professional voices/classroom portrait letting … · professional voices/classroom portrait l ......

10 PRIMARY VOICES K–6 Volume 11, Number 2 October 2002

Professional Voices/Classroom Portrait

LETTING GO OF“LETTER OF THE WEEK”

Donna BellPre-kindergartenteacher, SouthKilbourneElementary School,Columbia, SouthCarolina

O

Donna JarvisKindergartenteacher, SouthKilbourneElementary School,Columbia, SouthCarolina

Introduction: The Literacy Dig supporting the literacy growth of our kin-dergartners. We became determined to letgo of a deficit model that looks at instruc-tion by identifying what children do notknow. We wanted to let every child knowthat he or she could read and write, and wewanted to provide support and opportu-nities for children to use what they knewto learn new things.

These thoughts had a personally emo-tional impact for both of us as we immedi-ately connected them to our own literacyhistories. Experiences from our childhoodsuddenly took on new meaning as we con-sidered how each of us turned away fromreading as children:

Donna Jarvis: As a young child, I loved school,and I worked hard because I didn’t want todisappoint my teachers. Until I was in fourthgrade, I was always in the top reading group.Then my teacher announced that she was goingto move me to the middle reading group. Shethought I could do a “better job” in that group.Of course, I knew that she really meant I wasn’tgood enough for the top group. That day, Imade a conscious decision to stop reading. Isaid, “If she thinks that I can’t read well enoughto be in the top group, then I’m certainly notgoing to read in that other group.” And I didn’t.I didn’t read whole books again until I took achildren’s literature course as an undergraduatein college. One book I chose to read wasCharlotte’s Web. When I read it, I was saddenedto think of all the great literature I had missedover the years.

Donna Bell: Looking back over my readingbackground, things look pretty bare. I don’tknow how or why I turned away from readingbut I was certainly able to get through elemen-tary school, middle school, high school, andcollege without having to read very much. Idon’t remember teacher read-alouds until the

n the way home from our secondReading Initiative meeting, wewere both surprised at the emotions

stirred by our study group conversations.We had participated in a “Literacy Dig.”Like archaeologists, we were asked to “dig”for literacy in the world around us—not inthe usual places but in uncommon placesin our homes and communities. Prior tothis experience, we defined literacy asknowing how to read in “school-styled”ways—reading words, sentences, and para-graphs in books, newspapers, magazines—but when the members of our Reading Ini-tiative group shared the results of our“digs,” we were amazed. Literacy was ev-erywhere—on shampoo bottles, the micro-wave, the washing machine, videotapes,soup cans, coins, photographs, scribbledgrocery lists, receipts. And literacy wasn’tjust about reading words. It was aboutreading all kinds of symbols that help usget along in our world—road signs, logos,traffic lights. Our definition of literacybroadened to encompass all of the bits andpieces of communication that make up ourlives.

In our Reading Initiative session, werelated this understanding to the literacylives of our students. We realized that theyaren’t illiterate when they come to kinder-garten. No matter their home or commu-nity background, they are not “literacy de-prived.” Every child knows a lot aboutliteracy before he or she ever comes toschool. This was the beginning of a majortransformation for us. We began to thinkin new ways about what was essential to

SElson

Copyright © 2002 by the National Council of Teachers of English. All rights reserved.

Bell and Jarvis/Letting Go of “Letter of the Week” PRIMARY VOICES K–6 11

We did not expect theincredible impact [theReading Initiative]would have from thevery first day. We hadno idea how much itwould turn around ourthinking

seventh grade when my French teacher read ATale of Two Cities aloud to the class. I loved it. Ihave that marked-up, gnarled book to this day.But, after seventh grade, I didn’t read a wholebook again until I joined our Reading Initiativegroup. To be honest, I disliked reading. What ahorrid thought for a teacher who is supposed toinstill a love of reading in her children. I read tomy children, but I couldn’t give them passionfor reading.

After the Literacy Dig, we thoughtdeeply about the role of literacy in our ownlives—about how a fourth-grade teacher’sbeliefs about reading resulted in an actionthat turned a child away from reading fora very long time and about how a highschool and college student learned to dis-like and avoid reading. The Literacy Dighelped us understand and articulate whyour experiences had such long-lasting con-sequences. We knew that we wanted muchmore for our children—we wanted to cre-ate classrooms in which all children wouldknow that they were valued as literate hu-man beings; we wanted every child to cel-ebrate the fact that he or she was, indeed, afull-fledged member of what Frank Smith(1985) calls, the literacy club.

We took our first step in the fall of 1998when Susi did an inservice workshop forour faculty. Afterward, we went to her withquestions and asked for more to read. Wewanted to know not only how but why—why were these instructional strategiesimportant for kids? At the same time, wehad student teachers who were trying outnew ideas in our classrooms. They broughtus professional books and articles. Theyasked for our advice, but they also askedfor the space to implement practices theywere learning in their language arts meth-

ods course. They were strong and knowl-edgeable. The result was learning that wentboth ways. An intern would use a strategy,and we’d make a mental note that wewanted to talk about it. We began to noticeand worry and wonder about things wehad never noticed or worried or wonderedabout before.

