Poverty and its Affect on Literacy Development

Poverty and its Affect on Literacy Development
Katherine Barney

(Comments in red.)

Professional Statement and Introduction
I am currently a 2nd grade teacher at Patterson Elementary School in Kennedale ISD, Texas. I have taught for a total of 15 years, 11 of the years in the Kennedale ISD system. I have worked with grades 2, 4, 5, and as a G/T teacher k-5. My certificates include Elementary Education 1-8, Speech 1-8, ESL k-12, Gifted and Talented k-12 and I am currently (June 2007) preparing to take a Reading Specialist and MRT k-12 exam for certification. I am interested in learning more about poverty and its affect on literacy because I am very aware of the students who just “don’t seem to get it.” They are shuffled along to one program or teacher to the next with little progress or improvement. With high stakes testing driving curriculum these students are forced to do more of what they already don’t understand. I want to help reach these students by providing information to teachers that may be the key or at least be helpful to all involved. Over the past 15 years I have observed the population grow and change in Kennedale ISD. The influx of minority students and students of poverty has increased and changed the needs of the district’s students and continues to do so. This rise has created a call for change in our teaching strategies, as well as, a need to better understand our students emotionally and academically. I intend to develop a professional development session that not only immediately addresses those needs but will continue to develop teaching strategies through a book study and discussion group.

Background
Patterson Elementary is in Kennedale ISD a small district located in the southern suburbs of Dallas/Ft. Worth area. Over the last 3 years, the homes in the area have become rental property and several new apartment complexes (some subsidized) have been built. This has quickly changed the demographics of the school from primarily middle class families to an increased number of economically disadvantaged, minority, and ESL students. Recently, 2005, Patterson has qualified as a Title 1 campus and receives federal funding and the requirements that go along with it. The staff at Patterson Elementary predominantly comes from white, middle-class backgrounds, (KISD staff 96% white) with limited experience with this changing student population. Strategies for literacy instruction that have been effective in the past are not as effective now. For example, using the basal for reading along with worksheets, suggested activities, and predictable suggestions for struggling readers. While these work for the majority of students there is a group, usually from poverty level homes, that do respond successfully to these strategies. By poverty I am referring to poverty as defined by Dr. Ruby K. Payne, “the extent to which an individual does without resources.” These resources are not only financial, but emotional, mental, spiritual, physical, support systems, role models, and knowledge of hidden “class” rules.



There are 438 students currently enrolled at Patterson Elementary School. The majority of students continue to be white. The economically disadvantaged is estimated to be more than 28%. These statistics don’t take into account the other six areas of poverty that affect a large number of our students. For example, I have only 1 student out of 17 that comes from a middle class white family with married parents. Dad has a good job and mom works part-time at a preschool. All of my other students are being raised by relatives, have been homeless, have limited English vocabulary, have a parent in jail, or involved with drugs, etc. Several of these students are emotionally and sometimes physically abused. It is not difficult to understand why many of them are struggling learners. While I try to differentiate for each student I feel that there may be something more I can do help these students be more successful. I’d like to see this support follow these students all the way through their academic careers. Even though our student needs have changed, Patterson has been able to remain above acceptable. In fact we are ranked by AEIS 2004-2005 as Recognized and Commended on Reading/ELA. Our latest ranking continues to be recognized. (I mentioned this in my talk, but did not provide Power Point or handout.)

My goal is to provide teachers with information and experiences that will support them in the classroom when dealing with students who are not motivated by the approaches that have been successful in the past. The Kennedale ISD administration has issued a goal of achieving exemplary status on our campus on the upcoming state mandated tests. While having such a high goal is admirable, this particular goal did not come with the support needed to achieve it. It does not address the needs of lower SES students and the challenges teachers will face to achieve the goal with limited support. The materials that were given to tutors (I tutored last fall) were difficult for average ability students let alone struggling readers. It concerns me that the needs of the students are not being addressed appropriately.


Research Support (I condensed this information on the Power Point)

In this article, Who Said These Kids Don't Want To Learn? Harlin and Murray (2006) share the results of a study they conducted in 2003 with pre-service teachers and urban 8th grade students from a k - 8 that were 99.75% African American. The poverty rate for these students was 96%. The pre-service teachers were from white middle-class suburbs making the teachers and students from two different worlds. The goal was to change the attitude and expectations of students from urban high poverty level schools. The pre-service teachers met for 15 sessions with their assigned student. After the project several of the new teachers sought jobs at urban schools and saw themselves as agents of change. Getting to know the students and seeing that they wanted to be successful in school and have a positive experience changed the teachers’ perspectives. The students performed better academically as a result of the teacher ‘s positive expectations. This is an example of poverty level students improving literacy skills after their teachers developed an understanding of them and their personal educational needs.

