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.
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.
posted by Katherine at
10:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home