Soon after that, Susi presented thepossibility of beginning an NCTE ReadingInitiative study group at our school. Wesigned on immediately. We expected thatReading Initiative would bring us togetherwith colleagues to discuss classroom prac-tices, to read the latest research, and to bet-ter understand the kinds of things that ourinterns were learning. However, we did notexpect the incredible impact the experiencewould have from the very first day. We hadno idea how much it would turn aroundour thinking, causing frustration and con-fusion as well as jaw-dropping realizations.Some ideas we read about were brand newand eye-opening for us; others becameways to name what we knew from experi-ence. For example, seeing little transferenceto children’s real reading and writing, wehad already begun to question the value ofletter-of-the-week. Also, although we al-ways read to our children and wrote withand for them, we had not demonstrated(thought aloud) specific strategies used byproficient readers and writers.

By the end of the first year of the Read-ing Initiative, we had experimented withshared reading, interactive writing, inde-pendent reading, written conversations,minilessons/demonstrations/think-alouds, and small-group strategy work.Our shelves were quickly filling with pro-


fessional books, and we had read themall—some of them more than once! Towardthe end of that year, we realized that wehad never seen our children enjoying andchoosing reading and writing so much. Wehad never seen such a smooth transferenceof skills and strategies to their independentreading and writing. We couldn’t wait tospend the summer reading and planningfor the next year. Our experimentation withnew practices gave us a glimpse of whatwas possible, but we were curious and ex-cited to see how far our children wouldprogress with a full year of meaningful,strategy-based reading and writing expe-riences.

Donna Bell: Kindergartnersas ReadersThe second year of my participation in theReading Initiative began like every otheryear as 23 kindergartners arrived on thefirst day, 16 of whom spoke no English (sixdifferent languages were representedamong them). The majority of my studentshad little prior experience with books orwith being read to. All of them were wait-ing to see what kindergarten was all about,and I was ready to bring my learning tolife.

I focused on four primary objectives.First (related to my biggest paradigm shift),I was not going to look at my five-year-oldsas nonreaders; I wanted to empower chil-dren with the knowledge that they werealready readers, and I would move themforward from there. Second, I wanted to besure that my children understood that read-ing is about making sense, not about call-ing words or sounding out. Third, Iplanned to teach phonics as a strategy-based cue system used to confirm mean-ing-based (semantic) predictions in the con-text of whole-literacy experiences. Fourth,I planned to show children how to usewords and parts of words they alreadyknew (their names and environmental

print) to help them use graphophonemicknowledge (phonics) strategically.

As we gathered together that first day,I began by asking, through words and pan-tomime, “Who knows how to read?” Nohands went up.

“I bet you can,” I said as I unveiledmy environmental print wall.

“What is this?” I asked, pointing to aMcDonald’s bag.

“McDonald’s!” they all screamed, nomatter what language they spoke. I pointedto other artifacts from their real worlds.They recognized them immediately:“Burger King!” “Wendy’s!” “M&Ms!” “StarWars Episode Two!” A diverse group, wewere instantly united as we shared com-mon experiences and knowledge.

“But wait,” I said, “I thought you saidyou couldn’t read.” There were lots ofgiggles and smiles. When we finished thesession, I asked my question again, “Who

Alphabet chart with children’s names and environmentalprint


can read?” This time all the hands went up.Success! Having established that they couldread, we were off and running on our wayto unlocking great secrets and joys as read-ers.

During the next few days, I took pho-tographs of each child and used the pho-tos to create an alphabet chart in our class-room. I wanted the children to relate lettersand words in books to letters and wordsthey already knew; of course, the mostmeaningful words to them were theirnames. I made an 8 1/2" x 11" card for eachletter of the alphabet, attached the 26 cardsto a long piece of string, and hung it acrossthe room. Below each letter, I attached en-larged photos of children whose namesbegan with that letter. I labeled each photowith the child’s name in print large enoughto be seen from across the room. Below thechildren’s photos, I attached the environ-mental print artifact that represented aword beginning with that letter. Under the‘Mm’ for example, hung the photo ofMarcus and a McDonald’s bag.

I immediately incorporated the alpha-bet chart with its photos, name labels, andenvironmental print as a key resource whenwe read and wrote every day. Instead ofmy old letter-of-the-week routine—“m”goes “muh,” macaroni art projects, andcommercial letter people—I integrated spe-cific demonstrations (think-alouds) into ourshared reading to teach the children howto use what they already knew—theirnames and words from environmentalprint—to help them read in books. For ex-ample, when we were reading in big books,I might say:

Hey, that word starts just like Marcus’s name!Listen, Mmmmmmarcus. Look at Marcus’sname and then look at the word in this book.They both start with “M”! What do you thinkthis word could be if it starts like Marcus?

Through my professional reading, Ilearned that the ability to make analogiesbetween new words and words you al-

ready know are key phonics strategies. Ialso learned that good readers recognizechunks of words in as much time as it takesto recognize single letters, that the mosthelpful phonics information is at the begin-ning of the word, and the next most help-ful information is at the end of the word.Because I wanted the children to use thephonics knowledge that would help themthe most, I repeatedly demonstrated thosethree specific graphophonemic or phonicsstrategies:

Look at the beginning letter or letters.Are they like letters in any words youalready know?

Look through the word for familiarchunks. Are there any chunks in thisword that are like chunks in wordsyou already know?

Read through to the end. Does theword end with letters that are in anywords you already know?

To do this, I might stop as we werereading and say something like, “Hmm,how will we figure out this word? Let’s lookat the beginning letter and see if it remindsus of letters in any other words we know.Do you see any chunks in that word thatare like chunks in words you alreadyknow? Hey, that’s got ‘ing’ like in BurgerKing!” I guided them to use the most help-ful phonics information while teachingthem strategies for making connectionsbetween words in books and words theyalready knew.