Evidence-based Literacy Education and the African American Child (Perkins and Cooter, 2005) addresses the needs of African American students living in poverty through the LEAP program. The operational goal of LEAP was to prepare children to enter kindergarten functioning at an age-appropriate level of development (LEAP, 2005). The LEAP curriculum required a great deal of research and development to find the most effective curriculum for these African American children living at the poverty level. Following is a description of each critical component that resulted in effective teacher development and student learning. Reading aloud to children, books were selected from children's classics and multicultural literature, instructional scaffolding for addressing vocabulary, grammar, and syntax in spoken standard English, Phonological awareness, alphabetic principle, games and dramatic play, and fine-motor activities strengthen the whole hand first before writing. The conclusion made after collecting data from the LEAP program was that talented teachers and relevant curricula are the key. LEAP continues to be a powerful program and has received much attention as an effective pre-literacy program for African American children living in poverty. There is excellent information on the LEAP website www.leapsandbounds.org.

Project Athena (VanTassel-Baska, Joyce, 2005) The Project Athena program employs the use of language arts units from the College of William and Mary, Center for Gifted Education, at grades 3-5 and supplements them with a new set of materials called Jacob's Ladder, a reading comprehension program intended to move students from lower order to higher order thinking skills in the language arts (VanTassel-Baska, Stambaugh, & French, 2004). Supporting the implementation of the program is a series of workshops provided to project teachers over the course of 4 days a year, 3 in the summer, and 1 at the end of the implementation period midyear.
Participants included a random sample of 2,113 students across 3 years and 39 experimental and 38 control teachers. Approximately 43% of the population is White, 27.5% African American, 18% Hispanic, 3.4% Asian American, and the approximately 8% other ethnic origin.
Experimental students did significantly better than control students in both critical thinking and comprehension.
All ability groups and ethnic groups registered significant growth gains from using the curriculum.
Experimental teachers scored significantly higher on both the frequency of use and effective use of differentiated strategies across both years.
Project Athena caught my attention because it combines several of my own interests in education. Combining strategies from gifted education to teach higher order thinking skills and materials (Jacobs Ladder) to support comprehension along with quality staff development and continued teacher support to improve literacy skills in students of poverty. The results from a 3-year study shows improvements in all student ability groups and teacher use of effective strategies. This indicates that struggling learners from poverty level backgrounds can learn and improve H.O.T.S. from teachers that have ongoing quality professional development.

Interview(s)
Contact personnel (Arlington Elementary vice principal) of a school that serves a large economically disadvantaged and high minority population of students. (I would like to add this component for next yea’s presentation). Did not get a hold of person. Plan to add to next presentation.

Need
This project will address the needs of both students and teachers at Patterson Elementary. Instead of being proactive 2 years ago, we are now at the point of being retroactive in providing teachers with effective strategies and necessary awareness of the affective domain for their students.

Goals and Objectives
The goal of this professional development session on poverty and its affect on literacy is to give teachers an understanding of student backgrounds and strategies in order to support students from poverty in literacy instruction.
The teacher will develop an understanding of the affect of poverty on learning through participation in professional development activities.
The teacher will implement the question stem strategy during literacy instruction within one week of training and be prepared to share results through completion of a checklist.
The teacher will complete a pre and post survey on the effectiveness of the poverty awareness presentation.
(Replaced with) The teacher will:

§ Develop an understanding of students living in poverty.
§ Participate in affective professional development activities.
§ Apply question stem strategy with their students and give feedback through teacher checklist.
§ Complete a pre and post survey on their personal knowledge regarding the effect of poverty on student literacy development.

Description of the Project and Methodology The approach I will take to address the topic of poverty and its affect on student literacy development will be in the form of a one hour presentation that will include a survey, Appendix A- A story of a person who experienced growing up in poverty, direct instruction from A Framework for Understanding Poverty, and a group activity. In the future I will condense this even more and replace some of the time with a film clip. To increase teacher interest I will use a Ruby Payne “Could You Survive Poverty?” (p. 38). Activity- Using Eye Movement to follow the Learning and Processing, Payne (2005). Teachers will observe a partner, using a checklist (p.97), while teaching a math strategy to her. Teaching strategy- Question-making stems, teaching students to make questions while they are reading (p.105). I will demonstrate using questions stems to increase comprehension of a passage. I decided to not use this beforehand because I knew that one-hour was not enough time.
Time permitting I would follow with a book study group, using Framework for Understanding Poverty by Ruby K. Payne, that will meet weekly for discussion over four week period. This is the format I plan to use next year at the beginning of the school year. This is definitely the best way to cover this topic thoroughly. I need to focus on the affective information regarding the affects of poverty on literacy development.
Timeline
The professional development will be offered April 10, 2007 3:45 – 4:45 after-school in order to provide required SDEC hours for teachers. This was not enough time.
Next school year I will present a similar professional development followed by a 4 week book study supported by a book study blog and 30 minute weekly meetings.

