What and when was it implemented?
I implemented writing conferencing, the use of mentor texts, and rubrics as research-based strategies to increase writing achievement from January 4 to April 6. Conferencing occured daily with a student for about 5-10 minutes. The post test was given April 9-12.
How was it implemented?
First, I administered an informative writing pretest which allowed me to see specific areas and traits that I could support further with focused instruction.
I used a variety of mentor texts (i.e. professional books, teacher writing, class writing, and student writing) and a student friendly rubric during instruction and conferencing to support each of my students. Every day I taught a whole-group mini-lesson focused on a writing trait and provided an example with a form of mentor text. I also provided instruction on how to use the student friendly rubric to improve student writing during whole group instruction and individual conferencing. Students had access to those mentor texts at any time and were encouraged to use them. Additionally, during conferencing my anecdotal notes and observations drove my individualized teaching point regarding their area of growth (challenge) and a positive encouragement to continue regarding a personal strength (cheer).
Researched Based
Strategies
Conferencing
Mentor Texts
&
Rubrics
Why was it implemented?
After analyzing data from the beginning of the year, my students’ greatest area for improvement was writing. Additionally, it was evident from an attitude survey, given at the beginning of the year, that the majority of my students might not know the important components of writing in a particular genre or what makes a good writer. Many did not understand how they could improve. Writing well enables students to effectively participate in society and be responsible citizens, equipping them to improve society.
From my research, I knew that clear expectations through the use of rubrics (Berne and McMahon, 2015), quality models of mentor texts (Gallagher, 2014), and individualized instruction through conferencing (Culham, 2014 & Ackerman & McDonough, 2016) would support each of my students.
How did it enhance individual student learning?
Conferencing is individualized; therefore, I was able to meet each student where he or she was at. I knew the strengths, challenges, and interests of each of my students and tailored instruction to best support and motivate each one. I provided a lot of choice which also supported diverse learning needs. Students were able to work wherever they would be most successful. For example, some chose to lay on the floor in the front of the classroom with clipboards, others sat at a table, a few students sat right outside the door in the hallway at a table, and others sat at their desks. I continually provide anchor charts with visuals, step-by-step hints, a variety of types of mentor texts, and graphic organizers to support individuals. One student typed on a computer for a period of time and wore headphones with music to help him focus.
How did it foster culturally responsive teaching with multiple perspectives?
My classroom was intentionally set up to allow open space by the board where we all sat to do the mini-lesson. They chose to sit wherever they wanted when writing independently and used whatever writing utensil they chose. Students had writing notebooks where I encouraged them to do their writing to support organization; however, they had access to different types of paper at anytime. There was a focus board in the “back” of the room that displayed all current anchor charts or class writing for the particular genre we were working on in order to support learners who benefit from visuals. Students could accesses those at any time.
In order to meet individual needs, one student typed on a computer for part of the time. Additionally, he used headphones and music to help focus. He and all students had the opportunity to use headphones if they desired. Every individual has a different learning style. To tap into those different styles, I not only provided visuals, auditory instruction, but I also often played quiet classical music to support other students.
Mentor texts were always out and available to students during writing. They were allowed and encouraged to access them at any point during workshop in order to support all students who write at different speeds. I chose a variety of mentor texts that celebrated different perspectives and topics so that every student was able to connect with the literature in a personal way. Every student had access to the rubric as well. They were encouraged to look at the specific trait we were focusing on at the time of the lesson but were allowed access the whole rubric in the back of their notebooks and in the front of the classroom.
Every learner comes with unique experiences and backgrounds. Writing lends itself nicely to celebrating those differences if taught well. I make sure to allow students to write about topics they desire. By providing a wide variety of mentor texts many different perspectives are shared. Additionally, by teaching several different genres, students unique strengths can be tapped into. Because conferencing is individual, I was able to assess each student to praise them specifically and challenge them to push them to be their best writing self.
What data collection methods were used?
District Summative Assessments:
I was able to gather quantitative data from an assessment given for a baseline. This assessment was used to get a picture of each writer as a whole. The pretest was given by asking the students to write an informative piece. Students were able to choose their topic within prompt parameters. Their finished work was scored using the district rubric.
The rubric is broken down into four writing categories or traits (ideas, organization, word choice and voice, and sentence fluency and conventions). Each student is scored on a four level proficiency scale within each category. Scoring a one in any category is considered "beginning" and would be about proficient at a kindergarten level. Scoring a two considered "progressing" and is would be about proficient at a first grade level. A three is "proficient" for second grade, and a four is considered "advanced" and would be proficient at a third grade level.
At the end of the unit, I administered a post test. I asked students to write a informative research report. They were given four days for the assessment. They had two days to research and two days to write. This assessment was scored using the same method and district rubric as the pre-test.
These assessments were used to get objective, quantitative data on each students. The data from the pre-test helped me to analyze the strength and needs of my students individually and as a class. This information helped to focus my instruction and give purpose for my study. The data from the post-test showed the growth my students made and guides future instructional plans beyond this study. The data gave me insight to what worked and what did not.
Anecdotal Conferencing Notes:
Throughout my study, data was collected and gathered through conferencing notes on each individual writer. (This form can be found under the resources tab.) Each time I met with a student, I would record a "cheer" or something they did well and a "challenge" or a suggestion they could do to improve their writing. Based on my research, it is imperative to highlight the positives and strength of a writer to foster a love for writing and a positive writing identity. Each conference is conversational and led by the student. I also recorded any time a mentor text was mentioned by the student or myself. Additionally, the conferencing form had a spot to record anytime the rubric was mentioned and to record how the students rated themselves.
This qualitative data collected from conferences was ongoing and taken often. It allowed me to differentiate and individualize instruction. Conferencing conversations were unique to the needs and strengths of each student. The daily notes guided my instruction for whole group lessons and individual conferences. Conferencing notes also helped to maintain consistency each time I would meet with a student and highlighted trends.
Student Writer Identity Self-Rating Scale:
At the beginning of my study, my students took an online survey regarding their writing identity (how they think of themselves as writers) on a rating scale. They took the same self-assessment towards the end of the unit.
This qualitative data gave me a more well-rounded idea of what my students thought about themselves as writers, which helped me to intentionally tailor conversations with them. The data provided insight on what my students know of what makes quality writing.