But, I wanted them to learn muchmore than just phonics. I had heard toomany children handicapped as readers be-cause the only reading strategy they knewwas to laboriously “sound out” words oneletter at a time. To ensure that my studentsdid not develop as awkward, hesitantsounder-outers, my shared reading dem-onstrations always began with the use ofmeaning-based strategies. When we cameto difficult words, I asked, first, what would

We had never seenour children enjoyingand choosing readingand writing so much.We had never seensuch a smoothtransference of skillsand strategies to theirindependent readingand writing.


make sense in the context of the story, sen-tence, and phrase? I demonstrated howreaders draw on their background experi-ences with life and other texts to help themmake meaning; how they use strategies likechecking the illustration, going back to thebeginning of the sentence and startingagain, and reading on for clues. Then, Itaught the students to use phonics strate-gies to confirm their semantic predictions.In this way, I purposely drew the children’sattention to story, pictures, and print whileshowing them how to use prior experienceswith life and text to make meaning.

I also learned the power of helpingchildren develop metacognitive awarenessof strategies they were using. I did this byasking them to name the strategies theywere about to use or, after shared reading,to name the strategies they had just used.

The following exchange is typical of a “re-minder” minilesson before shared reading:

TEACHER: What do good readers do when theycome to words they don’t know?

JAEL YEON: They look at the pictures.CECELIA: They look at the first letter and the

last letter.KAREEM: They think about it.DEANDRE: They say something and go on, then

they go back.WAIL: They think if there’s a letter like in

another word they know.TEACHER: That’s great! Now let’s see if we can

use those strategies when we readour new book today.

I was amazed to see how quickly myshared reading demonstrations carriedover into other reading events. One day, forexample, during small-group guided read-ing, we came to a page that had a pictureof a person skating. The text was, “I amskating.” The children looked at the pictureand read, “I am walking.” After studyingthe text and the picture for a few seconds,Jael said, “No, it’s ‘I am skating.’” I askedher how she knew that the word was “skat-ing” and not “walking” and she said,“’Cause it starts like Soo Lin’s name so Iknow it can’t be ‘walking.’” We had notspent time that week with drills on the let-ter “S.” The children had not chanted, “Sgoes ssss.” We had not sung Mr. S songsnor had we engaged in “S Week” activitieslike “S” craft projects or “S” worksheets.Something more powerful and more last-ing had happened. As a strategic reader,Jael used the illustration to make a mean-ing-based prediction, then she checked thebeginning of the word to confirm or dis-confirm her predictions (“Could it be ‘walk-ing’?”). Because she knew how to use fa-miliar words (her name and friends’names), she made an analogy between the“S” in “skating” and the “S” in “Soo Lin”and quickly figured out that the wordcouldn’t be “walking.”

Strategy use soon became a way of life

Two kindergartners use what they’ve learned to make senseof text.


in our classroom. The children wereequipped with so much more than merely“sounding out.” They understood thatreaders think first about what makes sense.And, graphophonemically, they were notonly learning letter-sound relationships,they were using them. “Letter of the Week”had never had that effect.

Pedro

I might have missed the real importance ofeverything I was doing had it not been forPedro. Pedro was a native Spanish speakerwho was learning English as a second lan-guage. One day in April, I was administer-ing a district assessment that asked eachchild to name letters shown in isolation.Pedro’s responses made me appreciate theimpact of using familiar print on a child’sability to understand letter-sound corre-spondences. It also convinced me that be-ing able to name letters has little to do withbeing able to use them to read:

TEACHER: What letter is this [pointing to the Nn]?PEDRO: P.TEACHER: And what letter is this [pointing to

the Mm]?PEDRO: T.[We continued in this way through ten moreletters. Pedro correctly named only “O.” Then Idecided to see what he could do if we changedthe rules—if I asked him to make connectionsbetween the letters on the test and letters in hisfriends’ names.]TEACHER: Okay, Pedro. Can you tell me whose

name starts like this letter [pointingto Mm]?

PEDRO: Marcus.TEACHER: Good! And how about this one [point-

ing to Tt]? Whose name starts like this?PEDRO: Tynesia.TEACHER: How about this one [Bb]?PEDRO: That’s you! Mrs. Bell [he laughs]TEACHER: Okay, can you tell me what you hear

at the beginning of ‘table’?PEDRO: Like Tynesia [he points to Tynesia’s

photograph under the letter ‘Tt’ onour alphabet chart].

Wow! I was impressed. Using thenames of his classmates, Pedro demon-strated an understanding of letter–soundrelationships for almost every letter of thealphabet. He could only name “O” but hecould use many more letters. Pedro knew alot about reading and writing even thoughhe couldn’t name the letters. Examples ofhis literacy knowledge appeared over andover again. When we went to the zoo, hewas the child who tugged on my sleeve,pointed to the signs by the animal cagesand said, “Look, there’s another note aboutthe animals.” When we returned from thezoo, he wanted to write about the giraffes.I asked him where he could find the word“giraffe,” and he went immediately to abook about zoo animals and found “gi-raffe.” When he wrote, he used many let-ters correctly, not because he could namethem but because he could connect thesound he needed to words he alreadyknew—his friends’ names.

