empowering primary writers through daily journal...

Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 24: 112–122, 2010Copyright © Association for Childhood Education InternationalISSN: 0256-8543 print / 2150-2641 onlineDOI: 10.1080/02568541003635151

UJRC0256-85432150-2641Journal of Research in Childhood Education, Vol. 24, No. 2, February 2010: pp. 0–0Journal of Research in Childhood Education

Empowering Primary Writers Through Daily Journal Writing

Empowering Primary Writers Jones and East Jill JonesLiberty University, Lynchburg, Virginia

Jill EastPalm Beach County School District, West Palm Beach, Florida

Incorporating a journal writing routine into the classroom is critical to developing autonomouswriters. During the course of a full year, a first-grade classroom embarked on a quest to discover theimportance of creating successful writers. This study confirms the significance of implementing andestablishing authentic and meaningful journal writing sessions. The quantitative analysis demon-strates the constant growth and achievement that empowered this group of students to become writers.The journal entry examples depict one student’s personal writing journey and personalize theresearch. The findings delineate how journal writing, with proper teacher support, empowers studentsby increasing their writing abilities, through increased confidence and control over written language.

Keywords: differentiated instruction, efficacy, first grade, journal writing

Writing is an integral ingredient of the primary curriculum. Through writing, children learnto tame the printed world around them by manipulating words to express themselves. Successfulwriting experiences can lead to successful reading experiences by building the children’s levelof self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986). Positive thinking does affect student work, and success oftendoes breed success. As teachers, we must immerse children in meaningful writing experiences.

This article clearly delineates the positive results of a yearlong journal writing endeavor inone first-grade classroom. The purpose of this article is to depict the students’ writing growth,over the course of the academic year, and demonstrate the need to seamlessly interweavejournaling into the entire day and into the children’s home lives.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The power of the mind is unimaginable. Compliments and kind words are often overridden bythoughts of self-doubt and self-criticism. We are usually our own worst enemy. Bandura (1977,

Submitted January 23, 2009; accepted May 7, 2009.Address correspondence to Jill Jones, Liberty University School of Education, 1971 University Boulevard,

Lynchburg, VA 24502. E-mail: [email protected]

wcsstaff

Highlight

wcsstaff

Highlight

wcsstaff

Highlight

wcsstaff

Highlight

EMPOWERING PRIMARY WRITERS 113

1986, 1997) used the term self-efficacy to explain how people view their ability to achieve or exe-cute a task. One’s belief about ability often leads to successful outcomes, regardless of overallskills (Bandura, 1997; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003; Maimon, 2002). Children are more likely toperform a task if they believe they will be successful. Journal writing can promote efficaciousbehaviors by providing students with a task that is individually challenging yet attainable.

As teachers, we must promote and encourage confidence in our students’ abilities to write, and atthe same time, be active participants in their learning progress. Writing and reading are intricatelyinterwoven, one aspect building and relying upon the other (Clay, 1975). Therefore, a well-orchestrated writing system can influence children’s reading development because of its ability to linksymbols to sounds, an essential skill to the decoding process (Clarke, 1988; Eitelgeorge & Barrett,2004). The teacher of beginning writers must provide opportunities and purposes for writing andengage children’s interests as active participants (Clay, 2002; Graves, 1994, 2003). Educators mustinspire, motivate, and empower children to explore writing and be immersed in the process of writing.

Teachers have unique opportunities to reach all students individually through successful jour-nal writing sessions. According to Vygotsky (1978), the most effective individualized instruc-tion takes place within the child’s zone of proximal development—a learning environment inwhich the task is not too easy and not too difficult, due to cognitive support. Educators mustwork to determine students’ individual strengths and needs and then encourage them to soar intoa new level of maturity. To provide this type of atmosphere in the classroom, students should beinvolved in meaningful journal writing experiences (Fulwiler, 1987).

Educators must take the opportunity to conference with each child during journal writing ses-sions (Graves, 2003). It is imperative to differentiate the instruction based on the strengths andneeds of each student. This process enables the teacher to properly identify and target the stu-dent’s abilities. While conferencing one-on-one with the student, the primary teacher has theability to tailor the instruction, decide on a goal that is challenging, yet attainable, for the child,and, at the same time, build his or her confidence by confirming strengths. These steps help tofacilitate, and further create, the abilities of a more successful writer (Keene & Zimmerman,2007). By differentiating the instruction, through one-on-one conferencing, students becomeempowered to develop and reinforce the skills and strategies they need to master during authen-tic journal writing sessions (Bissex, 1980; McGee & Richgels, 2004).

