after the story maps of this book had been discussed with the class. He was a very oral and vocal child, often shouting for the teacher's attention and informing her when he had finished an activity. He often asked, "What are we supposed to do?" He attended school very regularly. From the beginning of the year, Merv knew that writing was a way of communicating ideas and indicated this in his early writings, e.g.:
He was aware that there should be periods. Capitals were used indiscriminately and were not related to the beginning of the sentences. He had an awareness of the conventions of spelling, but often relied on the sounds heard, e.g., "cos" for "because", "wite" for "white", and "fresis" for "freezes". He stayed on topic, relating all his comments to ice cream, for example. His writing was sparse, without elaboration or many descriptive words. By mid-year, there was evidence of some growth in his writing ability. The amount that he wrote increased as he elaborated and expanded on his writing. His spelling and sentence structure had matured, as shown in his piece using the February prompt: "When winter comes The Lives out side will diy be couse winter is cold." (When winter comes the leaves outside will die because winter is cold). His spelling improved, e.g., in his change from writing "because" as "cos" to writing it as "be couse". He was more often able to use periods correctly: "Winter is cold. Winter is very very cold if people go home they will get cold." Merv also started to use "then" to link his ideas, as in the following passage: "I whished that I was rich and then my wish came true and then I was rich then I was sad." By year end, it was possible to see further growth in Merv's writing. He put in titles. He used books that he had read and the themes used in the classroom. He had begun to use conversation in his writing, and he stopped using "then" to tie sentences together.
His spelling had improved; he had a good sense of story; his writing included a problem and a corresponding ending. He wrote more when he has able to choose his own topic rather than having to use a prompt. Merv used the themes that the class was working on as a basis for his writing. The dragon story given above was written a week after the class's dragon theme was finished, which shows that he was able to use ideas from a theme even after it was finished. During the interview, Merv stated that he was a good writer because he was always writing stories and he liked to write stories. He believed that he was a fast writer. To him, those were the qualities of a good writer. He decided what to write by looking in books and asking others to give him clues. He said that he learned to write through teachers and others showing him how. They showed him how to spell the words. He also said he learned to write from stories. He stated that to help others learn to write a story, he would help them spell and give them ideas. 2.Jill. Jill was a very friendly student who liked to please the teacher. She cooperated and did what was asked of her. At the beginning of the year, she was willing to share her stories. She had problems retelling the events of the story on a story map. In August, she used conventional spelling, like "I Like ThaT Cat Because it is soFt and warm Because it as fur and eyes to see things and ti as a tail and a nose". She crossed out "ting" to correct the spelling to "things", so she did some editing. She did not use periods correctly and she used capitals indiscriminately. She had difficult staying with one topic. For example, using the September prompt, she started writing about "penut Butter and Jalley Sandwitch" and then wrote about "sweet candys". She used some descriptive words, such as "Good Sandwitch", "Sweet Candys", it is "scitky" (sticky), and "it's red". By mid-year she did not put capital letters in the middle of words, though she still put capitals at the beginning of some words. In using the writing prompt, she stayed on topic and wrote about winter. She started to use conversation in writing, e.g., "Look Mom we are going to have a new house". She used more conventional spelling. During this time, however, she was insecure about writing stories and did not write many of them. By the end of May, although Jill was using a great deal of conversation in her writing, she was not using quotation marks.
Jill included more character development when she wrote that the third cat in her story was smart and brave. She had begun to put periods in the right places. Although she still used capital letters in the middle of the sentences, she generally put a capital letter in after she put in a period.During the interview, Jill stated that she is a good writer because her auntie told her so. She believed that writers need to be good at listening, reading and colouring in a colouring contest. She said, "Good writers write neat and take their time. They go where they don't have to get disturbed." She decided what to write by thinking and writing like another story. She learned how to write by taking homework to practice with her auntie and by trying her best to write. She stated that she could teach someone how to write by giving them ideas, getting them to look at pictures, letting them do experiments, and letting them think. She said that she did not have any books at home to read, but she did have paper and pencils with which to write. 3.Ruth. When Ruth started grade three she had a good vocabulary, demonstrated good reading ability, and liked to write. She understood how to complete assignments and what was required in a learning log. She had some difficulty in compiling events for a story map, but she had good story sense. She was able to write a story that parallelled those previously read. In September, when the class made a story map using the story, Has Anyone Seen my Umbrella?, Ruth wrote a parallel story called The Princess and the Shoe. She used the class-generated story map, but included some elements from the story of Cinderella, e.g., the maid kept putting shoes on the princess that did not fit. Ruth's spelling was good. In August, she spelled "kept", "petting", "about", and "snoring" correctly. She was able to elaborate on a topic, when writing about a cat, for example: "we talk about how it felt like and how it kind of like snoring but it wasin't snoring it was coming from it's trote." She was aware of periods and generally put a capital after a period. She stayed on topic. In the prompt on pizza, she wrote that she "smelt, checked to see it cooking in the oven and that it had cheese and sauce on it." In November, she began to get the idea of conversation although she did not directly use it:
At mid-year she had a better command of conversation. She was also using character names and showing some character development.