Another incident that revealed Pedroas a strategic reader who understood let-ter–sound relationships occurred duringsmall-group guided reading one day. Thechildren were reading Mrs. Wishy Washy’sTub by Joy Cowley, and they came to a pagethat said, “The water is in the tub.” The il-lustration was of a tub with animals, wa-ter, and bubbles in it. Our conversationwent like this:

WAIL & JOSE: [beginning to read] The [long pause]PEDRO: Say, something [a strategy we use to

mark our place when we come to ahard word and want to skip it tosee if there is a clue in the follow-ing text]

JOSE: The something is in the tub.Something is in the tub. What’s thatsay, Mrs. Bell? [pointing to theword water]

TEACHER: Well, what should we do to figureit out?

PEDRO: Did you put your finger on it?[meaning: Did you cover up thelast part of the word and look atthe first letter?—another strategy

Pedro demonstratedan understanding ofletter–sound relation-ships for almost everyletter of the alphabet.He could only name“O” but he could usemany more letters.


that I demonstrate during sharedreading]

TEACHER: Good idea. Why don’t you do that.PEDRO: [Puts his finger on the word water

so that only the “w” shows, thenlooks up at me] I don’t know[what the word is].

TEACHER: Well, whose name starts like that?PEDRO: Wail! [long pause, Pedro studies

the picture and then he reads] Thewater is in the tub.

TEACHER: Great! That’s it! You knew thatword started with the sound youhear at the beginning of Wail’sname because both of those wordsstart with a “W”! You knew somegreat strategies to help us figureout that word!

Here was a child who, by “school test-ing standards,” could not name letters andwords in isolation, but he was giving thegroup advice on how to use specific strate-gies to figure out words: (a) he told themto say “something” when they couldn’t fig-ure out difficult words and to read on tocheck the rest of the sentence for clues, (b)

he told them to cover up the end of theword and check the beginning letter, and(c) he reminded them to use familiar wordsto figure out new words. In a letter-of-the-week/skill-and-drill environment, Pedrowould have been lost as a reader. He couldnot have internalized, transferred, and usedletter-sound information in strategic ways.Pedro needed daily demonstrations of howreaders and writers use a range of strate-gies, and he needed to hear talk about let-ters and sounds as related to somethingmeaningful in his life, in this case, hisfriends’ names. When he left kindergartena month later, Pedro could still only name“P” and “O,” but he could use many moreletters and sounds to read and write. Moreimportant, he loved to read and write, andhe helped other children all the time. Thiswas a huge lesson for me in how form trulydoes follow function. Pedro used letters andsounds long before he could attach namesto them. He could use his knowledge ofwhat good readers do to enable him to ac-complish many things in his world.

Reflecting

About midway through the second year, Inoticed that the children were reading andwriting with passion and confidence that Ihad never seen before. I was particularlyimpressed with the impact of my new atti-tude and practices on the ESL children andthe children from homes that were not“bedtime story” environments. They con-stantly made connections between textsthey were reading and familiar print intheir worlds, and they used those connec-tions to help them as readers. They nolonger tried to sound out words one letterat a time but, on their own, they used cue-based strategies to help them make senseof text. It was huge for me to let go of letter-of-the-week and daily drill in letters andsounds but, each day, I became more andmore convinced that a phonics-first/skill-and-drill approach was actually holdingmy children back. With letter-of-the-week,Small-group guided reading


I rarely saw transference to children’s in-dependent reading and writing. In contrast,through the daily shared reading, interac-tive writing, written conversations, small-group strategy work, and utilizing child-ren’s names and environmental print, we“covered” many more sound–symbol rela-tionships, and the children understood andused them to read and write more than everbefore. By January, letter-of-the-week wasgone from my classroom forever. I was as-tonished at all that the children had accom-plished. All of them knew how to build onwhat they knew. They had developed un-derstandings of reading strategies thatthey could not only verbalize, but that theycould use to read independently. They ac-tually chose reading over other classroomactivities. To me, that is the ultimate goalof teaching readers—to create an environ-ment where they can choose to read for alifetime.

Donna Jarvis: Kindergartners asWritersIt was late spring and I was reading an al-phabet book about careers to my kinder-gartners. The book followed a predictablepattern: “You can be an umpire; you canbe a vet” and so on. When we got to “W,” Iread, “You can be a writer.” Tameka stoodup and said, “But Mrs. Jarvis, we’re alreadywriters!” She was absolutely right; theywere already writers. I thought back to themany ways they had used their under-standings about writing during the pastyear. I remembered when Cristina wrote tothe principal to get an answer to a ques-tion. Eating lunch one day, she looked upat flags painted on the ceiling tiles andasked, “Who did that?”

“You know, that’s a really good ques-tion,” I said, “I wonder how you could findout about that?”

“I could write to the principal,”Cristina suggested.

Then there was the time when Bryan,

irritated that the chicken served at lunchwas covered with too much pepper, knewexactly what do to: “We should write to thecafeteria ladies and tell them, ‘Don’t makeit too hot no more!’”

Yes, they were writers, and they be-lieved in themselves as writers, but howdid we get to this point? What happenedto cause this class of five-year-olds to seethemselves as writers, to act like writers,to think like writers—to be writers?