Evaluation
I will use teacher survey and group discussion feedback after all participants have implemented the question stem strategy modeled during the presentation.

References
Howard, Adam (2005). Lessons of Poverty: Towards a Literacy of Survival, JCT. Rochester: Winter Vol.21, Iss. 4; pg. 73, 10 pgs

Murray, Rosemary, Harlin, Rebecca (2006) Who Said These Kids Don't Want To Learn? Early Childhood Education. Olney: Vol. 82, Iss. 5; pg. 275, 4 pgs

Ruby K. Payne, Ph.D. (2005). A Framework for Understanding Poverty, Highland, TX, aha!, Process, Inc.

Ruby K. Payne, Ph.D. (1998). Learning Structures Workbook, Highland, TX, aha!, Process, Inc.

Perkins, Helen, J., Cooter, Jr., Robert, B. (2005) Evidence-based Literacy Education and the African American Child. The Reading Teacher. Newark: Oct. Vol.59, Iss. 2; pg. 194, 5 pg

VanTassel-Baska, J., Stambaugh, T., & French, H. (2004). Jacob's ladder reading comprehension program. Williamsburg, VA: Center for Gifted Education.

VanTassel-Baska, Joyce, Stambaugh, Tamra (2005) Project Athena. Gifted Child Today. Waco: Spring. Vol. 29, Iss. 2; pg. 58, 6 pgs.

Additional Materials include:
Copies from- Ruby K. Payne, Ph.D. (1998). Learning Structures Workbook
Power Point Presentation Appendix A: Howard, Adam (2005). First person story of what it was like growing up in poverty.

Reflections on Poverty and its Affect... Presentation

Katherine Barney
MEd, Curriculum and Instruction
Reading Specialist, MRT
ESL, G/T

Feedback Reflections

Date April 10, 2007
Location: Patterson Elementary Library
Number of participants: 9 the full hour 3 additional latecomers
Checklist on question stems will be collected April 20, 2007
Person
Comments from attendees
My reflections on each comment
1
Enjoyed presentation. It was too short.
Suggest spending more time on the Behavior Related to Poverty and
Intervention table. (p 47 of workbook).
Suggest 3 hours for presentation with more time spent on question stems.
My first thought when reviewing feedback on my pre and post survey was that I did not provide a survey for rating me as a presenter. Instead I asked them to respond in writing on the back of survey. Luckily they did respond, but I do not have data. However I do have results on whether their awareness of this population went up.

2
Good handout. I will use this right away. This information is useful for teaching many students in our district. I would like more information on this topic and more strategies for teaching this student population. Time allowed was to short.
This comment reflects the desire teachers have to reach this population. The concern from my last review by my colleagues that people would not be interested does not seem to be an issue. The information this person wants would be best given in a book study group and/or over several staff development sessions.
3
Good presentation. Not enough time to cover all material thoroughly.

I will be dividing this professional development into 3 one hour sessions and extend by providing activities that provide more practice with strategies.

4
Would like more information about Hidden Rules and how it applies to student/teacher relationship.
I think that by combining hidden rules and Behavior Related to Poverty I would have plenty to work with for 1- 0ne hour session.

5
No comment
I think this was the person who left early. The next day she verbally told me that she was very interested and would like to attend another session on the topic.

6
Principal- I really learned a lot from the hidden rules chart- you may want to have more specific examples ready to present with each item on the chart.
Overall valuable information, well structured. Good Job.
Look into adding a video clip from The Lookout movie once out on DVD. There is a section when brother has to plan the rescue of his brother. Question Stem activities needs more examples.
I like the idea of giving examples to go along with the Hidden Rules Chart.
A video clip would be an excellent addition. Another person suggested this idea with a clip from another movie. I am not familiar with The Lookout. I’ll have to check it out. To help the teachers that attended the session I am going to make student ready question stem sheets so that they can easily apply the strategy. I will go over the strategy again with teachers because this is where I ran out of time. Great feedback from my boss!
7
Great information. I really changed my thinking about poverty when we went over the different resources we need and how we can impoverished in other areas that are just necessary as money.
This person focused in on the section where I discussed resources (p 8 of workbook). First I read a story from Ruby Payne’s workbook about a young gang leader who was raising his 5-year-old nephew because his brother was shot and killed. Then we went through the resources chart to see what this young man had available to him to help. It also causes the reader to understand the priorities of these families.