By the end of May, Ruth's writing vocabulary had improved greatly, e.g., "in a middle of a big giganted forest a rainbow started to blom in the sky." She used emotions, i.e., "the rainbow was still ther everybody was scared, they ran". She used a variety of genres. Although she wrote stories, she also like to write fact books, like All about lollipops, and Balloons. Her ability to use punctuation was not as evident as it was at the beginning of the year. Ruth believed that she was a good writer because Mr. Brown (another teacher) said that she writes good. She stated that "writers need to be good at making pictures and writing long and best stories". She did not like to illustrate her stories. She said, "Good writers write words down. They make sentences that make sense and they make long stories." The way she decided what to write was to look at pictures and think about them and look at other books. Her sister and mom helped her learn to write "by holding her hand and helping her to write the alphabets". She believed that she could improve her writing by making it more interesting. To teach others how to write a story she would help them look at books and show them pictures to give them ideas, and she would talk to them. She stated that she did not have any books at home that she could read. Overview of the Grade Three Experience At the beginning of grade three, students generally understood that writing was used to communicate ideas. By the end of the year, having gained an awareness of their audience and the understanding that words can be manipulated and changed, they changed their original text to enhance the meaning. Over the course of the year, the students made considerable progress in writing. This progress was demonstrated in terms of their ability to communicate their ideas, their desire to write, their awareness of the writing process, and improvement in the mechanics of their writing. The following example, drawn from anecdotal records, shows the change that occurred in students' writing behaviour. When a student brought a kitten to school in August, the lesson was changed to accommodate the situation. Students were allowed to interact with the kitten, petting and holding it. They discussed how the kitten felt, what it looked like, and what activities it carried out. Then the students were asked to write about the kitten from any perspective they wanted, e.g., what it looked like or a story involving it. It took about ten minutes before the majority of students were writing, a period in which students were asking such questions as: "What are we supposed to write?" and "How do you spell kitten?" Even after being told that they could write anything, they were reluctant to write. Although they were informed that spelling was not important at this time and they should do the best they could with spelling, they were still reluctant to spell the words, instead asking their neighbours for the correct spelling. After 30 minutes, when students were asked to share their work, only four were willing to share. In contrast, at year end when students were told to write, most began right away after looking around the room to see what was on the walls and discussing possible ideas and problems that interested them. The students were relaxed and willing to write. A few had some problems beginning, especially new students who had been in the classroom less than a month. The other students, however, did not ask how to spell words and wrote for a long period of time without becoming restless. The students did a great deal of re-reading to help them continue on with their stories, as well as to ensure that the pieces they were writing made sense. They showed each other what they were writing. Some students still believed, however, that when they got to the end of the page, they were finished writing. Initially the students had difficulty deciding what to write and finding ideas on what to write. They wanted more direction. They frequently used picture prompts for ideas. The students tended to relate events from their own experiences. Some less capable writers would draw pictures and then write about the pictures. Writing to these students was a retelling of what was in the picture. Often the students did not have any direction for their stories. In using plots from other stories, they tended to rewrite the original story rather than use its plot to make up their own. For example, one student simply retold Miss Nelson Is Missing, changing the name to Mr. Nelson Is Missing and viewed this change as creating a different story. By the end of the school year, students were able to manipulate stories that they had read. For example, a student who was reading Dennis Lee's poem, "Jelly Belly", wrote about someone named Jelly and tried to use rhyming words as Lee had done in the poem. At this point, students tended to write about the themes that they were working on, even though that was not required. Sometimes students would continue to write using ideas from a theme long after the theme was finished. Story webs were used to outline ideas for a story, and then the story was written based on these ideas. At the end of the year, a less capable writer who used pictures to get ideas, was able to use the pictures to create a story with a problem and a solution. At first, students' writing generally consisted of simple sentences and used very basic writing mechanics, as shown in the following example:
Students would
repeat the same information to make their story longer, e.g.:
By the end of the year, this same student was better able to sequence a story:
Generally the students wrote in a way that made events follow more logically from the preceding sentence. Students' initial vocabulary consisted of simple words that were safe to spell. During the year, their written vocabulary increased, e.g., one student used "sneaked" and "bothered" even when she did not know how to spell them. By the end of the year, students did not repeat the same information over and over again to make a long story, and their writing was more elaborate. The level of spelling ability increased without time being spent on drill and practice. Even a person with lower writing ability now would spell words like "shiny", and a boy who wrote "loot" for "looked" in the fall was writing "looket" in April. To get correct spelling, children used the word wall, asked a friend, or went to the dictionary. Students had difficulty using periods correctly, with some just putting them in at the end of the line. None of the students used quotation marks. Students also used conversation in their writing only rarely at first. However, as the year progressed, they used more conversation and also quotation marks. When they were reminded to put in periods, they had a better idea of where to put them, and they were more likely to put in question marks when they wrote questions. Initially students did not use the writing process because they did not know what it was. They expected to write only a first draft and do nothing more with the piece after that. When students were introduced to the writing process, they used a checklist to ensure that they went through the whole process in their writing. They found revision the most difficult step in the process because they confused revision with editing. By year end, they had moved away from the belief that if you change the spelling of words, you are changing the story. At year end, most were comfortable with the idea of using the writing process in their written work. Most students used the checklist to go through the process of writing before they asked the teacher to edit their work. The students believed that all the stories they wrote were good; therefore, they went through the editing process with most of their stories to make books. They enjoyed making books as their finished product. Each child made between five and ten books, which were made available for the rest of the class to read. Students shared these stories at sharing time, and they were well read by the students in the class. By the end of May, students were beginning to use felt boards to tell their story through the medium of drama. The student writing interviews yielded important and interesting information. All except two said they were writers. The reasons given by the two who said they were not writers was their inability to spell. Five students believed that mechanics was important in being a good writer. Many students said that they got their ideas from books. Some believed they got their ideas from thinking "in their head". Students tended to have a variety of sources from which to obtain correct spelling. Most cited the dictionary as their most used source, but observations indicated few students used this source very often. They also indicated that they received the spelling from friends or books, or by sounding it out. Very few said they got spelling from the teacher. About half the students believed the members of their families helped them learn how to write. The other half said teachers helped them. The kind of writing help that students stated they received was always related to some aspect of mechanics. When students were asked what they would do to teach someone else how to write, they talked about some form of writing process. Most students stated that they had writing materials at home, but few, if any, had any books at home that they could read. Results of the Research Project Interviews at the end of the project enabled the researchers to get the views of parents. Initially, when parents were asked whether or not their children had discussed the writing at school with them, most responded, "Yes." Only four of the 45 parents who consented to be interviewed stated that their children either would not write or were neutral about writing. All parents, except two, expressed pleasure at the amount of writing their children had done. They talked about some of the writing they had seen during parent-teacher interviews. Most stated that their children were doing quite a bit of writing at home. One parent, who said that her son did not write, told us how he would write little notes when he was going somewhere. All parents were willing to have their children participate in a writing project next year. When asked whether she was pleased or displeased with the writing project, the parent of a grade one child said she was not sure and related the following incident.