This was the second year of my par-ticipation in NCTE’s Reading Initiative. Asa result of my professional study and ex-perimentation during the first year of theReading Initiative, I began the second yearwith a new perspective on literacy learn-ing. The opportunity to learn and grow inthe company of other teachers who wantedto learn and grow changed the way Ithought about the teaching of reading andwriting. I came to see myself neither as ateacher of kindergartners nor as a teacherof reading and writing, but as a teacher ofchildren who were already readers andwriters. I knew that I could promote fur-ther literacy growth by validating theirknowledge, immersing them in demonstra-tions of what readers and writers do, andproviding opportunities and support forthem to read and write for real reasons.

As described in our introduction, the“Literacy Dig” was one of the most power-ful engagements during our first year of theReading Initiative. As a result, my view ofliteracy deepened and broadened. I noticedliteracy everywhere and in a variety offorms. Like Donna Bell, I began the schoolyear showing children all of the things thatthey could already read—“Pizza Hut” onthe pizza box, “McDonalds” on the ham-burger bag. The success of that lesson wasapparent when one little boy turned to meat the end of his first day in kindergartenand said, “Golly, Mrs. Jarvis, I’m gonna tellmy daddy that you taught me how to readtoday!”

I built from that beginning as I dem-

How did we get to thispoint? What happenedto cause this class offive-year-olds to seethemselves as writers,to act like writers, tothink like writers—tobe writers?


onstrated how the children could use theirexisting literacy knowledge to help themas readers and writers—“How can we fig-ure out what that word might be? Whatwould make sense here? Does it start likeany other words you already know? Look,it starts just like McDonalds!” and so on.During shared reading and in minilessonsbefore independent reading, I consistentlydemonstrated strategies that readers usewhen they read—how they hold books, turnpages from left to right, and use picturesas well as print to read the story. I learnedhow the power of demonstration comesfrom making my thought processes visible:

I’m turning this page from right to left. I thinkI’ll look at the pictures because the pictures canhelp me read the story. Hmmm, this picture tellsme that the story is about . . . I know that goodreaders look for words or parts of words that arelike other words they know. Hey! There’s aword that starts just like the ”J” in ”Mrs. Jarvis”!

The children emulated those behav-iors beautifully as our independent/buddyreading time expanded from 10 minutes to30- and 40-minute periods; children fullyengaged in reading with each other, on theirown, and sometimes to a favorite stuffedanimal. At the end of independent readingtime, we came together to share the strate-gies we used as readers and the connectionswe made across books and life’s experi-ences.

I was not as happy, however, with thechildren’s understandings about writing.Experience taught me that many childrendo not see themselves as writers unlesstheir writing looks like an adult has writ-ten it. I suppose that this comes from mes-sages sent by parents and teachers who donot accept a young child’s scribbles anddrawings as writing. I had even seen five-year-olds tease their peers about the markson their papers saying that their scribblesand swirls were not “real writing.” Frommy experience and from my professionalreading, I knew that young children’sdrawings, scribbles, swirls of color, stringsof shapes and letters are all intentionalforms of written communication. So, I be-gan to think about how I could let the chil-dren know that I valued their approxima-tions. I wanted to show them that they werenot preparing to be writers but that theywere already writers. I decided to start bycelebrating and validating their knowledgeand then providing demonstrations, oppor-tunities, and reasons for them to build onwhat they already knew.

Affirming/Validating that Children

Are Already Writers

On the third day of school, I introducedjournals to the class by explaining that ajournal is a special place for writing aboutanything that is in your head. (I rarely givetopics for children to write about because Ibelieve we all have a variety of our ownexperiences from which to choose.)I told

One kindergartner reads his book to a favorite stuffedanimal.


them that they could go back to the journaland revisit things they’d been thinkingabout in case they ever wanted to writeabout them again.

Before I sent the children to write,however, I wanted to free them from con-straints that kept them from seeing them-selves as writers. On a large piece of chartpaper, I demonstrated some of the differ-ent ways that writers write:

Ways That Writers Write

[What I Said] [What I Wrote]

Sometimes writers A O T X M Swrite like this:

Or maybe you know [swirls and scribbles]someone who writeslike this:

Or this: [drawing of a houseand a flower]

Or this: CAT

Or this: I love you.

Then I said, “When you write today, Iwant you to write the way that you knowhow to write.” The children went to work,some writing freely, some timidly lookingat their neighbors to see what they weredoing. As I looked around the room, I couldsee the children writing in a variety ofways. At one table, Cristina and Mary werewriting strings of letters. Across the table,John was drawing pictures and labelingthem with scribbles. At one point, Marylooked up and said, “Look at John’s paper.He doesn’t know how to write.” Cristinapeered over at John’s paper and thenturned to scan the “Ways That WritersWrite” chart.

“Yes, he does,” she said, “See, Mrs.Jarvis wrote like that.” The children werelearning that writing can take many formsand that they, too, were writers.

From that day through the end of theyear, the children accepted and celebratedmany forms of written communication.They looked forward to writing. Daily writ-ing time became sacred to them. If we were

interrupted or if there was a change in ourschedule, the children insisted that wewrite at another time. Many children choseto write during Center Time and not justat the writing center. They found so manyreasons to write that we made journals forevery center: the housekeeping journal wassoon filled with grocery lists and recipes,the book center journal held book reviewsand notes about friends reading together,and the block center journal had drawingsand words about building projects.

Near the end of the year, we had a“goodbye” party for our student teacher,Miss Oliver. In the middle of the celebra-tion, Jasmine provided a perfect illustra-tion of how writing had become central totheir lives. She came to me and asked,“Mrs. Jarvis, can I write? I need to write.”She went to work and soon produced anote written on pink paper and folded inhalf. It said, “I will miss you Ms. Oliver. Ilove you.” Because we started with andhonored what the children knew aboutwriting, because we wrote all the time forreal reasons, the children felt validated aswriters, they wanted to write, and theyneeded to write.