8
No comment
She did fill out survey.

9
No comment
She did fill out survey. Later Ann discussed what I had discussed and that she had found the Behavior Related to Poverty and
Intervention table very helpful. She plans to use some of the suggestions with her students.
10
Three people came in the last 20 minutes after finishing their tutoring sessions.
These people were disappointed that they missed the presentation and asked for the handouts. I am going to go over the packet next week during our team meetings for those who are interested.






Survey Reflection

While responding to the statements below keep in mind that the students being referred to are from poverty level environments.

Rate1 through 5 from 1 strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree.

Pre Average Post Average

3.5 Poverty is mainly defined by a lack of financial resources. (p. 7) 4.5

1.5 I understand what motivates people of poverty. 4.5

3.0 I am comfortable with my teaching strategies for struggling readers. I need to spend more time on this.

4.0 With strong academic support students of poverty can achieve proficient 4.0
literacy skills. I need to spend more time on this.

5.0 When students respond inappropriately to the teacher or in social 5.0
situations it’s more effective to teach appropriate responses than to focus on
discipline. (p. 35)

1.5 I am familiar with the 5 registers or aspects of language. (p. 27) 4.5

3.0 The registers of language play an important role in how we communicate 5.0
with students.

2.0 Students in poverty have an I.Q. of 9 points lower than the average I didn’t get to thisstudent. (p. 87)

2.0 I understand the differences in values between poverty, middle, and the 4.0
wealthy and can apply that knowledge to my teaching approach.

1.0 The different levels of social class do not impact basic learning styles or 3.0
student ability. I need to spend more time on this.

Conclusion:
Using feedback from the people who attended the professional development is very helpful for planning future presentations. I received several good ideas for future presentations on this topic and the interest was very high. I feel that collaboration during professional development is essential to creating effective presentations. Therefore, when I ever I need to present a new topic I will try to have a practice run at least in front of one colleague.

Improving the Quality of Primary Level Student Revisions

Improving the Quality of Primary Level Student Revisions
Primary students are easily frustrated with and reluctant to revise their writing. They are often confused between revision and editing. Revision can be defined as an examination of the text already produced, eventually followed by a step involving corrections or modifications brought to the initial version of the text (Temple, Nathan, Temple, & Burris, 1993). Editing comes at the end when the writing is ready to be reviewed for accuracies. After reflecting on student performance this past year, as well as my instructional strategies, I felt dissatisfied with the quality of writing produced. This led me to ask, “How can I help my second grade students improve their writing using revision strategies?” I want to improve student effort during writing.
The first step in the writing process is to motivate students to want to write. Then teach the students to use their own writing to learn how to revise. An important finding in several revision studies has indicated that students are more successful in making revisions when using their own work. Cameron, Edmunds, Wigmore, Hunt, & Linton (1997) documented that student revision increased when 1st – 5th grade students used personal writing. Students also dramatically increased in ability to make revisions between grade 2 and grade 4. The results imply that second and third grade teachers have a strong influence on student writing abilities. Tina Robertson (2000) found that students responded to and continued to use more revision strategies when she used students’ own work rather than artificially generated work with errors. Elbow (1998) emphasized the importance of writing long pieces so that there is plenty to revise. One model of revision is to cut the paper into strips removing and/or adding text. Calkins (2003) recommends inserting blank paper where the cuts are made so that new sentences or words can be added. This technique can be extended by combining or adding on to sentences as illustrated by Smith (1996), member of the Okalahoma Writing Project. Smith designed a technique to teach students to reduce words/sentences using an Aesop fable that she extended to seventeen sentences as an example. She challenged the groups to return the fable to its original five sentences. The students responded favorably and were able to transfer the strategy of combining sentences to their own writing.
Putting written work aside a few days helps students look at their stories from a different point of view. Chanquoy, L. (2001) designed a study delaying writing and revising. The number of overall revisions increased about 2% in the delayed (next day) strategy. I wondered if second grade students would benefit form this. Which led me to ask, “Are second graders ready to revise?” Beal (1990) compared student ability to identify and make revisions to errors made in teacher written text with 3rd through 6th grade students. She discovered that 3rd graders were just as likely to make revisions as 6th graders indicating that students are capable of revising at their developmental level. This caused me to conclude that second grade students are ready to revise.
In almost all of the research it was determined that teacher modeling was necessary for students to be successful in writing. Cameron, Edmunds, Wigmore, Hunt, & Linton (1997) found that students were most successful in applying revision strategies when they watched the teacher model how to revise first. The pre-teaching of revision strategies improved student ability to make appropriate corrections. Matsumara, Patthey-Chavez, Valdes & Garnier (2002) conducted a case study involving several different urban schools. While there were differences attributed to socio-economic status they observed that the quality of teacher feedback made more impact on student revisions than the economic status of the school. In order to support students in revision growth teacher support and scaffolding is necessary. Another important factor that supported revision improvement was the use of engaging assignments. Vygotsky (1978) concluded that students performed better when they were engaged with learning.
Mini-lessons targeting student needs is an effective tool during the writing process. A study by Shoudong & Powers (2005) on the effect of mini-lessons on errors identified by the teacher indicated that measurable improvement was made using this technique. The teacher highlighting specific areas that need improvement is an effective strategy to improve student revision Robinson (1985). Both studies emphasized that it was imperative that the teacher read and address student weaknesses frequently followed by peer revision when students are ready. Marchionda (2004) wanted to improve student editing so she developed a peer review strategy that involved having two different students edit each paper. Marchionda observed that students interacted in a non-threatening atmosphere and learned to take criticism constructively. She concluded that student editing and quality of writing increased with two-peer conferencing.
To improve the quality of instruction and student writing I plan to implement the strategies of modeling revision strategies on my own writing first, encouraging a lot of writing in order to implement the cutting strategy for combining and adding, reading and responding to my students personally for several weeks before teaching peer editing, use the two peer editing strategies outlined by Marchionda.
Methodology
This case study will be conducted by the classroom teacher, Katherine Barney, using her 06/07 - second grade class writing samples. The students will keep a working portfolio of written work of the course of the year. Writing samples will be collected from three different developmental times, September, December and April. Data will be collected and compared of quantity and quality of revisions on each writing sample. Ongoing student conferences, teacher reflections/observations, and colleague collaboration will be documented. Pre and post surveys of student and teacher opinions regarding revisions will be collected. Research will be concluded in May of 2007.

