ED 255 920 AUTHOR SPONS AGENCY GRANT NOTE PUB TYPE EDRS PRICE DESCRIPTORS ...

873 Pages·2007·26.56 MB·English

DOCUMENT RESUME
CS 208 814
ED 255 920
Perl, Sondra; And Others
AUTHOR
Final
How Teachers Teach the Writing Process.
TITLE
Report.
City Univ. of New York, Bronx, N.Y. Herbert H. Lehman
INSTITUTION
Coll.
National Inst. of Education (ED), Washington, DC.
SPONS AGENCY
Jan 85
PUB DATE
NIE-G-82-0011
GRANT
895p.; Sample fieldnotes containing handwriting
NOTE
(approximately 100 pages) will have very marginal
reproducibility.
Reports - Research/Technical (143)
PUB TYPE
MF06/PC36 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Techniques;
Case Studies; Classroom Observation
DESCRIPTORS
Classroom Research; *Classroom Techniques; Elementary
Secondary Education; Ethnography; Inservice Teacher
Education; Research Methodology; *Teaching Methods;
*Writing Instruction; *Writing Processes; *Writing
Research
ABSTRACT
Presented in this report are the results of a
document what happened in the
three-year case study designed (1) to
approach to
classrooms of 10 teachers who were trained in a process
provide those teachers with
the teaching of writing, and (2) to
approach, by
occasions to deepen their understanding of the process
practices
collaborating with them in the documentation of classroom
small-scale basic research
and by assisting them in conducting
report describes
studies in their classrooms. The first part of the
topics as project objectives,
the project as a whole, covering such
orientation, the teachers,
the research site, the writing process
second part
data collection methods, and research results. The
following: 15 articles
contains supporting documents that include the
practice, 3 of which
written by the teachers oh classroom theory and
articles written by the researchers for
are case studies; 5
list of conferences
publication; 3 papers delivered at conferences; a
from some of their
attended by study .participants; and handouts
presentations. (HOD)
***********************************************************************
made
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be
from the original document.
***********************************************************************
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF aDLPCADON
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
ifUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER IERIC)
This dicument has been reproduced as
eciffV071 from .he person or orpanaahon
XE
originating it
Minor changes have been made to improve
reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this docu
rent do not necessarily represent official ME
poodle:at, or policy
How Teachers Teach the Writing Process
Final Report
to
The National Institute of Education
Sondra Perl
Principal Investigator
Lehman College
Bronx, NY 10468
James Carter
.
Nancy Wilson
Research Associates
NIE Grant No. G-82-0011
Acknowledgements
Researchers often tal!r
of difficu)ty in
gaining access to
schools.
Administrators, they
say, can be hard to reach,
school secretaries
officious, teachers
uncooperative, and
students shy of
strangers.
For us, the opposite
was true.
From the day this
project began,
Shoreham-Wading River
administrators, staff,
teachers and students
welcomed us into
their schools and
often into their
homes.
When we first brought
the idea of studying
the teaching
of writing to the
Administrative Council,
all of the
district's principals,
Dick Anderson, Cary
Bell, Marty
Brooks, Norman Bussiere
and Shelley Levine,
wrote letters of
support; when we received
funding, they fulfilled
their
promises.
Norman Bussiere brought
us articles and books
on
philosophy, literature
and teaching, Marty
Brooks took time
to answer our questions,
Cary Bell and his
kssistant
Principal, Bonne Sue
Adams, found
us a room of our own
--
without windows bus
with empty file cabinets
and desks
-- in
the newly-designed middle
school offices.
This project would
never have occurred if it
weren't for
the backing of two key
administrators.
Richard Doremus, the
Superintendent of Schools,
not only believed in
our work and
followed our
progress as we came and went in
the various
schools but also
was willing to make the
district's resources
available to
us when it looked as if
our own were running
out.
In particular, it
was Dicx who approved the
district's
support for our study
group when our federal funds
came to an
end.
Mark Goldberg, hich
school Assistant Principal
and the
district's expert
on writing, supported this
project from an
initial talk in
a Syracuse restaurant through
four years of
hard work.
He read our proposal,
greeted us on the first day
-- and many other days
-- of school, walked us through tho
district, welcomed
our consultants, visited
our study group,
came to us with questions
and answered ours when he
could,
cheered and laughed and
praised and encouraged.
Of course, no project
in a school
can ',unction well
without the help of
secretaries.
Based in the District
Office, Helen Igoe
tracked us down in each
school whenever
we
had phone calls.
Doris Olson offered
assistance (on
computers, with typing,
fitting us into this
Superintendent's
busy schedule)
whenever we asked.
In the high school,
Florence Giallorenzo let
us stash our briefcases in her
office and opened Mark'o
for us when he
was away.
In Miller Avenue, Maria
Gatz and Alice Teufel often
typed
for us while Marilyn
Baran and Wilma Kehl
gave us mailboxes
and access to both their
xerox and coffee machines.
The middle school secretaries
came to know us best.
