 

 

 
 

 
  

 

‘ ,

‘ ._ .

. ‘

i . ,.
u . ‘

. ‘

. ‘
.‘

. .

a .

‘ . .
., .,
.

\ ,

 

 

 

LIBDTQY
Michigan State
University

 

 

Ilﬂifﬁii'v‘ﬁﬂ'il ITIIHMIWanFITiNIIUﬂWlﬁUI

3 1293 02106 7818

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11m clamps-p.14

 

BECOMING LIT ERATE IN AN INNER CITY, WHOLE LANGUAGE SCHOOL

By

Debra Lynn Goodman

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of English

1999

ABSTRACT
BECOMING LIT ERATE IN AN INNER CITY, WHOLE LANGUAGE SCHOOL
By
Debra Lynn Goodman

This study describes the literacy experiences of Lauren and Marco, second graders
in an inner city, whole language classroom. The focus is the social nature of classroom
literacy and the relationship between literacy events and literacy development. Lauren and
Marco’s literacy experiences are described in addressing the questions: What are the social
and cultural literacy events and practices in the schooling of two second graders?; What
factors appear related to the literacy learning of developing readers within this classroom
culture?

Deﬁcit perspectives of African American learners portrays literacy as a discrete set
of skills, and literacy development as standardized test scores. Deﬁcit images of inner city
students are at odds with teacher’s observations of articulate, literate children. I view
children’s literacy experiences as both social practice and language process, shifting from
ethnographic-style to transactional research methodologies. Transactional perspectives view
literacy as a language process involving meaning construction. Social literacies perspectives
describe multiple literacies, dependent on contexts, social relationships and sociopolitical
factors change.

This study follows two second graders through a day of school: “Marco’s Day”
and “Lauren’s Day”. I explore children’s literacy experiences as social activities and
children’s roles as meaning makers within social literacy events. The data comes from
following ﬁfteen children from kindergarten through second grade. Observations were
documented through audiotape, video tape, photographs, ﬁeld notes, interviews and
children’s work.

Signiﬁcant ﬁndings of this study highlight the importance of social interactions for

children’s literacy development. The classroom creates social spaces for language learning,

 

I.‘

 

with children engaged in a wide range of texts, genres and social activities within literacy
events. Children “learn by overbearing” as they participate as listeners and observers, as
well as readers and writers. Participants are talking about texts in ways that make implicit
language processes explicit. Literacy events occur throughout the day, including procedural
times when texts are instrumental in planning and transitions. Children’s proﬁciency with
social events involving instrumental texts and literature texts, suggest a role of schools in

linking literacy development in home, school and wider community.

Copyright by
DEBRA LYNN GOODMAN
1999

For Yetta and Ken Goodman

You illuminated my path
with your wonder in children
your respect for teachers
your love of language
and your belief in me.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This work would not exist without a group of inspired, brave and hard working
teachers. Susan Austin, my friend and colleague, opened her classroom to me, collected
materials and viewed tapes with me, and read early drafts of this dissertation. I hope I have
captured a little of her talented work in my retellings. I also owe a great debt to Lauren’s
and Marco’s other teachers, Barbara Lauchlan and Mary Jo Regnier. We started this study
together and I continued with constant conversation and encouragement. The other
members of my TAWL group also offered inspiration and support (not to mention snacks):
Mindy LePere, Marjorie Hamois, Tanya Sharon and especially Toby Curry. These women
have been essential to my own learning, but they have also supported countless young

learners with democratic and liberatory teaching.

The members of my dissertation committee have each contributed to my drinking
throughout my degree, and during the time I was working on this study. Geneva
Smitherman kept me straight on linguistics and language variation. Patti Stock and Jenny
Denyer reﬂected my own ideas back to me and help me see further than I could on my own.
Shem' Thomas, as an outside reader, gave me some great ideas for revisions -- not to
mention proofreading tips. And I can’t express my appreciation enough for Marilyn
Wilson and Diane Brunner, my co-chairs, who helped keep me going, gave me many ideas
about methodology and writing, and were willing to read and respond to my work at the last

minute. (Sorry about that!)

There were also the phone calls and email with the ex-ofﬁcio members of my
committee including Denny Taylor, my parents (of course), Jerry Harste, and the
participants in Xtar, an action research list serve. In addition, many researchers were
generous in responding to my questions and sending me articles, in particular: Carole

Edelsky, Joanne Larson, Margaret Phinney, David Bloome, Susan Florio-Ruane, and Brian

Street. In addition to my committee, David Goodman, Yetta Goodman, and Susan Austin
helped with proofreading my chapters and providing suggestions and critique. I also had
many wonderful colleagues who asked about my work and provided encouragement,

particularly Bess Altwerger and Barbara Flores.

I especially have to thank the three people who put up with a lot of work weekends
and holidays, not to mention ﬁts of euphoria and despair: my partner, Cheryl and our two

sons, Reuben and Eli. Much love to all of you.

sh

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. xii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................... xiii
CHAPTER 1
WHAT COUNTS AS LITERACY? ................................................................ 1
Introduction ......................................................................................... 2
Background of the study .......................................................................... 6
The evaluation committee ...................................................................... 7
Documenting literacy learning in holistic classrooms ....................................... 8
What counts as literacy? ......................................................................... 1 1
The legacy of a deﬁcit view of African American children ............................... 11
Economic and social reproduction .......................................................... 16
Cultural incompatibility ...................................................................... 18
Unexamined assumptions of “failure theories” ............................................ l9
Literacy and economic success .............................................................. 21
Social literacy in family and community ...................................................... 23
What counts as literacy? : A social perspective ............................................... 27
Autonomous models of literacy ............................................................. 28
Critical Literacy ............................................................................... 29
A transactional perspective of what counts as literacy ....................................... 31
Literacy as social practice and language process ............................................. 34
What counts as literacy? Learning from Marco and Lauren ................................. 35
Overview of chapters ............................................................................ 38
CHAPTER 2
THE RESEARCH JOURNEY .................................................................... 40
Historical and political climate of the study ................................................... 41
Research questions from within a holistic, progressive perspective ....................... 43
Assumptions ...................................................................................... 44
Research questions .............................................................................. 45
Data collection .................................................................................... 47
Selection of the children in the study .......................................................... 49
Selection of Lauren and Marco for this study ............................................. 51
Not a representative sample .................................................................. 52
The data ........................................................................................... 52
The setting ........................................................................................ 54
My role as a classroom researcher ............................................................. 55
The use of a camcorder in classroom research ............................................... 57
Pilot studies ....................................................................................... 57
Reading strategies in kindergartners ........................................................ 58
A narrative participation framework ........................................................ 59
The “Raccoon Group” ........................................................................ 60
Data analysis ...................................................................................... 62
Selection of days .............................................................................. 62
Identifying a unit of analysis ................................................................ 62
Deﬁnition of terms as they evolved in this study .......................................... 63
Data analysis methodology .................................................................. 64
Data analysis procedures ..................................................................... 65
A note about transcription .................................................................... 67
Writing as analysis ............................................................................ 68
The social nature of research ................................................................... 69

viii

CHAPTER 3

LAUREN AND MARCO IN TWO DAYS OF SCHOOL ..................................... 70
Language Events in Two Days of School ..................................................... 7O
Marco’s Day ...................................................................................... 71

Discussion of Marco’s Day .................................................................. 74
Scheduling and transitions support meaning construction ............................ 74
Classroom structures create social spaces for learning ................................ 76

Lauren’s Day ..................................................................................... 78
Discussion of Lauren’s Day ................................................................. 82
Comparing Marco and Lauren’s Days ......................................................... 83
A social ZPD and the specter of cheating .................................................. 83
Whole Class Lessons, Standardized Testing and the Use of Class Time .............. 85
A Proﬁle of Marco ............................................................................... 90

Marco pays attention .......................................................................... 90

Marco pays attention to social interactions ................................................. 91

Learning by overheating ..................................................................... 92

Marco reads and writes ....................................................................... 94

Marco’s understandings about written language .......................................... 99

A Proﬁle of Lauren ............................................................................. 102

Lauren has a good time ...................................................................... 102

Lauren gets busy ............................................................................. 103

Lauren speaks up ............................................................................ 105

Lauren is an author .......................................................................... 106

Literacy in a Community of Learners ......................................................... 106
Conclusion ....................................................................................... 108
CHAPTER 4
LITERACY EVENTS AND PRACTICES
IN LAUREN’S AND MARCO’S SCHOOL DAYS ........................... 109
Introduction ...................................................................................... 109
Identifying Literacy Events .................................................................... 114
What is a “text”? ............................................................................. 116
Looking for “Social Practice” in Literacy Events ........................................... 117
Literacy Activities within Literacy Events .................................................... 119
Reading and Writing Literature ................................................................ 123

Reading (or listening to) literature: ......................................................... 124
Reading to the class ....................................................................... 125
Choral Reading ............................................................................ 126
Reading to/with “a friend” ............................................................... 127
Reading to yourself ....................................................................... 127
Reading book excerpts as reference or model for writing ............................ 128

Writing a literature book .................................................................... 128

Preparing to read or write literature ........................................................ 129
Selecting materials for reading .......................................................... 130
Selecting materials for writing ........................................................... 131
Making a blank book ..................................................................... 132
Outlining a written text ................................................................... 133

Discussion of “reading and writing a literature text” ..................................... 134

ix

Literacy Events Where Talking about Texts is the Major Activity ........................ 135

Discuss “unfamiliar language” in a text ................................................ 136
Discuss information using a text as a reference ....................................... 136
Discuss text as an author ................................................................. 137
Discuss how texts work .................................................................. 137
Discuss reading, writing process ....................................................... 138
Discussion of “Talking about Texts” ...................................................... 138
Reading and Writing in Pursuit of Other Social Activities ................................. 139
Literacy Events involving Recording or Reporting Information ....................... 141
Reporting information using visual aides .............................................. 141
Using lists, charts, and forms to keep classroom records ........................... 142
Using tallies, charts or graphs to compile information ............................... 142
Reporting News ........................................................................... 143
Reporting progress ....................................................................... 144
Request texts for display ................................................................. 144
Literacy Events Involving Planning or Organizing Class Activities ................... 145
Reading or writing to label, sort, identify, or locate .................................. 145
Organizing or planning an activity with a list .......................................... 145
Reading or writing to record and regulate behavior ................................... 146
Discussion of “Reading and Writing in Pursuit of other Activities” ................... 147
Texts as “contested” grounds ............................................................... 149
Literacy events involving “doing school work” ............................................. 151
Participating in a guided lesson on “doing a math sheet” ............................ 152
Writing (or pasting) “right answers” onto a math worksheet ........................ 152
Circling, labeling or coloring a targeted response ..................................... 154
Conclusion ....................................................................................... 155
CHAPTER 5
MAKING MEANING IN A CLASSROOM COMMUNITY ................................ 158
Meaning Making in Lauren’s and Marco’s Classroom Community ...................... 160
A Community Focus on Meaning ............................................................. 163
Making the process explicit ................................................................. 165
Distinctions between literacy events and meaning making .............................. 167
Social roles in classroom literacy events ..................................................... 175
Meaning Making in Marco’s Day ............................................................. 177
Marco as listener ............................................................................. 177
Marco as overhearer ......................................................................... 181
Marco reads and writes: ..................................................................... 186
Meaning Making in Lauren’s Day ............................................................ 195
Lauren as (selective) listener ................................................................ 196
Lauren as writer .............................................................................. 200
Becoming a writer. Lauren’s storytelling .............................................. 204
Becoming a writer. Lauren’s spelling .................................................. 207
Lauren as reader .............................................................................. 210
Comparing Lauren’s and Marco’s meaning making ........................................ 214
Listening and NOT listening ................................................................ 215
Reading and Writing Strategies ............................................................. 217
Conclusion ....................................................................................... 220

CHAPTER 6-

BECOMING LITERATE ......................................................................... 222
Learning from Lauren and Marco: ............................................................ 222
Creating Social Spaces for Language Learning .......................................... 223
The Social Construction of “Instrumental Texts” ........................................ 225
Social Roles in Literacy Learning: Learning by Overheating ........................... 226
Talking about Texts: Making the Process Explicit ....................................... 228
Factors in Marco and Lauren’s literacy development ....................................... 231
Contexts for Literacy Learning ................................................................ B2
The Math List: Building BridgesBetween Home and School .............................. 233
The “Book Club Diary” - Building Bridges to other Social Worlds ...................... 237
Implications for Research ...................................................................... 245
Crafting literate Identities: the Social Experience of Literacy .............................. 246
Lauren ......................................................................................... 248
Marco .......................................................................................... 249
POST SCRIPT:
WHAT HAPPENED TO LAUREN AND MARCO AFTER SECOND GRADE? ........ 251
APPENDICES ..................................................................................... 254
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEWING PROCEDURES ....................................... 254
APPENDIX B: MARCO’S DAY ............................................................. 256
APPENDIX C: LAUREN’S DAY ............................................................ 277
APPENDIX 11 LITERACY EVENTS OF MARCO’S DAY .............................. 302
APPENDIX E' LITERACY EVENTS OF LAUREN’S DAY ............................ 307
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................. 312

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Comparison of content focused time to transitional time ............................. 76

Table 2 Comparison of workshop time, whole class events,
and transitions on Lauren’s Day ........................................................ 83 a

Table 3 Time use in “Whole Class Math,” “Small Group Math,” and “Silent Writing”... 88

Table 4 Literacy activities within literacy events catalogued ................................. 120

xii

 

 

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12
Figure 13
Figure 14
Figure 15

Figure 16

LIST OF FIGURES

Deﬁnition of “Whole Language” written by Dewey teachers .................... 10
Data collection Iimeline ............................................................... 48
Placement of children in ﬁrst and second grade ................................... 51
Marco reads ............................................................................ 96
Texts and genres ...................................................................... 118
Marco’s and Lauren’s activities related to reading and writing literature ...... 134

Examples from “Literacy: Some Purposcful Distinctions” (Edelsky, 1991) .. 169

Meaning potential and meaning construction in Three Toed Sloth ............. 172
Marco experiences "The Three Toed Sloth” ....................................... 175
Meaning potential and meaning construction in “Silent Writing ................ 185
Meaning potential and meaning construction in “Book Clubs” ................. 194
Lauren’s story (As read aloud.) .................................................... 205
Lauren’s invented spelling .......................................................... 208
Lauren spells 19 of 50 words (38%) conventionally ............................. 209
Lauren Reads Dragon’s Fat Cat .................................................... 21 1
Building bridges between home, school and other communities ............... 242
xiii

 

Chapter One
What Counts as Literacy?

This study describes the literacy experiences of two second-graders, Lauren and
Marco, within one inner city, whole language classroom. The study focuses on the social
nature of classroom literacy, exploring the relationship between literacy events and the
children’s literacy development. I ﬁrst interviewed Marco and Lauren when I was the
school librarian at The Dewey Center, an inner city school-of-choice. My colleagues and I
were disturbed by the discrepancy between deﬁcit images of inner city students and our
own observations of the bright, active and literate children in our classrooms. I began
interviewing and observing children as a school evaluation project, and continued with these
observations for my doctoral research.

As I observed Lauren and Marco’s literacy experiences, I considered the following
questions: What are the social and cultural literacy events and practices in the schooling of
two second graders? ; and What factors and principles appear to be related to the literacy
learning of these developing readers within this classroom culture? This chapter begins
with an introduction to the children and the second grade classroom. The introduction
becomes a backdrop for an ethnographic - style study of the literacy experiences of two
children in an inner city classroom in a large city.

Before describing literacy use and literacy learning in the classroom, it is necessary
to address the contradictions between public images of rampant illiteracy among inner city
schools and my own experiences as an inner city teacher. I address this discrepancy by
considering “What counts as literacy? ” and, by extension, “Who counts as literate?” I
begin by describing how a group of teachers involved with literacy evaluation struggled with
a legacy of deﬁcit models of inner city children. I then explore and critique other
explanations for “failure” in urban schools. Next, I describe several theoretical stances on
literacy and literacy learning including a language process or transactional perspective and

Street’s (1998) dichotomy: Autonomous, Critical Literacy, and New Literacy Studies.

Pi. ids-3 no...”

 

U...
m“

D. A
I" ‘p
”‘05.

his 3:3
’

r

1")
a)

 

.. I1"

At the end of this chapter I provide a summary of my conclusions. Lauren and
Marco are participants in a literacy rich classroom community. Literacy events include the

reading of ﬁction, non-ﬁction and poetry. But social literacy events are pervasive and

0
children read and write as they plan, clean up, prepare for lunch, and so on. Marco and ‘
Lauren participate in literacy events in a variety of social roles as listeners and observers as

well as readers and writers. As they participate in classroom literacy events, Lauren and

Marco are learning how to read and write. They are also learning what it means to be I!-

readers and writers in a variety of social contexts. "
Introduction

Terrence and Alicia have just ﬁnished reading a book to the class. Susan Austin,
their teacher, looks around. “You have book clubs that want to read to you today.”

A voice whispers, “Yes!”

Susan continues, “But I think you have given us a lot of listening energy. So
what I’m going to do is, I’m going to send tables at a time to get something for
‘Silent Reading.”

As Susan is talking, Jackie approaches with a request.

“Okay,” Susan says, “Let’s do this. Jackie just said something about ‘Silent
Writing.’ If you would prefer to write rather than read, I will give you a choice --
only for the next ﬁfteen minutes. And then we’re going to listen to a book club.
Square team, please go get your writing or reading.”

The room is noisy as children rush off to get materials. Some go to the library
comer and collect books, pillows and stuffed book characters. Others head to the
writing table for paper, staplers, or art supplies. Sharonda picks out four illustrated
song books from a large plastic basket under the calendar table. She sits down in
the “reader’s chair” by the door, and begins with The Hole in the Bucket,
(Westcott, 1990) singing out the words with great enthusiasm.

Jackie shows me a wrestling book she is writing with Terrence. “Miss
Goodman, I made a chapter book,” she announces proudly. Jackie and Terrence
are writing about children in the class using “book names” instead of real names.

I ask, “Why did you think of having a book name?”

Jackie says, “It was kinda simple. We didn’t want our real names to be in the
book. In biography books we want our names to be in them.”

Marco comes over and stands next to Jackie so he can see the book as he listens
to her talk. Jackie talks about how she represented the voices of wrestling
announcers in the book text. “Don’t you know how they say and... AND...
A:ND’?” she asks me, imitating an announcer with growing excitement. She
shows me the text:

Johnny Cage vres Lukane and and and Lukane won.

Susan asks the children to settle down. Amber stands illustrating the cover of
Alicia’s new book with a beautiful vase of ﬂowers. Alicia leans across the table
watching. Across the table, Jonathan sits at his seat reading a book.

Marco shows me a book that says “Pictionary” on the cover. “I’m making a
dictionary,” he says.

 

can
c...

E3

'3'

Susan tells a group in the back, “No, you can’t do this. This is ‘Silent
Reading.’ Not ‘Read Aloud.’ Not ‘Book Club’ time. This is not a talking time at
all. Marco, get something to read now. Or something to write.”
Lauren and Katherine settle down on the floor near the door with their backs
against the front wall. They each have two pillows, one for their seat and one for ,
their back. They each hold a book, and seven more books are scattered on the ﬂoor .
between them. Lauren is reading out loud to herself, but Katherine is listening to
Susan’s instructions.
Susan says, “Hurry and get what you (need). Everybody has to ﬁnd a spot
quickly.”
Lauren continues to read out loud. She is reading an illustrated chapter book

Dragon’s Fat Cat (Pilkey, 1992). Katherine puts her book down and leans over to
listen to Lauren reading. .3
Sharonda asks Lauren, “Does this say (??)'.” Lauren goes over to help ‘
Sharonda. ;
in

She is sitting down when Sharonda calls again. “When... is this ‘when’?”
Lauren and Katherine over to look at Sharonda’s book.

Susan calls from her desk, “Katherine, Lauren, and Rudy. Would you choose a
book you want to be read to you?” Katherine and Lauren go to get books for the
“Books to Go” bags. The bags will include one book to practice at home for
reading aloud to the class. The other book is for an adult to read to the child.

In the corner near the door, Sharonda is reading her second book, If a Tree
Could Talk (Williams, 1994a), an environmental poem. She speaks with great
emphasis, “We WISH you would stay.” Jessica sits on the carpet nearby,

engrossed in a longer picture book.
Susan says, “On your mark. Get ready. Get set. Read or write.” Susan sets a

timer for ﬁfteen minutes. The room gets very quiet as ‘Silent Reading (and
Writing)’ ofﬁcially begins.

This ten minute transitional time provides a snapshot of Susan Austin’s second
grade classroom, where literacy events are squeezed between other literacy events. This
vignette also introduces the two case study children -- Marco, who is eager to hear about
Jackie’s writing, and Lauren, who is too busy reading to listen to Susan’s announcements.

Susan offers “silent reading” to give the kids a break between two whole class
listening experiences: Read Aloud and Book Clubs presentation. (“You’ve given us a lot of

listening energy”) It takes ten minutes for children to “get ready” for silent reading and
writing. But during that time, most of the children are engaged in a variety of reading and

writing activities. When Silent Reading ofﬁcially begins, Sharonda is reading the second of

ﬁve books she will during the Silent Reading language event.

 

‘ Transcription Notes: (??) indicates that spoken language is inaudible. Italics inciate texts
read aloud. In “A:ND” the capital letters indicate emphasis and the colon indicates an
elongated vowel sound.

3

—¥—______——_—_—_____A

 

In addition to reading and writing, children are involved in book selection, topic
selection and a variety of “pre-composing” activities. Lauren and Katherine gather a large
stack of interesting titles, and then choose additional books to take home. Lauren tells me
later that she loves Miss Austin’s books. Sharonda selects from the popular song and
poetry books gathered in a large plastic basket near the front of the room. Children do not
wait for Susan’s guidance, but ﬁnd materials and resources themselves, and seek assistance
from each other.