Literature Bibliography

Beal, C. R. (1990). The development of text evaluation and revision skills. Child Development, 61(1), 247.

Calkins, L. M. (2003). Units of study for primary writing: A yearlong curriculum (grades K-2) series. Portsmouth, NH: Firsthand Heinemann.

Cameron, C. A., Edmunds, G., Wigmore, B., Hunt, A. K., & Linton, M. J. (1997). Children's revision of textual flaws. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 20(4), 667-680.

Chanquoy, L. (2001). How to make it easier for children to revise their writing: A study of text revision from 3rd to 5th grades. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 15.

Elbow, P. (1998). Writing without teachers (2nd ed.)Oxford University Press, Inc.

Lane, B. (1993). After the end teaching and learning creative revision. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Marchionda, D. (2004). Peer review times two. Quarterly 2004, 6-21-06 . Retrieved http://www.writingproject.org/cs/nwpp/print/nwpr/1984

Matsumura, L. C., Patthey-Chavez, G. G., Valdés, R., & Garnier, H. (2002). Teacher feedback, writing assignment quality, and third-grade students' revision in lower- and higher-achieving urban schools. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 3.

Robertson, T. (2000). I set out to prove you wrong and discovered the world of writing. In B. Solley A. (Ed.), Writer’s workshop (pp. 78 - 80). Needham Heights, MA

Robinson, A. The Effects of Teacher Probes on Children's Written RevisionsU.S.; Illinois; 1985.

Smith, D. (1996). Stripping for revision. Teaching PreK-8, 26(7), 56.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Literature Review

Improving the Quality of 2nd Grade Student Writing Revisions
Literature Review
Katherine Barney