Barbara Bajelr, Carla Schmidt
and Pat Sturm smiled
3
at three pm: when
they were leaving for
the day, we
were
frequently beginning
the second part cf
ours, meeting and
talking in our middle
school office.
To all of them,
we
offer our thanks,
and eapecielly to
Jennie Klotz who
wished
us well every Thursday night
as we left for the city
and
welcomed us back
on Monday morning, and
to Ginny Gannon who
typed and typed and
typitd our early drafts.
Naturally thie project
would never have taken
place if we
had not had places
to leep.
To the teachers who
opened
their homes to
us, Dennis Allendorph,
Audre Allison, Diane
and Ross Burkhardt,
Stu Rachlin, But Silver
and Marcia
Sitver, we offer
our thanks.
And finally, without
ten teachers and
their students,,
there would be
no research, no report,
no project at all.
In
fact, what follows
here is as much
a reflection of their
thinking as it is of
ours.
To Audre Allison
f Diane and Ross
Burkhardt, Phyllis
Glassman, Anita Graves,
Reba Pekala, Len
Schutzman, Jack Schwartz,
Bill Silver, and
Marcia Sitver, and
to all the students
whose lives we touched
and who touched
us, we say thank you.
Sondra Perl
Nancy Wilson
January 1985
4
How Teachers
Teach the Writing
Process
Table of Contents
Part I:
The Project
as a Whole
Teaching and
Writing
Basic Research
1
on Writing
The Present Study
1
,
2
Objectives
.
.
2
The Research Site
The Writing
2
Process Orientation.
The Teachers
3
4
Data Collection
5
Summary of Results
6
Writing as
a Social Act
6
Teachers are Unique
7
Themes and Variationc
3
Teachers as Writers
8
Teachers as Enablers
10
Teachers as
Learners
13
Committed Teaching
13
The Act of Reflection
14
Collaboration:
Reflection in Concert
with
Others
15
The Climate for
Innovation
16
Part II:
Supporting Documents
Introduction
II-1
Section 1:
Ethnographic Inquiry
in Progress
1-1
Raw Data
Sample Fieldnotes
1-2
Perl on Burkhardt,
D
1-3
Perl on Burkhardt,
R
1-13
Wilson on Allison
1-16
Wilson on Schutzman
1-26
Carter on Pekala
1-34
Carter on Graves
1-44
Carter on Silver
1-52
Excerpts from Teaching
Journals
1-59
Burkhardt, D
1-60
Burkhardt, R
1-77
Allison
1-79
Schutzman
1-85
Pekala
1-93
5
Graves
1-101
Silver
1-110
First Level Analysis
Sample Calendars
1-119
3urkhardt, D...
1-120
Burkhardt, R
1-121
Allison
1-122
Schutzman
00004 OOOOOO 1-123
Pekala
1-124
Graves
1-125
Silver
1-126
Thinking Aloud Memos
1-127
Perl on Burkhardt, b
1-128
Perl on Burkhardt, R
1-181
Wilson on Allison
1-187
Wilson on Schutzman
1-218
Carter on Pekala
1-220
Carter on Graves
1-241
Carter on Silver
1-253
Reflections on Teaching
or "Implicit
Classroom" Statements
1-258
Burkhardt, D
1-259
Burkhardt, R
1-261
Allison
1-264
Pekala
1-268
Graves
1-271
Silver
1-275
Second Level Analysis
Selected Narrative Accounts of Three
Teachers
1-277
Perl on Burkhardt, D
1-278
Wilson on Allison
1-331
Carter on Graves
1-415
Portraits of Seven Teachers
1-443
Perl on Burkhardt, D
1-444
Perl on Burkhardt, R
1-447
Wilson on Allison
1-450
Wilson on Schutzman
1-452
Carter on Pekala
1-455
Carter on Graves..,
1-457
Carter on Silver
1-460
Section 2:
Products -- Classroom Research by the
Teachers in the Study
2-1
Expinring the Composing Process
with Eighth Grade Students
Diane Burkhardt
2-2
Margaret:
A Case Study in
Composing
Diane Burkhardt
2-24
Becky:
A Case Study in Compositor
Ross Burkhardt
2-40
The Teacher as Writer
Ross Burkhardt
2-45
Writing Groups:
In Pursuit
of Magic
Audre Allison
2-64
6
The Senior
Essay
Len Schutzman
By Popular
2 -82
Demand
Reba Pekala
2 -90
What AboLt the
Struggling Writer?
Reba Pekala
2 -93
Science Time
or Is It Writing
Time?
Reba Pekala
2-100
Using Journals
to Encourage
the
Writing Processes
of Second
Graders
Jack Schwartz
2-104
Tale of
a Fourth Grade Case
Study
Anita Grarles
2-110
Teacher Shares
Anita Graves
2-121
Sharing as
a Motivation for.
Writing
Anita Graves
2-124
"Can You Read
My Story?"
Approaches to
Conferencing with
Children
Bill Silver
2-127
A Point of View
about
Point of View:
Can
Fifth Graders
Do It?