Susan sets ﬁrm guidelines, insisting that children participate in deﬁned reading and
writing activities. But she is willing to negotiate, taking up Jackie’s suggestion for writing
as well as reading. Children’s talk about texts provides examples of the how members of
this community explicitely focus on reading and writing processes. Jackie and Marco’s

exchange shows how language is used in awareness of various text genres and styles.

Sharonda sees her classmates as resources for her reading and asks Lauren to help her with

unfamiliar text.

Susan Austin is a teacher in the Dewey Center, where I spent my last ﬁve years of
elementary classroom teaching. The school is a large city public school-of—choice with a
whole language philosophy. The scene described above is a familiar experience for teachers
at the Dewey Center. My colleagues and I observed children engaged in a wide range of
meaning construction activities in our classrooms. Like Susan, we heard an enthusiastic
“Yes!” to reading and writing experiences. On the day that I observed the vignette above,

Lauren, the child I was observing, directly participated in some 37 literacy events involving
29 different texts.

Like most teachers, we had doubts and worries, and we shared them with each other.
When should we trust that children were developing as literacy learners, and when should
we be concerned? How far should we push children to be authors of their own learning,

and when should we intervene? How could we move beyond teaching reading and writing

 

 

!'
l
l.

 

iii/3.

-
3‘. I
h. L

to help children become critical readers and writers? How could we create more democratic
classroom communities? Discussions and debates outside of our classrooms heightened
our own concerns. The literacy learning we observed was not reﬂected within the district’s
deﬁcit driven signs of “success”: testing, grading, and evaluation.

Of greater concern to us were the growing questions about whole language
education among African American educators and parents. Most of the children in our
classrooms were African American. About half of the children at our school came from the
poverty stricken neighborhood around the school. We could not change the conditions of
poverty and the inequities of America’s public schools from within our classrooms. But we
found hope as children became problem posers (Freire, 1994) and decision makers in a
curriculum that was built upon inquiry, authoring, and choice. Still, we were always
working to improve and strengthen teaching and curriculum in our classrooms. In order to
improve classroom teaching, we focused our attention on documenting and understanding
learners and learning within our whole language school.

In Voices of the Self, an educational autobiography, Keith Gilyard describes studies
of African American students in school. He states, “Oddly enough, conspicuously absent
are the voices of the students themselves. I’m not speaking about the street stories or the
recorded snatches of conversation that typically have provided some researcher with his or
her data, but the articulate opinion of those African American students who face the task of
public school language education. It is not being idealistic to expect at least some students

to be able to furnish such information if encouraged to do so.” (Gilyard, 1991, p. 10)

In this study, I ask young children to tell their own stories about literacy learning. I
make visible “the voices of the students themselves.” I also closely observed the literacy
learning of these children. I have selected a case study approach in order to come as close
as possible to understanding and describing literacy learning experiences from the child’s

perspective.

-l;

’1
he... .

I

 

4..

.g.
“-4.“. I

lk.

\H .

s 'I
.I

it.

 

 

Background of the study

During my last years of teaching in elementary schools, I worked with a group of
teachers planning and transforming an inner city neighborhood school into a city-wide
magnet school. Named after the progressive educator, John Dewey, the school philosophy
embraces Dewey’s experience-centered, democratic approach to teaching and curriculum
(Dewey, 1963). The Dewey Center was conceived by a group of whole language teachers
and adopted by a predominantly African American, inner city community. Unlike Kozol’s
(1991) description of city magnet schools in inner city neighborhoods where neighborhood
children are not included, our school proposal was designed to serve neighborhood children
ﬁrst.

My colleagues and I believed that whole language theory had the potential for
supporting teachers in creating the democratic schools that Dewey (1961) envisioned,
bringing together a long tradition of progressive education with new understandings about
language learning. We named our proposal after Dewey to place our school within a long
history of progressive education and assure parents we were not experimenting on children.
We never really thought the school would use Dewey’s name, but parents voted almost
unanimously to change the school name after investigating Dewey’s philosophy and
beliefs.

During the time when I worked at The Dewey Center, the school experienced a
major transition on several levels. The population tripled from around 200 to 600 students.
The demographics shifted as predominantly low-income families from nearby housing
projects were joined by “citywide” families of various socio—economic levels. The school

curriculum shifted from a focus on academic content, with reading and writing as the
“subjects” of study, to an inquiry driven curriculum, with reading and writing (and math)
as the tools of inquiry. Materials shifted from textbooks and worksheets to a wide range of

children’s literature and writing materials. Classroom organization shifted from a

 

..
Cw

.

"a

- a
. .1
C I

--
_--.

transmission model to a transactional model (Weaver, 1988). In a transactional classroom,
children are active participants in their own learning.

These changes had a major impact on everyone in the school, including students,
parents and staff. The school attracted a group of experienced teachers with a strong
background and interest in whole language and holistic education. This community of
evolving teachers and changing classrooms, with a school-wide focus on whole language
theory and practice, provided an opportunity to observe how reading and writing develop in
holistic school settings. It is within the climate of professional change that this study
begins.

The evaluation committee

As a part of this change process, I chaired the school evaluation committee. Our
goal was to develop tools for evaluation that would reﬂect the learning and teaching in our
classrooms. The committee planned a three-year process for our own professional
development. We planned to spend the ﬁrst year learning ways of documenting literacy
learning, and a second year learning how to interpret and analyze these “documents.”
During the third year, we would begin compiling data to develop a picture of the range of

literacy development that was occurring in our school.
As a part of this project, I volunteered to follow a group of kindergarten children
through the three years of our evaluation project. At that time, I was school librarian and I
had the ﬂexibility to observe and interact with children and teachers. I was given a half day
a week to work with a group of twenty kindergartners. My meetings with the
kindergartners included engaging them in reading and writing experiences and interviews
about the reading and writing process. I followed ﬁfteen of these children through ﬁrst and
second grade with classroom observations and additional interviews.
The evaluation project ended after the ﬁrst few years. However, I describe the
project because it inﬂuenced this study in two ways. First, the project grew out of the

concerns of the teachers on that committee. Our primary interest was improving teaching

 

 

*1;
Ené‘l
.

if" -;

‘n.._

5-,,
ﬂ.
Iv\_‘

and learning in whole language classrooms. However, we worked within a historic context
of deﬁcit views of children and literacy learning in inner city communities. Secondly, I
began gathering data while focusing on the broad goals of the evaluation committee. As I
conducted these observations and interviews, my questions were wide ranging:
What does it mean to become literate for children in our school?
How can we document and describe children ’s literacy practices and literacy
learning?
0 How does the social structure of the classroom, and the “instruction” of the teacher,
serve to enhance or inhibit literacy practices and literacy learning?

These questions became more focused as I continued to follow the children for this
study. As I reframed my research questions for doctoral research, I began with this
extensive, longitudinal data set. I wanted to look closely at literacy development, and I had
many years of experiences observing and describing children’s reading and writing
transactions with texts. What interested me was how the classroom community in a whole
language school inﬂuenced children’s literacy development. I narrowed the focus of my
questions to focus on the social nature of literacy and literacy learning in the second grade
classroom community.

Documenting literacy learning in holistic classrooms

The major goal of the Evaluation Committee at the Dewey Center was to develop
ways of assessing learning and learners that matched our understandings of the richness
and complexity of language and learning within the social setting of our classrooms. We

needed to shift our ways of describing literacy to match our shifting paradigms in
curriculum and teaching. Our understandings of whole language theory and practice were
most inﬂuenced by researchers such as Brian Camboume, Kenneth and Yetta Goodman,
and Frank Smith, and teacher/researchers such as Nancie Atwell, and Bobbi Fisher.
InWhat’s Whole in Whole Language , a book read and re-read by teachers at the
Dewey Center, Ken Goodman (1991) proposes four theoretical “pillars” of whole
language: a theory of language, a theory of learning, a theory of teaching, and a theory of

curriculum. Kenneth Goodman, who spoke to teachers and parents at the Dewey Center

twice during the ﬁrst few years, has since added a fifth pillar, a theory of the social nature of
language and learning. However, as a whole language teacher, I had come to think and talk
about the original four pillars supporting three “walls”: content, process, and the
social/cultural community in the classroom (D. Goodman, 1991). Dewey Center teachers
worked together to describe and deﬁne whole language in a brochure provided for parents
and community (See ﬁgure 1).

A major tenet of whole language is that literacy learning in school can occur in the
same way that children learn language at home. After studying young children learning
language at home, Brian Camboume (1988) identiﬁed eight conditions of language
learning: immersion, demonstration, engagement, expectation, use, responsibility,
approximation, and response. Camboume’s model has implications for language teaching
as well as learning, since his conditions suggest a social context for home learning that
might be cultivated within the classroom community. Teachers at the Dewey Center used
Camboume’s model to critique the “authenticity” of classroom learning experiences

compared with the real-life language learning experiences outside of school.

The vignette from Susan Austin’s classroom above illustrates some of the changes
teachers at the Dewey Center observed within whole language classrooms. Children were
reading and writing a wide range of literary genres, and enthusiastically discussing these
texts. Students appeared to enjoy school and have a positive, comfortable attitude towards
writing and reading. Children appeared to view themselves as a part of a social community
of learners, and participation in the social community was a resource for individual learning.
In addition, children appeared to view reading and writing as meaning construction and
focused their attention on making sense rather than getting the words right.

Our observations were often discussed at lunchtime and at staff meetings, but they
were not valued by district ofﬁcials since the district recognized three measures of academic
success: letter grades, standardized test scores, and attendance. The discrepancy between
our descriptions of literacy learning (as illustrated in the vignette above) and ofﬁcial

descriptions of literacy learning in our school is based on different underlying assumptions

Figure 1: Deﬁnition of “Whole Language” written by Dewey teachers

 

What is Whole Language?

Whole language focuses on the learning process. In a whole language school
children are learning how to learn. Children participate in drama, role-playing, research and
other experiences that give them tools for life-long learning. Children learn how to ask
questions, select t0pics, ﬁnd materials, read, write, interview, share, and present as they focus
on science, social studies and literature themes. The school-wide young authors program
takes children through the entire process of writing and publishing. In our classrooms,
students are evaluated on their growth as learners as well as on their written projects or oral
presentations.

Whole language is meaning-based. The best learning experiences are those that
are meaningful to the child. Learning experiences such as letter writing, storytelling, ﬁeld
trips, interviews, reading ﬁction and non-ﬁction books, and drama help children to construct
meaning and understand the world around them. Even beginning readers can start with
signs or familiar stories. Language skills are easy to learn when the focus is on making
sense.

Whole language is developmental. Children must be allowed to grow at their
own pace. Mistakes are a part of the learning process. For example, as children become
writers they "invent" spelling and punctuation rules. These invented spellings reﬂect the
child‘s learning. Whole language teachers look for growth rather than perfection.

Whole language is experience-based. Hands-on activities and projects provide
the basis for learning and provide many opportunities for reading, writing, talking,
calculating and thinking. For example, science experiments allow children to see and
understand science concepts. A classroom store teaches econonrics and provides practice
with math and language. Paper and pencil activities can't replace ﬁrst hand experience.

Whole language is child-centered. Teachers develop their classroom curriculum
based on their understanding of children and how children learn. Activities grow out of the
particular interests and needs of each class group and each child. Children have choices and
are encouraged to express themselves in discussion, writing, and other creative media.
Children are helped to select materials, plan activities, and organize their time so that they
become self-motivated learners with a lasting thirst for knowledge.

Whole language is functional. Adults use language to get what we want, ﬁnd
things out, share with others, and express our thoughts and feelings. Children will read and
write when they have a reason to read and write: to remember things, to give reports, to
enjoy good book, or to say thank you to someone who lives far away. Learning
CXperiences in whole language classrooms have a real-world purpose.

Whole language is strength oriented. A child's view of himself or herself is
extremely important to success in school. Learning experiences that are successful and
enjoyable give children conﬁdence that they can learn, and encourage them to become active
learners. Whole language teachers observe and evaluate children to learn about their
background and interests. Class experiences build on the child's strengths, rather than
focusing on the child's weaknesses.

Whole language is social. Children learn more when they talk and share with
others. Classroorrrs are often noisy as children work on a variety of projects. Children are

grouped in many different ways so that they may share their unique talents and points of
vrew.

 

 

10

 

about what counts as literacy. Before documenting the literacy learning of children at the
Dewey Center, I address the question “What counts as literacy?”
What counts as literacy?

A fundamental theory of literacy underlies any attempt to understand and describe
literacy experiences. Answers to the questions “What counts as literacy?” and “Who
counts as literate?” drive differing perspectives on literacy research, assessment, and
instruction. For administrators in our district, like many state ofﬁcials and others in the
“public” audience, statistical measurements such as letter grades and test scores are what
counts as literacy. These scores are used to label countless learners as “illiterate” in spite
of the prevalent view in the professional community that reading tests are inaccurate, biased,
and pedagogical ﬂawed (Dyson, 1997; Edelsky, 1991; Shannon, 1989)._

Sonia N ieto 1996) describes three major theories that attempt to explain the “school
failure of students, particularly those from culturally diverse and poor backgrounds.” In a
deﬁcit theory, school failure is viewed to be “the fault either of the students themselves, who
are genetically inferior, or the social characteristics of their communities, which suffer from
economic and cultural disadvantages.” (Nieto, 1996, p.229) An economic and social

reproduction theory proposes that schools reproduce the economic and social structures of
society. A cultural incompatibilities perspective suggests that school failure is caused by
incongruities between the culture of the home and culture of the school.

The legacy of a deficit view of African American children

Gloria Ladsen Billings (1994) traces the “language of deprivation” in the
educational community. In the 19608, children were labeled “culturally deprived” and
“disadvantaged.” Although the goal was to improve “student and teacher effectiveness, the
use of such terms contributed to a perception of African American students as deprived,
deficient, and deviant.” In the 1980s and 19903, the popular term is at-risk. “The language

of deprivation had changed, but the negative connotations remained.” (Ladson-Billings,

1994)

ll

N ieto points out that while “characteristics students bring with them to school
including their race, ethnicity, social class, and language, also often have a direct impact on
their success or failure in school”, there is not a causal effect between these characteristics
and school failure. “Instead it is the school’s perception of students’ language, culture, and
class as inadequate and negative, and the subsequent devalued status of these characteristics
in the academic environment, that help to explain school failure.” (1996, p. 230) It is not
the child’s language, culture or class that is disadvantaged, but the way that schools engage
in reproducing the discriminatory practices in the larger society.

Historically, deﬁcit perspectives have led to what Gilyard (1991) calls
“eradicationism” as educational policy. “From their [policy makers and educators]
outlook poor reading and writing scores by Black English speakers are understood to be the
direct result of these students’ inability to abandon their own delimiting dialect.” (Gilyard,

1991, p. 72) The thinking is that the language (and culture) of racial and ethnic minorities
must be rejected before they can learn.

There has been a disturbing and regressive return to deﬁcit driven school policy in
the last several years. The New York Times recently proﬁled a group of Brooklyn third
graders who are in summer school in order to pass a test that is their “ticket to the fourth
grade.” This test not only determines who will pass or fail, but what teachers will do during
the summer course.

The lesson plan, based in part on guidelines from the Chancellor, is closely linked to
the city’s reading and math texts. It dictates what books to read -- an assortment of multi-
CUltural works intended to make reading more interesting for these students, who are mostly
black or Hispanic -- and when to read them and even what is written on the chalkboard.
Mrs. Hunt learned the other day that she must add “mandatory” to “summer school, Class
3-224” to remind students of the importance of being there. (Archibold, 1999, p. 38)

The Times reporter does not question the racial demographics of these mandatory

students. or ﬁnd it odd that one child’s mother reports that he “generally took home good

12

grades.” He also does not appear disturbed by placing the names and pictures of children
in a public article under the headline “Pupils with Low Scores Face Grueling Struggle to
Learn.” These children are not only deﬁned as illiterate by one test score, but they are
being deﬁned as struggling leamers by one of the highest symbols of literacy in our
country. How much is expectation, adult’s perceptions about what these children know
and can do, a factor in this “grueling struggle.”

For these children, what counts as literacy is determined by their performance on
one test. Not only are their literate lives outside of school discounted, but the professional
judgment of teachers, reﬂected in grades and other evaluations, are discounted as well.
Policies such as this one in Brooklyn are propped upon the widespread belief that American
schools are failing, and teachers and children are at fault. Studies have shown that the
“failure” of American children to achieve in schools is largely a “manufactured crisis.”
(Berliner and Biddle, 1996) In an exhaustive and thorough analysis of measures of
“reading performance” Kaestle and others (1991) report the following conclusions, among
others:

' According to the US Census, the number of Americans who considered
themselves “illiterate” decreased from 20% of Americans in 1870 to .06% of
Americans in 1979.

° The median educational level of adults in the United States rose from 8.6 to 12.5
years of schooling between 1940 and 1980. Since “reading achievement”
levels have remained stable at each grade level, the “level” of literacy in the
nation has increased considerably.

° The deﬁnition of “functional illiteracy” has changed dramatically since the term
emerged in the 19305. First deﬁned as at least three years of school, current
“illiteracy measures” deﬁne “functional illiteracy” as an 8th or even 12th
grade “reading level.”

These authors do not ﬁnd any decline in literacy learning, even by the questionable
statistics of test scores. This ﬁnding includes the literacy learning of disenfranchised
groups. However they do point to a “gap” between children in wealthy districts and those
in poorly funded districts: often including African American and poor children. “Even if

schools today are performing about as well as they have in the past, they have never excelled

at educating minorities and the poor.” (Kaestle, 1991, p. 128)

13

In Savage Inequalities Jonathan Kozol (1991) documents the inadequate funding
of most public school systems and the gross inequities in public school funding between
wealthy communities and poverty stricken communities.

There is a certain grim aesthetic in the almost perfect upward scaling of

expenditures from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich within the New
York City area: $5,590 for the children of the Bronx and Harlem, $6,340 for the
non-white kids of Roosevelt, $6,400 for the black kids of Mount Vernon, $7,400 for
the slightly better off community of Yonkers, over $11,000 for the very lucky
children of Manhasset, Jericho and Great Neck. In an ethical society, where money
was apportioned in accord with need, these scalings would run almost in precise
reverse. (Kozol, 1991, p. 123)

In this light, attacks on urban public schools serve to mask the inequities in our
school systems based on cultural diversity and economic class. As these inequities become
more difﬁcult to ignore, the problems of large urban districts have become the focal point of
attention in many state governments. The district where the Dewey Center was housed was
recently taken over by the governor, who ordered the mayor to disband and reconstruct the
school board. The ﬁrst recommendations of the reconstituted school board were to require
every student in the district to wear a uniform, and to institute military-style schools.

A mask of concern for inner city children conceals a political agenda to discredit
public schools and blame economic inequity on its victims. Well meaning teachers, parents
and community members are drawn to support deﬁcit driven policy and curriculum for
urban schools. However, many city parents see through this attempt to “help” the city’s
children by destroying the last vestiges of community input and control. One parent said
on the local TV news, “It’s almost as if our children are being declared criminals before
they have a chance to show if they’re good or bad students.”

Some politicians and right wing interest groups have learned to use deﬁcit theory to
undermine and attack urban schools. This new attention to urban schools is not a response
to actual declines in literacy leaming within urban centers, but a concerted political effort to
maintain a policy of inequity and discrimination in public school funding. In addition to

take-overs of large urban districts, recent legislative measures favoring charter schools and

14

private school vouchers are calling cards of a political campaign aimed at ending public

education as we know it.

These campaigns draw attention away from the real problems of urban education

today. Berliner and Biddle (1996) outline their own list of the “real problems of American

Education” obscured by the manufactured crisis. I summarize just a few of these problems

below:

Income and wealth inequity. “Income and wealth are much less evenly

distributed here than in other Western nations.” (p.216) This income gap has
widened in recent years. In 1987 dollars, families in the ﬁrst decile of income
had 14.8% less income than in 1977, while families in the top income decile
were earning 49% more than they had ten years earlier.

QLthh and stagnation of the economy. “Over the past twenty ﬁve years,
average wages in America fell behind the rate of inﬂation, and the only reason
American families have been able to keep even is that more and more of those
families have been supported by two wage earners. Also, costs of crucial basic
needs- particularly housing and health care- have increased sharply in recent
years.” (p. 233)

Racial, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity School districts have conﬂicts
over how to distribute scant resources to meet the needs of various cultural and
linguistic groups. In addition, these populations are unevenly distributed within
states and districts.

'u ic iscrimination and Black Americans. “Racism in this country has
historically meant that Americans were willing to tolerate far worse conditions
for the poor (who are thought to wear black faces) than are tolerated by other
Western Countries. This tolerance of inadequacy for the poor has generated
appallingly bad schools, where the educational accomplishments of the students
are dismal.” (p. 227)

Suburbs, ghettos and city centers. Local funding allows afﬂuent parents to
avoid paying for urban schools. Schools are often expected to provide
recreational facilities and services lacking in cities.

Violence and drugs. These issues affect the health and progress of American
children. In addition, in countries “where rates of violence and drug abuse are
lower, schools can spend more of their resources on the education of students.”
(p. 232)

MW. America has a growing aging population, a
signiﬁcant voting block promoting its own interests “which often do not include
the needs of young people.” (p.234)

It is much easier to blame teachers and children for educational concerns than to

face these “real” problems. In urban districts, school board and state concerns have

become a political struggle “in defense of good teaching” (K. Goodman, 1998). In recent

years, such attacks have particularly focused on whole language or “process” teachers.

Reid Lyon, of the National Institute of Child Health and Development, has become a

15

spokesperson for a movement to legislate a phonics approach to reading instruction. At a
hearing in California he testiﬁed, for example, that many inner city children hold their books
upside down when they ﬁrst come to kindergarten (Taylor, 1998). Lyon’s comment
discredits children’s homes and families as language learning communities.