In spite of her concern, however, Mom was proud of the level and amount of writing her child had done. Conclusions and Recommendations This study has documented the noticeable growth in the childrens' writing abilities in these three classrooms. By the end of the year, the children in all three classrooms viewed themselves as writers. They are now comfortable with the writing process and confident of their ability to write. They have moved from being almost totally teacher oriented at the beginning of grades two and three (i.e., they wrote for the teacher or to please the teacher rather than themselves) to being self-oriented and writing ideas that they wished to express. Such growth supports the use of the writing process as part of the English language arts approach. Moreover, based on the amount of writing and the degree of development in the children's writing abilities, we would recommend that teachers of Aboriginal students use the writing process as advocated by the English Language Arts Elementary Curriculum. The themes provide a context within which language processes can be taught and used. They also facilitate interactive learning through literature and response, providing a context for talking, reading and writing. Word charts and poetry also give children vocabulary to use in their writing. Because of the ongoing debate about this approach to teaching English language arts and the reluctance of some teachers to implement the curriculum, school boards may need to examine how teachers can be encouraged to move in the direction set out by the new curriculum. This may be facilitated by providing the results of this study to those charged with defining the direction of educational programs. Teachers who participated in the study have had the opportunity to examine their beliefs and practices about teaching the writing process. They were able to reflect on the results of actions taken during student writing time and have made decisions about the changes they will make in future instruction in this area. From the researchers' perspective, this learning process was probably the most important outcome of the research. Over the span of the project, the researchers also realized that collaboration and discussion about the research, including visits to each other's classrooms, was the most worthwhile and beneficial part of the research project. Since all the teachers were involved in the same process, there was a common ground for discussion. The discussion relieved anxieties and helped in planning future activities. Children benefited indirectly as teachers changed and modified their teaching to reflect their own professional growth. It is our conclusion that teachers engaged in implementing the English Language Arts K-5 Curriculum need to be aware of the value of a support group, particularly if they have not been using the writing process and/or themes in their classrooms. We recommend that principals encourage peer support groups among teachers and facilitate teacher visitations between classrooms. On the basis of their experiences in this research project, the researchers believe that children should be immersed in a great deal of good literature to give them ideas and vocabulary for their writing, as well as to develop their story sense. Since many of the children involved in this study did not have this kind of knowledge, the teachers needed to provide the necessary background before students could use story elements in writing. Teachers found that they needed access to literature written in different forms, such as travel logs, diaries, and letters, that they could share with the children as models for writing. A listing of suitable materials would have made it easier for teachers to acquire these materials. Teachers who have little familiarity with children's literature are in special need of this resource. Aboriginal children also need access to good quality literature that features Aboriginal people. Money for these resources needs to be available. Communities need libraries to provide children and their parents with access to books. However, it is also important to help parents realize that children need writing materials as well as books to help them become confident, literate individuals. The school needs to explore ways to foster this realization in many families. The researchers recognize that the modelling of writing processes is very important to students' growth in writing ability. Children need writing models. These can be provided by the teacher and through the posting of models or charts of different forms of writing. The presence of models allows the children to be aware of the different forms of writing when they are starting a new draft. We also accept that children need interaction with peers and other writers to expand their thinking and writing. During the research project, prompts were given at three different times: the beginning, mid-point, and end of the year. The prompts did not lead to the best writing the children produced at these times. The lines provided on the page led the children to consider their writing done when the lines were filled. They did better writing when they chose their own topics. Often their choices evolved from stories or from talk related to the theme being studied in the classroom. This experience would indicate that children need to choose their own topics for writing rather than be asked to write from prompts. It also leads the researchers to conclude that assessment of student writing should not be done on the basis of short, teacher-selected topics that all students must use for writing during a predetermined time. Rather assessment should be based on writings chosen by the student and/or teachers in the course of their usual writing activities. The interview with students at year-end revealed children's thoughts concerning their writing and indicated what they believed a good writer should do. The researchers found this interview a valuable source of insight into student thinking. Such interviews would also be useful at the beginning of the year. However, if these insights from the interviews were put into each student's portfolio and sent to the next teacher with the child, a year-end interview would probably suffice. This study concentrated more on story writing and less on writing in the content areas. Consequently, writing in the content areas needs to be explored. Writing in learning logs and reflection logs is being used in new content area curricula, such as math 1-5. This type of writing should be a focus of further research. It would also be valuable to implement a longitudinal study that followed the progress in the writing of these students through the next year to determine whether or not progress is sustained over time. Tracking the writing of a group of students throughout their schooling would give deeper insight to teachers about the value of using the writing process. Finally, it would be useful to implement a project that studies the effects of an integrated language arts program on students whose first language is not English or who come from a non-standard English home environment. Researchers would need to interview the parents of these students as well as describing the effects of the programs on them. It is recognized that, although this project dealt with Aboriginal students, it did not relate the experiences with the program to the students' Aboriginality. Information from such research would benefit the teachers who work with Aboriginal and other students. Atwell,
N. (1987) Booth, D., J.
Booth and J. Phenix (1994) Calkins, L.
(1991) Clay, M. M.
(1982) Cullinan, B.,
ed. (1993) Froese, V.,
ed. (1990) Graves, D. H.
(1978) Jasmin, J. (1993) Johnson, T.
D. and D. R. Louis (1989) Parry, J. and
Hornsby, D. (1988) Routman, R.
(1991) Saskatchewan
Education (1992)
|
|||||||||||||||||