Writing is a vital tool and, with the proper motivating guidance, students will become success-ful writers. When teachers create an environment that promotes self-efficacy, students developinto autonomous writers (Lambirth & Goouch, 2006). Teachers and students must be activelyinvolved for the journal writing sessions to prosper. This student-teacher interaction motivatesstudents to succeed. When teachers, children, and others work together to inspire, entice, and sup-port developing writers, children write well (Graves, 1995; Lambirth & Goouch, 2006). This kindof commitment will eventually cause children to successfully communicate their ideas, motivateand challenge them to spread their wings, and help develop meaningful writing skills. Consistentjournal writing sessions can engage students and inspire their development into master writers.

DEFINING JOURNAL WRITING

Journal writing has numerous definitions. It can entail students copying information from theboard, free writing on any topic, and/or formally writing in response to a given prompt. The

114 JONES AND EAST

following elements defined the journal writing process in this first-grade classroom: dailypractice, consistent feedback, integration into other classroom practices, a supportive environ-ment, sharing opportunities, and a home/school connection.

Journal writing occurred daily, spanning from the first day to the last day of school. The stu-dents knew that the morning routine involved placing homework in the correct bins, movingtheir attendance slips, and writing in their composition journal notebook.

Consistent feedback was another critical element (Graves, 1994, 2003). Each studentreceived specific feedback at least twice a week. This task was accomplished through theteacher reading and responding to a minimum of five journals a day through brief one-on-oneconferences, and through the parent volunteer program. The “miniconferences” involved theteacher sitting next to the student and reading the journal out loud (often receiving help from thestudent). Then, the teacher chose one aspect to discuss and wrote the child’s “writing secret” atthe bottom of the page—for example, “Capitalize the first word” or “Remember to use aperiod.”

The journal writing process also was interwoven throughout the day. The Word Wall, spell-ing dictionary, alphabet/sound charts, Elkonin boxes, science terms, and family meeting were allpart of journal writing. The students knew they had to spell the word wall words correctly andeven created a fun name for offenders: “Word Wall Criminals.” Students used the Elkonin boxesand their alphabet sound charts to assist them in writing unknown words. The family meetingprovided a forum for sharing. Each day, two or three students read their stories aloud (practicingfluency), while their classmates actively listened and responded.

The classroom environment was continually being managed to create optimum writing envi-ronments (Graves, 1995). Classical music played quietly while the lights were dimmed; scarymusic played, the lights were turned off, and students wrote using flashlights; Scottish musicplayed and a leprechaun was hidden in the room.

The students were also acutely aware that they were writing for an audience. They had theopportunity to read their work during family meeting time, to the teacher in miniconferences, toa parent volunteer, and to their parents during parent-teacher conferences and open house nights.

The last component—the home/school connection—was critical. Parent volunteers wereasked to spend the first 30 to 40 minutes of the day walking around and listening to students’journal entries. While parents often orally applauded the students’ content and efforts, they weregiven specific messages they could write in the student journals (see Figure 1). Parents were alsogiven the opportunity to arrive later in the day and listen to students’ journal entries.

METHOD

Participants and Setting

The 15 student journals selected for review were from the same teacher’s first-grade classroom.The teacher also served as one of the researchers in this study. This classroom consisted of26 students. Six student journals were not included in the data analysis, due to the childrenmoving in or out of the classroom. Three student journals were missing significant writing sec-tions, due to the loss of one or more composition notebooks, and two of the children wereunwilling to leave their writing journals at the end of the school year for use in the current study.


The participants were composed of eight boys and seven girls and represented the varied literacyabilities found in this classroom.

This classroom was situated in a high socioeconomic level area; however, approximately25% of the student body was bused to the school from a low-income, federally subsidizedhousing area. This Florida school district is one of the largest in the United States and continuesto experience growth issues. The school itself was brand-new and equipped with SmartBoards,four computers in every classroom, and computer projection equipment.

Data

This article is based on two sources of data: (1) student writing journals and (2) teacher/researcher observation notes. The journals were part of the students’ everyday curriculum andreceived their daily attention. The teacher/researcher’s observation notes also framed the basictemplate of this article and, as a result, should not be ignored.