Bill Silver
2-132
Section 3:
Products -- Work
produced by the
Researchers
3 -1
Articles written
for Publication
Reflections
on Ethnography
and Writing
Sondra Perl
3-2
Creativity and the
Composing
Classroom: Making
Thought Visible
Sondra Perl
3-4
What'e in
a Fieldnote?
When Students
Become
Researchers
Sondra Perl
3-9
Looking for
a Place to Write:
Three Student Views
of
Freshman Comp.
Nancy Wilson
3-24
Characteristics of
Successful
Writing Instruction:
A
Preliminary Report
James Carter....
3-54
Papers delivered
at Conferences
Ethnography in the
Classroom:
When Students, Teachers
and Researchers
Study
the Writing Process
Sondra Perl
3-59
Ethnographic Research
in Progess
Sondra Perl
3-64
Contexts for Learning:
View of an Eighth
Grade
Classroom
Sondra Perl
3 -7?
Forthcoming Work
3-91
Section 4
-- Dissemination
4 -1
List of Conferences
and Workshops
Selected Hand-outs
4 -2
Bibliography
5 -1
8
How Teachers Teach the Writing
Process
Part I:
The Project as a Whole
Teaching is an instinctual
act,
mindful of potential, craving
of
realizations, a pausing, seamless
process,
where one rehearses constantly while
acting, sits as a spectator
at a play one
directs, engages every part in
order to
keep the choices
open and the shape alive
for the student, so that the
student may
enter in, and begin to do, what
the
teacher has done: make choices.
[A.
itartlett Giamatti 1980. p.24]
Teaching and Writing
The way Giamatti describes teaching
resembles the way an
increasing number of scholars and
researchers view writing.
Writing, too, can be thought
of as a seamless process.
During this process, writers
rehearse, sit at times
as
spectators and engage themselves
to keep the shape of what
they are producing alive
PO others may enter in and see what
the writers themselves have
seen.
This view is offered
to call attention to the similarity
between two major areas of
study
teaching and writing
--
both conceived as
processes.
The research described here is
based on the assumption that
an adequate understanding of
teaching and writing must
be based in part on observations
of
people as they
engage in these processes.
This study, then,
is descriptive.
The research team documented what
happened
in the classrooms of public
school teachers who were and
still are continuing to
develop a process approach to
the
teaching of writing.
Basic Research on Writing
Taking a process approach
to the teaching of writing is
relatively new.
Systematic investigation of the
composing
process only began within the last 15
years.
Before that
time, writing
was generally taught, measured, and evaluated
on the basis of a finished product.
Such questions as what
writers did during the composing
process or how that process
might he facilitated in the
classroom were rarely given
careful attention.
1
It was not until Janet
Emig (1969) used
a case-study
approach to observe
writers during the act of
writing that
empirical data concerning
what writers do began
to be
collected.
Since that time other
researchers have followed
Emig's lead and
observed how writers of
different ages and
abilities compose.
Some have used videotapes
to examine the
moment-by-moment interaction
between writers and their
emerging texts (Matsuhashi
1981).
Others have sat beside
students and watched them,
recording their observations
in
fieldnotes (Calkins
1983; Graves 1982).
Still others have
used Emig's original
technique of asking writers
to compose
aloud and devised
methods for analyzing
composing-aloud
protocols (Flower &
Hayes :#.979; Berl 1979).
It is fitting that all
of this work has been in
the area
of basic research.
It would have been
inconceivable for
teachers to take
a process approach to the
teaching of
writing without sufficient
prior research into the
nature of
the composing
process.
Now the accumulated findings
of basic
research into the .composing
process are beginning to provide
rich, new perspectives
for the teaching and
learning of
writing.
Very little is known, though,
of what happens in
classrooms when teachers'
practices are informed
by this
research and theory.
While ethnographic studies
that examine the
procesil of
schooling are increasing (see
Ethnography in Education
Research Forum 1980-1984),
so far only a handful of
ethnographers have chosen
to examine the teaching
and
learning of writing (Clark
& Florio, 1981; Clark,
et. al.
1982; Nelson 1980;
Woods-Elliott 1981).
This work is
an important and impressive beginning.
More
needs to be done,
as indicated by Donald Graves
(1981,
p.106), director of
the Writing Process Laboratory
at the
University of New Hampshire
and a major researcher
on
children's composing
processes:
The teaching of writing needs
major
focus for the 80's.
But we can no longer
afford the errors of
the past when
experimental designs
were used to study
specific teaching
methodologies.
Our
preoccupationn with the
correct stimulus
for writing, correcting
and grading final
products, or with exercises
to increase
sentence complexity need
to be abandoned.
So much more is
now known about the nature
of the process itself,
children's
development as writers,
and the importance
of the context of writing
that a new focus
is needed on the teacher.
Even though
much of our research has
focused on
teachers in the past,
we have never
actually studied the
process of teaching
writing.
We have never studied
even one
teacher to know what ingredients
are
involved in teaching writing.
Whereas the
2
10