Improving the Quality of Primary Level Student Revisions
Primary students are easily frustrated with and reluctant to revise their writing. They are often confused between revision and editing. Revision can be defined as an examination of the text already produced, eventually followed by a step involving corrections or modifications brought to the initial version of the text (Temple, Nathan, Temple, & Burris, 1993). Editing comes at the end when the writing is ready to be reviewed for accuracies. After reflecting on student performance this past year, as well as my instructional strategies, I felt dissatisfied with the quality of writing produced. This led me to ask, “How can I help my second grade students improve their writing using revision strategies?” I want to improve student effort during writing.
The first step in the writing process is to motivate students to want to write. Then teach the students to use their own writing to learn how to revise. An important finding in several revision studies has indicated that students are more successful in making revisions when using their own work. Cameron, Edmunds, Wigmore, Hunt, & Linton (1997) documented that student revision increased when 1st – 5th grade students used personal writing. Students also dramatically increased in ability to make revisions between grade 2 and grade 4. The results imply that second and third grade teachers have a strong influence on student writing abilities. Tina Robertson (2000) found that students responded to and continued to use more revision strategies when she used students’ own work rather than artificially generated work with errors. Elbow (1998) emphasized the importance of writing long pieces so that there is plenty to revise. One model of revision is to cut the paper into strips removing and/or adding text. Calkins (2003) recommends inserting blank paper where the cuts are made so that new sentences or words can be added. This technique can be extended by combining or adding on to sentences as illustrated by Smith (1996), member of the Okalahoma Writing Project. Smith designed a technique to teach students to reduce words/sentences using an Aesop fable that she extended to seventeen sentences as an example. She challenged the groups to return the fable to its original five sentences. The students responded favorably and were able to transfer the strategy of combining sentences to their own writing.
Putting written work aside a few days helps students look at their stories from a different point of view. Chanquoy, L. (2001) designed a study delaying writing and revising. The number of overall revisions increased about 2% in the delayed (next day) strategy. I wondered if second grade students would benefit form this. Which led me to ask, “Are second graders ready to revise?” Beal (1990) compared student ability to identify and make revisions to errors made in teacher written text with 3rd through 6th grade students. She discovered that 3rd graders were just as likely to make revisions as 6th graders indicating that students are capable of revising at their developmental level. This caused me to conclude that second grade students are ready to revise.
In almost all of the research it was determined that teacher modeling was necessary for students to be successful in writing. Cameron, Edmunds, Wigmore, Hunt, & Linton (1997) found that students were most successful in applying revision strategies when they watched the teacher model how to revise first. The pre-teaching of revision strategies improved student ability to make appropriate corrections. Matsumara, Patthey-Chavez, Valdes & Garnier (2002) conducted a case study involving several different urban schools. While there were differences attributed to socio-economic status they observed that the quality of teacher feedback made more impact on student revisions than the economic status of the school. In order to support students in revision growth teacher support and scaffolding is necessary. Another important factor that supported revision improvement was the use of engaging assignments. Vygotsky (1978) concluded that students performed better when they were engaged with learning.
Mini-lessons targeting student needs is an effective tool during the writing process. A study by Shoudong & Powers (2005) on the effect of mini-lessons on errors identified by the teacher indicated that measurable improvement was made using this technique. The study emphasized that it was imperative that the teacher read and address student weaknesses frequently. It is best to use teacher-guided revision before adding peer revision techniques. Marchionda (2004) wanted to improve student editing so she developed a peer review strategy that involved having two different students edit each paper. Marchionda observed the following; students interacted in a non-threatening atmosphere, students learned to take criticism constructively, and the input from two different people helped the student address more aspects of their writing. She concluded that student editing and quality of writing increased with two-peer conferencing. To improve the quality of instruction and student writing I plan to implement the strategies of modeling revision strategies on my own writing first, encouraging a lot of writing in order to implement the cutting strategy for combining and adding, reading and responding to my students personally for several weeks before teaching peer editing, use the two peer editing strategies outlined by Marchionda.

Theory summary for L P

Writing Revision Lesson #1:
2nd Grade level
Katherine Barney

Theory (still in progress as of 6-28-06)


Research:
Calkins, L., Bleichman, P., (2003), The Craft of Revision, Firsthand, Portsmouth, NH
Elbow, P. (1998). Writing without teachers (2nd ed.)Oxford University Press, Inc.
Lane, B. (1993). After the end, teaching and learning creative revision,. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Marchionda, D. (2004). Peer review times two. Quarterly 2004, 6-21-06 retrieved from http://www.writingproject.org/cs/nwpp/print/nwpn/4?x-t=resources.view



My burning question is: How can I motivate my students to revise more effectively?
The research I have reviewed up to this point emphasizes revision quality more than student attitude towards revisions. For motivation purposes I have found Lucy Calkins and Barry Lane to give several student friendly suggestions. This was most helpful to the development of my lesson, but did not include easily accessed quantitative data to support it. I will be delving more deeply into the research I have gathered for my literature review. I plan to use this information to support and/or adjust my revision lesson and future lessons with the information from the review.
I based the basic lesson format and approach on Bleichman’s (2003) example lesson and background knowledge. I started the lesson off referring to what will happen prior to the lesson, because as Elbow (1998) emphasizes, you can’t get started revising until you have written enough to work with. Even at a primary school level the student has to have several sentences to work with. This is where various amounts of scaffolding become necessary in order to get everyone to the point where they can participate in a revision lesson. For a specific revision technique I chose to modify and adapt the peer review strategy described by Marchionda (2004) because I liked the idea of copying the students original for their peers to write on. I think it would remove some of the fear of writing on someone else’s piece because the original would still be untouched. Also Marchionda’s research reflected positive results in attitude and quality of revisions. I feel confident that I am on the right track, yet I will continue to be open to new ideas and approaches that I may encounter in future research.