Quantitative Analysis Procedures and Results

The student journals were separated. Only journals that depicted writing throughout the entireyear were included in the analysis process. Student journals were analyzed by computing thefollowing categories: correctly spelled words, total words, and correct use of punctuation for allthree sample dates. Three specific dates were chosen for data analysis: August 14, January 14,and May 25. Student absence resulted in a 2-day deviation standard.

The raw data were transformed into mean and standard deviation scores as an initialstatistical procedure (see Table 1). The mean gain scores for each category demonstratedmarked growth. A repeated-measures ANOVA then was conducted to explore the participants’

FIGURE 1 Parent/volunteer writing prompt sheet.

“Here’s Your Secret to Good Writing!”

Sounds and Spelling

1. Write the sounds you hear2. Writing begins on the left side of the page3. Stretch the word–c . . . a . . . t4. Write the beginning sound (listen for the beginning sound . . . now write it)5. Write the ending sound (listen for the ending sound . . . now write it)6. The word have is on the Word Wall. Check the word wall7. Reread and check your writing for errors

Conventions

1. Put spaces between your words2. How do you begin every sentence?3. What do you need at the end of your sentence?4. Add “juicy words”–big, little, delicious, colorful, slowly5. Does your story have a beginning, a middle, and an end?6. Do you need the word and at the beginning of your sentence?7. Use transitional words

116 JONES AND EAST

development in all three categories. Table 2 depicts a summary of the Statistical Package for theSocial Sciences (SPSS, ver. 16.0) analysis results. A repeated-measures ANOVA on correctspelling produced a significant result, F(2, 13) = 16.808, p < .05, with a significance level of.000. Wilks’s lambda produced a significant result, F(2, 13) = 9.388, p < .05, with a significancelevel of .003. A repeated-measures ANOVA on total words used produced a significant result,F(2, 13) = 14.961, p < .05, with a significance level of .000. Wilks’s lambda produced asignificant result, F(2, 13) = 10.432, p < .05, with a significance level of .002. A repeated-measures ANOVA on correct punctuation produced a significant result, F(2, 13) = 10.578,p < .05, with a significance level of .000. Wilks’s lambda produced a significant result, F(2, 13)= 8.726, p < .05, with a significance level of .004.

All three categories—correct spelling, words used, and correct punctuation—depicted asteady upward trend in mean scores. Figure 2 places all three line graphs together. This consis-tent and large increase in these three categories of writing skills depicts children using inventivespelling techniques to express themselves while building writing endurance. It would appearthat correct spelling mirrors the process in steady growth without the same upward gains. Punc-tuation, as many primary educators would testify, is the last element for students to grasp wellenough to use in everyday writing. Although the three categories depict different levels of gain,all of them demonstrate steady growth over time.

TYLER’S WRITING JOURNEY

The ANOVA analysis, tables, and figures depict the significance of daily journal writing. Thissection allows the reader a glimpse into one student’s writing journey.

TABLE 1Data Analysis Chart

Correct Spelling of Words Total Words Used Correct Punctuation

Name August January May August January May August January May

Chris 20 31 128 27 43 129 2 6 25Tyler 0 37 59 0 82 69 0 0 2Tristan 5 32 34 12 50 39 0 1 3Ashni 20 84 95 24 96 98 2 10 7Alyssa 14 37 110 19 42 113 0 1 17Michael 4 18 64 6 30 79 0 4 4Molly 20 54 66 22 59 68 2 5 13Sammy 6 24 80 11 30 98 1 1 6Claudia 51 204 313 53 209 322 7 24 39Adrian 10 38 34 18 40 37 0 12 6Stephen 9 28 12 12 35 17 1 6 5Paolo 39 31 61 54 41 63 0 1 5Kaitlyn 6 68 55 13 82 71 1 3 3Chandanie 14 56 73 19 75 74 1 8 7Kayla 0 38 75 11 59 215 0 5 3M 14.53333 52 83.93333 20.06667 64.86667 99.46667 1.13333 5.8 9.66667


