ED'218 653 CS 207 076 AUTHOR Graves, Donald H. a Casestudy Observing the Development of Primary Children's Composing, Spelling
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
'DOCUMENT RESUME ED'218 653 CS 207 076 AUTHOR Graves, Donald H. TITLE' A CaseStudy Observing the Development of Primary Children's Composing, Spelling, and Motor Behaviors during the Writing Process. Final Report, September 1, 1978-August 31, 1981. INSTITUTION New Hampshire Univ.-, Durham. Dept. of Education. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Education '(ED), Washington, DC. tb PUB DATE [82] ,GRANT NiE-G-78-0174 NOTE 501p.; Articles ay be marginally legible-4 EDRS PRICE MF02/PC2rPlut Po tags. DESCRIPTORS Case Studies; Chi d Language; *Clastroom Observation Techniques; Cla room Research; Elementary Education; Elementary Scho 1 Students; Handwriting; Punctuation; Spelling; *Studt Behavior; *Teacher Behavior; I Teaching. Methods, Writing Instruction; *Writing Processes; *Writing Research ABSTRACT 1 \ Sixteen children in five different classrooms in the same, small, \ural-:suburbah schoolin New Hampshire were observed for 2 years to do umeat what primary children did when they wrote.Eight of the childr n were observed from age 6 through 7, andeight from 8 through 9. Thr e researchers were on-site-in.classrooms 4 days outof 5 for the 2-year project. Data were gathered through child and teacher interviews, direct observation of children throughspecific protocols,'and ideo recordings of children while composing, _ conversing with other children, and in conference, as well as through . all of the children's iritten products. Data from observationsof child behavior duiing the writing process together with data from ,observations of teacher practices led to seven hypotheges4 (1) behaviors of writers are ideosyhcratic aid highlyIvariible; (2) clusters of iehaviors should be observed before making decisions . about-writers; (3) scope and sequence curricula have little relevance ,in helping writers developl(A_Lthe_scaffolding.-conference-apprOach i-s-the best response to the variable writer; (5).let studentswrite daily, sustain selections-longer, and write at predictabletimes; (6) let children choose most of their topics because it assists themWith voi-ceTheightens-semantic domain, skill of narrowing topic, andbatic decision making;.and (7) skills are best taught within the context;of the child's own writing. (Appendixes include copies of research , articles, selected chapters from a book, articles related to the study, and data examples.) (HOD) 6 ************************************************************* ********* * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made froM the original document. *********************************************************************** U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION EOUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 0 This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this docu- ment do not necessarily represent official ME position or policy. FINAL REPORT For NIE Grant No. G-78-0174 o Project No. 8-34/9-0963 September 1, 1979 - August 31, 1981 ACase Study Observing the Development of Primary CrtzItsComphildos*SellianiMotorBehaviors During the Writing Process --- 0 Donald H. Graves, DirectOr 0. Writing Process Laboratory Department of Education University of New Hampshire Durham, New Hampshire 03824 1 g- 0 0 Ackowledgements --I want to thank the children and teachers at theAtkinson Academy,. the public school and site of ourdga gathering for this study. Our .study didn't intend to imposeorilthe children or teachers but three riesearchere "living in" for two years in not unlike housing a neighbor's pet elephants rent free. We are indebted to the case study children ° anc: to the teachers in whose rooms we did ourobservations: John Gaydos, Pat Howard, Judy EganJanet Dresser, Carolyn Currier, Lyn Kutzelman, and Joan Claveau. A special thanks is due Mary Ellen Giacobbe who had researchers in her room for two years, wrote, articles, andcritiqued much of the study data. Me-teachers-in-this-studywere more -than-professionals Wader Rather, there were colleagues in this research venture,supplying valuable information from their child data. Behind the teachers was the principal, Jean Robbins, the reason for beingin Atkinson in the first place. Research such as ours demanded the backing of a strong principal. ale had one. o My two colleagues, Lucy Calkiris and Susan Sowers, werethe heart of this research venture.For two years theycobserved, questioned, analyzed, wrote, published, and shared their datawiththousands of . persons-. 