Going beyond What They Know:

Providing Demonstrations,

Whole-Group Shared Writing,

and Interactive Writing

Now that the children saw themselves aswriters, I wondered how I was going tomove them forward without compromis-ing the validation of each child’s level ofunderstanding. Providing explicit demon-strations of what writers do seemed to bethe answer, so I focused my demonstra-tions in a variety of ways. One way was bymaking the Morning Message a daily ritualin our classroom. Every day, the childrenwatched me write a message to them on achart tablet. I always tried to make the mes-sage authentic communication from me tothe children: “Today is Monday. Art timeis changed today.” Or “I found a great pic-

Because we startedwith and honoredwhat the childrenknew about writing,because we wrote allthe time for realreasons, the childrenfelt validated aswriters.


ture of a giraffe in the newspaper today. Ibrought it for you to see.” As I wrote, Ithought aloud about the process of con-structing text: “Hmmm. I need to write theword today. What sound do I hear at thebeginning of today? Does today start like anyother words I know?” or “I’m starting asentence so I need a capital letter here,” and“I’m at the end of this thought so I need aperiod.”

Sometimes, to help them focus on aparticular letter or rule of writing, I left outparts of words or punctuation marks. Wewould decide what was missing and some-one would write the missing part. To givethe children ownership, I asked one childeach day to tell us something she or hewould like to add to the message. I wroteas the child dictated, talking through theconstruction of the message as I wrote.Later, that child would provide an illustra-tion for the day’s Morning Message. At theend of each week, I put the messages to-gether with a “Daily News” cover page.This created a big book that became a partof our class library.

As I wrote the Morning Message eachday, it did not take long for the children tobegin saying things like, “I can write that”or “I know what letter goes there,” so webegan “sharing the pen”—writing theMorning Message interactively. I invitedthe children to write the parts of the wordsthat they knew, and I wrote the rest. At theend of each interactive writing session, wenamed the strategies we had used, and Ireminded the children to use the same strat-egies when writing on their own

1-1 Interactive Writing

While whole-class interactive writing wasa wonderful way to demonstrate manythings that writers do, I found that writinginteractively with individual children al-lowed me to help each child based on whatthat child knew about writing. I began 1-1interactive writing with each child once ortwice a week—sitting down to construct

text with a child whenever I could: duringan activity time, as the children were com-ing in at the beginning of the day, when theother children were writing independently.I quickly learned that 1-1 interactive writ-ing was a powerful way to celebrate whatchildren already know while assessing theirknowledge, thus providing immediate sup-port tailored to each child’s needs. The fol-lowing description of a writing session withEmily illustrates the potential for these 1-1interactions.

Emily was a child whose writing al-ways looked pretty much the same. Formost of the school year, she drew picturesof a sun and flowers. Sometimes she addedletters, but by April, she had not yet at-tempted to string letters together to makea sentence. One day, Emily drew her typi-cal sun and flowers, but across the top ofher paper, she also wrote numerals from1–19; then, down the left side of the paper,she drew rows of boxes. I asked her to tellme about the boxes and she said, “They areall of the windows.” I asked what shewould like to write about her picture andshe answered, “How many windows?” Atthat point, our interactive writing began:

TEACHER: How would you like to begin writing“How many windows?” How manywindows?

EMILY: H.TEACHER: Good, you write an “H” right here.

Now what comes next?EMILY: “Ow” like “ouch.”Teacher: You hear “ou” like in “ouch”? Good,

then you write the “ou” part.EMILY: [Writes “o”]TEACHER: That’s exactly right, and there is

another letter after the “o.” It’s a “w”[I write the “w”]. What was it youwanted to say?

EMILY: How many windows?TEACHER: How many windows? Okay, you

wrote “How,” – so what comes next?How many windows?

EMILY: Many.TEACHER: So, skip a space and write -

I quickly learned that1-1 interactive writingwas a powerful wayto celebrate whatchildren already knowwhile assessing theirknowledge, thusproviding immediatesupport tailored toeach child’s needs.


EMILY: M! [she writes “m”]TEACHER: You are doing what good writers do!

You jumped over to leave a spacebetween “how” and “many” and youwrote “m.” How did you know tomake an “m”?

EMILY: It’s like Matthew.TEACHER: Yes! Good for you. Matthew. Many.

I’ll write the next part for you in“many”—“a – n” [I write the “a” andthe “n”]. What do you hear next?Many.

EMILY: E.TEACHER: Good, I hear it, too. It sounds just like

“e” but, you know what? When wewrite “many,” we use the letter that isat the end of your name, “Emily,” tomake that “e” sound. What letter is atthe end of “Emily”?

EMILY: Y.TEACHER: Yes! Now you write it right there.

[Emily writes “y”]. Let’s read whatwe’ve got so far [we read the texttogether].

We continued to talk through the con-struction of the message one letter, chunk,space, and punctuation mark at a time.Writing with Emily in this way, I was ableto see what strategies she was using, andthat allowed me to make decisions aboutwhat I could do next to support her as awriter.