TABLE 2SPSS 16.0 Analysis Results

Data Categories

Descriptive Statistics M SD N

MultivariantTestsb Value F

Hyp. df

Error df Significance

Correct spelling

August 14.53 14.242 15 Pillai’s Trace 0.591 9.388a 2.000 13.000 0.003January 52.00 45.547 15 Wilks’s Lambda 0.409 9.388a 2.000 13.000 0.003May 83.93 69.844 15 Hotelling’s Trace 1.444 9.388a 2.000 13.000 0.003

Roy’s Largest Root 1.444 9.388a 2.000 13.000 0.003Total words used


Roy’s Largest Root 1.605 10.432a 2.000 13.000 0.002Correct punctuation


Roy’s Largest Root 1.342 8.726a 2.000 13.000 0.004

Mauchly’s Test of Sphericityb

Within-Subjects Effect Mauchly’s W c2 df Significance Greenhouse-Geisser Huynh-Feldt Lower-bound

Correct spelling 0.522 8.460 2 0.015 0.676 0.723 0.500Total words used 0.578 7.127 2 0.028 0.703 0.758 0.500Correct punctuation 0.629 6.026 2 0.049 0.729 0.793 0.500

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

SourceType III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Significance

Correct spelling Sphericity assumed 36199.244 2 18099.622 16.808 0.000Greenhouse-Geisser 36199.244 1.353 26757.557 16.808 0.000Huynh-Feldt 36199.244 1.446 25027.014 16.808 0.000Lower-bound 36199.244 1.000 36199.244 16.808 0.001

Error (Correct spelling) Sphericity Assumed 30151.422 28 1076.837Greenhouse-Geisser 30151.422 18.940 1591.940Huynh-Feldt 30151.422 20.250 1488.981Lower-bound 30151.422 14.000 2153.673

Total words used Sphericity Assumed 47542.800 2 23771.400 14.961 0.000Greenhouse-Geisser 47542.800 1.406 33803.723 14.961 0.000Huynh-Feldt 47542.800 1.516 31352.951 14.961 0.000Lower-bound 47542.800 1.000 47542.800 14.961 0.002

Error (Total words) Sphericity Assumed 44489.200 28 1588.900Greenhouse-Geisser 44489.200 19.690 2259.469Huynh-Feldt 44489.200 21.229 2095.657Lower-bound 44489.200 14.000 3177.800

Correct punctuation Sphericity Assumed 547.733 2 273.867 10.578 .000Greenhouse-Geisser 547.733 1.459 375.460 10.578 .002Huynh-Feldt 547.733 1.585 345.491 10.578 .001Lower-bound 547.733 1.000 547.733 10.578 .006

(Continued)

118 JONES AND EAST

Tyler’s first writing (on August 14) was a string of letters: K N N S D S A D S A L S U D OS U D O U S T G T o S A D (all S letters were backwards). Tyler’s journal writing fromAugust 25 paints a vivid picture of how individual assessment can lead to immediate efficaciousbehavior (see Figure 3). Tyler had chosen to write about alien astronauts and spent about15 minutes on his writing and 15 minutes on his drawing. Upon completion, Tyler wasinstructed to meet with the teacher/researcher at the reading table. Prior to leaving his seat, Tylerhad read his journal to a parent volunteer, who had written a personal writing secret “rememberspacing” and the compliment “good job” on his journal—along with the date. When asked toread his journal, Tyler stated, “Alien astronauts are scared.” He then proceeded to talk about thepicture he had drawn depicting alien astronauts fighting a large spacecraft and rocket in space.Tyler stated that the aliens were scared because our astronauts were forcing them to leave space

TABLE 2(Continued)

Tests of Within-Subjects Effects

SourceType III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Significance

Error (Correct punctuation)

Sphericity Assumed 724.933 28 25.890Greenhouse-Geisser 724.933 20.424 35.495Huynh-Feldt 724.933 22.195 32.662Lower-bound 724.933 14.000 51.781

Corrected tests are displayed in the Tests of Within-Subjects Effects Table.a. Exact statistic.b. Design: Intercept within-subjects design.

FIGURE 2 Line graphs depicting all three categories.


instead of landing on Earth and the aliens were almost out of rocket fuel. He went into anelaborate story that explained why the aliens were there and how our astronauts were going tofight them.