Graduate Coursework Info

Katherine Barney
MEd, MRT
IRA 1.1, 1.3, 2.2, 5.1, 5.2, 5.4
TExES 8, 9, 10, 13, 14


IRA /NCATE Program Standards for Reading Specialist

Standard 1 Foundational Knowledge 1.1, 1.3
I demonstrated knowledge of psychological, sociological, and linguistic foundations of writing processes through the application of research-based revision strategies used in my lesson.

Standard 2 Instructional Strategies & Curriculum Materials 2.2
I have demonstrated the use a wide range of instructional practices, strategies, approaches, methods, and curriculum materials to support writing instruction through my lesson development and presentation.

Standard 5 Professional Development 5.1, 5.2, 5.4
I have participated in professional development through posting responses to reading assignments, presentations, classroom discussions, and collaboration with group members regarding the latest research based writing instruction strategies displayed a positive disposition related to reading and the teaching of reading. As well as, participating in professional development programs through taking this graduate course.


TExES Reading Specialist Competencies

Competency 008 (Written Language) I demonstrated an understanding of written language and instructional methods to reinforce reading and writing through using literature to base research-based revision instruction in my lesson plan.

Competency 009 (Assessment) I applied knowledge of assessment instruments and procedures used to monitor and evaluate student progress in writing through evaluation and feedback section of my lesson.

Competency 010 (Instructional Methods and Resources) I applied knowledge of methods and resources for providing effective literacy instruction that addresses the varied learning needs of all students by scaffolding and meeting the needs of each student in individual or small group conferences,

Competency 013 (Theoretical Foundations and Research-Based
Curriculum) I applied knowledge of the theoretical foundations of literacy and of research-based literacy curriculum to the development and implementation of the lesson I developed..

Competency 014 (Collaboration, Communication, and Professional
Development) I applied Knowledge of procedures for collaborating and communicating with educational stakeholders and for designing, implementing, evaluating, and participating in professional development. Through posting responses to the BWP Blog and Discussion board. I have demonstrated collaboration with group members in evaluating the current teaching environment of literacy skills during class discussions and writing activities.

Revision Lesson Plan

Writing Revision Lesson #1:
2nd Grade level

Prior to this lesson students will have listened to the book The Plant That Ate Dirty Socks by Nancy McArthur (4th/5th grade reading level), watched a 1 minute film clip from Little Shop Of Horrors (emphasizing the plant puppet) and have a 1st draft writing response.
Recommended alternative book written at a 2nd grade level Elizabite, Adventures of a Carnivorous Plant, by H.A. Rey, 1942, 1969, Houghton Mifflin
Elizabite eats insects for appetizers and enjoys eating hotdogs, puppy tails, whatever gets near. The text rhymes and the look is very similar to Curious George (for obvious reasons!).


Instructional Objective:
The student will revise a draft for vivid images by responding to peers suggestions with 80% accuracy.
The student will respond constructively to others' writing by highlighting 2 sentences that would benefit from more detail with 100% accuracy.




Instructional Materials and Resources:
Puppets- Craft supplies to make a plant puppet out of a paper plate: paper plates, construction paper, googly eyes, pipe cleaners
Teacher made revision puppet “Carnivella”
2 copies of each student’s 1st creative writing draft on carnivorous plant response (see below for an example prompt)
Highlighters or color pen for revising
The Plant That Ate Dirty Socks by Nancy McArthur
The Craft of Revision by Lucy Calkins and Pat Bleichman’s pages 1-10





Content:
Language Arts- writing 2nd grade (Writer’s Workshop)