'Their insights,critiques, energy, and ability to show . ' children as themselves were what made the datalifelike and usable. .., t . ; Universitrof New Hampshire. Another group_of persons worked at the 1 !... Chief among these wasPrilfessor Donald,Murray who gave unceasing help r. for four years. He contributed his years of experience in investigating the composing process and through his personal,eighteen-foot-shelf collection of what writers have said about writing fr9m early Greeks to yesterday.Even more his hours of listening and help with manuscripts for'Susan, Lucy and myself were a constant source of encouragement. Professor Tom ..Newkirk has'alda been a helpful critic with data and early manuscripts. Special thanks are also dt Rebecca Rule for her writing and work with her colleague Virginia Stuart on the detailed work on child concepts of writing. The office was held together during the first three three years by Lois Cyr, who supplied many a balm for the upsets of conducting research. Cathy Field-Wallace brought us through a critical transition -period-to-Laura Ferguson4-8-7ski-11-ful work-as an _ a report. ,:..-- f . i 4 ' ,ca. Encouragement came from otherquartersiii46;to Professor --, John Lockwood,,Direcior of-Research for the University of New Hampshire, . , and. to Dr. Marcia Farr,program.officer from the National1 ' Institute if - of Education. ;\ Finally, special thanks to my wife Betty, who not only read and critiqued much of the writing, but spent many hours alone because of it. Donald H. Graves University of New Hampshire o 1 TABLE' OF CONTENTS STUDY SUMMARY Page 1.0 - What Did This Study Set Out To Do And Why? 1 2.0 - How Did We Go About Doing It? 2 3.0 - What Did We,Fina? 4 3.1 The Writing Process 4 3.2 Development of Writers 4 3.21 ,Time and Space 7 3.22External to Internal 8 Egocentric to Sociocentric 3.23 ' 8 3.24Explicit to Ithplicit . 8 3.3 The Process of Development and Revision 9 3.4 Concepts 13 3.41 Concept Defintions 14 3.42What Concepts Are Used 15 3.43General Order of Concept Use 16 3.44Concept Density 16 . 3.45Profile of a Concept - Topic . 18 375Soaf : gr 19 3.6 Transitions from Oral to Written Discourse 21 3.61 Overt and Early Manifestations of Speech 21 3.62Page Explicit Transitions 21 3.63_ Speech Features Implicit in Text 22 3.7 Handwriting 23 3.8 Spelling 25 .5.9 Punctuation 27 4.0.- Seven Hypotheses on Implication of Study Findings 28 4.4 Behaviors of Writers Are Ideosyncaatic And Highly, Variable. 28 4.2Observe Clusters of Bghal4ors Before Making Decisions About Write 30 . 4.3Scope and Sequence Curricula Have Little Relevance to How Writers Develop 30 4.4 Scaffolding7Conference Approach Is the Best Respopate to the Variable Writer, 32 4.5 Teachers ,Should Their. kite'rs Write Daily, Sustain"Selections Longer, and'At Predictable Times. 33 Q TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 4.6' Teachers Should Let-Children Choose About 80% of Their Topics Because It Assists Them with Voice, Heightens Semantic Domain, Skill of. Narrowing Topic, and Basic -Declsion -Maki4. 341 4.7 Skills Are Best Taught Within the Content of the .Child's Own Writing. 35 5.0 - Disdemination' 37 4.1 APPENDIX 6.0 - Annotated Contents of the Appendix 45 7.0 - Research Articles 56 7.1 "Research Doesn't Have to Be Boring." 56 7.2 "What- ChildrA Show Us About Revision." 61 7.3"Andrea Learns to Make Writing Hard." 69 7.4 Six-Year-Old'sWriting-Process - The First Half of the First Grade." 77 7.5 "Let Children Show Us How to Help Them Write," 84 7.6 "Children.Learn the Writer's Craft." 97 7.7 "When Children Want to Punctuate: Basic 10/f Skills Belong in Context." 7.8 "One Child', One Teacher, One Classroom: The Story of One Piece of Writing." '111 7.9 "In the Writer's Workshop and in the Classroom." 125 1'1 7.10 "A New Look at Writing Research." 144 7.11 "Writing Research for the Eighties: What Is Needed." 151 7.12"Where Have All the Teachers Gone?" 161 7.13"Children's Rewriting Strategies." 166 7.14"Patterns of Child Control of. the Writing Process."°, 177 7.15 "Young Writers Preference for Non-' Narrative Modes of Composition." 189 7.16 "The Spelling Process: A Look at Strategies." 207 7.17"The Growth and Development of First Grade Writers." 219 7.18' "Case Study of a Nine-Year-Old Writer."' 239 8.0 - Book Chapters 8.1 "The Writing Process." 263 8.2 "How Do Writers Develop?" 278 a Page TABLE OF CONTENTS % 8.3"On Buyin&qasses.for a Wolf." 90 8.4 "Making Development Visible...? ... 8.5 "When Writers Speak." . 13 8.6 "Handwriting Is for'Writing:" 326 8.7 "Revision'." V#1\ 9.0- Related Articlea 9.1 "The Researcher Who Watches Children Write."* 357 9.2"The Craft of Writing." 364 "Punctuate? Pundtuate.qPunctuatel" 368 9.3 :. 9.4"One School's Writing Program." ,371 9.5 ,"_ Eids Can,Write the First Week of School." 377 379 9.6 "Kds Ca Rit." . 9.7 "After All, They-Have Writing In . 381 . ComMon." . 9.8 "Break the Welfare Cycle: Let Writers_ Choose Their Topics." 388 -,19.9:-"Questions for Teachers Who Wonder If 4. ,Their Writers Change."' 395 a 9.10 "Romance Precedes Precision: Recommended . Classroom Teaching Practices." 413 10.0 - Data Examples 10.1 Spelling Evolutions 419 10.2 Concept Descriptions 421 10.5Computer Printouts of Child Language .427 10.4Sound-Grapheme Relaticnship in Composing 431 10.5 Writer Variability 434 10.6 Evaluation Scale 436 10.7Observation Protocol 437 10.8Observation Classification Protocol 44o 10.9 Classification of Revisions 441 fT:0-Dissemination 450 7 a STUDY SUMMARY - WHAT DID THISSTUDY -ET OUT TO DO ANDWHY? s e This study ,set t to document 'what primary children did when they wrote.