As a reading specialist, I have conducted many “book handling” interviews with
kindergartners and ﬁrst graders. The ﬁrst task involves handing a book to a child upside
down and backwards and asking them to show me the front. I have never met a
kindergartrrer who did not turn the book right side up and identify the front cover. Of the
twenty children that I interviewed at Dewey in the winter of their kindergarten year, all of
them knew that books were read from left to right and top to bottom.

Within this campaign against public education, negative descriptions of African
American children are used deliberately to gain public favor. One article in the Baltimore
Sun describes wild, out of control children and the classroom teacher’s comment that “it’s
not their fault.” Pictures of African American children are prominently displayed. These
descriptions play to middle class white stereotypes and lead to the foregone conclusion that
inner city public school teachers are doing little to help these “poor urchins.”

The political situation in literacy education today brings into clear focus the socio-
political aspects of early literacy research in schools such as The Dewey Center. In an
effort to document and represent children’s learning, teachers and researchers struggle
against a campaign to paint African American children as deﬁcient language users and
disabled learners. Within a deﬁcit model, what counts as literacy is deﬁned so narrowly
that large groups of young readers and writers are labeled illiterate.

Economic and social reproduction

Kozol’s (1991) Savage Inequalities suggests that schools reﬂect the economic and
social inequities of the larger society. An economic and social reproduction perspective

argues that that “schools reproduce the economic and social relations of society and

therefore tend to serve the interests of the dominant classes.” From this perspective, the

16

fact that “70 percent of students in urban schools were dropping out was understood not as
a coincidence but actually as an intended outcome of the educational system. In other
words these students were “doing just exactly what was expected: they were succeeding at
school failure” (Nieto, 1996, p. 234).

Dyson ﬁnds that “socio-cultural and linguistic differences can be institutionally
framed as correlates of academic deﬁciencies, from the very start of a child’s school life”
(Dyson, 1997 , p.11). Dyson and the teachers in the San Francisco East Bay study group
identiﬁed a range of factors in differential treatment of students including: reputations,
expectations, grade levels, retention, report cards, and standardized test. Nieto (1996)
identiﬁes many “structural factors in schools” that perpetuate discrimination based on
differences including tracking, testing, curriculum, pedagogy, physical structure, disciplinary
policies, limited roles of students and teachers, and limited parent and community
involvement.

Patrick Shannon (1989) describes how tracking or ability grouping discriminates
against children in “low” reading groups:

0 Teachers interrupt students in lower ability groups during oral reading between
two and ﬁve times more frequently.

° Seventy percent of reading in high ability groups is done silently, while 70% of
reading in low ability groups is oral.

0 Students in high groups were often asked to read texts that were easy for them
while students in lower groups were asked to read texts that were difﬁcult for

them (Shannon, 1989, p. 102).

This data is especially disturbing in light of studies of the selection process for
ability grouping. “What is most often found is that differences in dress, deportment,
manners, language and language use are interpreted as intellectual deﬁcits.” (Shannon,
1989, p. 103)

Cultural reproduction explains some of the problems of urban education without

placing blame on learners. However, Nieto points out several problems with accepting a

simple explanation of “cultural reproduction” to explain student failure. One problem is

that social and cultural reproduction theories focus on social class and “almost complete(ly)

17

neglect the role of gender and race” (Nieto, 1996, p. 235). For example, women often
worked in the home in the past making it “unclear how females were prepared by schools
for their role in society” by inequities in school funding. In addition, “The purposes of the
dominant class are not perfectly reﬂected in the schools but are resisted and modiﬁed by the
recipients of schooling. (p. 235)”

Cultural incompatibility

Another explanation for inequities in educational achievement focuses on cultural
incompatibilities, where “school culture and home culture are often at odds.”

The more consistent that home and school cultures are, the reasoning goes, the
more successful students will be, in general terms. The opposite is also true: The
more that students’ experiences, skills, and values differ from the school setting, the
more failure they will experience (Nieto, 1996, p.235).

Edelsky describes power based inequality in her study of the bilingual classroom
where English speaking children did not learn Spanish. English speaking children were
often in the role of language teacher, while the Spanish speaking children were always in the
role of learner.

The gross inequality of power between two languages (and two groups of

people) that guarantees that one set of young children will always be language
teachers and the other set language learners, that one set will be congratulated for
making almost no progress while the other is disparaged for making tremendous
(but not ‘total’) progress -- the situation is not one that any program can change.
(Edelsky, 1991, p.28)

Lisa Delpit (1995) worries that holistic classrooms may fail to educate African
American children in the “culture of power” that they need to survive in dominant society.
Delpit describes ﬁve aspects of power in urban classrooms:

1. Issues of power are enacted in classrooms.
2. There are codes or rules for participating in power, that is, there is a “culture of
power.”
3. The rules of the culture of power are a reﬂection of the rules of the culture of
those who have power.
4. If you are not already a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly
the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier.
5. Those with power are frequently least aware of -- or least willing to acknowledge

-- its existence. Those with less power are often most aware of its existence
(Delpit, 1995. p. 24).

18

 

Delpit’s concern is that European American teachers, either by design or by
ignorance, are likely to fail to address issues of power in the classroom. She is particularly
concerned about process writing or whole language practices because of their “indirect”
approach, which may not serve to make the “rules of that culture” explicit.

For Delpit acquiring the codes of power is what counts as literacy. Her assumption
is that reading, writing and speaking like someone within the “culture of power” will allow
the learner to achieve power: “This means the success in institutions -- schools,
workplaces, and so on -- is predicated on acquisition of the culture of those who are in
power.”

Delpit proposes that it is important for African American children to be directly and
explicitly taught the culture of power in school. However, Edelsky’s study suggests that we
must be careful that such teaching doesn’t reproduce the power relationships between
cultural groups. Ladsen-Billings (1994) has developed a criterion for “culturally relevant”
teaching that seeks in all teachers and students ways of developing respect for and critical
analysis of culture and cultural differences.

One limitation of “the cultural mismatch theory” is that it “is still insufficient to
explain why some students succeed and others fail.” N ieto sites Gibson’s study of
Punjabi students who have been quite successful in school (Nieto, 1996, p. 236). Edelsky’s
(1991) conclusion that the power differential in bilingual classrooms “is not one that any
program can change” suggests studies of literacy learning must look beyond notions of

“success or failure.”
Unexamined assumptions of “failure theories”
Edelsky warns of some pitfalls of transfonnative research and/ or teaching including
“unexamined acceptance of prevailing conceptions of language instruction and evaluation,
especially written language” and “a focus on failure, along with an absence of concrete

examples of liberatory practice” (Edelsky, 1991, p.3).

19

Jonathan Kozol’s Savage Inequalities (1991) and Amazing Grace (1995) are
crucially important in exposing the relationship between schooling and discrimination in the
United States. However, Kozol also provides an example of unexarrrined assumptions
about language competency and language learning in inner city communities.

We may estimate that nearly half of the kindergarten children in Chicago’s
public schools will exit school as marginal illiterates.

Those very few who graduate and go to college rarely read well enough to
handle college- level courses.

In strictly pedagogical terms, the odds of failure for a student who starts out at
Woodson Elementary School, and then continues at a non-selective high school, are
approximately ten to one. The odds of learning math and reading on the street are
probably as good or even better. The odds of ﬁnding a few moments of delight, or
maybe even happiness, outside these dreary schools are better still.

Kozol describes a failure mechanism that makes it difﬁcult for Chicago students to
graduate from high school, go on to college, or do well at the colleges they attend. He
equates this with students’ actual abilities to read, write, and think. In spite of the wise and
well-read people that Kozol interviewed for Savage Inequalities and Amazing Grace, he
buys into the “failure” of children to learn to read and write, most likely based on test
scores. Edelsky deplores this practice as contradictory for transfonnative educators. “Even
though tests are hopelessly biased, even though they are conceptually invalid, even though
they are used to support social stratiﬁcation, tests and test scores are nevertheless appealed
to - with a straight face - in work that is supposed to promote change”(Edelsky, 1991, p. 4).

Kozol’s last comment about learning on “the street” is ironic in that it appears to

underestimate not only the people of the inner city, but the importance of social literacy and
local literacies. Brian Street studied social literacies outside of school. He reports that
“uneducated” people in Iran read and write in rural villages, but there is often a rrrismatch
in “literacy practices” between the community and the school. Further, in homes and
communities reading and writing is a social practice, embedded within the activities of daily

life (Street, 1995).

20

 

Carole Edelsky warns that a focus on reasons for “school failure” can be
“conserving” of social and economic injustices rather than “transfonnative”:

Much research in language and education provides both summaries and also

richly detailed pictures of these failures, so much in fact that it is the ‘scientiﬁc’
mainstay, however unintentionally, of a ‘failure industry’. As McDermott has said,
millions of people are ‘measuring documenting, remediating, and explaining’ these
failures. What is conserving about all the activity is that it puts an analytic distance
on failure and offers no countering ‘language of possibility’ (Aronowitz and
Giroux, 1985 in Edelsky, 1991, p.6).

Denny Taylor (1993) claims the “in-the-hea ” measures of tests and grades focus
on “what’s wrong with the child” as educators attempt to help children, particularly those
in trouble. She describes how this process can produce the failures it attempts to avoid, for
families and schools as well as for children:

When we evaluate children we get lost in our own abstractions and children fail.

When children fail, families are placed in jeopardy. Sometimes families fail. When
children fail, teachers are held accountable. In essence, they too are found wanting.
The ultimate irony of the situation isthat when children are given the opportunity to
create an authentic foundation for their own existence, they do not fail. In our adult-
made, in-the-head-tested educational system, we consistently underestimate the
enormous potential of children to participate in the construction of their own
learning environments. (Taylor, 1993, p. 26)

While what counts as literacy may differ in Kozol or Delpit’s discussions, there is
often an underlying assumption that they are failing to learn to read and write, supported by
statistical measures such as tests or grades. With these constant failure messages, urban
teachers tend to assume that students in our classrooms compare poorly with suburban
counterparts. Teacher’s expectations inﬂuence how children progress in schools.
However, there is little evidence outside of test scores to support this assumption. One
reason for the unexamined assumption that inner city children can’t read and write is the
commonly held belief that literacy has a causal relationship with economic success.
Success in school, in terms of grades and promotion, and later economic success in life are
equated with literacy levels.

Literacy and economic success
In our highly literate society, then corrrrnon assumption is that highly successful

p00ple are highly literate. By extension, poor people are assumed to be uneducated and

21

i’ ,
'e.
i
i
L-

 

illiterate. Literacy is viewed as the key to economic advancement, while illiteracy is
inextricably linked with poverty. Lauren expressed this viewpoint as a kindergartner:

Debi: How do you think people learn how to read?
Lauren: They go to a library.

Urn... because reading is very important and you need to know how to read.
What would happen if you don’t know how to read?
Then you would be on the streets... holding a sign.

D: They go to a library? Why would you go to a library to learn how to read?
L: Because reading is important.

D: Reading is important?

L: And you got to know how to read.

D: Why is it important?

L'

D:

L:

Lauren’s comment illustrates how notions of what counts as literacy are imbedded
in our fanrily and cultural beliefs. In a study of “print awareness” of preschoolers, Y.
Goodman, Altwerger and Marek found that 3 to 6 year olds are reading the print in their
environment such as stop signs, logos, and product labels. They found that young children
are able to “read” (make sense of) many product logos and signs. Predictably, children
read print they were familiar with, and were more likely to read print given a more complete
context. Few children read the “milk” printed in handwritten letters; more children read the
logo “rrrilk” copied in the original shape and color; still more children read the word
“milk” on the side of a carton. Since the children were interviewed using contrived tasks,
the researchers speculated young children are even more proﬁcient readers given the full
social context of the breakfast table or the grocery story.

The researchers found no correlation between income levels and ability to read
environmental print. Children of all income groups performed equally well, responding to
texts that they had experienced in family or community literacy events. However, while all
children were readers, lower income children were less likely to identify themselves as
readers. In addition, middle income children were more likely to suggest reading was

learned at home and it was “easy”, while lower income children were more likely to believe
that reading would be learned at school and would be “hard.”
As a teacher, I used procedures from this print awareness study to evaluate young

readers. For me, the study had several important implications. First, when you go looking

22

for literacy, you generally ﬁnd it. This maxim is true for illiteracy as well. Secondly, young
children are reading the texts around them. Third, reading signs and logos and other
“environmental” print may be more universally familiar to young children than reading
books. Finally, very young children have already formed perceptions about what counts as
reading and who counts as a reader.

As a reading specialist and classroom teacher in Detroit, 1 evaluated many children’s
reading using nriscue analysis (Y. Goodman, Watson and Burke 1996), a procedure where
children read and retell an entire story. In ﬁfteen years, I only met one child who was still a
beginning reader after completing third grade, and he had never been to school before he
came to my ﬁfth grade classroom. However, it is common for children labeled as “non-
readers” to deny their own reading and writing abilities. Reading a TV Guide, according to
one group of fourth graders, was so easy anyone could do it. School reading tasks, on the
other hand, were difﬁcult and challenging.

The popular link between literacy and economic success has led to the assumption
that inner-city families and communities lack literacy experiences. The “common sense”
belief that poverty equals ignorance is so widespread that it is often accepted by teachers,
parents and children in these communities. Evidence of proﬁcient reading and writing in

home and community contexts is rejected in this view of what counts as literacy.
Social literacy in family and community

Ethnographic studies have taken the study of early literacy to the breakfast table and
the grocery store. Shirley Brice Heath (1983) describes the poor African American
community of Trackton, where adults sit on their front porches reading the paper and calling
to each other about the news. While children in these families may not be reading picture
books, they are sitting on laps or playing nearby when these literacy events occur. Luis

Moll describes what he calls the “funds of knowledge” in the Latino community, which
include community resources about school, church, auto repair, cultural history, health and

medicine, and other areas of expertise (M011, 1994).

23

Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) observed an inner city African American
community in the north. They selected families with children who appeared successful in
ﬁrst grade, and discovered a system of support for children’s literacy development within
the extended family. The authors compare their study to Heath’s and identify a wide range
of types and uses of reading and writing including:
instrumental, dealing with schools, and public agencies
social/interactional, such as letters, notes, and cards
news related, newspapers, magazines, etc. to gain information

conﬁnnational, documents, special writings or announcements
critical/educational, schoolwork and studies

Although not all children have book reading experiences at home, all children have
experiences with story telling. Miller and Mehler (1994) describe the “power of personal
storytelling” within families. The authors note that all families engage in storytelling, and
young children are strong storytellers by the time they enter school. They found several
consequences of family storytelling for language learners including: acquisition of narrative
skills, a heightened opportunity to learn past the immediate event or incident, and “self-
construction.”

The authors observe that “personal storytelling is an important means by which
young children, together with family members, experience and re-experience self in relation
to other” (Miller and Mehler, 1994). They speculate that bringing personal storytelling into
kindergarten classrooms would make children’s transitions into school easier, as they
would explore self in relation to other in the classroom community. However, the
researchers found few opportunities for storytelling when the children in the study entered
school, and those storytelling experiences tended to focus on curricular goals and differed
from the social construction of stories in families.

In each of these studies, meaning construction occurs within the social context of
f61111in and community. It is questionable whether individual instruments for evaluation or
research reﬂect the child’s linguistic understandings and abilities within the supportive

social context of language practices in homes and communities.

A comprehensive account of self-development would have to be much more
dynamic than has previously envisioned: it would have to take into account not only
the child’s moment-by-moment interpersonal encounters, but his or her participation
in iterative narrations of those encounters, which are themselves imbedded in
moment- by- moment interpersonal encounters” (Miller and Mehler, 1994, p. 47).
Studies that have followed children from home to school have found that children
have fewer opportunities for the rich experiences with language observed in home settings.
Wells and others (1986) audiotaped children’s language and literacy experiences during the
pre-school years. When the researchers followed these children to school they found
“compared with homes, schools are not providing an environment that fosters language
development. For no child was the language experience of the classroom richer than that of
the home -- not even for those believed to be “linguistically deprived” (Wells, 1986, p. 87).

Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) also found children’s literacy experiences in
school bore little resemblance to the rich social experiences of children at home. They
followed one child, Shauna, through a day of school. While the ﬁrst grader participated in a
wide range of literacy events in conversation with an extended group of family members,
she spent her school day quietly working on worksheets, looking at her library book, and
playing silently with ﬂashcards and language puzzles. She also spent many nrinutes silently
waiting for activities to begin.

There is a prevalent view that inner city parents do not provide literacy experiences
for their children, because of their own presumed illiteracy. Toby Curry, a middle school
teacher at the Dewey Center, introduced a roving “parent journal” that traveled from family
to family. Curry wrote back to each parent’s letter, sending a copy to the last parent while
passing the joumal on to the next family. Parents wrote eloquent messages about the work
their children were doing, their own aspirations, and their thoughts about Curry’s
classroom. They read the letters of previous parents and wrote responses in support and
admiration. In four years of parent journals, there was only one case where a family

member didn’t add a letter to the roving journal.

25

Taylor and Dorsey—Gaines’ study of inner city families pushes the boundaries of
how we answer the question “What counts as literacy?”

True, some of the parents with whom we worked did not ﬁnish high school, and

some of the older children did drop out of school during the four years that we
visited the families. In addition, some might argue that many of the children came
from “broken homes.” But no one can deny that these were literate homes. One
of the explanations for this apparent paradox lies in the persistent use of obsolete
deﬁnitions of literacy as a series of dispassionate skills that can be counted,
measured and weighed (Taylor, 1988, p. 200).

When children do not succeed in school, it is common to blame the “lack of
language models” in the homes. However, in each of these studies, children brought richly
literate backgrounds to school. Heath observed rural children overheating newspaper
conversations as they grew up on their relatives’ knees. Miller and Mehler note that oral
storytelling is a strength of most young preschoolers. Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines describe
inner city children participating in a wide variety of literacy events. When we invited parents
to write letters at the Dewey Center, we got thoughtful and often eloquent responses. Wells
points out that no child in his study experienced language in school as the same rich
opportunity for talk and interaction that they enjoyed at home.

These studies suggest that school discourse communities could gain much if
teachers were more aware the discourse of families and communities outside of school. The
prevalent view that inner city families are illiterate has at least two negative implications for
inner city children in schools. First, it turns the focus of society away from ﬁxing the real
“gates” that keep inner city children from succeeding such as racial discrimination, poverty,
violence, etc. If illiteracy is blamed for the lack of economic success, then schools, teachers
and even learners are at fault, and not American system of economic inequity. The rallying

cry of “illiteracy” is used to obscure social injustice and economic discrimination.

Secondly, nrany concerned educators and public ﬁgures accept that inner city

children (and adults) can’t read and write, often based on test scores and similar statistics.

The danger in the assumption that inner city children come from illiterate homes is that the

focus of schooling (for example President Clinton’s education initiatives) becomes merely

26

teaching them to read and write. Instead, it becomes important for teachers and classrooms
to recognize and afﬁrm children’s literacy practices in homes and communities since these
practices are often invisible and discounted.

In addition, educators must look further than literacy levels to consider the role of
schooling in improving the economic status or quality of life of inner city children. Delpit
states that children need to be educated in the “discourses of power” in order to change
power structures. Her suggestion implies that literacy learning moves beyond the acts of
reading and writing to include negotiating larger social issues and structures. In addition to
afﬁrming children’s home literacy practices, schools have a role in providing connections
between the social literacy practices at home and the social literacy practices in the wide
range of discourse communities in the wider world. What counts as literacy involves
participating in the social literacies of the child’s world.

What counts as literacy? : A social perspective

Researchers in the ﬁeld of New Literacy Studies use the term “social literacies” to
describe a socio-cultural perspective of what counts as literacy. Reading and writing, from
a socio—cultural perspective, involve a variety of social literacy practices that include the
literacy event, the meanings brought to the event, the characteristics of the literacy event, and
the social relationships involved. In this description, literacy is a social process difﬁcult to
describe using grades, attendance, test scores and other individualistic measures abstracted
from social contexts.

From a New Literacy Studies perspective, there is not a single entity called
“literacy,” but “multiple literacies” depending on social context. David Barton (1994)
describes a social perspective on literacy:

' Literacy is a social activity and can best be described in terms of the literacy
practices which people draw upon in literacy events.

' People have different literacies which they make use of, associated with different
domains of life. Examining different cultures or historical periods reveals more

' Piazza? literacy practices are situated in broader social relations. This makes it

necessary to describe the social setting of literacy events, including the ways in
which social institutions support particular literacies. (Barton, 1994, p. 34)

27

A

Researchers in New Literacy Studies have primarily been working with adult
populations or at the university level and few New Literacy studies have focused on the
social nature of literacy practices in elementary classrooms. Anne Haas Dyson (1993) has
brought studies of social literacy into schools with her descriptions of children’s writing as
“social work.” Dyson describes how young children develop as authors in relation to
others in classroom “story-making.” This occurs when stories are “socially enacted”
within classrooms where children write on self-selected topics within social groupings, and
have opportunities to “perform” their stories through reading or drama:

When socially enacted, though, narratives not only communicate, but they allow their
authors to manipulate or regulate their own identities and those of others. Through their
narratives, the observed children worked to (a) establish commonalties, or social cohesion,
with others; (b) criticize others or defend themselves from others’ criticisms; and (c) take
the stage, the interactional spotlight, for an artistic performance. (Dyson, 1993, p. 58)

From a New Literacy studies perspective, theoretical models of what counts as
literacy can be categorized by how the researcher/educators consider the social and political
worlds of the participant. Brian Street (1998) groups theoretical approaches to literacy into

three types of theoretical models: Autonomous models, Critical Literacy, and New Literacy

studies.
Autonomous models of literacy

Deﬁning what counts as literacy as a score on an achievement test or report card is
an example of an “autonomous” model of reading (Street, 1998). Literacy is deﬁned as an
individual’s collection of skills. From this perspective, researchers and educators consider
language abilities and language learning autonomously from a social context Oral
language is seen as separate from written language. Cultural issues, linguistic issues, and
socio-political issues are not seen as connected with literacy issues. The goal for educators

is to identify the leamer’s problems and ﬁx them.