TEKS 2nd Grade Language Arts:
(17) Writing/grammar/usage. The student composes meaningful texts applying knowledge of grammar and usage. The student is expected to:
(B) compose complete sentences in written texts and use the appropriate end punctuation (1-2);
(C) compose sentences with interesting, elaborated subjects (2-3); and
(18) Writing/writing processes. The student selects and uses writing processes for self-initiated and assigned writing. The student is expected to:
(A) generate ideas for writing by using prewriting techniques such as drawing and listing key thoughts (2-3);
(B) develop drafts (1-3);
(C) revise selected drafts for varied purposes, including to achieve a sense of audience, precise word choices, and vivid images (1-3);
(19) Writing/evaluation. The student evaluates his/her own writing and the writing of others. The student is expected to:
(A) identify the most effective features of a piece of writing using criteria generated by the teacher and class (1-3);
(B) respond constructively to others' writing (1-3);
(C) determine how his/her own writing achieves its purposes (1-3);
(D) use published pieces as models for writing (2-3); and



Accommodations and Modifications:
During Scribe’s Studio (Writer’s Workshop) students work independently and in small groups with teacher based on need. Teacher provides scaffolding and support based on individual need (example: story frames).

Instructional Procedures:
1. Sponge Activity (5 minutes)
Teacher uses plant puppet, Carnivella, to recall the story The Plant That Ate Dirty Socks and the 1st draft stories that they have completed.
Greetings scribes and writers, it’s time for Scribe’s Studio.
Carnivella is going to help us remember what we have read and written about so far in this unit. Carnivella asks students to tell her about the story and then what they were supposed to write about. At this time teacher/puppet reviews what a writer does with a piece of writing he/she wants to take to publishing phase.

2. Set induction (5 minutes)
Pass out paper plate puppets. Have students observe puppets. Is the finished? What would you like to add? What could you add to make the puppet look interesting? etc. Point out that adding or taking away from puppets is a form of revising. Compare the revising of their 1st drafts to the revising of their puppets. Instruct students to set puppets aside until later.

3. Large group instruction (10 minutes)
Teacher reads her/his writing response on flip chart or overhead transparency. Teacher models through thinking aloud a sentence that would paint a clearer picture by adding more description. Use a highlighter or different color ink to highlight areas that would benefit from revision. When teaching students this strategy be sure to describe the strategy with replicable descriptors. For example:
Sentence: The vine grew.
Strategy: Add more words so that the reader can picture what is happening.
Teacher says: “I can add the words, The vine grew so long that it went out of the door.” Use a different color pen to write the added words.
Ask students to point out sentences that would benefit from adding more information. Use the same terminology as before to add words to each sentence.
Explain to students that they will be finding two places on their partner’s paper that words could be added to. The peer editor can write a question right on the copy of the paper. Afterwards they will discuss their observations and ideas/questions. (Practice asking questions about the teacher’s writing.)
Examples of questions:
What happens next?
What was he doing?
Where did it take place?
What did it look like?

4. Independent work or group work (15 minutes)
Teacher assigns partners to read and highlight each other’s papers (5 minutes). Then partners meet to review the two sentences they have questions about. Students focus on one paper at a time discussing ideas and writing them down. (5 minutes for each student). Tomorrow students will do the same thing with another partner.

5. Feedback (2 minutes)
Gather as a whole group and discuss feelings and ideas that came from the peer editing.

6. Evaluation (10 minutes)
Ongoing assessment through observations and questions. Take note of students who need additional practice or instruction.

Summarize the strategies that students used to revise by writing on board.
(Based on Pat Bleichman’s Session 1 in the Craft of Revision.)

Writers revise by:
We reread and make plans.
We reread, make a movie in our minds, and add words.
We make changes to out drawing or puppet

How is revising a puppet similar/different to revising a story?
Ask students to give an example of a revision strategy they used today.

7. Closure (2 minutes)
Praise students for positive use of materials, time and strategies. Be sure to emphasize positive behavior and following directions.

Plan to give students time at the end of writing to revise their puppets. Some students may want to write a puppet show script!

Extension:
The peer editing techniques, using copies of the original to mark up, can be used several times by concentrating on one aspect of revising the story at a time.
Stories can be collected into an anthology.
Students could be encouraged to write ongoing adventures like the series The Plant That Ate Dirty Socks.
The topic of carnivorous plants could be written in an essay format in order to compare and contrast narrative and essay.
Some students may want to research carnivorous plants and how to care for them. Students of all ages are always interested in plants that eat meat! This naturally falls into characteristics of living things.
The puppet Carnivella could be used throughout the year as a revision specialist.
Using the literature and informative text creates a natural and strong reading/writing connection.
Students could be instructed to change the plant into something else (living or nonliving). How would that affect the story details? What a great way to rewrite the story with a different twist!



Future research involves comparing results of different revision instruction strategies and looking for patterns. For motivation purposes I have found Lucy Calkins and Barry Lane to give very student friendly suggestions.

Photo