The teacher/researcher told Tyler she was proud of his hard work and impressed with hispicture and story about the alien astronauts. Then, she asked him to turn back to his very firstjournal entry and the few pages after it. Tyler tried to skip the third and fourth entries; however,he complied with the teacher and turned back to those pages. One page was blank except for alarge X drawn through the page; the other page had a large X drawn through some randomletters. The teacher/researcher asked Tyler to put his finger on the X page and then look at thewriting about the alien encounter. She then asked Tyler how he thought he was doing in writing.Tyler’s face completely transformed as he smiled and quickly stated that he was doing muchbetter now because he knew so well what the story was about that he could even draw a picturewhen he was done. He then apologized for making Xs on his paper and promised not to do thatanymore because he was a good writer now. The teacher/researcher accepted his apology andshowed him how he did a good job of matching the letters and sounds in the words ileen (alien)and rsntnes (astronauts). Then, she showed Tyler the importance of spacing by writing him aletter without any spaces in it. The letter read, “IlikeyouTyler!” Tyler told his teacher thatthe letter was hard to read and asked her to read it to him. The teacher/researcher rewrote thesame letter with spaces and asked him to try again. This time, Tyler was able to read the letterand laughed at his teacher’s first attempt. Tyler was reminded that spacing helps the readerunderstand the writing and that he could use his finger as a “spacer.”

FIGURE 3 Tyler’s first two samples.

120 JONES AND EAST

Tyler’s writing sample from August 25 showed the teacher/researcher that he was beginningto feel comfortable with the writing process and his ability to translate his oral language anddrawings into print (Schickedanz & Casbergue, 2004; Sulzby, 1986; Wiseman, 2003). Theteacher/researcher’s new goal for Tyler was for him to create a narrative story that included abeginning, a middle, and an ending. Tyler was shown how to use the class Word Wall and hispersonalized writing dictionary to correctly spell commonly chosen words, such as “space,”“ant,” and “Saturn.”

Tyler’s median and final journal entries allow the reader to enter his world of “slow butsteady” writing practice and its ensuing success (see Figure 4). Figure 4 depicts Tyler’s medianwriting sample. The retelling of this story was:

One warm day a F3 tornado hit our school, nrrrr nrrrr nrrrrrr [Tyler makes a loud whirring noise],now for the noise of a F3 tornado . . . it is incredibly loud and painful! The tornado was wrecking thehouse and funneling. The F3 is gone now because the weather pressure has changed due to a barom-eter shift. It is only a F2 now it is racing, brushing and turning, in every which way possible intoouter space. It is picking up speed and it is churning and ferocious. The country has aliens in it parkand they are turning it into a F1 with their ray-gun technology . . . their guns are not working prop-erly on Earth so the F1 is not a F2 . . . now a F3 . . . now a F4 . . . now a F5 . . . oh no!!! How manytornados are going to be created now? There is a new F1 F2 and F3 and a crazy F4.

A comparison of Tyler’s retelling and his actually writing demonstrates that he still has more“story” going on his head than he is able to express in print. However, this writing sample doesdemonstrate his increased writing stamina, confidence, and improved ability to match letters/

FIGURE 4 Tyler’s median and last sample


sounds, use spacing, and correctly spell common sight words (is, the, now, a, one). Figure 4 alsodepicts Tyler’s final writing sample. His retelling of this story was:

One day me and Tristan turned into ants. When me and Tristan walked outside some ants saw us.The ants said one of us was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Me and Tristan said “yes” we areone of you and the ants came rushing at us and started to carry us away . . . but at 2 p.m. me andTristan got bigger and bigger and they couldn’t carry us to their leader. At 3 p.m. me and Tristan gotbiger and biger and the ants just stared and twitched their antennas. At 2:45 p.m. me and Tristanwere kids again and we lived happily ever after.

Tyler’s concluding writing sample depicts his incredible writing journey. He started with astring of letters, moved into invented writing with portions of the story containing correctlyspelled sights words and large sections of the story missing, and progressed to a concludingwriting sample that demonstrated strong letter/sound correspondence, directionality, story struc-ture, and a desire to interweave his current math lesson (telling time) into his writing. Tyler wasone of the first-grade students the principal had on a “watch list” for retention the first half of theyear. His significant writing and reading gains removed him from that list. Tyler’s concludingwriting still demonstrates his struggle with writing all the details of the story in his head, but heis aware of his growth and is determined to continue his improvement. More important, Tyleracts like a successful writer and appears to understand that his growth is a direct result of hishard work and dedication over time.

EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

The practice of daily journal writing in one primary classroom demonstrated that this endeavorhas the potential to increase students’ writing confidence and control over written language.When the classroom teacher immersed the students in an enriched writing environment, the stu-dents’ achievement was spectacular. By creating a rich writing environment, teachers can reapthe benefits of producing talented writers who have improved spelling and reading abilities.

Educators play a vital role in the writing process. The steady and consistent writing gainshighlight the importance of effective and daily one-on-one conferences. During meaningful dia-logue with the students, teachers have the opportunity to scaffold instruction and allow childrento strive for improvement. This relationship also can empower students by showing them how tocompare their efforts to earlier attempts; thus, the process eliminates negative comparativethinking (I am not as good as Sally). Students begin to feel successful, and this confidence canspur them to write and begin to view themselves as expert writers. Through faithful journal writ-ing sessions, with constant teacher support, primary children are able to increase their knowl-edge of their strengths and begin to create attainable goals for themselves.

The data demonstrated the impact that daily journal writing sessions can have on primarystudents’ understanding and use of correct punctuation and spelling. The authentic writing environ-ment is key to learning how to apply these grammar skills (Bissex, 1980; McGee & Richgels, 2004).Through all of the “secrets,” Elkonin Sound Boxes, and small-group writing instruction, these stu-dents moved away from invented spelling and began to employ appropriate grammar and spellingtechniques. The children entered first grade with different writing abilities and exited first gradereaching attainable goals, making personal gains, and feeling confident about their writing abilities.

122 JONES AND EAST

The creativity of the students’ journal writing was evident as the students began creatinghigher level stories by inserting metaphors, humor, and meaningful dialogue. These childrenbegan to include clear sections for the beginning, middle, and end to their stories. Their laterentries demonstrated heightened confidence and creativity. All educators can attain this type ofgrowth by immersing children in daily meaningful writing sessions and building positive attain-able goals through individual tailored conferences.

The journey that these students took gave them the confidence to take their skills further andto create longer stories, spell more words accurately, and incorporate higher level cognitivethought into their journals. The growth and challenges were attainable and, at the same time,encouraged the students to reach their goals. Through the process of positive interactionbetween teacher and students, these children were able to make remarkable strides and devel-oped the skills needed to become empowered readers and writers.

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice

Hall.Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.Bissex, G. L. (1980). Gyns at wrk: A child learns to write and read. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Clarke, L. K. (1988). Invented versus traditional spelling in first graders’ writing: Effects on learning to spell and read.

Research in the Teaching of English, 22(3), 281–309.Clay, M. (1975). What did I write? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Clay, M. (2002). An observation survey of early literacy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Eitelgeorge, J. S., & Barrett, R. (2004). Multiple continua of writing development in a first grade classroom. Reading

Research and Instruction, 43, 17–64.Fulwiler, T. (1987). The journal book. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Graves, D. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Graves, D. (1995). Creating the writing room: Children’s writing flourishes when you build a predictable environment.

Instructor, 105, 34–35.Graves, D. (2003). Writing: Teachers and children at work (20th anniversary ed.). Exeter, NH: Heinemann.Keene, E. O., & Zimmerman, S. (2007). Mosaic of thought: The power of comprehension strategy instruction (2nd ed.).

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Lambirth, A., & Goouch, K. (2006). Golden times of writing: The creative compliance of writing journals. Literacy,

40(3), 146–152.Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the

classroom. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19, 119–137.Maimon, L. (2002). The relationship between self-efficacy and the functions of writing. Journal of College Reading and

Learning, 33(1), 32–45.McGee, L. M., & Richgels, D. J. (2004). Literacy’s beginnings: Supporting young readers and writers (4th ed.). Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.Schickedanz, J. A., & Casbergue, R. M. (2004). Writing in preschool: Learning to orchestrate meaning and marks.

Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Sulzby, E. (1986). Young children’s concepts for oral and written texts. In K. Durkin (Ed.), Language development dur-

ing the school years (pp. 95–116). London: Croom Helm.Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Wiseman, A. (2003). Collaboration, initiation, and rejection: The social construction of stories in a kindergarten class.

Reading Teacher, 56, 638.

Copyright of Journal of Research in Childhood Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not

be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

empowering primary writers through daily journal...

Documents