Writing Disciplinary Texts

Synthesis:

McKeough
This author begins the chapter by discussing how the CCSS for writing offer "a developmental roadmap of competencies."  However, the CCSS are limited, so McKeough goes on to describe how specifically to use them in the classroom.  In a "trickster tale" by fourth-grade student Jessica, she follows the CCSS standards by writing a narrative, establishing a situation, introducing characters, organizing an event sequence, using dialogue, incorporating transitional words and concrete phrases, and providing a conclusion.  However, her knowledge goes beyond what the CCSS require because she includes sequentiality, particularity, intentional states, and canonicity and breach (CCSS do not focus on the latter two).  The chapter then goes on to demonstrate the developmental change in character and story breach.  Even before first grade, students understand trouble and character development.  By third grade, a complicated event is often introduced that may alter one or more characters' mental state.  In fifth grade, students should be able to include "a resolution that fully addresses the problems and complications.  As well, their characters' motivations are made clearer in relation to trouble they experience."  During the middle school years, a great change occurs in students' writing.  Character traits are more thoroughly explained as a result of current or prior events that happened to the character.  The characters become increasingly more psychologically complex.  In high school, students begin to include literary devices such as social similes and metaphors, flashback and foreshadowing, paradoxical consequences, and perspective taking.  To support the development of narrative writing in the classroom, students must be taught to "read with a writer's eye."  They must "pay attention to literary elements and techniques so that they can be used in one's own writing."  First, though, students must read for understanding.  The authors of the chapter created developmentally based rubrics to assist teachers with RwWE activities.  These rubrics are tailored to specific grade levels and always include a link to writing.  This intentional use of rubrics begins as early as first grade and allows teachers to look across the grade levels to "develop an understanding of how knowledge and skills build from less to more complex."  Teachers need to recognize each individual student's capabilities and build on those.  

Ferretti and Lewis
This chapter about argumentative writing states that while young children are able to argue, they are not consistently taught how to do it effectively and consequently ignore important perspectives, even their own.  Hence, students must be taught to acknowledge opposing perspectives, as argumentation is "a constellation of propositions."  Students also must know how to judge arguments by using critical standards, as well as how to defend arguments by answering critical questions.  Argument is dialogue, and argumentative writing is "a problem-solving process."  Teachers are often afraid to introduce activities that have the potential for breeding conflict, but students actually need "real-world social contexts for argumentative writing."  To "bridge the gap" between written argument and person-to-person argument, students need opportunities for collaborative experiences.  Prewriting should be done prior to these interactions. Furthermore, students needs support and scaffolding during all aspects of the writing process for argumentative essarys.  The self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) model was designed with this in mind through six phases of instruction.  Other strategies are detailed, such as TREE for younger students and STOP and DARE for older students.  AIMS, SCAN, and ASCQ are other variants of the SRSD approach.  Finally, it is important to remember that "students must be able to analyze and interpret literature before they are able to write analytic arguments about it."  And as always for historical arguments, students must engage in sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration.

Responses:

Text-to-Text
In all of our readings last week, the authors discussed the importance of giving students time to write daily.  While the readings this week did not specifically state that particular point, it is implied because the strategies mentioned take a lot of time and practice.  I was also reminded through the readings that students need explicit feedback if they are to improve their writing.  This was mentioned last week in the readings when they referred to individual writing conferences with students.  The McKeough reading reminded me of some readings I have done in early childhood classes which discuss the developmental stages of writing.  Just as young children progress through different stages in the writing process (scribbling, mock handwriting, emergent, etc.), older children progress through different stages, as well.  It is helpful for teachers at all levels to be able to look across the different grade levels so that they can more effectively point their current students in the right direction.

Text-to-Self
While I have learned a lot from the readings that we have been doing this year, some of the strategies mentioned have been hard for me to apply in my own classroom because I teach such young children.  I was very excited that the readings this week gave explicit strategies for me to use with my students.  I believe that writing is so important, and we cannot expect students to be good writers as adolescents if we do not give them a strong writing foundation in their early years first.  I am particularly looking forward to doing more narrative writing with my students.  This may have to be in the form of interactive writing only initially, but I realized that I don't practice this kind of writing with my students nearly often enough.  As the texts mentioned, teachers (myself included) tend to focus primarily on expository writing, which is obviously important, but not exclusively.

Text-to-World
I can't help but think that if we really engage students with the kind of argumentative writing and discussions that were mentioned, our world will be a much better place.  For one thing, our politicians will know how to argue better, and as voters, students will actually understand the arguments.  It seems that the majority of voters vote a certain way because they are ill-informed, and I believe that this could go back to the way that those same voters were taught about argumentative writing in school.  Many people today do not know how to consider opposing viewpoints or even defend their own point of view.  If they are lucky, high school students may have had one speech class during their school years in which they were taught how to debate, but this could so easily be expanded upon in all ELA classes so that we have a more informed citizenry.

Questions:

1.  One of the readings talked about teachers being afraid to introduce topics that could provoke conflict, and I find myself fitting into this category of teachers!  Should there be topics that are always "off-limits," or should I, as a teacher, just know how to appropriately direct arguments while allowing all topics?  Sometimes it is difficult for me to not share my own viewpoint, as well.

2.   Now that I know how narrative writing progresses developmentally through different grade levels, what are some good ways to support those students who I notice are not where they should be developmentally?