Editing and Revising

Although there was a lot of writing goingon in my classroom, and I saw carryoverfrom whole group and 1-1 interactive writ-ing to their independent writing, I stillworried about how to balance my belief invaluing their attempts with my responsi-bility to move them forward. If, duringwhole-group Interactive Writing, a childsaid, “I can write that!” and then came upand wrote the wrong letter or mark, Iwasn’t sure how I felt about correcting thatmark. Would it send conflicting mes-sages?—“You said I could write my waybut now you’re changing what I wrote.” Icertainly didn’t want to do what my fourth-

grade teacher did to me—turn children offto reading or writing by sending the mes-sage that they weren’t good enough. Iwanted to show respect for their attempts.On the other hand, if I let the noncon-ventional forms remain on the MorningMessage, I wouldn’t provide the demon-strations of conventional writing that thechildren needed. Then, something hap-pened that made me think in a whole newway.

In November of that year, Susi cameinto my classroom with an article on inter-active writing (Button, Johnson, &Furgerson, 1996). I read the article thatnight. The very next day, I began to usewhat I had read. The authors explained thathaving materials at the writing easel to usefor correcting mistakes gives children theopportunity to edit their work. Edit theirwork! This was the answer I was lookingfor. I could move children forward by teach-ing them that editing and revising arethings that good writers do all the time. Icould do that without compromising mybelief in making them feel valued as writ-ers. The article reminded me that goodwriters revise their work all the time.

I began to incorporate editing and re-vision into my demonstrations duringwhole group and 1-1 interactive writing. Inoticed that if I asked children to rereadsomething they had written incorrectly,they usually noticed the problem. Some-times another child noticed it first. Whenthat happened, my first words to the writerwere: “Would you like to fix it?” Together,we might practice the letter or letters on acorner of the chart paper or on the whiteboard. This became a way to demonstratesubtle differences in letters like “b” and “d,”to talk about the sounds that “y” can have,or to make connections to words the chil-dren already knew. Then the child wouldwrite the correct form on a white sticky la-bel or piece of correction tape and cover theoriginal writing. I soon learned that givingchildren the tools to edit and revise doesn’t

I still worried abouthow to balance mybelief in valuing theirattempts with myresponsibility to movethem forward.


attack their sense of self as writer at all; itadds to their feeling of ownership.

Writing for Real Reasons: Contexts

for Composing and Revising

Because of my professional reading, I alsobegan to think about the idea that writersneed real reasons to write. I wanted thechildren to see that writing can be a usefulpart of their daily lives. So, I began to lookfor opportunities to demonstrate writingfor real reasons. Soon I was “thinkingaloud” about writing all the time. I wrotereminders to myself on the board, talkingthem through with the children as I wrote.I might say: “PE time is changed today, I’dbetter put a note on the board to remindme. Let’s see, what do I need to write toremind me that PE is at 2:00 today?” At thesame time, I engaged the children in help-ing me think through the process of con-structing the message:

I’ve got to remember to take the library booksback to the library. I’d better write myself a note.What should I write to remind me about thelibrary books? Oh yes, I think I’ll write, “Don’tforget the library books.” Hmm, what letters doI hear when I say “Don’t”? Does it start like anywords I already know?

When messages were circulated fromthe office or from another teacher, I usedthose opportunities to model writing forreal reasons. At another point in my career,I would have saved those notes for later sothat I could go on “teaching,” but I began

to stop and say things like, “This is a reallyimportant note from Mrs. Bell. I need towrite back to her.” I also began writingnotes to individual children—a few wordsjotted on a little piece of note paper or asticky note—and the children eagerly an-swered my notes with written messages oftheir own.

The class quickly picked up on mydemonstrations about writing as a usefulpart of daily life. One incident stands outas a particularly good example of childreninitiating writing for real reasons. It alsoprovides an illustration of how purposefulwriting can lead to spontaneous miniles-sons in editing and revision. The incidenttook place on the school playground wherewe had three places to play: the yellowtower at the front of the building, the redtower at the back of the building, and thejungle gym area. The children liked theyellow tower and played there often. Some-times, they would play with children fromother classes.

This was all great fun until Tim, a littleboy from another class, began to throwsand on the other children. Talking to Timdid not seem to help. Inviting Tim to playwith us didn’t help. Removing Tim fromthe situation didn’t deter him. He onlycame back to throw sand again. One day,in frustration, I said, “We’ll just have to re-member not to play by the yellow toweranymore.” As we lined up to go in fromrecess, I asked the children, “How will weremember not to go to the yellow tower?”One of them shouted, “Write it!” Back inthe classroom, I got some chart paper, satdown with the class and asked, “Whatshould we write?”

“We are going to the red tower,” theclass decided.

“What is the first word we need?” Iasked. Jade came up and wrote the word“WE” in capital letters. I said, “Let’s lookand see if there is anything we need to edit.What do we know about capital letters andwords?” Jade immediately recognized that

An authentic reason for writing prompted this note.


only the “W” should be capitalized. I askedif she would like to use a white label to fixit. Jade covered the “E” with a white stickylabel and on the label, she wrote, “e.”

“You know what, Jade? You just didwhat good writers do. You looked at yourwriting and thought, “Hmmm, some-thing’s not quite right.” Then, you figuredout how to fix it.” The opportunity to writeauthentically grew into an opportunity todemonstrate and practice using priorknowledge, editing, and revising.