28

Street describes an “autonomous” view of reading and writing as one that divorces
practice from cultural or political context The instructional “study skills” approach
focuses on “fixing” student’s problems. Autonomous views of language can be connected
to deﬁcit perspectives. They result in reductionist pedagogies, where language is segmented
into small pieces. Since autonomous perspectives ignore the role of culture and cultural
diversity, they may lead to eradicationist education with the goal of eliminating any
differences between the child’s language and the expected language of the school.

Critical Literacy

Critical literacy can be most closely associated with the work of Paulo Friere (for
example, 1994). Literacy is not an individual ability to read and write, but a tool for
identifying problems and solutions in communities, particularly oppressed communities.
The goal is not just to read and write, but to think and critique, and ultimately to act Critical
literacy means educating for democracy. For a growing group of “social justice”
educators, educating for democracy includes establishing democratic classrooms and
schools. Leaming focuses on relevant experiences and language, meaningful to the learner.
Evaluation is strength oriented and contextual.

From Street’s perspective, the “weakness” of Critical Literacy in classrooms is a
focus on “acaderrric socialization,” the “acculturation of students into academic discourse”
(Street, 1998). In academic socialization, student reading and writing is viewed as a
“transparent medium of representation” that can be critiqued by the teacher and shaped
towards the mainstream culture. Although the focus is on meaning, rather than skills, there
is a lack of focus on institutional practices. Power is viewed as a quantity rather than as a
social process.

Street places Whole Language within a critical literacy perspective. Delpit criticizes
Whole Language for not acculturating children into the discourse of power. My
observations of Susan Austin’s classroom raise questions about both of these contradictory

statements. In the following chapters I describe how Susan and the children shift social

29

structures such as scheduling and assignments in ways that address underlying institutional
practices. In addition, discussions among members of this community often include
making underlying language practices and processes visible and explicit in ways that go
beyond acculturation into mainstream culture.

Since a prime function of education, and parenting as well, is acculturating learners
into the community, it is a challenge to imagine a shift in teaching practices from a Critical
Literacy to 3 Literacy Studies perspective. However Street raises an important question to
consider, particularly in light of Delpit’s critique. As Gee (1991) puts it, since literacy is a
social language process, learning to read always involves learning to read a discourse. In
my own words, when a child is learning how to read and write, they are also learning how
readers and writers act within particular social literacy events.

In this study I found many examples of how Lauren and Marco are learning how to
be a reader and writer, at the same time that they are leaming how to read and write. When
these social practices (how to be a reader and writer) are made explicit, then children have an
opportunity to address underlying issues of power and social structures of schooling. I’m
not saying whole language classroom communities, or Susan’s class in particular,
consistently address our role as acculturation of students into the discourse of schooling.
However I describe in Chapter Six how educators consider the role of school discourse
communities in making connections between the discourse of home and families and the
discourse communities in the larger society.

Street divides descriptions of what counts as literacy into Autonomous models,
Critical Literacy, and New Literacy Studies. However, while these categories address
perspectives on the social practices of reading and writing, they do not address the reading
and writing as language processes. Over the past thirty years there has been
groundbreaking research in reading and writing processes that has signiﬁcantly shifted

PefSpectives among educators about what it means to read and write.

30

For example, Freire’s classroom pedagogy (Freire, 1994, Shor, 1987) focused on
discussions of symbolic or signiﬁcant words. Recent work has recognized the potential of
adult beginning readers to construct whole, relevant texts such as letters, articles, songs, and
books. While New Literacy Studies theorists tend to ignore these distinctions, transactional
perspectives and social perspectives inform each other. I’m not convinced that we must
abandon critical or transactional perspectives as we move forward into new understandings
of literacy as social practice.

A transactional perspective of what counts as literacy

Research traditions that view reading and writing as language processes are
transactional because they focus on the transaction between reader (or writer) and the
written text. Transactional perspectives are also called psycholinguistic or sociolinguistic
perspectives (Smith, 1971; Weaver, 1988; K. Goodman, 1996) reading and writing are seen
as constructive processes, involving both language and thinking. Rosenblatt (1971) also
describes a transactional view of reading to include the aesthetic experience that the reader
has in “evoking” a text.

A transactional model of reading is built on basic assumptions about language and
learning. Literacy is written language and not oral language written down. Reading and
writing are active processes with readers using printed text to construct meanings. Readers
and writers bring meaning to the text in order to evoke meanings in transaction with the text.
These meanings are shaped by the participants’ previous experiences and understandings,
and are thus inﬂuenced by socio-cultural histories. Psycholinguistic perspectives are
inﬂuenced by cognitivist views of learning. Learning to read and write is a process of
constructing or inventing the principles and rules of written language. In the transactional
process, the reader/writer acts on the text as the text acts on the reader and writer. Through
this transaction, both reader/writer and text are changed.

From a transactional perspective, meaning construction (or “evoking the poem”) is

What counts as literacy. Preschoolers who look at the logo “Crest” and say “toothpaste”

31

are readers because they are able to construct meaning with text. Understanding precedes
comprehension in the sense that a reader brings meaning (language and experiences) to a
text in order to construct meaning with a text. The term transaction implies a dynamic
process where the reader acts on the text and the text acts on the reader. As a result, both
reader and text are changed.

Researchers exploring the reader’s role in meaning construction rediscovered the
work of Louise Rosenblatt (1978) who ﬁrst described reading as a “transaction” between a
reader and a text. Rosenblatt was most concerned with the readings of works of literature.
She distinguished between “efferent” reading, strictly to gain information, and “aesthetic”
reading such as the “lived through experience” of reading a book. The reading of a work
of literature is, to Rosenblatt, as much a creative act as conducting an orchestra

Transactional perspectives of reading have a different research focus than
autonomous or skills perspectives. The research lens is enlarged from a focus on sub-skills
for working on small pieces of language (such as sounds, letters or words) to the reader or
writer’s transactions with whole meaningful, functional texts. Transactional research
focuses on reading and writing processes, rather than measurable products. The reader’s
retellings and interpretations of texts become signiﬁcant in evaluating comprehension.

Ken Goodman (1996) developed a methodology for understanding the reading
process called rrriscue analysis. This procedure involves having the student read and retell
an entire text without interruption. Goodman coined the word “miscue” to describe
readers’ mistakes, which he found revealed a good deal about the language systems and
strategies involved in reading. This represented a shift from a deﬁcit model uncovering a
reader’s weaknesses to a model that viewed readers as knowledgeable language users.
Miscue analysis studies Brown, 1996) have shown that all readers, even those labeled as

“slow” readers, have a wealth of experiences and language strategies for making sense of

texts.

32

In the ﬁeld of early or emergent literacy, a group of Piagetian researchers studied
how young readers and writers invent the rules and principles of written language (Y.
Goodman, 1990). Ferreiro and Teberofsky (1982) identify three stages in the literacy
development of young children in Argentina. Very young pre-school children appear to
hypothesize that writing is iconographic, with written symbols representing meaning
directly. For example, children predicted that the word “cat” (gato in Spanish) should be
bigger than the word “kitten” (gatito).

English has some iconographic symbols, the most obvious ones being numerals.
Numerals, like Chinese characters, represent concepts rather than sounds. In interviews
with young children, it is common for children to read numbers before they read letters or
words. They have even surprised me by reading symbolic texts such as “15% off.” This
reading ability may reﬂect a familiarity with products and advertisements, or it may be
because of the iconographic nature of these symbols.

Children later realize there is a relationship between the spoken utterance and the
printed words and will attempt to match spoken words or syllables to units of written texts
(letters or words). For example, when my son was about three, he pointed to each letter in
the text “PUSH” on the lid of a trash can and read, “trash can, trash can.” He had to
repeat trash can twice to match each letter. Ferreiro and Teberofsky call this the syllabic
stage because Spanish speaking children tend to focus on matching each spoken syllable to
one unit of text. The work of these Piagetian researchers shows that children construct
various hypotheses about how written language works before arriving at an understanding
of the alphabetic nature of English. In the view of these researchers, once a child reaches
the alphabetic stage “the rest is just mechanics.”

Other early transactional studies of literacy focus on how children learn what it
means to be a reader and writer in their world. Marie Clay (1972) developed book handling
activities to explore young children’s awareness of how print is organized and read in

books. As mentioned earlier, Goodman, Marak, and Altwerger developed a variation of

33

Clay’s “Sand Test” and also created a procedure for exploring children’s “print
awareness” or understandings of how print is organized and read in advertisements and
signs. Many researchers (Wells, 1986) have explored children’s responses to storybook
reading. These researchers have found that as children are learning to read and write, and
even before, they are learning about how print is organized and used within their social
worlds.

Literacy as social practice and language process

Transactional perspectives of reading and writing are limiting if reading and writing
are observed separately from the social and cultural context. Ferreiro and Teberosky’s
study, for example, was based on Piagetian type “tasks” using isolated words and
sentences. Miscue analysis, while involving whole texts, is often conducted in contrived
situations outside of the “real life” social practices of reading and writing. These
methodologies are important since they have taught us about literacy and learning
processes. However, they have limitations in understanding the nature of literacy within
social literacy events.

On the other hand, social literacies perspectives often ignore literacy as a language
process. As Edelsky puts it, this perspective “changes the terms altogether, switching the
focus from psychological goings-on to social ones” (Edelsky, 1991, p. 79). Edelsky
argues that literacy should be viewed as both language process and social practice:

It is a short step from seeing literacy as a social practice to seeing it only as a
social practice. And, in fact, because interior processes have been ‘discredited’ as
‘psychological’ within the literacy-as-social—practice view, this work discourages a
serious consideration of the profoundly social nature of interior processes, and,
reciprocally, the extent to which underlying processes are implicated in social
practice (Edelsky, 1991, p. 79).

In this study, I use ethnographic-style and transactional methodologies to describe

literacy as both social practice and language process. I start by identifying literacy events,
or occasions when children participate in social experiences with texts. Within these

literacy events 1 use rrriscue analysis and writing analysis methods to look closely at the

children’s transactions with text. These observations are informed by debrieﬁng interviews

34

when 1 ask the children to talk about the day’s events and read and discuss the texts they
read and wrote during the day. Bringing the social practice and language process
perspectives together, I attempt to address the complex nature of literacy practices in
schools.
What counts as literacy? Learning from Marco and Lauren
Even when we speak of literacy as a social process, we rarely look
beyond the literacy event and the linguistic transactions that take place. So much of
the process remains buried in the multiple layers of communication that are a part of
our contextual worlds. We forget that to be literate is a uniquely human experience,
a creative process that enables us to deal with ourselves and to better understand
each other. (Taylor, 1988, p. 200)

As a researcher, this study has been a journey of renewal and discovery. After many
hours watching Marco and Lauren negotiate the literacy events of the day, I have renewed
my appreciation for the “uniquely human experience” of being literate. I have watched in
amazement as Marco, while still discovering the alphabetic nature of text, invents a symbolic
outline for a group project I listened with wonder to Lauren’s stories and her descriptions
of what it means to be a writer. After observing Marco and Lauren literacy experiences in
this classroom community, I have four general conclusions.

1. Children are becoming literate as they participate in social literacy events.

This study builds on the assumption that children learn language through using
language. Halliday (1979) puts it this way: learn through language, learn about language,
learn language. Susan’s whole language classroom provides a wide range of social literacy
practices with a rich meaning-potential for young readers, writers, and language learners. In
one day of second grade, Lauren participated in 37 literacy events involving 29 different
texts. On Marco’s Day, he participated in 30 literacy events involving 27 different texts.
Most of these literacy events involved reading or writing literature (ﬁction, non-ﬁction, and
poetry) although many events involved reading and writing for other social activities. A
small number of events involved school exercises, for the purpose of instruction or
evaluation. As participants, children are becoming readers and writers (learning language)

as they are using language to read, write, and learn.

35

2. Children participate in events as readers and writers, but also as listeners, observers,
and overhearers.

Children in this community participate in literacy events in a variety of social roles,
not only as readers and writers, but as observers and listeners. In addition, I discovered that
children learn language not only by learning through language , but through many other
social practices such as planning, organizing, getting ready for lunch, and so on. As
children participate in social literacy practices, they are learning to read and write but they
are also leanring how literacy works within a particular social and cultural context.

Literacy events occur not only during content area leanring experiences, but during
procedural activities as well. The range of events and activities expands notions of “text”
and “genre”.

This study has expanded my understanding of the social activities, texts and genres
of literacy events in the classroom. As I expected, the children in this classroom are
immersed in a range of experiences with literature texts: reading and writing ﬁction, non-
ﬁction and poetry. There are very few commercial “school” texts, and literature texts are
the mainstay of children’s reading and writing material. However, half of the texts the case
study informants encounter are “instrumental” texts, written and read during other social
activities. Children use texts as tools to accomplish a variety of results and goals: recording
and reporting information, planning or regulating classroom activities, and so on. In these
literacy events, reading and writing are often invisible as they are imbedded in the social
activity where the focus is not text construction. Literacy events involving these
instrumental texts are usually familiar and comfortable to the children, suggesting that these
practices are similar to literacy practices outside of school.

3. Literacy events include demonstrations and discussions of language and thought
processes, making implicit understandings explicit for participants.

An important ﬁnding of this study is the potential of classroom literacy events for
making language processes explicit. In Marco and Lauren’s classroom, children and

teacher are interested in language, learning, and thinking processes. The teacher plays an

36

important role, prompting many process discussions. These discussions often introduce
speciﬁc values, such as the importance of meaning construction. In addition, the teacher’s
language connects children with a discourse community of people interested in literacy and
learning processes. Discussions about literacy processes make these processes explicit to
the reader/ writer, and also to the observers. These discussions focus on the fomrs and
conventions of written language, the function of literacy in society, and the process or
reading and writing. Explicit discussions of literacy and language form an important link
between the discourse and literacy practices children bring from home communities and the
discourse and literacy practices in the wider community. I have come to believe that one
largely untapped potential of schooling is to make explicit connections between home
discourse and the language of wider communication.

While I observed many examples of discussions where implicit linguistic processes
and practices were made explicit, these discussions were not lessons introduced to teach a
particular language convention or practice. Instead, these discussions occurred within the
social context of a literacy event involving meaning construction for a social purpose other
than language learning. Discussions were generally initiated by Susan’s observations
(“Marco made a prediction”), children’s observations (“Look, Miss Austin, one page has
black and white and the other page has colon”), Susan’s questions (“How did you ﬁgure
that out?”), or children’s questions.

4. As children become literate within the social context of classroom literacy events and
practices, they are crafting literate identities.

We use language not only to meet needs and functions but to understand who we
are in relationship to the people around us. As Marco and Lauren participate in literacy
experiences in this classroom, they develop a sense of who they are in relation to other
readers and writers. These identities are social constructions, crafted through the social
interactions of literacy events. Lauren and Marco each describe themselves as “a good
reader”. They appear to know what’s going on and approaches classroom reading and

writing experiences with interest and conﬁdence.

37

 

In this study, I attempt to describe the process “buried in the multiple layers of
communication that are part of our contextual worlds”. 1 am left with a new appreciation
for the intensity and integrity of social literacy experiences within any discourse
community. More than ever, I am convinced that school literacy events must have the richly
contextualized layers of communication that are present in literacy events outside of school.
I am convinced that children need opportunities to interact with each other as they use
language in school. It is through these interactions that children not only learn to read and
write, but learn how to be readers and writers in their contextual worlds.

In this chapter I have provided the history of this study and the rationale for the
study. In the next chapters I provide a description of the study and a presentation and
interpretation of the data that has led me to these overall conclusions. The subsequent
chapters are organized as follows.

Overview of chapters
Chapter Two: The Research Journey.

Chapter Two describes the study methodology, and the background of my data
collection and analysis process. I describe my desire to move away from defensive
“racehorse” comparisons and look closely at literacy learning in whole language
classrooms. I trace the evolution of this study beginning when I interviewed kindergartners
for the school evaluation comrrrittee, continuing with several pilot studies as I followed these
children through second grade, and concluding with my decision to focus on the social
nature of classroom literacy for Marco and Lauren.

Chapter Three: Lauren and Marco in Two Days of School

This chapter describes Marco and Lauren’s immersion in multiple experiences with
literacy texts and practices through participation in classroom literacy events. I begin with
an introduction to Marco and Lauren. I provide a time line for Marco’s Day and Lauren’s
Day, and discuss the overall classroom structures and how they related to literacy. This
introduction to the children creates an understanding of my perceptions as I observed

Marco and Lauren at the end of second grade.

38

Chapter Four: Literacy Events and Practices in Lauren and Marco’s School Days

Chapter Four begins by drawing connections between participation in literacy events
and literacy learning. Next I describe and discuss the literacy events in Marco’s Day and
Lauren’s Day. The Marco and Lauren’s literacy experiences are sorted by the social
activity (i.e. reading to the class.) within each event. Grouping the events by social activity
allows a discussion of the social practices underlying the children’s literacy experiences.
Literacy events are grouped into three general categories of activity: Reading and writing
literature, Reading and writing while engaged in another social activity; and Reading and
writing school exercises.

Chapter Five: Making Meaning in a Classroom Community

Chapter ﬁve explores the nature of Lauren and Marco’s literacy experiences in term
of meaning construction, social function, and the roles and relationships of participants. I
describe a classroom where meaning making is a community focus. Before describing
Lauren and Marco’s meaning making experiences, I distinguish between literacy events and
meaning construction and discuss how social roles and relationships emerge within literacy
events. I organize the discussion of Marco and Lauren’s meaning construction processes
around social roles: listener/observer, reader, writer, etc. At the end of the chapter, I discuss
and compare Lauren and Marco’s experiences as listeners, and as readers and writers.
Chapter Six: Becoming Literate.

In this chapter I further develop my conclusions about the incredible importance of
social interactions in literacy development. Literacy learning can be seen in the intersections
between home, school and the wider community. Teachers have a role in helping to make
these connections explicit, so that children recognize the social and linguistic foundations
they bring from home. When schools focus on building connections between communities,
literacy instruction helps children to see how language works within particular social
contexts. I suggest that schooling should emphasize the intersections between literacy in

home, school and the larger community.

39

Chapter Two
The Research Journey

This study explores the literacy experiences of two second-graders, Lauren and
Marco, within the culture of one inner city, whole language classroom. In my description of
Lauren’s and Marco’s reading and writing, I view literacy experiences as social and cultural
practices through case study and thick ethnographic-style descriptions. Within these
literacy experiences, I also view literacy as language process and look closely at children’s
transactions with text Shifting research lenses from nricroanalysis of language processes
to macroanalysis of social practices provides a more rounded image of the children’s
literacy experiences. In this chapter I will describe my research process in gaining an
understanding of Marco’s and Lauren’s literacy experiences.

As described in chapter one, this study evolved within the historical, cultural, and
political climate facing teachers and families at the Dewey Center, and facing public school
teachers across the United States. I begin the chapter by describing a research climate in
which holistic approaches are pitted against fragmented approaches in language education in
metaphors like “the reading wars.” I describe my desire to move away from defensive
“racehorse” comparisons and look closely at literacy learning in whole language
classrooms. I trace the evolution of the study, beginning when I interviewed kindergartners
for the school evaluation committee, continuing with several pilot studies as I followed these
children through second grade, and concluding with my decision to focus on the social
nature of classroom literacy for Marco and Lauren.

My methodology in data collection and analysis is a ﬂuid process that I am
continually reﬁning as I observe the children, review the data, discuss observations with
teachers, colleagues and advisors, and analyze the trends and patterns within the data. I
describe the methodology and decisions behind the methodology for data collection,

description and interpretation. In addition, I describe how the process of writing this

dissertation interacted with data description and interpretation.

Historical and political climate of the study

A predominant metaphor in literacy, learning, and teaching theories today is that of a
pendulum swinging. This pendulum is said to swing from holistic to atomistic views of
language, from behaviorist to cognitivist views of learning, and from leamer-centered to
direct-instruction views of teaching. If educators accept the pendulum metaphor, the logical
approach to curriculum development might be to ﬁnd the middle ground and somehow
avoid being knocked over as the pendulum swings by. A similar, more deadly, metaphor is
the “reading wars”, in which phonics ﬁrst advocates are pitted against holistic educators.
Again, there has been a “moderate” cry to “end the reading wars” by ﬁnding a middle
ground.

This outcry for moderation ignores several important factors in the pedagogy and
politics of language and literacy education. First, a signiﬁcant shift has occurred in
theoretical understandings and beliefs about written language processes over the last 30
years (For example, Weaver, 1988, Brown, 1996, Goodman, 1996, Graves, 1994). Where
reading was viewed as “decoding” from print to oral language, reading and writing are now
commonly viewed as language processes, involving meaning construction. Observations
that young children are learning to read and write in the same way they learn oral language,
through social experiences with print, are well documented and widely accepted (Hall, 1987,
Camboume, 1988). Readers and writers use all language systems (semantic, pragmatic,
syntactic, graphophonic) simultaneously as they construct meaning. Reducing language
learning to the graphophonic system (phonics) from a whole, meaningful context makes
language learning more difﬁcult (Smith, 1971, Goodman, 1986). Most literacy researchers
and educators are not bunched in the middle of a battle-ﬁeld between whole language and
phonics approaches. Instead, they probably place themselves at some point between the
“middle ground” (an eclectic or “balanced” approach) and the holistic end of this

continuum (Allington, 1997, Pearson, 1994, Weaver, 1998).

41

The “reading wars” metaphor inaccurately presents an image of two contending
group of educators. In fact, the current situation is that a group of non-educators with a
political agenda is attempting to deﬁne and control research and teaching through legislation
and political campaigning. Holistic educators, on the other hand, have not attempted to
narrowly deﬁne and control research and teaching through legislation. In an attempt to
push phonics legislation, phonics proponents paint whole language advocates as extremists
on an either/or battle for the “right” teaching methods. In states like Califonria, this
political campaign has led to situations reminiscent of McCarthyism where the theoretical
models of consultants, schools of education, and materials are checked by the “paradigm
police” (K. Goodman, 1998; Taylor, 1998) before they are allowed contact with state
funded schools or universities. In an educational world of strong metaphors, teachers and
researchers who take a strong position become extremists (pendulum swing), or even
terrorists (reading wars).

These metaphors play a destructive role in the progress of literacy research and
teaching when researchers give them too much credence. We compromise our own
progress in holistic education, narrowing our attention to the teaching of phonics and
spelling “holistically.” Or we conduct racehorse studies to determine which methodology
is “best.” While comparison studies may be useful and even valuable in some political
arenas, they are limited in describing and critiquing the complex and social nature of literacy
learning in classrooms.

There are problems and limitations in racehorse studies that attempt to compare
Whole Language classrooms with other classrooms. First, Whole Language is a theoretical
approach to language, leaming, teaching, and curriculum. Reading and writing experiences
in whole language classrooms may not exist in other classrooms. Whole language is a
belief system, not a strict methodology, and varies widely in practice from classroom to
classroom. It is difﬁcult to deﬁne classroom teachers as “whole language” or “not whole

language.” Teachers who advocate reductionist approaches such as “skills” or “phonics”

42

often use holistic practices such as sustained silent reading, reading aloud, creative writing,
drama, class discussions, etc.

But the major limitation of racehorse studies is that it is externally motivated.
Research that responds to public concerns and attacks does not address important questions
about language and learning in whole language classrooms. In order to collect a balanced
data sample, researchers are limited in their ability to examine holistic practices closely, and
to critique and extend such practices. As an urban public school teacher I have spent much
evaluation time and energy proving that my students are readers and writers. Externally
motivated research fails to address and answer critical research questions arising from
within holistic and progressive educational communities.

Research questions from within a holistic, progressive perspective

I described in Chapter One the way my colleagues and I, as inner city teachers,
began to see the political potential of whole language curriculum. While we can do little to
change the conditions of poverty and powerlessness in the inner city community around the
school, we found hope in watching children become problem posers (Freire, 1994) through
basic whole language tenets such as choice and authority over their own learning.
Collaborative learning and curriculum negotiation created potential for democratic
citizenship (Dewey, 1961). Indeed, this political potential may be one reason why whole
language is the current scapegoat of the same organizations that were attacking
“humanistic” educators a few years ago.

I began this study with a fervor to document the strength and power of whole
language classrooms for the outside world. I particularly wanted to prove that whole
language programs work with African American and inner city children. While under
political attack and set off in a “camp” separate from the rest of the educational community,
I am not naive enough to address my work to my political opponents.

However, I have had much internal argument and dialogue with educators such as

Lisa Delpit (1995) and Maria de la Luz Reyes (1992) who have critiqued and questioned

43

holistic practices out of a concern for children of color. They state that African American
children and Latino children are not succeeding in “process focused” classrooms, and
conclude this may be because “indirect” approaches are a more comfortable cultural fit for
white, middle class children. One problem with this argument is that the dichotomy between
direct language (Sit down.) and indirect language (Would you like to take your seat?) is
equated with direct and indirect instruction.

After closely observing and documenting Marco’s and Lauren’s literacy learning
within the social culture of the second grade classroom, my thinking and my questions
quickly moved beyond the defensive posture of wanting to champion whole language
classrooms. I found myself engaged in external and internal dialogue about the literacy and
literacy learning of the children in my study and the social factors that support and thwart
literacy learning. Delpit and Reyes raise some important and critical questions. To what
extent are African American children succeeding or failing in whole language classrooms?
What aspects of these classrooms are supporting or thwarting literacy learning? What is
the relationship between direct or explicit language and direct or explicit teaching?

As I stated in the ﬁrst chapter, I am ultimately concerned with the role of teaching
and schooling in educating for democracy and social justice. I have conducted my study
within whole language classrooms because I believe these classrooms have the most
potential for “transfonnative” (Edelsky, 1991) language and literacy education.
Assumptions

I began my study with the following assumptions about literacy and literacy
learning.

° Literacy and literacy learning exist as social practices and language processes
independent of the opinions of politicians, teachers and researchers.

° Writing is holistic, with socially constructed meanings and functions. Literacy is
embedded within the culture of the United States as families eat, shop, pay bills, share

stories, write letters, make plans, seek information and otherwise live their lives.

44

There are social and cultural traditions and beliefs about the roles of literacy in human
lives. Literacy experiences in the home community and socially constructed beliefs
about the role of literacy within readers and writers’ lives affect their responses to
literacy events within classrooms and schools.
Reading and writing are meaning construction processes. They always involve
perception and interpretation. Since perceptions grow out of our socio-cultural
experiences, reading and writing can never be politically “neutral.” They are socio-
political processes.
Literacy involves issues of power. Literacy is used to deﬁne, persuade, regulate, and
even incarcerate. Literacy measures and standards used to sort and grade have an
inﬂuence on an individual reader or writer’s development.
Whole language classrooms, in attempting to build upon children’s language use
outside of schools, provide a rich and fertile ground for literacy use and literacy learning
within school.
Whole language classrooms support interpersonal and cultural aspects of literacy
learning by encouraging talk, choice, and collaboration.
Whole language classrooms, like all classrooms, reﬂect the political and cultural
structures of the outside community. Issues of inequity in race, gender, culture,
language and socioeconomic background cannot be ignored.

Research questions

The study began as I interviewed a group of kindergartners for our school

Evaluation Committee. I began observing these children in ﬁrst grade using these
observations and interviews as a pilot to develop and reﬁne my data collection methodology.
I began to conduct all day observations, which continued through the children’s second

grade year. At this time, I had general working questions:

' What does it mean to be literate in these classroom communities?
' What does it mean to become literate in these classroom communities?

45

During the interviews, observations, and my ongoing reviews of data tapes, notes and
documents, I noticed many factors of literacy learning that I investigated in pilot studies,

which I describe later in this chapter.

0 Home and community literacy experiences.

° The power of story, and the use narrative structures in class discussions.

' Understandings of functions and forms of written language.

' The relationship between sign systems in terms of language learning: oral language,
written language, math, science, art, etc.

0 Relationship between individual “development” (Piagetian cognitivist perspective) and
social “experiences” (V ygotskian social constructivist perspectives).

' Social alignments and groupings, and relationship to cultural alignments and groupings
outside of school.
Oral language development.

Leamer’s perspectives about reading and writing and self as reader and writer.
The development of pragmatics as a cultural linguistic system.

However, my main interest was in considering some of the apparent contradictions
and lingering questions within progressive literacy evaluation and research, particularly
concerning African-American students. On the one hand, Moll (1988), Heath (1983), and
Taylor/Dorsey-Gaines (1988) describe a wide range of “funds of knowledge” and literacy
events and practices within African American and Mexican American communities. On the
other hand, Jonathan Kozol details “savage inequalities” which, he assumes, result in
ignorance and illiteracy.

Assuming that inner city children bring a history of experiences with social literacy
practices to school, how are these experiences reﬂected within the literacy events of whole
language classrooms? Are inner city children “less literate” than other children,
contributing to a lack of “success” in school and later in life? Or are there factors within
the school culture that perpetuate class structures outside of school? Are there cultural
miscommunications between teacher and students? Other questions are raised based on
Street’s (1995) dichotomy between Critical Literacy and New Literacy Studies perspectives,
described in Chapter One. To what extent are we engaged in “acculturating students into
academic literacy”? Is this an inappropriate role for classroom teachers, especially when

students are young children?

In order to explore these socio-cultural issues in literacy learning, I decided to focus
on the social aspects of literacy learning. I narrowed my scope to studying Marco’s and
Lauren’s experiences so that I get closer to the child’s point of view (Taylor, 1993) of

literacy and literacy learning experiences. My revised questions are:

0 What are the social and cultural literacy events and practices in the schooling of two
second graders?

' What factors and principles appear to be related to the literacy learning of these
developing readers within this classroom culture?

Data collection

The study focuses on the literacy events and practices during two days in March of
the children’s second grade year. The children were observed in a variety of learning
experiences throughout the school day in order to explore social aspects of literacy across
curricular areas. In addition, the study draws on historical data including observations,
interviews and documents collected from a larger group of children followed from
kindergarten through second grade.

Fr gure 2 provides a timeline for data collection. I interviewed 20 kindergartners as
part of the Evaluation Committee project. The classroom teacher, Barbara Lauchlan,
provided documents such as journals and other writings. Fifteen children returned as ﬁrst
graders and I began to observe them in the three classrooms where they were placed. I
interviewed all 15 children in the fall and spring and collected written documents for all 15
children. Observations were documented with audio tape, photographs, and ﬁeld notes. I
wanted to observe children’s literacy experiences in a variety of social activities, and I began
following one child throughout a day at school during the winter term. In order to

accommodate these longer observations, I selected eight students for more focused study.

47

February -
May 1994

September-
December
1995

January- May
1995

May 15

September
1995 to June
1996

May
29, 30, 31,
June 7,11

Figure 2 - Data Collection Timeline

Kindergarten year
Interviewed 2O kindergartners including: book handling, writing sample,
reader and writing interview, print awareness.

First grade year
Began informal observations and interviews of the 15 children who returned
as ﬁrst graders. Collected audio tapes, photographs, ﬁeld notes and
documents.

Identiﬁed eight children and piloted focused, all day observations.
' Jan. 23 Lauren

Feb. 6 Dion

Feb. 21 Shaundra

Mar. 14 Martin

Mar. 21 Amber

Mar. 28 Marco

Apr. 11 Shaundra

May 22 Clairese

Conducted interviews with other seven children
Second grade year

Focused study on Susan Austin’s classroom. Conducted all day
observations focusing on six children:

' Sept. 20 Shaundra (placed in second grade after this visit.)
Oct. 11 Amber

Oct. 25 Lauren

Nov. 3 Marco

Dec. 6 Jonathan

Dec. 14 Victor

Dec. 18 Sharonda

Feb. 7 Amber

Mar. 7 Marco

Mar. 13 Lauren

May 7 Jonathan

May 15 Victor

May 20 Sharonda

Conducted reading, writing and rniscue analysis interviews with 12 of the
original 20 kindergartners.

48

During the second grade year, I spent 18 days observing and interviewing in Susan
Austin’s classroom. Out of the original group of children, 13 returned for second grade
and 10 were placed in Susan’s classroom. I conducted two day length observations (one in
the fall and one in the spring) focusing on each of six children. Observations were
documented with videotape, audio tape, ﬁeld notes, and written documents. At the end of
each day, I held a debrieﬁng interview with the child I had been observing. I also had
periodic interviews with all 13 children still attending the school, in two classrooms, and
collected written documents.

These interviews and observations were supported by discussions with the
classroom teachers during the observation days and while analyzing the data. As I began to
describe and analyze the data, I returned to the school and interviewed three of the study
children as fourth graders: Lauren, Lauren, and Marco.

Selection of the children in the study

The 20 kindergartners who were in the original Evaluation Committee project, were
selected (out of a class of around 28 kindergartners) because they returned permission
notes. Within this group, the selection of “case study” children was based on: concern for
balance in children’s socio-economic background, gender, and age; teacher’s experience;
accommodations for an in-depth, case study methodology; and placements of students by
parents and school personnel.

' Representation: All of the children in the study are African American. As I selected
children for close observation, I was interested in balance based on community, gender,
and birth date. The Dewey Center has two distinct community populations:
“neighborhood” children and “city-wide” children. Neighborhood children live
primarily in federally subsidized housing near the school, in a community reputed to be
one of the most economically depressed areas in the state of Michigan. City-wide
children come from a range of socio-economic backgrounds, but tend to have parents

who are working, often professionals and college educated.

49

° Teacher’s experience: Because I wanted to observe children’s literacy learning in whole
language classrooms, I selected children in classrooms with experienced whole language
teachers. The three teachers in this study were veteran teachers who had worked to
develop whole language classrooms for at least ﬁve years. In addition to teaching
experiences, they read professional materials and attended study groups, classes, and
workshops focusing on whole language theory and practice.

° Student Placement in Classrooms: In the end, many decisions were made for me by
parents and school administration. Figure 3 charts the classroom placements of the 15
children who returned to the Dewey Center as ﬁrst graders.

As a ﬁrst—year teacher, Kathy2 did not have a experiential background with whole
language teaching and theory. When the children were in ﬁrst grade, I closely observed the
eight children in the other two classrooms. I particularly focused on the four children in
Mary Jo’s room (Lauren, Marco, Martin, and Shaundra) who were a good match in terms
of gender, community, and birthdays. In the second grade year, Mary .10 left to teach in
another school. All 13 children returning from my original 20 kindergartners were placed
in Susan’s classroom. However, several weeks into the term, the classrooms were
reorganized and Shaundra, Mark, and Clairese were moved into another second grade
classroom with Bill, a ﬁrst year teacher.

My matched set of four was broken up with Martin at another school and Shaundra
placed in another classroom. I was particularly disappointed to lose Shaundra, who had
written in kindergarten: “My family is kindful,” but the decision could not be reversed.
Because of my interest in balancing gender, age, and community, I selected the three
children (Lauren, Marco, and Amber) from the ﬁrst grade “case study” group and three

additional children (Sharonda, Jonathan, and Victor) for close observation in second grade.

 

11 have permission to use the names of the three primary teachers in the study. I use their names out of
mpect for them as teachers and collaborative researchers. I give pseudonyms to other adults in the study.

50

Figure 3 - Placement of children in ﬁrst and second grade

 

 

 

 

 

First de placements: '
Mary Jo’s classroom Susan’sT‘lassroom Kathy’s Classroom '
Martin- citywide boy (Man) Dion- citywide boy (Feb.) Danielle Julia

Lauren- citywide girl (Man) Mark - citywide boy (Sept) Sharonda Destine

Marco- neighborhood boy Amber-neighborhood girl (Jan) Victor Bruce

(A r.)

Shgundra- neighborhood girl Clairese-neighborhood girl Jonathan

(May) (Sept) .,
Secoggrade placements:

Susan s classroom Also in Susan’s room

Lauren Amber Sharonda-neighborhood (Mar) 4
Marco Victor - neighborhood (Nov.)

Jonathan- citywide (Sept)
Weft-school) DioHLeft—seheol) Danielle

 

Julia
Bill’s classroom Mark Destine
Shaundra Clairese Bruce

 

 

 

 

Box represents “case study” first graders, shading indicates “representative” groupings.
Selection of Lauren and Marco for this study

The selection of Marco and Lauren for in-depth case study was a result of decisions
about study methodology. When I decided to use day-long observations as a framework
for data collection, it limited the number of children I could study closely. Still, I observed
eight children in ﬁrst grade, and six children in second grade. However, the amount of data
accumulated over the three years was overwhelming. Data collected for the second grade
included over 50 hours of videotape alone. I needed to select a “slice of data” that would
be small enough to manage within the parameters of this study, without losing the big
picture of literacy learning within this classroom culture.

I decided to start with “one day in the life” of a few children. Following a child
throughout a school day would allow me to document literacy events and practices in a
variety of academic and non-academic contexts. I initially selected three children (Lauren,
Marco and Amber) because they were the only children I observed closely in both ﬁrst and
second grade who were still in a classroom with an experienced whole language teacher. In

addition, Amber was among the most proﬁcient readers in Susan’s class, Lauren was a

51

 

fairly typical reader among the second graders, and Marco was among the least proﬁcient
readers.

However, documenting just one day of school was a monumental task involving
going back and forth between videotape viewings, audio tapes, notes, charts and narrative
descriptions as I attempted to glean the nature of literacy practice and literacy learning for
each child. Lauren participated directly in 37 literacy events involving 29 different texts
during one day of observation, while Marco participated in 30 literacy events involving 27
texts. Lauren and Marco were the obvious choice for case studies because I had spent
more time observing and interviewing them than any of the other children in the group of
six I observed in second grade.

Not a representative sample

I stress that Marco and Lauren are not representatives of their class, communities,
genders, etc. It’s important not to draw conclusions about gender or socio-economic
community in terms of reading proﬁciency or any other factors, based on just two children.
If the original 20 kindergartners were somehow ranked by ability to read independently at
the beginning of the ﬁrst grade year, the boys and girls, neighborhood and city-wide
children would be fairly evenly distributed along this list. Martin, a city-wide boy in my
original focus group, and Sharonda, a neighborhood girl, were among the most proﬁcient
readers in the original twenty. While it is possible that boys in inner city communities are
more likely to have slower literacy development, I can’t draw that conclusion based on
Marco’s development alone. Examining this hunch would be a different investigation and
involve more of the children.

The Data
This study focuses on two days in March, which I call “Marco’s Day” and
“Lauren’s Day.” These observations were video taped, audio taped, and supplemented by

ﬁeld notes, activity maps (room maps showing student placement during language events),

52

and copies of student work. In addition to these observations, I had additional data and

resources available:

Debrieﬁng interviews: At the end of each full day observation, I conducted a
debrieﬁng interview reviewing the day and the literacy events of that day with the child I
observed.

Additional observations: There are a total of 17 days of video-taped observations
during the second grade year, as detailed above on the data collection timeline, ﬁgure 2.
Reading/writing interviews: I conducted Reading Miscue Interviews (Goodman,
Watson, and Burke, 1987) and reading and writing interviews with all children several
times a year. Appendix A details the components of these interviews.

Documents: Samples of the children’s written work during the day of observation were
c0pied, as well as samples from writing folders and other work folders.

Teacher’s perspectives: Susan Austin, the second grade classroom teacher, was
available to answer questions and participated in viewing sessions of the videotapes.
The kindergarten and ﬁrst grade teachers also were available at the time of the
observations and later by phone.

Data from kindergarten and ﬁrst grade: All children were interviewed once during
the kindergarten year, and several times during the ﬁrst grade year. First grade
observations were audiotaped and supplemented by ﬁeld notes, photographs, room
maps, and copies of written work. I collected documents written by the children from
kindergarten and ﬁrst grade including journal entries, stories, class publications, artwork,
etc.

My remembrances: I visited the kindergarten classroom frequently, and the children
also visited the library, where I was librarian. During the ﬁrst and second grade year I

was present during all observations and interviews.

53

The setting

The Dewey Center for Urban Education is a public school of choice in a large North

American city. The school is situated near the downtown area, across from a neighborhood
of federally subsidized townhouses. The school serves the neighborhood population and
then draws children from the rest of the city on a ﬁrst-come, ﬁrst-serve basis. Children in
the neighborhood population are 99 percent African American. Most live in subsidized
housing near the school. City-wide children are also 99 percent African American but
represent a wider range of socio-economic backgrounds. City-wide parents transport their
children to the school, indicating a level of commitment, as well as personal choice, towards
the school’s philosophy and structure. All of the children in Susan Austin’s classroom are
African American and there was a balance between the neighborhood and city-wide
communities.

Susan Austin’s classroom is organized to maximize collaboration and dialogue.
Small two-seat tables are grouped into ﬁve clusters, which she calls “teams”, and children
are free to talk and assist each other during most work times. There is a carpeted area for
class meetings, and a library comer with another carpet and small rockers and cushions for
reading. The classroom is ﬁlled with books in the library comer, on a cart near the meeting
area, and in many small baskets scattered around the room. A basket near the meeting mg,
for example, is ﬁlled with song and poetry books used to gather the class together.

Supplies and materials are organized so children can get them easily. Each team has
a plastic caddie with crayons, markers, pencils, and glue. There is a writing area with
various types of paper, pencils, scissors, staplers and other materials for writing. There is a
math area with manipulatives, books and materials for math. A table near the meeting area
holds the materials for the calendar and “days of school” activities and the bulletin board
with these activities is organized so that everything is in the children’s reach.

The classroom walls are dripping with print and artwork, usually growing out of the

children’s learning experiences. There are bulletin boards with charts, signs and children’s

54

work. Poems, charts, children’s work and a variety of group projects are also posted on the
chalkboard with magnets, taped on the walls and windows, and attached by Clothespins to
two wires strung across the room. Materials on the walls include: lists documenting class
activities (i.e. books read to the class), information related to author study or research
projects, large class reports about science or math problems, charts and graphs of class
activities (i.e. the “missing persons graph”), artwork and writings related to current themes
of study, poetry on chart paper, and so on.
My role as a classroom researcher

I ﬁrst met Marco and Lauren and their classmates when they were in kindergarten,
as their library teacher and frequent classroom visitor. The children knew me quite well by
the time they were in second grade. During classroom observations, I acted as if I were
visiting the classroom of a friend and colleague. During group meetings, I sat on the
outside of the group and would occasionally make comments. When the children were
working, I usually sat down at the table where I could observe them closely. I responded to
questions and comments, and sometimes asked children to talk about what they were doing.

The human subjects review process heightened my concern about student
“consent” to the research process. I explained to the class why I was in the classroom, and
answered the children’s questions about my research study. We had a very interesting
discussion, at one point, about the relationship between reading and other sign systems,
such as mathematics. Although research consent is required by the parent and not by the
child, I always asked children’s permission for interviews or anything beyond class
activities. Children often took an interest in my ﬁeldunotes, particularly in ﬁrst grade, and I
developed a form for them to write ﬁeld notes of their own.

Since I was a colleague and close friend of the teachers in this study, I was
sometimes asked to play an instructional role in classroom activities. During the ﬁrst grade
year, Mary Jo asked me to conduct reading conferences (as she was doing) and

occasionally help children with reading and writing. There were occasions during the

55

 

second grade year when Susan asked me to “watch” the children brieﬂy so she could
handle a problem or emergency. Children often solicited interactions with me. I generally
responded as a visiting teacher to the classroom. These interactions included reading me an
original story or published book, seeking assistance with reading and writing, or seeking
help with other classroom activities.

My approach was very similar to the classroom teacher’s on these occasions. As an
observer, one dilemma was how to respond when I saw children “acting out.” While I was
obviously inﬂuencing the outcome of the behaviors, I worried that it might be artiﬁcial (and
disruptive) to ignore children’s behavior when they were aware I was watching them.
Again, I decided to ignore or respond to children’s behaviors as an adult visitor in the
classroom. In the later chapters, I identify and discuss my own roles in literacy events that I
participated in directly.

As an inner city teacher for 15 years, I am especially sensitive about the relationship
between teacher and researcher. Critique and critical reﬂection are essential in educational
research, but I have grave concerns about studies that paint negative images of classroom
teachers. The three teachers I worked with in this study are very special people. They
spend enormous amounts of energy, time, and money to created literate environments for
the young children in their classrooms and receive very little validation or support. The
teachers invited me into their classrooms, and I felt it was important to share and discuss my
observations and hunches throughout the data collection and analysis process. The
teacher’s perspectives improved my understanding of what was going on. Because I’m not
doing a comparison study, my inﬂuence on literacy events in the classroom does not
substantially change the nature of these events and what can be learned from them.

It is impossible for any primary grade teacher to look good throughout long days in
classrooms crowded with very young children. Lost chances and missed opportunities for

learning are easy to spot on the play back of videotapes. In writing this study, I ﬁnd it

easier to critique my own interactions than to critique Susan’s actions because I am viewing

56

I.‘ man-4:; l

events from my own perspective. One way I address this concern is by sharing this thesis
with Susan and inviting her insights and suggestions for revisions.
The use of a camcorder in classroom research

The video camera was both helpful and distracting. I introduced the camcorder on
several visits before my ofﬁcial observations, allowing the children to view the recordings
and see themselves on camera. While they quickly learned to ignore the camera, they
continued to be aware of it and would occasionally look up at the camera during
observations. Lauren would sometimes adjust the microphone to be sure it was facing her.
At one point, Marco and David recited an off-color rhyme and both looked up at the camera
and covered their mouths.

Because I was operating the camera, it did become more difﬁcult to take extensive
ﬁeld notes. I could place the camera to focus on the child, but had to check that it was not
jostled, etc. Ideally, one researcher (or more) should operate the camera while another
observes and takes ﬁeld notes. In addition, it’s important to attach a mike directly to the
camera to pick up conversations and sub-vocalizations as children work. I also used audio
tape recordings as a backup.

While videotaping is more disruptive than other data collection methodologies,
viewing classroom activities on camera is very powerful. There is so much that is not
captured on audio tape such as how children are oriented towards one another, facial
expressions, body language, etc. Humor or irony is often lost on audiotape. The videotape
also caught incidents and events that I missed while observing.

Pilot studies
As indicated earlier, Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day were selected from a larger
longitudinal body of data. The data collection was initiated for a group of teachers with the
goal of improving evaluation strategies in our school. I used this data collection for several
pilot studies, which helped to expand my understandings and reﬁne my methodology for

this study.

57

Reading strategies in kindergartners

I conducted one pilot study to describe and compare the interviews of four
kindergartners, Marco, Martin, Lauren, and Shaundra. As I expected from children in whole
language classroom, the kindergartners had holistic responses to reading, and expected that
written texts would make sense. They described learning to read as a fairly simple social
process; someone reads to you and then you read to yourself. As children talked, they did
not separate their literacy experiences from the daily life of the family, and the relationships
between family members. Each literacy event described was also a social event in the life of
that child.

11 ' er en intervi w
I take a book and I open it and I make the story up and I read it. And sometime I
don’t know how to read, or it’s bedtime. My mommy reads a story to me and then
we’ll watch TV and then go to bed. Every night I eat something.

All four of the children identiﬁed themselves as readers, although only Martin and
Shaundra could construct meaning from an unfamiliar text. Three of the children said they
learned to read at home, from the parents. For these three children, the school literacy
experiences were so familiar and comfortable, they felt like home literacy experiences. Only
Marco described some of his interactions with the teacher, indicating that these exchanges
were important to him. For each of the children I interviewed, warm, “home like”
experiences with real books in school appear support and extend the literacy experiences
that children bring from home.

One thing that struck me about these interviews is the amount of reading strategies
that these ﬁve and six year olds described. Although Lauren was not yet reading
independently, she described eight different reading strategies including: reading a familiar
book, looking at the pictures and making up a story, and asking your mother to read to you.
Marco described six different strategies including asking your mama or auntie to read to

you, and “pick an easy book”:

58

From Mmg’s kindergarten interview
I don’t be reading the hard books because cause I don’t know how to read ‘em.

Sol be picking out the books. And then when she (the teacher) say, “When you
get done with your journal, then you go look at the book.” So I pick an easy book.

What impresses me about these descriptions of strategies is that the children aren’t
only learning how to read but how to be a reader. Lauren is learning to construct meaning
as she looks at a book, but how reading is as much a part of life as eating or going to bed.
Marco is learning the language of familiar texts, but also how to pick a book within his
kindergarten class.

As I talked with the kindergartners about reading and writing, I gained new
appreciation for the complexities of written language. Children may go through stages in
constructing written language systems, however each child appears to be working on his or
her own questions about language, focusing on different language functions, and thinking
about different genre or topics. Conducting and analyzing these interviews allowed me to
get to know these children as learners. It is unnecessary to check off progress or judge a
child against a standard. It is enough to discover the child’s wisdom, and his or her current
areas of inquiry and build from this strong language base constructed in early experiences
(Wells, 1986) with family and community.

A narrative participation framework

In a study of institutional and conversational discourse, I analyzed a classroom
discussion focusing on a conﬂict during lunchtime when James was teased because he
“liked Lily.” Susan brought this conﬂict to the class in order to talk about “being kind”
to each other. I was looking for a typical IRE (Initiation, Response, Evaluation) pattern, or
some variation of the classroom discourse patterns described by Cazden (1988) and others.
What I found was something looking more like the types of conversations that happen
outside of school.

Many children got involved in the discussion, and two additional issues of interest
emerged: the issue of friends keeping secrets, and the issue of boys liking girls. I began to

see this discussion as a “narrative participation framework” (Goodwin, 1990) where the

59

children and children were “negotiating the point” (Polanyi, 1985) of the story “James
likes Lily.” As the issues involved in the socially constructed story, “James likes “Lily”,
were explored, children began telling their own stories involving teasing based on boy/girl
friendships.

This study raised the issue of the unofﬁcial language policies in classrooms.
Susan’s policy of always calling on children when they raise their hand creates a possibility
for children to take important roles in classroom discourse. What impressed me most about
the discussion was the potential of narrative structures for class discussion. Storytelling
expanded the conversation to include many children. Children spoke as often as Susan, a
high level of participation according to other discourse studies (Gutierrez, 1994). Children
also took longer conversational turns as the structure shifted into a narrative framework. I
was even more impressed when Susan reminded me that two of the most eloquent speakers,

Kenneth and Patrice, were not very avid readers and writers. This is one reason Susan
believes class discussions are important.

The “Raccoon Group”

In another discourse analysis study, I examine the interactions and activities of a
group of six children (ﬁve second-graders and one ﬁrst-grader) engaged in a research
project investigating raccoons. In this study, my perceptions as a participant were very
different from my interpretation after analyzing the event During this group meeting, the
children begin to divide into three groups focused around tasks. As a participant at that
time, I remember being frustrated because I thought the group should work together. I
intepreted Lauren and Danielle’s actions as “fooling around” while only Darryl, Sarina,
and Julia were “working.” Audrey appeared to be doing nothing.

After constructing a detailed timeline of alignments and activities at this meeting, I
have a very different picture of the event. Early in the event, Danielle appoints herself as
scribe and asks the group to tell her something to write. Lauren goes to get a dictionary in

her role of helping Danielle with the spelling. There is actually little “off task” activity as

60

7‘!" a

the girls talk about raccoons and what they should write about. Audrey attempts to get into
the conversation, but she is ignored until she ﬁnally gives up and stops talking.

The Raccoon Group study taught me several important things, besides not to trust
my ﬁrst impressions. All of the participants work to complete “the assignment,” but group
members have differing views of the assignment Darryl, Sarina, and Julia viewed “the
assignment” as ﬁnding information about raccoons. Danielle views “the assignment” as
being a scribe, while Lauren saw her job as helping Danielle to spell. As an adult
participant, I privileged the views that matched mine, involving reading and learning about
raccoons. If I had listened more closely to Danielle and Lauren, I rrright have heard their
understandings of “the assignment” and helped them to consider how to participate in
learning about raccoons.

In addition, since I wanted the whole group to work together, I did not see how
Audrey was ostracized from the group. Ironically, Audrey initially attempts to read the
same magazine article that Julia was reading. It would have been easy to encourage the two
girls to work together. If] had attended to the children’s own social alignments around
tasks related to their view of “the assignment”, I might have been able to support
alignments where everyone was included.

The Raccoon Group is an example of miscommunication between adults and
children in the classroom. However, it was not a case of indirect or inexplicit language.
Susan’s initial instructions are quite direct, but they are interpreted differently by group
participants. My mistake was in assuming that children were “fooling around” rather than
assuming that everyone was interested in participating in the research experience. It was
critical to observe and listen to the children’s understandings of the Raccoon Group event in

order to clarify Susan’s intentions as make the research experience more explicit to the

children.

'61

Data analysis

My methodology for data analysis evolved as I considered my research questions
within this large body of data. How might I come to understand the reading and writing of
two young children, embedded within the cultural context of one second grade classroom?
What would be a good “unit of analysis”? I wanted to exarrrine literacy practices very
closely, without losing the ﬂavor of the entire classroom community. For this reason, I
decided to describe an entire school day for each of the children I was studying, Marco and
Lauren. Through careful description of each day, I attempt to paint a portrait of two socially
situated literate children.
Selection of days

I selected two days in March because of their close proximity. The days also occur
late in the year, when the children are relatively experienced with literacy practices in this
classroom. The children have almost three years of experiences with school literacy,
affording me an opportunity to look backward through the data to learn how the patterns I
discover in these two children evolved. A retrospective analysis was beyond the scope of
this study, but I hope to continue with it in the future.
Identifying a unit of analysis

Once I decided to focus on two days of school, I needed to identify smaller units for
analysis and discussion. Obvious smaller units were the language events that deﬁned the
day, such as: Morning meeting, Silent Writing, Math time, etc. Because I catalogued data
on a spread sheet, I initially attempted to “code” each action or activity throughout the
classroom day, looking at texts, functions, Marco’s experiences, etc. This became
overwhelming and also very repetitive as the same general activity (i.e. writing a story) might
occur for some time. In addition, not all activities involved literacy. However the general
literacy activities or literacy events were units I could identify and study for trends and

comparisons.

62

The literacy event is a good unit of analysis because it is small enough to describe
one social activity such as writing a story, reading a book, making a list, etc. On the other
hand the literacy event provides a holistic picture since it describes the entire social context
of the reading or writing experience.

Definition of terms as they evolved in this study

Language event: I am using the term language event as researchers in discourse analysis
or conversational analysis use the term speech event. (Goodwin, 1990, Tannen, 1989).
I chose language event to indicate that the event may (and generally does) include both
speech and written language. A language event is a unit of language that is bounded or
framed by some type of shift in participation structure. A language event’s duration
may be short (i.e. faculty exchanging greetings as they pass in a hallway) or long (i.e. a
faculty meeting). In Susan Austin’s classroom, language events generally correspond
with instructional activities: morning meeting, writing time, math time, etc. Shifts from
one activity to the next were usually cued by the teacher’s language (i.e. “Okay, clean
up. Daily helpers, you can read if you want”) The boundaries of language events in
the classroom often involved what I call “transitional events” as students cleaned up
from one activity or began preparing for the next. In addition, some language events
had distinct sub-events. For example, Morning Meeting included calendar, weather,
daily news, and attendance.

Literacy event: A literacy event is a speciﬁc “occasion in every day life where literacy has
a role.” (Barton, 1994, p. 36) This term has been generally credited to Heath (1983),
and was popularized within literacy education by researchers such as Harste, Burke and
Woodward (1984). For the purpose of this study, a literacy event is any event
involving a text where the child is a participant either as a reader, writer, listener, or
observer. In some cases the case study child is a peripheral participant or overhearer of
the literacy event. In some cases a text is focus of a discussion, but is not read or

written during the event A language event may involve several literacy events.

63

Literacy practice: A literacy practice refers to “common patterns in using reading and
writing in particular situations.” (Barton, 1994, p.37) The term literacy practice is
related to the use of “social practice” in anthropology. Literacy, Barton suggests, can a
be seen as “social practices related to the written word.” The literacy event is the
speciﬁc incident (Marco reads a book), while the literacy practice is the generalized
social practice (reading a book).

Data analysis methodology

In order to describe the practice and process of Marco’s Day I used three
methodological approaches.

1. Ethnographic analysis:

Erickson’s Audiovisual Records as a Primary Data Source (Erickson, 1982)
provides amethodology which allows a researcher to shift lenses between language events
and smaller units, focusing in on interesting transitions and telling examples without losing
track of the larger picture. Rather than transcribe an entire language event, the researcher
catalogues the event, developing timelines and charts to create a picture of what’s happening
within the event Transcribing is selective, focusing on key points in the entire event I
used this approach in the Raccoon Group study while taking a class with Susan Florio-
Ruane and Jenny Denyer. Their handbook Researching Communication in Educational
Contexts (1997) is built upon Erickson’s approach.

2. Narrative description or anecdotal analysis

Patricia Lambert Stock (1995) has described how classroom anecdotes take on a life
of their own as they are retold. With each telling, participants gain new insights and
understandings of the event and its signiﬁcance for teachers and learners. I wrote out each
language event in narrative form, and then wrote initial reactions and interpretations of the
event. These commentaries were wide ranging, but I used them to bring out the key issues

for discussion. These narratives are found in Appendix B (Marco’s Day) and Appendix C

(Lauren’s Day).

3. Transactional analysis
I used several methodologies for focusing on reading and writing as language

processes including miscue analysis, writing analysis, book handling and print awareness

interviews. Some of these methodologies are detailed in Appendix A.

Data analysis procedures

1. Initial viewing/timeline
I initially viewed each videotape without stopping. This allowed me to construct a
general timeline for the language events and the activities within events.

2. Second viewing
I viewed each language event more slowly, noting key activities, literacy practices and
talk within the event Most camcorders can imprint actual time directly on the videotape
while making the recording. This provides additional information and makes data
retrieval easier.

3. Cataloging language events
I used a spread sheet to catalog each language event. Each row detailed an activity, or
sometimes a speech act. Columns had headings for observational notes and interpretive
notes. After some experimentation, I ended up with a two columns for observation: one
column focusing on the “class”, and another focusing on “Marco” or “Lauren.” I
used a loose-leaf binder for each child to organize this data once printed.

4. Early data analysis
I selected a spread sheet for categorizing data because any number of columns can be
added for analysis. The initial categories I used to head “analysis” columns were texts,
genre, practices, process, stance, principles of learning, and notes. As I decided to look
at literacy practices as a unit of analysis, issues such as genre and function were more
interesting under the umbrella of a literacy practice, and it seemed better not to break

practice down into these smaller segments. My ﬁnal columns for the analysis of each

65

activity included: “texts”, “practices”, and “notes” (my inferences, descriptions and
other comments).

5. Third viewing: focus on the child’s experiences
I viewed each video recorded language event again, ﬁlling in missing information on the
spreadsheets. I did not transcribe in detail, but focused on documenting the child’s
actions and some literacy related talk. I used maps and sketches to augment my notes.

I also listened to audiotapes when language was inaudible or additional information was

needed.

6. Narrative description and analysis
After viewing carefully and cataloguing each language event, I wrote a narrative account
of the event. In these narratives, I described my observations and refrained from
inference or opinion. I reread each narrative, highlighting points that I found interesting,
and wrote a commentary after each narrative segment, identifying and discussing aspects
of the child’s literacy experience that I found important. Once I had identiﬁed factors
of interest, I used colored markers and pencils to highlight elements in the narratives
such as: literacy practices, Marco's literacy, texts, relational principles (written language
relating to other sign systems), linguistic principles, a focus on process or strategies.
Rereading the narratives closely allowed themes to emerge that could be synthesized in
the ﬁnal analysis. As I narrowed the focus of analysis, I rewrote the narratives and
commentaries in order to develop aspects I had identiﬁed for analysis and discussion
and to downplay other issues not included in this study. These revisions became
Marco’s Day (Appendix B) and Lauren’s Day (Appendix C).

7. Identifying patterns and issues for discussion and analysis:
I began to compile data on charts and tables in order to identify issues for discussion. I
started with Literacy Events and Practices (See Appendix D and E), again using
columns to detail each event in terms of text, genre, practice, child’s experience, etc. I

developed a list of texts, which I organized by genre. As I began to write about these

66

 

texts, I realized I was losing the picture of the social practice. I decided to reorganize
literacy events by “activity” (reading a book, making a list), since activity approached a
notion of social practice more than texts and genres. At this point, I abandoned my
spread sheets and actually put each literacy event on 3x5 cards so that I could group
them in piles and see what kinds of patterns emerged. I found three broad types of
literacy activities: reading and writing literature, reading and writing as an instrument for
other social activities, and school exercises. These activities are discussed in Chapter
four.

8. Analyzing while writing:
While writing, I continued to return to the data to extend and reﬁne my understanding of

the patterns and issues I was discussing. This included:

' Viewing: Continued to review some of the videotapes with speciﬁc questions in
mind.

' Timeline: Created more detailed two page timeline of the days, including events,

transitions, and key phrases that seemed to signal events and practices.
° Notes and written documents: Reviewed ﬁeld notes, and student documents.
0 Audiotapes: Used tapes particularly where talk is inaudible or additional information

desired.
' Interviewed Susan (classroom teacher): Involved Susan in phone interviews and

viewing sessions, particularly with questions or puzzles.
° Debrieﬁng interviews: Reviewed and selectively transcribed debrieﬁng interviews to

see how Marco and Lauren describe and discuss various events of the day.
0 Miscue analysis: Used miscue analysis to look closely at readings and writings

during the day.

A note about transcription

In order to give a ﬂavor of the language events, I often include dialogue in the actual
words of the speaker. These transcriptions are generally placed in quotations marks, in a
traditional narrative form. Occasionally, I switch to the more typical format of transcription,
that of a play. Because of my choice of narrative, I have cleaned up some of the hesitations

(um.. uh) and backtracking or repetitions in the speech. I have used transcription markings

67

to indicate variation in speech: capital letters indicating emphasis (PLEASE stop.), a colon
indicating elongated vowel sounds (I took mine home). These and other markings are
footnoted when they appear. I have also selected to use italics to indicate when the speaker
is reading a written text

Marco, Lauren, and most of their classmates have many features of African
American Vernacular English in their speech. As seven and eight year olds, they also have
some of the speech immaturities of young children. In addition, the oral speech of both
children and adults includes fragments and unconventional grammatical forms. When
representing the children’s language, I record their speech in the syntax and morphology
that I hear on tape. For the most part, I ignore most phonological variations and use
conventional spellings for all speakers. The exceptions are phonological variations at the
morphemic or syllabic level such as “pose” for “supposed.” I try to represent these
variations in the language of all participants. For example, Susan might say “gonna” for
“going to”, while Marco often says “g’on” /gon/. I use the narrative convention of eye-
dialect, rather than linguistic transcription, when representing phonological variations.

Writing as analysis

I discovered that early dissertation writing is actually a part of the data analysis and
interpretation process. For example, I originally thought Chapter 3 would be Marco’s Day,
and Chapter 4 would be Lauren’s Day. After completing the ﬁrst draft of Chapter 3, I
realized I had just written an appendix (Marco’s Day - Appendix B). Once I shifted
Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day to appendixes, I rewrote Chapter 3, focusing on texts and
genres of both children’s day. I realized that I wasn’t really writing about social practices
so texts and genres became a chart, and vignettes were incorporated in a new chapter in
which I described and discussed literacy practices by activities. My advisors suggested that
I introduce Marco and Lauren before discussing the literacy events, and so Literacy Events

and Practices became the current Chapter Four.

68

This process sounds fairly straightforward when described as hindsight. However,
these revisions involved painful disappointments, periods of great uncertainty, and days of
inertia as I tried to pick up the pieces and move ahead. Still, every step backwards in writing
was a step further in understanding the nature of literacy and literacy learning in the
classroom. And I hope I also arrived at some distinctions between data analysis and
interpretive writing or research.

The social nature of research

In this chapter, I described my research journey. Although I was tired of having to
defend whole language, I started out doing just that. But I soon got caught up in the more
important and interesting aspects of literacy events in Marco’s and Lauren’s school lives.
When studying literacy “from a child’s point of view,” Denny Taylor (1993) is a great
inspiration. I return to this reminder, cited in chapter one, of the difﬁcult but promising road
of the literacy research journey.

Even when we speak of literacy as a social process, we rarely look beyond the

literacy event and the linguistic transactions that take place. So much of the process

remains buried in the multiple layers of communication that are part of our

contextual worlds. We forget that to be literate is a uniquely human experience, a

creative process that enables us to deal with ourselves and to better understand one

another. (Taylor & Dorsey—Gaines, 1988, p. 200)

I draw upon two research traditions: transactional analysis of literacy processes, and
ethnographic analysis of the social practice of literacy. In the process of inquiry and
writing, I am learning to be a researcher. I have learned that each of these perspectives on
literacy informs the other, creating a more complete picture of the literacy as a “social
process.” By drawing these two perspectives together, I hope it is possible to move beyond

“the literacy event and the linguistic transactions” and reveal the “multiple layers of

communication” in the contextual worlds of Marco’s and Lauren’s classroom.

69

Chapter Three
Lauren and Marco in Two Days of School

In this chapter, I introduce Lauren and Marco and provide an overview of two days
in their school lives as second graders. Marco and Lauren’s literacy proﬁles emerge from
the social literacy practices (discussed in Chapter Four) and meaning making processes
(Chapter Five) of their classroom experiences on these two days. These proﬁles are also
informed by interviews at the end of each day and by my history with Marco and Lauren
over three years of interviews and observations.

The proﬁles of Marco and Lauren take an advocacy evaluation stance (Taylor,
1997), focusing on their strategies and understandings as language users, their strengths
and abilities as learners, and their roles and interactions within the social context of this
classroom. I met Lauren and Marco when they were in kindergarten. By the end of their
second grade year I had interviewed them many times, and watched them grow as language
learners. I introduce Marco and Lauren in this chapter in order to share the insights and
connections that I brought to the second grade observations.

Language Events in Two Days of School

I observed and videotaped Marco and Lauren’s second grade classroom on eighteen full
day visits. For this study, I have selected two days in March for close observation. I call
these days “Marco’s Day” and “Lauren’s Day” because my observations followed the
activities of a case study child. A more complete narrative description of each day is

included in Appendix B - Marco’s Day, and Appendix C — Lauren’s Day.
Each of these days involved seven “language events.” A language event is a unit of

discourse deﬁned by a particular activity (i.e. Math) and “participation structure” (Schultz,
1982). For example, Lauren’s Day starts with the language event “Things to Do” when
children talk and move around freely as they work on a variety of tasks listed on the board.
The participant structure shifts to “Morning Meeting” where the children gather on the

ﬂoor, one person talks at a time, and speakers must be recognized by the discussion leader.

7O

There were often brief “transitional events” as children completed one activity and moved
to the next I have elected to use “language event” rather than the more common term
“speech event” (Schiffrin, 1994; Tannen, 1989) to imply that the event includes both

speech and written language.
Marco’s Day

This observation was on March 7 of Marco’s second grade year. The observation
starts with the second language event of the school day.

9:37 Event 1 - Three Toed Sloth (4 m 20 s)
Susan stands at the front board conducting a mini-lesson focused on the poem “Three
Toed Sloth” (Prelutsky, 1983). The children sit at tables, with their “handwriting”
copies of the poem in front of them. The mini—lesson includes a scientiﬁc discussion of
sloths, a search for “long-O” words in the poem, and a choral reading of the poem.

Marco’s Experience: Marco sits with his pencil poised and looks very attentive. During the
choral reading, he recites the title and ﬁrst line of the poem, and then listens as others
recite. After the mini-lesson, he shows his paper to David and says, “I did all this.”

9:41 Transition Event 1.1 - Cleanup (l m 50 s)
The children put away materials from the morning work time, and gather on the area rug
near the door.

Marco’s Experience: Marco puts his paper away in his desk. He sits down on the ﬂoor
near the carpet, just to the side of the front row of children.

9:43 Event 2 - Morning Meeting (12 m 7 5)
“Morning Meeting” is a daily ritual with small variations from day to day. On this
day, the “daily helpers” lead the class in a calendar discussion, involving an analysis of
the days of school, day of the month, and weather. Next, Susan takes attendance by
exchanging greetings with each child in Swahili (Jambo). The daily helpers tally those
children present and absent. Finally, the class stands and sings two active songs. A
third song ends with “Teddy bear, teddy bear, sit right down,” signaling the “Books to
Go” event.

Marco’s Experience: Marco sits on the ﬂoor near the front. He often looks at his new
shoes. He sometimes talks with Jonathan and Terrence. James, one of the daily
helpers, complains and Susan asks Marco to apologize to James, and he quickly
complies. Marco watches the daily helpers as they tally the attendance, and joins in as
the class counts the tally. He participates in the songs, making up his own rhythmic
dance.

9:55 .Event 3 - Books to Go (25 m 6 8)
“Books to Go” is a classroom program where children take turns taking home book
bags with two books: one for the parents to read to the child, and one to practice reading
to the class. On this day, James reads If a Tree Could Talk (Williams, l994a), and then
Amber reads the ﬁrst part of the book Snakes (Demuth, 1993).

71

Marco’s Experience: Marco sits in the second row of children. He continues to admire his
new shoes, but always looks up at the picture. He applauds enthusiastically, with his
hands above his head, when James ﬁnishes reading. Marco is very attentive to the book
Snakes. He makes a slithering motion with his body when Amber says, “snakes slither
and slide.” He asks to see the picture. At one point Amber pauses and Marco predicts
the next word in the text Susan calls attention to Marco’s prediction.

10:20 Transition 4.1: Preparing for Math (6 m 143)
Susan walks to the board and lists choices for math, explaining each activity as she adds
it to the list. Children signal each other, making plans. Susan calls a small group to
meet with her on the area rug while the other children have choices. The children get up
and get materials and begin activities. Susan distributes materials to the small group and
leaves to help the children making choices to get settled.

Marco’s Experience: When Marco’s name is called, he gets a clip board and sits down next
to Susan in the loosely forming circle on the area rug. He places his paper on the
clipboard, and writes something. He carefully places his plastic bag of unit blocks
under the clip on his clipboard and looks up at Susan as she gives talks to the class.

10:27 Event 4 - Small Group Math. (23 m 28 s)
Susan sits on the ﬂoor with the children, who form a loose circle on the area rug. Each
child has a worksheet on their clipboards and a set of “unit blocks” (1x1 cm cubes
representing ones and 10x1 cm sticks representing tens). Susan provides step by step
instructions for using the unit blocks to solve two digit addition problems with
regrouping. The children talk and work together as Susan directs the activity.

 

Marco’s experience: Marco sits next to Susan. He follows her instructions on his own,
listening carefully to her interactions with other children. At times he reports his
progress to Susan (“I got thirteen”). He frequently looks around at what other
children are doing, but does not interact with his classmates.

10:50 Transition 4.2 - Math Cleanup (5m)
Susan tells the children to put away math materials and get ready for writing. She sets a
timer for four minutes. The Daily helpers place writing folders on each table. Once
children are prepared, they begin to write without further instructions.

Marco’s experience: Susan asks Marco to gather up the unit blocks. He does this
methodically, carefully lining up the tops of each baggie. Jonathan helps him put the
blocks away. Then he leaves the room to go to the boy’s bathroom across the hall.

10:55 Event 5 - Silent Writing (24 m 298)
Susan reminds the class that everyone needs to complete their autobiography. Those
ﬁnished can work on other projects. By the time she sets a timer for 20 minutes of
silent writing, most children have been working for several nrinutes. Children work
quietly, but get up when they need supplies or have questions.

Marco’s experience: Susan calls Marco over and gives him a blank book for the “sloppy
copy” of his autobiography. Marco sits next to David, and the two boys work quietly,
frequently looking at each other’s work. Jackie comes over to tell me about her
dinosaur book, and Marco shows great interest in the discussion -- making comments,
listening attentively, and leaning over to look at the materials she is showing me. Marco
spends most of the writing time illustrating the cover of his autobiography.

72

11:21 Transition 5.1 - Writing] lunch prep
The daily helpers call students’ names to get ready for lunch. Children continue to
write before and after their names are called.

Marco’s experience: Prompted by David’s writing and a dialogue with David, Jackie and
me, Marco orally composes and begins writing the ﬁrst page of his autobiography.

11:30 L U N C H
Susan asks the “buyers” to line up for lunch. Marco gets in line.

12:30 Transition 6.1- Introduction to afternoon (1m 21s)
Children come in and gather on the area rug. Susan reviews the plans for the afternoon.

Children make comments and react to plans.

12:31 Event 6 - Books to Go - Part II (28m)
Amber ﬁnishes reading the book Snakes. (14 m) Then Destine reads D.W. All Wet (4
m). Susan complements Destine on her growth as a reader. She talks with the class
about snakes and recommends a book called A Snake Mistake (Smith, 1994).

Marco’s experience: Marco sits in the front of the group. He asks several questions as
Amber reads. One question prompts a brief discussion about snakes shedding their
skin. Marco applauds enthusiastically when Amber ﬁnishes reading. Marco listens to
Destine reading, looks up at the illustrations, and also interacts with Jackie who sits next

to him.

12:55 Transition 7.1- Prep for Book Clubs (4 m 18)
Susan calls out the names of the book clubs, and gives each group a folder.

Marco’s experience: Marco responds to Susan when she calls his book club. He convinces
David to get up. He jumps around on the area rug with Danny and is sent to time out
He goes to confer with Susan about the group project, and returns to the table with a
stack of envelopes.

12:59 Event 7 - Book Clubs (33m 45s)
Children are working in small group “book clubs” on a variety of different projects.
Marco and David are working on a group book using What ’s in my Pocket (Williams,
1994b) as a model. I assist the boys with planning and writing.

Marco’s experience: Marco opens the envelope seams. He makes a visual outline of six
shapes, and counts out six envelopes for “pockets.” As Marco plans, he reads sections
of the book to himself. Marco takes leadership in this event, and tells me the plan for
the group project in detail. He has difﬁculty including David in the project work. At
one point they stop to make “triaramas,” and David spells out his name for Marco to
write. As Marco starts writing on the ﬁrst envelope, I intervene and work with him on
the ﬁrst “pocket.” Then Marco and David each make a pocket, using my envelope and
their book club book as a model. While working, Marco reads my writing and his own.

1:33 Transition 7.2- Book Club clean up (10 m)
Susan gives instructions for writing in “book club diaries” and cleaning up. She sets a

timer for eight minutes because the room is messy with projects. David cleans up the
materials while Marco writes.

73

Marco’s experience: I locate the book club diary because Marco and David aren’t sure what
it is. Marco writes the date, using the class board as a resource. He writes the names of
the group members, remembering David’s name because “he taught me.” I assist
Marco in writing, “We made 3 pockets.”

1:45 Debrieﬁng Interview
After the cleanup time there is a group activity related to the rain forest unit Marco
meets with me for a debrieﬁng interview at this time.

Discussion of Marco’s Day

What strikes me about Marco’s Day is how the children move smoome from
activity to activity with very little direction. Marco spends most of his time engaged in
learning experiences, or in related activities such as preparation and cleanup. Very little
class time is spent on “management,” or disciplinary activities, and Marco spends almost
no time waiting between language events. In this discussion, I describe how Susan and the
students work together to create large chunks of work time and smooth transitions that
maximize opportunities for learning experiences and meaning construction.

Scheduling and transitions support meaning construction

The classroom schedule maximizes time for learning experiences. The transition
from math to writing provides a good example. As Susan gives instructions for cleanup,
she announces that the next activity will be Silent Writing. Including brief instructions, the
class takes ﬁve minutes for cleanup and four minutes to get settled for writing before the
writing time “ofﬁcially starts.” However, by the time Susan announces the beginning of

“Silent Writing”, most of the children are already writing or drawing. At Marco’s table,

Destine writes her autobiography for 30 minutes, starting well before “Silent Writing”

starts and stopping only to line up for lunch. Children are encouraged to continue writing

during the lunch preparation, because the “daily helpers” call them one at a time to go to
the bathroom and lockers.

This classroom structure is “transactional,” with time and space organized to
maximize children’s transactions with texts, learning experiences and other learners.

Weaver (1988) contrasts a transactional organizational structure with a “transmission”

approach, where the teacher closely directs learning experiences. The “transmission”

74

model of classroom organization is often called “direct instruction” and might be
compared to Freire’s (1994) “banking” view of education. To illustrate how scheduling
affects children’s opportunities for constructive work, I compared just the process of
“going to the bathroom” on Marco’s Day with “Shauna’s Day at School” documented in
Growing Up Literate (Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines, 1988).

Shauna’s teacher uses a common practice of taking the entire class to the bathroom
at once. In the morning, it takes thirteen minutes for the children to get from the library to
their classroom including the bathroom visit In the afternoon, Shauna’s class has to wait
for another class to leave, and the bathroom visit takes 14 minutes. Shauna spends most of
that time silently waiting in line, while her classmates go the bathroom a few at a time. The
only time I observed Marco waiting was just after Book Club cleanup, when he sat at his
table for a few moments crooning a popular tune into my microphone. This is just one
example of the contrasts in how time is used in the “transmission approach” in Shauna’s
Day of School and the “transactional approach” of Marco’s Day.

Table 1 contrasts class time during Marco’s Day devoted to content area “work”
with class time focusing on procedures. The majority of time (75%) was spent on content
focused activities. In addition, nearly half of the “transitional time” (class time spent on
classroom procedures) included opportunities for children to continue working or begin
working on content focused activities. For example, the children spent 21.5 minutes
engaged in “cleanup,” but during 14 minutes of that time many children continue working
or begin working on new learning experiences. During the six minutes that the class is
“getting settled” for a group meeting, such as waiting for a reader to get a book during
“Books to Go”, there is informal talking rather than silent waiting. This talk often involves
conversations about books, and resembles the productive “exploratory talk” described by
Barnes (1993).

Very little class time is focused on “behavior,” in part because teacher and students

cooperated to stay focused on learning experiences. In addition, the workshop approach

75

allows Susan to handle children’s problems, conﬂicts and questions directly without taking
up the time of the entire class. For example, Marco is sent to “time out” when he disrupts
the planning time for Book Clubs. Once Susan has helped the groups to get started, she
talks to Marco brieﬂy and then sends him back to join his group.

Table 1 - Comparison of Content Focused Time to Transitional Time

“Work Time” minutes minutes work discussion
Sloth 4.5 21.5 140*

 

 
 
  

Transitional I
Time
1 0 °/o (18 m)

”Transitions with
work opportunity

(27.5 m) 1 6%

l Worktime (2 hr
21.5m) 74%

Classroom structures create social spaces for learning

Susan has worked with the children to create classroom structures that offer the
potential for meaning construction. Even when she thinks kids need to get up and stretch,
she introduces active songs that engage children in socially experiencing the cadence and
melody of poetry with their bodies, using three semiotic systems: kinesthetic as well as

music and language. The singing time provides an example of how Susan and the children

work together to provide seamless transitions between activities. After attendance Susan

says, “Stand up” and begins singing “I’m gonna shake, shake, shake my sillies out.” The

children sing and dance through several verses. A child starts chanting, “Head and
shoulders baby, one, two, three.” -- a children’s playground song in the African American
tradition. Susan says, “okay” and the class enjoys the active verses of this chant. After the
song is over, Susan leads, ”T eddy bear, teddy bear turn around. Teddy bear, teddy bear sit
right down,” and the children sit down on the area rug ready to listen to Amber read.

Singing time is an example how Susan and the children use classroom structures
such as scheduling, room organization, grouping, curriculum development, discipline, and
language policy to create a social space for learning. These social and pedagogical
structures include:

1. Whom: Writing, math, and book club are organized in a workshop
approach. Because there are ongoing projects and choices of activities, topics and
genres, students never run out of “work” to do. The workshop structure allows Susan
to work closely with a small group, as she does during math. During workshops,
questions, problems and conﬂicts are discussed without interrupting the entire class.
Within workshops, students work in formal or informal groupings, allowing
opportunities to observe and talk with other learners.

2. WW Supplies are available to the students. The daily helpers
assist in distributing materials and coordinating the classroom procedures. Children
don’t have to wait, and the teacher spends her time scaffolding learning experiences.

3. AW Children’s comments throughout the day reﬂect their
involvement in all aspects of the class, including procedures. Susan works with the
children throughout the school year to establish this learning community. In addition,
children are involved in teaching and collaborative learning experiences. Susan
contributes to this community by understanding and respecting the needs and abilities

of young children to move and talk as they learn. Susan also expects children to respect

77

each other and themselves, as she illustrates when she asks Marco to apologize to
James, as the discussion leader.

This overview of Marco’s Day portrays a community of learners working together
to construct structures that create social spaces for learning. Of course, the critical element
is what types of learning experiences children are engaged in within these spaces. The
quality and nature of learning experiences, involving meaningful and relevant literacy events,
is the focus of the following chapters. The overview of Lauren’s Day further reveals how
these structures support social literacy practices through language and literacy events.

Lauren’s Day

This observation takes place on March 13 of Lauren’s second grade year. The
observation begins as the children enter the room in the morning.

8:35 Event 1 - Things to do (48 min.)
Susan stands in the hall as children put away their coats. A “Things to do” list is
posted and children read it and consult each other as they enter the room. The class is
noisy and busy as children greet each other and select work activities. Some children go
to “sign in” or write a message on the “Daily News.” Other children begin working
on the two “assignments” starred on the list: coloring a map and completing a math
sheet. PA announcements start and children quiet down, but continue to work. They
stand and recite the “school pledge.” Susan interrupts the workshop time to provide
instruction on the math sheet (7 minutes). After this, children have ten minutes to
complete their work. Children who complete the “assignments” begin to work on
choices such as: read, write, and draw.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren enters the room and begins with the two assignments. She
colors and labels Mexico on a map of South America, using a sample map as a model.
As she works on math, she frequently looks over at her friend’s paper to compare
answers. Lauren works intently, but also talks and jokes with the girls at her table and
others that come by. During PA announcements she continues to work, even as she
stands and recites the pledge. Lauren attends to Susan’s math instructions, writing in
answers on her sheet Lauren takes a short break after she turns the math in, and then
pulls out a rough draft book she is working on and begins reading it to Amber and me.

9:22 Transition Event 2.1 - Cleanup / gather (10 min.)
Susan asks for cleanup, telling the “daily helpers” that “You can read if you want to.”
Susan circulates as the children ﬁnish up their work and begin cleaning up. The daily
helpers, with a few friends, stand in front of the calendar and “read” the song book
This Old Man (Adams, 1974). Children join in as they gather on the area rug.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren continues to read her book to me until Susan tells her to join
the class. She puts her book away and sits near the singers between Amber and Alicia.

78

9:33 Event 2 - Morning Meeting (9 min.)
“Morning Meeting” is a daily ritual with small variations from day to day. Today, the
“daily helpers” lead the class in a calendar discussion, involving an analysis of the days
of school, day of the month, and weather. Next, Susan takes attendance by exchanging
greetings with each child in Spanish (“Hola.”) while the daily helpers tally those
present and absent. The meeting shifts to “Books to Go” when Susan says, “I
promised Danny he could start the ‘Books to Go.”’ Children ask about the “Daily
News” and Susan says they will do it after Danny reads.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren sits in a group of six girls. She leans towards Katherine,
talking. Susan calls Lauren’s attention to the calendar discussion saying, “Lauren,
look. I want you to see this.” Lauren attends to the meeting, occasionally interacting
quietly with friends. She looks up before her name is called, ready to greet Susan.

9:42 Event 3 - Books to Go (25 m)
“Books to Go” is a classroom program where children take turns taking home book
bags with two books: one for parents to read aloud, and one to practice reading to the
class. On this day Danny reads Who Sank the Boat? (Allen, 1996). Then children read
from “The Daily News,” postponed from Morning Meeting. After that Sharonda
reads Teddy Bear for Sale (Herman, 1996). Susan complements Sharonda for how
much her reading has improved;

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren looks at Danny as he reads. She plays with her bracelet and
interacts silently with Katherine, looking up when Danny shows the picture. She smiles
when Danny reads a funny line. Lauren watches Sharonda intently, and looks closely at
the pictures. She moves closer to Alicia and begins retwisting a braid. She and
Katherine play with Amber’s braids, pulling them down and watching them spring back.
She continues to listen to Sharonda, who is reading slowly. Lauren smiles when Susan
praises Sharonda’s reading.

10:07 Transition 4.1 - Preparing for Math (8 min.)
Susan says, “When you get to your seats, I’m sorry, but we have to do some work in
math books again.” There are groans and a few cheers. Children go to their tables and
get out their math books. Susan tells them to ﬁnd a certain page. It takes about three
minutes for everyone to get their books out and ﬁnd the page.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren and Amber look for their math books in the cubbies under the
table. Katherine comes over and they clap hands and talk until children start to get
settled. Lauren ﬁnds her book and sits waiting. Lauren sits with Danielle, Amber and
Alicia, when Susan has them cluster for “teamwork.” Lauren ﬁnds the page in the
math book right away. She offers to help Amber and Danielle.

10:15 Event 4 - Math (35 min.)
Susan places magnetic unit blocks on the board and asks the children to signal if they
can “read my number.” Initially, she calls on individuals to answer questions. Later
the children chant responses together. After working through several problems, Susan
has the second graders tear the page out of the workbook. She explains how to do both
sides of the page. Then she calls the ﬁrst graders for a meeting on the carpet, while the
second graders ﬁnish their work sheet “on your own.”

79

Lauren’s experience: Lauren writes in her workbook, as Susan starts instruction. As Susan
goes through answers, Lauren writes in her book and raises her hand. After the
instructions, Lauren tears the page out of the workbook and puts her book away. She
begins circling answers on her paper. Danielle accuses Lauren of “looking at my
paper,” but Lauren says, “I’m not.” She works intently, reporting her progress out
loud, “I’m on the second page!”

10:50 Transition 4.2 - Math to Writing (10 min.)
Susan announces, “When you’re done with math, you can start writing.” The room
becomes noisy and busy, as children ﬁnish their math. Susan gives several warnings
(ﬁve nrinutes, three minutes) and then tells children to get settled with their writing. She
begins counting backwards slowly from ten to zero.

Lauren’s experience: Lauren says, “Yes!” when Susan announces it’s time for writing.
She watches Amber working. Katherine and Alyssa come over and the girls argue
playfully. Lauren ﬁnishes her math and turns it in. She gets out the book draft she is
working on. She talks to me about her book, and reads from where she left off in the
during “Things to Do.” I ask what’s conring next, and Lauren tells the next segment,
smiling as she talks about humorous events. She begins writing as Susan says, “six.”

11:00 Event 5 - Silent Writing (20 min.)
Susan says, “Everyone should be writing now.” She sets the timer for 20 minutes.
The room becomes very quiet. At Lauren’s table, Lauren and Jonathan are writing.
Amber and Alicia are making blank books. They have trouble with the stapler and the
project takes time. Susan has had Danielle switch with Bruce after he had problems
with another “team.” He sits staring at his desk, and ﬁnally starts working on his
unﬁnished math sheet after encouragement from Susan, Jonathan and me.

Lauren’s experience: Lauren writes steadily during the entire twenty minutes. She writes a
page, then illustrates it She tells me a bit about the illustration. When she turns a page,
she carefully creases the back so it will lie ﬂat. Occasionally she stops to think, but she
continues to write most of the time. She writes and illustrates three pages, with several
sentences on each page.

11:20 Event 5.1 - Writing] lunch prep (3 min.)
The timer rings and Susan says, “Would you please clean up your tables, it’s almost
lunch time.” The daily helpers begin calling children’s names to prepare for lunch.

Lauren’s experience: Lauren goes to the bathroom when her name is called. She returns
and talks with me about her story until Susan asks the class to line up for lunch.

11:30 L U N C H
Susan asks the children to line up silently. After lunch, the children go to Science and
Susan has a planning time.

1:10 Transition 6.1 Read Aloud (10 min.)
After returning from science, Terrence and Alicia take turns reading a picture chapter
book Two Dog Biscuits (Cleary, 1996).

Lauren’s experiences: Lauren sits behind Amber, and pats Amber’s hair as she listens. She
laughs when Terrence reads a humorous line in the book.

1:20 Event 6 - Silent Reading (and Writing) (25 min.)

80

Because the children have just been sitting, Susan decides on ﬁfteen minutes of “Silent

Reading” before Book Club presentations. Jackie asks about writing, and Susan

revises her plan to include both. She calls table “teams” to go get their materials and

get settled. Children get books and pillows and ﬁnd spots around the room to read.

Other children get writing materials and begin writing. Susan calls Lauren, Katherine e
and Rudy to choose books for the “Books to Go” bags. Then she sets the timer for ,
ﬁfteen rrrinutes and says, “Ready, set, write.” The room is a quiet murmur as children

read aloud to themselves, or interact quietly as they write.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren and Katherine get pillows and books and a D.W. doll. They
sit down to read near the front door, with books and doll piled between them. Lauren
begins reading Dragon’s Fat Cat (Pilkey, 1992), an illustrated chapter book, aloud to
herself. She assists Sharonda when she asks for help. Lauren reads almost two
chapters before Susan calls her name, and then goes to select books for Books to Go.
She returns to her book and reads about 3 1/2 chapters all together.

1:45 Transition 7.1 Preparation for Book Club Presentation (5 min.)
The timer rings and Susan gives instructions for clean up and gathering for the book
club presentation. Children begin to put materials away and gather on the area rug.
They are facing away from the calendar wall, and the Lunch Boxes (Ehrlich, 1991)
group begins to arrange their chairs in the “stage” area near the windows. Susan
begins singing the book Ten in the Bed (Rees, 1988), but stops to give further
instructions for clean up.

Lauren’s Experience: Lauren continues to read as Susan gives instructions. She does not
stop until Katherine tugs at her arm. Katherine is concerned because I am recording
Lauren reading. She suggests that Lauren ﬁnish quickly, but Lauren does not want to
“disobey Miss Austin.” She comes over to ask if I’m coming back tomorrow, and I
ask if I can interview her after the presentation. She puts the books aside for the
interview and goes to join the Lunch Boxes group as they prepare for the presentation.

1:50 Event 7 Book Club Presentation (20 min.)
The Lunch Boxes (Ehrlich, 1991) group is sitting in a row of chairs facing the area rug.
They have bags on their backs, like backpacks. Susan begins by talking about “the ﬁrst
presentation.” The Lunch Boxes group gives a choral reading of their book. Susan is
confused because they were going to do a play, and suggests that they show the class
the lunch boxes they made as one of their projects. Each girl in the group shows the
construction paper foods. The class is restless, but interested and amused by the girls’
project The presentation ends when the last girl is ﬁnished and another class comes in
to watch a movie.

Lauren’s experience: Lauren is a member of the Lunch Boxes group. She sits in the middle
of the group. She appears to be leading the choral reading, looking around to see if the
other girls are looking at her and then beginning to read. The girls keep together fairly
well, aided by the rhythmic text, written in couplets. Lauren and Alyssa share one book,
holding the book between them. Lauren and Alyssa appear to be leaders as the group
reads the entire text with few hesitations. Lauren shows her “food” to the class saying,
“This my lunch box. This my apple. This my Swiss cheese.” and so on. Children
laugh at the more unusual items.

2:10 Debrieﬁng interview

Kathy’s class joins Susan’s class to watch a movie together. Lauren meets with me for
a debrieﬁng interview at this time.

81

 

 

Discussion of Lauren’s Day

Lauren’s Day provides strong examples of the collaborative nature of learning
within the social spaces created by this classroom community. Lauren has several close
friends and is friendly with many of the girls in the classroom. She sits next to Amber and
the two girls often collaborate on stories together. Amber is an unusually strong artist and
often illustrates pages in her classmates’ books. Lauren works closely with Katherine
during “Books to Go” and Silent Reading. Lauren also interacts with Danielle and Alicia,
who sit at her table. Alyssa often stops by to talk to Lauren. During class meetings, Lauren
sits close to her friends on the carpet and often whispers or interacts with them. At times
Susan reminds her to listen.

Lauren and her friends work closely together, and tend to be very aware of each
other’s work. When the class is working on math worksheets, Lauren frequently compares
her answers with Katherine’s. At two points she snatches Katherine’s paper away to look
at it more closely. Lauren and Amber appear to know each other’s writing quite well. In

one case, Amber remembered Lauren’s book better than Lauren:

Lauren’s Day, “Things to Do” (See Appendix C)

“Our teacher, Mrs. McGee, she is nice. ”
Amber says, “You said McGillicutty.”
“Oh, I forgot. After school we walked to the playground.”
(Italics indicate the speaker is reading a text aloud.)

 

This collaboration is supported by a “workshop” approach to work time where
children work on a variety of projects, move around to get supplies and materials, and see
the children around them as resources as well as the teacher. Table 2 shows a balanced

schedule between workshops and whole class events on Lauren’s Day.

During this day about over half of the total class time is spent in workshop settings,
particularly if we had the 27 minutes of work time provided during transitions. To some
extent, this day is atypical because 25 minutes are spent in whole class math instruction and

the book club time takes the form of a class presentation. In the next section I discuss the

82

differences between whole class events and workshop events as I compare Marco’s and

Lauren’s days.
Table 2
Comparison of workshop time, whole class events, and transitions on Lauren’s Day

events Whole Class Events Transitions

 

Notes: SG - song, INS - procedural instructions, ** work time available during transitions
Comparing Marco and Lauren’s Days

Marco’s and Lauren’s Days have similarities in terms of how classroom structures
such as time and organization are used to create a social space for learning. I describe
below how the collaborative nature of this classroom community creates a social zone of
proximal development (Vygotsky, 1989) that is different from more competitive classroom
structures where collaboration might be viewed as cheating. I then describe the nature of
whole and small class events on these two days, and the inﬂuence of an upcoming
standardized test on the social space for learning in the classroom.

A social ZPD and the specter of cheating

Lev Vygotsky (1978) describes a zone of proximal development (ZPD)
representing the difference between what learners can do on their own, and what they can do
with help. His work suggests a role for teachers in providing a “scaffolding” within the
child’s ZPD. Within this classroom, the structure of social literacy events creates a Social
Zone of Proximal Development. Rather than the teacher, Lauren uses her peers as
resources, particularly when working on the math worksheets. When Susan ﬁnishes

explaining the math problems, Lauren looks over at Katherine’s paper and asks, “What’s

83

the last one?” During reading she switches roles, helping Sharonda and Katherine with
unfamiliar texts.

On Marco’s day, during the small math group, Danielle offers to show Audrey and
Destine how to use the language blocks. Later James shyly asks Terrence if he needs help,
and then proceeds to conﬁdently instruct Terrence in the procedures. This is an interesting
switch because Terrence was one of the kids on the rug (See Chapter 4) who assists readers
during Books to Go. Children are aware of the “funds of knowledge” (Moll, 1994) in the
classroom. Amber, an unusually talented artist, illustrates a page in Lauren’s book and
works on a beautiful vase of ﬂowers for the cover of Alicia’s blank book.

In addition to collaboration, the workshop provides Opportunities for
“demonstrations” (Camboume, 1988) of readers and writers in action. While Marco
reports his work progress to Susan and appreciates her attention, he also attends to the
interactions and actions of the students around him. He comes over to listen when Jackie, a
very creative and inquisitive child, shares her work with me. When children engage in
observing these social demonstrations of literacy in action, they are learning what it means
to be a reader or writer within a particular literacy event Recent research on early literacy
has indicated that children’s observations of their parent’s reading and writing activities
may be more important than reading aloud experiences (Barrs, 1993; Taylor, 1997).

In a situation where children are sitting in rows, Marco and Lauren would not have
an opportunity to observe the interactions and “work” going on around him. Both Marco
and Lauren observe the actions of children around him, and children in the classroom help
each other to assignments and other projects. These activities are labeled “cheating” in
competitive classroom structures. Susan encourages working together and calls it “team
work.” The social ZPD is not accidental but is fostered by structures such as the

classroom workshops.

84

 

Whole Class Lessons, Standardized Testing and the Use of Class Time

I have described the value of workshops in creating a social space for collaborative
learning and a variety of demonstrations of what it means to be a reader and writer. The
whole class activities on these two days provide a contrasting social structure for
reconsidering the importance of collaborative spaces for literacy learning. Language Events
on Lauren’s Day were somewhat evenly divided between whole class events and
workshops. On Marco’s Day, there were also two events involving small group meetings:
Math and Book Clubs.

The whole class language events occurring on both days include: “Morning
Meeting” and “Books to Go.” These language events involve opportunities for Lauren
and Marco to observe demonstrations of reading and writing in action, particularly during
“Books to Go” when their classmates read stories to the class. “Morning Meeting” is led
by the “daily helpers” and involves a variety of reports concerning focusing on charts and
models. The daily routine of this meeting has positive and negative implications. Children
have repeated opportunities for leaming, as concepts are discussed every day. However, the
repetition may get tedious, and Susan has to remind both Marco and Lauren to attend the
meeting activities.

On both Marco’s and Lauren’s Days, there was one additional whole class activity.
Marco’s Day included a 5-minute mini-lesson focusing on the poem “Three Toed Sloth”.
Lauren’s Day included a whole class math lesson involving 16 rrrinutes of direct instruction.
On Lauren’s Day, Susan also provided whole class math instruction for 7 minutes during
“Things to Do”. On Marco’s Day, Marco also works on a math sheet, but this was during
a small group math lesson. Each of the math sheets on Lauren’s Day involved whole class
instruction.

The literacy practice “working on math worksheets” was unusual in this classroom,
as suggested by Susan’s introduction on Lauren’s Day, “When you get to your seats, I’m

sony, but we have to do some work in math books again.” It was very unusual to have a

85

 

 

 

 

worksheet assignment during the “Things to Do.” On other observations, the children did
“math journals” at this time, solving a story problem often having something to do with
classroom or public events. Children shared their solutions during Morning Meeting.
Susan told me math worksheets were used on this day because standardized testing was
starting the next week and the worksheets and workbook pages were similar to the types of
problems children would be facing on the test

The differences between the whole class math lesson on Lauren’s Day and the small

group lesson on Marco’s Day were striking. Susan’s method of instruction was similar on
both days; she worked through the problems with the children, posing each part of the
process as a question (“How many tens?”, “What do we do next?”). However, on
Marco’s Day, Susan watched each child, and provided extra instruction as she observed
their progress. In the small group children collaborated and talked, and asked Susan
questions without raising their hands. Marco had more interactions with Susan during this
time than during the entire rest of the day.

Susan instructs the children to count their ones, “What do we add ﬁrst?”

Marco counts all his unit cubes (ﬁve and eight). He says, “I count thirteen.”

Susan works with other children, making sure they are following the procedures.
Marco watches Susan’s interactions with other students.

Susan talks to the group. “Okay, thirteen. Now what do we have to do?”

"Trade for a ten,” Marco says, looking down at his blocks. Then he picks up
ten cubes and exchanges them for a stick. He has ﬁve tens and three ones laid out.

Marco says, “I traded.”

Susan says, “Okay. Good, Marco.”

Susan then explains to the group how to record the information on their paper,
indicating the trade above the tens column. Marco looks over at other papers. He
begins to write. Susan shows Marco how to record his answer.

Susan addresses Marco directly nine times during the math meeting, and interacts
with him directly eight times during the rest of the day, at least while I was observing. The
number of interactions in other segments of the day may be skewed due to my presence,
which might cause Susan to be less likely to see how he’s doing. Nevertheless, it seems
clear that the small group supports Marco’s learning processes and strategies.

On Lauren’s Day, Susan stood at the board and the children sat at their desks. A

good deal of time was spent waiting as Susan made sure that everyone was with her. It took

86

 

 

3 full nrinutes for all of the children to ﬁnd the right page in their math books. The entire

class had to wait if a child had a problem or conﬂict.

Lauren’s Day, Mam (Apmndix C)

As Susan writes another problem on the board, Sharonda goes up to complain about
Bruce. Susan says, “Bruce, you know what I said about teammates getting along.”
Danny raises his hand. Susan says, “Danny is this important?” She tells Kenneth
to “sit down and boss Kenneth.” (Worry about yourself and not other children.)

After spending 9 rrrinutes going through several examples with the class, Susan took
6 minutes to explain how to do the rest of the worksheet. During the whole class
instruction Susan could not check to see that everyone was understanding and children
could not talk and assist each other because it would be disruptive. Children’s participation
in the discourse involved raising their hands to “signal” they had the answer or providing
an answer to the problem.

The differences between the small group math lesson on Marco’s Day and the
whole class lesson on Lauren’s day raise questions about the beneﬁts of direct instruction.
Although Delpit (1995) suggests that direct instruction may provide more learning
opportunities for African American Students, these language events show that the workshop
structure provides more opportunities for interactions and a greater potential for learning.

In the small group structure, Marco participated in more interactions with his teacher and his
classmates than Lauren did during the more lengthy whole class structure.

A standardized testing period coming up at the end of March had an inﬂuence on
classroom literacy events during these two days. The “Three Toed Sloth” event was part
of a rain forest unit introduced because Susan felt that some of the texts children would read
for the reading text were far removed from the experiences of urban second graders in
North America. Lauren’s assignment of coloring Mexico on a map of North America was
related to this unit. The search for the “long 0 vowels” was also prompted by the
standardized test As an experienced whole language teacher, Susan creates inquiry
focused, literature experiences and slips in a 2 minute phonics lesson in preparation for the

“reading” test.

87

 

pr:

Su

Cl'i

rel:

“t

COl

C12

pit

llll'

er;

Clll

She

ll; ".1. ....r... in.
\l. .5 PF. l5.

\ 3.\ m...\..tr. \nl

The math instruction took over longer chunks of Lauren’s Day as Susan worked to
prepare children for the type of problems they would face on the test The test prompted
Susan to change the texts and literacy practices children encountered. They shifted from
“math journals” where children provided a variety of solutions to problems drawn from
every day life, to commercial “worksheets” where the problems had no meaning or
relevance to the kids. In addition, the structure of literacy events changed so that children
were spending time waiting, personal problems and conﬂicts became disruptive, and
everything seemed to drag out.

Table 3 compares how time was used in the “Whole Class Math Lesson”
compared to Marco’s small group lesson, and Lauren’s “Silent Writing.” The “Whole
Class Math Lesson” involved over an hour of class time, including 14 minutes focused on
procedural matters. The “Small Group Math Lesson” and “Silent Writing” times,
involved just over 1/2 hour with most of that time devoted to collaborative learning
experiences. In addition, because “Silent Writing” followed math on Lauren’s day, it was
cut short because of the math lesson. On other days, the actual writing was followed by a
sharing time.

Table 3
Time use in Whole Class Math, Small Group Math, and Silent Writing

Lauren’s Whole Class Marco’s Small Group Lauren’s Silent Writing
Math Lesson 63 min.* Math Lesson 37 min. 3 min.*

      

   

m
m

m
m

same
The math instruction on Lauren’s Day illustrates the detrimental inﬂuences of
standardized testing on this classroom community. When Susan introduces “worksheets”

rather than “math journals”, she changes the nature of relationships between participants in

88

the literacy events and also the relationship between children and texts. During “Things to
Do” the math work sheet involves cutting out answers and pasting them in appropriate
boxes. Many children report difﬁculties with the assignment, so Susan stops the class to go
through several problems together. Because gluing would take up too much instructional

time, she tells the children to write the answers with their pencils and glue them down later.

Lauren’s Day, “Things to Do” (See Apmndix Q)

Susan reminds the children to put their names on their papers, and then tells
Lauren that she can get the glue.

“Miss Austin,” Lauren calls out, “Do I have to glue it?”

Susan says, “yes.”

This exchange is interesting because Lauren is not seeking instruction, but
essentially questioning the validity of the assignment If the answers are already written in
the boxes, is it really necessary to glue them? Lauren bows to Susan’s authority and glues
the answers down on the worksheet. She is aware of the boundaries of these instructions,
and later tells Danielle that it is not necessary to glue anything down if the answer is
“zero.” However, Lauren’s question expresses an implicit awareness of the “nonsense”
of this task. Lauren’s question exhibits a critical stance towards her school work. She
appears to feel that there is a reason behind the tasks she is expected to do, and that these
reasons will make sense to her.

Whole class learning experiences such as “Morning Meeting” and “Books to
G0” are important in bringing the class together, and providing a common base of shared
literature and conceptual understandings. Whole class instruction on math worksheets is
questionable in terms of learning and meaning construction. It changes the nature of social
literacy practices in the classroom, and the relationships among participants.

This pre-testing period affected the mood of interactions in the classroom. After the
“Things to Do” meeting, Susan told the children she was “way crabby” about how things
had been going during the morning. It was a bad day for Susan, and she was frustrated

about children’s behavior, although she appeared to have a cold as well as testing anxiety.

Of course a bad day for Susan is still a good day for language learning as my description of

89

Lauren’s literacy experiences. In the next sections, I provide an introduction to Marco and
Lauren before describing these literacy experiences in the next chapters.
A Proﬁle of Marco

On this day, Marco is wearing jeans and a red plaid shirt. After lunch, he ties the
shirt plaid shirt around his waist. He has a plain white T-shirt underneath. Marco has a
“fade” haircut, short on top and even shorter on the sides. Marco had on new gym shoes,
which he tied and retied as he sat on the area rug for class meetings.
Marco pays attention

Throughout the day, Marco is attentive and methodical about his schoolwork.
When Marco was asked to gather up the unit blocks after math, he neatly lines up the tops
of the baggies before putting them away. Later, while working on his book club project, he
methodically unseals a stack of envelopes, stacking the ﬁnished “pockets” in a tidy pile.
When I invited Susan to view the videotape of the “Three Toed Sloth” language event, we

both agreed that Marco’s entire demeanor was one of “paying attention.”

Magco’a Day, Three Toed Sloth (See Apmndix B)

The camera shifts to focus on Marco who sits at the “square team” table,
between David and James. He holds his pencil poised to write; peers closely at the
board and then down at his paper. On Marco’s right, James is circling words on his
paper. Marco looks at the board, moves his mouth, and looks down at his paper
again. He points at the paper with his pencil, and says something to David. He
glances over at the camera.

Susan and I were somewhat surprised to see Marco’s attentive posture. Marco was
not a strong “independent” reader and writer. This study has changed my association of
proﬁcient readers with paying attention. I now believe that less proﬁcient readers and
writers are more likely to pay close attention to the social events in the classroom. Even in

kindergarten Marco believed that literacy learning involved “studying.”

15mm Mama’s kiadargarten intarview;

D: Okay. Well how do you become a good reader?

M: Because... uh... because I be... because I be studying.

D: You’re studying? Okay so studying makes someone a good reader?
M: Yep.

D: Is there anything else they need to do besides study?

M: Yeah. They just tell their mama... grandmother... or their auntie or their
mother... tell them to read the story. And sometimes they say, “No” and
sometimes they say “yeah.”

Marco lives with his grandmother in a household where there are many adults
available to read to a young child. He sees adults as a resource for literacy learning. In
addition, his family has conveyed to him a perspective on what “makes someone a good
reader.” It’s important to “study.” Marco has taken this to heart, and continues to be
studious and attentive in the second grade classroom.

Marco pays attention to social interactions

Marco studies in order to learn, but he also pays attention to the social exchanges
around him. When I asked him what he liked about his classroom, he talked about many
aspects of this social world including choices, sharing, and taking pictures -- most likely for
class books. During these classroom practices, Marco has opportunities to observe and
participate in meaning construction through a variety of sign systems: art, oral and written
language, and the varied materials and experiences of “choices.” At the same time, events

like “taking pictures” and “sharing” begin with learning about the children around him --

the most important people in his school life.

Eryn; Qbﬂgﬁng Interview

Marco: Like we do choices, like people bring they stuff in to share like they doing
now. And then like we take pictures and sometimes. Like. .. when people
get on the escalator they some time Kenneth (mimes reaching and grabbing)
be trying to take the pencil. And so every time I see it I try to go stop it

Marco describes his role as peacemaker when children get on the “conﬂict
escalator,” Susan’s metaphor for classroom conﬂicts, in his list of things he likes about his
classroom. Susan started out the year with a unit on “peacemakers” in order to encourage
children to think about resolving conﬂicts peacefully.

Marco’s attention to social interactions includes language use. For example, he
displays his concern for appropriate language when he and David enjoy a raunchy couplet

from a movie before remembering they are on camera:

91

Margo’a Day, Book Clubs (See Appendix B)

David leans over towards Marco. David says, “What’s that (??)3 Your mama
something... she... something in 1998.”

Marco says, “Your mama got to skate. She (?hit the ