What Gets Written Down is Important

Chapter 18 "History of Schools and Writing" by David R. Olson in the Handbook of Research on Writing, continues to build my educational foundation of the historical perspectives on the role of schools as literate institutions. The formalized system of schooling continues to determine how reading and writing are viewed and valued in our classrooms today. I laughed to myself after reading in Chapter 18, "Children learn that talk is cheap; what gets written down is important" (Olson, 2008, p. 286). Earlier in the week, my colleague, Gail, came to my office after teaching her "Introduction to Early Childhood" course for preservice teachers. She told myself, and a fellow colleague, that she had just had an epiphany while teaching. She was discussing with her students the writing of lesson plans with an emphasis on developmentally appropriate practices, and turned and wrote the word "objectives" on the chalkboard. As Gail turned around, she witnessed twenty students writing the word "objectives" in their respective notebooks. Just the act of the teacher writing something, anything, on the chalkboard, was enough motivation for students to copy the word. The students were perpetuating the notion that anything written down by the instructor was important, regardless of the fact that Gail had spent a considerable amount of time discussing other aspects of the lesson plan assignment verbally. She stated that very few students seemed engaged or wrote anything in their notebooks during the lecture format. Gail admitted that she herself, is not a visual learner. Therefore, she conducts most of her classes in a lecture format, uses very few Power Point presentations, or other forms of notes/handouts to disseminate her information. She feels it is the students' responsibility to listen and note important information during her sessions. This, however, has led to some apathetic students who seem disengaged during her classes, or perhaps, unable to differentiate the information of critical importance. This makes me wonder...Does Gail need to change or enhance her teaching practices, or do her students need to learn the art of notetaking?

The importance of writing down pertinent information has been ingrained in students for the past few centuries, when reading competence began to be assessed on the written responses that students provided. No longer were oral recitations the norm, and a way for instructors to view the strengths and weaknesses of a child's literary skills. Instead, it was through the written word that teachers began to discern who was a skilled reader. "Today, ironically, children's reading ability is assessed almost exclusively through writing, that is through written tests" (Olson, 2008, p. 286).

The reliance on high stakes testing, entrance examinations to colleges and universities, and certification examination, such as Praxis II, are all written assessments of students' competence. This fact strengthens the importance of writing instruction in today's schools, from early childhood to college classrooms. Too often, students are able to articulate their knowledge and understanding of a subject, but fail to demonstrate that same understanding in a written format.

Through recent readings, past and current research, and personal reflection, I have narrowed my literacy interests and line of inquiry, which now includes a specific focus on writing. I am looking forward to sharing my growing passion later this semester.

Colloquium

I enjoyed attending my first colloquium at Kent State University earlier this week. The "job talk" given by the candidate provided an overview of her current research in middle school literacy classrooms and its implications for the future. As a member of the audience, I began envisioning myself in her place, perhaps in a few years. The most important aspect that I gained from my attendance was the realization that I have the desire and confidence to engage in these components of the interview process. I attribute this to my work in higher education for the past five years. My position and duties have steadily evolved at Baldwin-Wallace College, from teaching one night course a semester, to working full-time in the Division of Education. In addition to teaching literacy and teacher education courses, I spend many days presenting on various requirements of our undergraduate program, from freshman completing introductory field experiences, to student teaching orientation sessions, and cooperating teacher and college supervisor meetings. The unique audiences often require different presentation formats, and provide me the opportunity to discuss course requirements, strengths, and challenges across our educational program. These opportunities, along with professional presentations on my own research, should help sustain my comfort level with different audiences and interview formats.

Changing Our Minds

I continue to be intrigued by the various history of reading and writing articles and chapters that I have read in the past few weeks. As someone with an innate passion for reading, I do not think that I have given the art of writing equal justice. These readings have enabled me to learn the history of these two subjects and how the past has influenced current theory and practice. Changing Our Minds: Negotiating English and Literature provided the reader with a more thorough grasp of recitation literacy and decoding/analytic literacy, which differed in six distinct ways. "The first difference was that decoding/analytic literacy defined reading as decoding and analysis of parts and, thus, required students to be able to understand materials they had not seen or heard before, unlike recititation literacy, in which students were only required to read (or recite) the preannounced materials" (Myers, 1996, p. 86).

Decoding/analytic literacy also differed from its counterpart in the structure of school organization in which it was taught. The decentralized school system, supported by Stanford's first dean of education, Ellwood P. Cubberly, is a prime example of the emergence of the standardized management system, in which teachers were regarded as "supervised workers" and students were viewed as the "products of a school-factory system" (Myers, 1996, p. 87).

Viewing pupils as products stifled students' learning and offered little to no choice in the classroom. I am once again reminded of the image and metaphor of the traditional school desk, whose construction has retarded the intellectual growth, as well as the spiritual growth of children for centuries. Montessori (2009, in The Curriculum Studies Reader, Flinders & Thornton, Eds.) expressed her concern regarding her research on scientific pedagogy, stating, "The principle of slavery still pervades pedagogy, and therefore, the same principle pervades the school. I need only give one proof-the stationary desks and chairs" (p. 28).

The design of the school desks and chairs may have evolved throughout the years, however, standardized testing and limited choice in curriculum materials has contributed to a lack of motivation and student choice in education . "It behooves us to think of what may happen to the spirit of the child who is condemned to grow in conditions so artificial that his vary bones may become deformed" (Montessori, 2009, in The Curriculum Studies Reader, Flinders & Thornton, Eds.) Recent research on the use of basal readers in the classroom, estimate that nearly 90% of elementary teachers use basal reading programs to teach literacy components. I intend to explore this area in depth, as I conduct research with Julie and Liz on reading selections in middle school basal reading series, and the effect these selections have on adolescent boys' motivation to read.

Local Literacies

I have been intrigued by the ethnographic research by David Barton and Mary Hamilton in Local Literacies: Reading and Writing in One Community. Lancaster, or Lancashire, England, was the setting of this study in which various residents were interviewed in order to determine the local literacy practices that were present in the everyday lives of those who call Lancaster home. Four main individuals were followed throughout the study: Harry, Shirley, June, and Cliff. Each of them viewed literacy in a very different way.

HARRY...

"Harry appears to view the world as being divided between educated people and uneducated people. It seems to be his yardstick for talking about people, including himself" (Barton & Hamilton, 1998, p. 88).

This quote made me reflect on the difference between schooling and education. This is a topic that is of focus during my first few classes of my Introduction to Teaching and Education course at the undergraduate level. Many students initially believe that the terms are synonymous. However, they soon realize that, "In contrast to education, schooling is a specific, formalized process, usually focused on the young, and whose general pattern traditionally has varied little from one setting to the next" (Ryan & Cooper, 2007, p. 26 in Those Who Can, Teach). In contrast, education is formal and informal learning that occurs on a daily basis. It is apparent that Harry views formal schooling as a true measure of a person. Perhaps, this is based on the fact that he was unable to attend a particular grammar school that he had gained admittance to due to financial circumstances. Harry has failed to realize that life experiences help educate an individual, in addition to the traditional educational setting.

SHIRLEY...

"Shirley's mother also has some writing difficulties, and Shirley has researched the possibility that there is an inherited tendency to dyslexia through several generations of her family, talking to her own parents and grandmother about their experiences of reading and writing. This is probably one of the reasons she was interested in taking part in the research project with us-a strong interest in reading and writing difficulties prompted by her son's experiences at school" (Barton & Hamilton, 1998, p. 102).

The majority of us, prompted by doctors and medical research, make it a priority to learn our medical history. However, I wonder how many individuals investigate their literacy history? It would be quite interesting to discover the reading and writing habits of our families and the impact this has had on our literacy skills and preferences. Shirley is an advocate of her community and social change, thereby using her literacy skills in multiple ways. However, it is her son's struggles with literacy that seemed to compel her into further research and investigation. While reading about Shirley, I recalled a few of my teacher education candidates who entered the field of education based on their own child's struggles with literacy. One woman commented that after her son was identified with special needs, she knew she wanted to learn about various reading and writing strategies in order to help her own child succeed in the future.

JUNE...

"There is a sense in which literacy is not important to June. Nevertheless, literacy seems to be something she uses as it is needed in order to get things done. She does not go out of her way to do things with literacy and it does not particularly interest her. It arises in her daily life in an incidental way, when she draws on reading and writing in order to get things done; or she uses it to pass time, such as browsing in the bookshop by the bus stop" (Barton & Hamilton, 1998, p. 128).

June's background clearly indicated that literacy was part of her everyday life and enabled her to complete the tasks needed to work, organize a household, and communicate with family and friends. Many adults equate literacy with reading and writing in scholarly formats, forgetting the many avenues in which reading and writing skills enable them to lead productive lives.

This concept brought to mind an article I recently read on document literacy. The research involved a sample of 472 adults from North Carolina. Each participant was asked to indicate on a visual scale his/her familiarity with 74 document elements (i.e. bar graphs, pie charts, address lists), as well as how frequently he/she used the element in daily life. Cohen & Snowden (2008) state that, "Document literacy is a core component of an individual's ability to function in modern society" (p. 9). Therefore, document literacy needs to be further addressed in classrooms and the creation of more user friendly documents needs to be considered.

Read more about this study:
Cohen, D.J. & Snowden, J.L. (2008). The relation between familiarity, frequency, and prevalence and document literacy performance among adult readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 9-26.

CLIFF...

"Although he did not spontaneously talk a great deal about literacy, when we asked Cliff in a later interview about his theories of literacy and how people learn, he responded with stories about the cruelty of teachers at his school when he was learning to read. His observation about literacy was that associating reading with punishment did not encourage him to learn, and he thinks that children probably learn better nowadays because schools are more enjoyable places" (Barton & Hamilton, 1998, p. 136).

Cliff's negative attitude towards reading was based on his past experiences as a student who was subjected to "cruel teachers". Therefore, he expressed a penchant for writing because it appealed to him and engaged him in an active way.

As educators, we must be cognizant of the influence that we have on our students each day. A misconstrued comment or action may affect a student more than we realize. This can result in lower levels of motivation and engagement in various subject areas, which he can note from Cliff's responses, can be easily carried into adulthood.

I am looking forward to the completion of Local Literacies and the themes and patterns that will emerge from the data.

The History of Writing

Cuneiform Writing

The History of Writing: View to learn more about the materials that were used as writing evolved in our world.

The Reader, The Scribe, The Thinker...

Monaghan and Saul's article, The Reader, The Scribe, The Thinker: A Critical Look at the History of American Reading and Writing Instruction exemplifies the notion that the disciplines of reading and writing are not equally recognized, regarded, or perhaps, even taught by players in the field of literacy. A disparity has occurred throughout the history of education in which reading has been more valued than its writing counterpart, although reading is indeed a receptive skill while writing is defined as a productive skill. It was interesting to learn that writing has been viewed as more synonymous with the mechanics of the process, as well as penmenship instruction. "The pedagogical emphasis was perscriptive: 'good' writing was taken to mean a mastery of capitalization, punctuation and syntax as well as correct spelling and pleasing handwriting" (Monaghan & Saul, 1987, p. 87).

This quote resonates with me since I have instructed several students who initially equate writing with handwriting. Often responses on "Reading Interest Inventories", that I have administered in the beginning of the school year, focus on the product of writing rather than the process. I am also realizing that the title of my interest inventory needs to address writing, as well. Perhaps I am perpetuating the stereotype that reading is more important than writing.

It is somewhat ironic that educators tend to concentrate their efforts on the reading currciulum when one of the loudest complaints is often the inability to have choice in the reading program or materials mandated by the school district. The use of basal reading programs and scripted teacher materials began to be used in earnest across the nation as one response to A Nation at Risk. Published in 1983, this government document advocated more "teacher proof" materials in order for American students to raise test scores and compete with their global counterparts. Although progress has been made since that publication, it is hard to ignore the fact the inordinate amounts of money are spent each year on reading programs that have not resulted in all children reading at or above grade level.

Writing instruction, on the other hand, offers teachers and students more choice and control. Student choice is continually advocated in terms of motivating readers, of all ages. Are students being given choice in terms of writing assignments, as well? Or are contrived writing prompts leading to poorly written responses and a lack of motivation in this area? With less materials needed and more control afforded, why isn't writing on equal footing with reading?

I am currently in my sixth year of teaching an undergraduate "Teaching of Phoncis" course to preservice teachers. The beginning of the course always begins with a history of phonics research and terminology, since many students have not focused on this topic since their own childhood days. Although we define synthetic, analytic, and anologic phonics approaches, I want my students to be aware that one specific approach has not been truly advocated by research. Cunningham (2009) states that, "Children need systematic phonics instruction but there is no best systematic approach (p. 247). I found it enlightening to read that Flesch's Why Johnny Can't Read and What You Can Do About It (1955) opened the dialogue among teachers regarding students' phonics instruction and its place in the broader reading curriculum.

In the phonics course, I also try to stress the key component of writing in early literacy skills. "Writing is perhaps the best opportunity for developing young children's print concepts, concrete words, phonemic awareness, and knowledge of letters and sounds. Because they are writing what they want to tell, children become perfectly clear about what reading and writing are for" (Cunningham, 2009, p. 24). Future teachers need to see this connection.

As literacy instructors, we must all continue to advocate for effective reading and writing instruction, even if we have a particular passion for one over the other. Continuing to explore the verticality of writing instruction is empowering. "Without knowledge of the intellectual history of curriculum studies, without understanding of its past and present circumstances (both internal and external to the field), one cannot contribute to the field. One cannot advance its conversation and thereby complicate our understanding. Nor without such knowledge can one claim expertise" (Pinar, 2007, xv).

NCATE

Scholarly writing has been a recent area of concentration for me during the last few months. I have been enlisted to help write the NCATE report for the Early Childhood Education program at Baldwin-Wallace College. The report will be sent to NAEYC (National Council for the Education of Young Children) this month. So, needless, to say, many hours have been devoted daily to the writing of contextual statements, compiling, disaggregating, and interpreting data, and aligning rubrics and course assignments to standards. This is not an easy fete, however, it has enabled me to experience yet another aspect of higher education. I will keep you posted on my progress!