Reflections

Throughout that year, I continued to readand study and talk with Donna and ourReading Initiative group. After each read-ing and each professional conversation, Itried something new or a new twist onsomething old. Like Donna, these experi-ences confirmed my suspicion that “letterof the week” was not an effective way tohelp children understand letter–sound re-lationships. As they wrote and made con-nections to words they already knew, mychildren learned and used far more lettersand sounds than they had ever used before.I found great joy in noticing so many thingsthat the children could do as writers. Ilearned how important it is to (a) help chil-dren see themselves as writers and to valuewhat they know, (b) provide demonstra-tions (by writing with them interactivelyand thinking aloud) of how to use whatthey know to write, revise, and edit, and(c) show children that there are lots and lotsof opportunities to write for real reasons.

Most important, I learned to trust thatif children see themselves as writers, areprovided consistent demonstrations ofwhat writers do, and have real reasons towrite, they will grow as writers. Emily andDaisha, who wrote in pictures and singleletters from August to March, were two ofmy teachers. In April, just when I was be-ginning to lose all hope for them as writ-ers, everything seemed to click. Suddenlythey were writing conventional sentences,

unassisted. I knew then that, given supportin the form of validation, demonstration,and purpose combined with a little pa-tience, the children would make connec-tions and grow as writers.

Closing ThoughtsOur experiences with the Reading Initia-tive sparked a learning cycle that we can-not stop. As we finish writing these articles,we think about how much more we’velearned since that second year in the Read-ing Initiative. We continue to read and ex-periment in our classrooms. We reevaluateand make changes in practices all the time.We continue to have confusions, questions,and frustrations as well as jaw-droppingrealizations. If we could offer advice foranyone who desires to try something new,it would be this:

Spend time reading and acquiring agood knowledge base in literacytheory and practice.

Don’t try to change everything atonce. Evaluate what you are doingnow and pick one thing you can thinkabout, implement, and work on.

Find a buddy to read and to talk withso that you can help each otherthrough the process.

Don’t get frustrated. Remember thatchange takes time.

Be a kidwatcher and enjoy their growth.

We’re not where we were five years ago,and we’re not where we’ll be five years fromnow, but we continue to be guided by ourdesire to ensure that none of our studentslose the joy and confidence as readers andwriters that we lost as children. We wantto create classrooms where children viewthemselves as highly literate human beings,and their understanding of what readersand writers do will motivate them to be life-long members of the “literacy club.”

I learned to trust thatif children see them-selves as writers, areprovided consistentdemonstrations ofwhat writers do, andhave real reasons towrite, they will growas writers.


ReferencesButton, K., Johnson, M. J., & Furgerson, P.

(1996). Interactive writing in a primaryclassroom. The Reading Teacher, 446–454.

Smith, F. (1985) Reading without nonsense. NewYork: Teachers College Press.

Growing Your Knowledge BaseIn addition to the references above, the followingtexts specifically impacted our learning as we stud-ied, talked, experimented, and made changes to-gether:

Cambourne, B. (1988). The whole story: Natural learning andacquisition of literacy in the classroom. Auckland, NZ:Ashton Scholastic.

Fisher, B. (1995). Thinking and learning together: Curriculumand community in a primary classroom. Portsmouth,NH: Heinemann.

Fisher, B. (1998). Joyful learning in kindergarten. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fisher, B., & Medvic, E. (2000). Perspectives on sharedreading: Planning and practice. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Hindley, J. (1996). In the company of children. York, ME:Stenhouse.

Holdaway, D. (1979). The foundations of literacy. Sydney,Australia: Scholastic.

Martens, P. (1996). I already know how to read: A child’s viewof literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Moustafa, M. (1997). Beyond traditional phonics: Researchdiscoveries and reading instruction. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. (1996). Guided reading: Goodfirst teaching for all children. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Ray, K. W. (1999). Wondrous words: Writers and writing inthe elementary classroom. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Routman, R. (1996). Literacy at the crossroads: Crucial talkabout reading, writing, and other teaching dilemmas.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Routman, R. (2000). Conversations: Strategies for teaching,learning, and evaluating. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Taberski, S. (2000). On solid ground: Strategies for teachingreading K–3. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.


As we prepared these manuscripts, I read Donna B.’s and Donna J.’sarticle aloud to my husband. His first response was something to theeffect of, “They really developed a culture in that classroom that made

children comfortable taking risks. That’s key to learning.” Exactly. Thesetwo teachers were explicit in letting each child know, from the first day ofschool, that his or her knowledge and approximations were valued. Thisattitude and their actions helped build the sense of security and confidencethat allowed the children to take risks within a safe learning community.

This becomes the perfect segue to Clint Wills’s article in which he de-scribes literacy rituals in relation to the evolution of a caring community inhis second-grade classroom. Coming to Bradley at the beginning of our studygroup’s second year, Clint brought experience with current theory and prac-tice, having studied and taught in some enviable professional settings. Thus,his focus within our group was to push beyond the boundaries of that knowl-edge base, a goal prompted by questions that emerged in his classroom andthat were fueled by a commitment to the lifelong examination of his ownpractice. In his Classroom Portrait, Clint reflects on his own visions andexpectations for the development of classroom community. In doing so, hedeepens our understanding of the concept that positive emotional bondsare basic to learning. He does this by describing how specific literacy ritualscan provide safe contexts for sharing literacy and lives in ways that haveremarkable impact on both literacy learning and on building a communityof learners who care about one another.

BRIDGING THE THEME

October 2002 Volume 11, Number 2 PRIMARY VOICES K–6 25

professional voices/classroom portrait letting … · professional voices/classroom portrait l ......

Documents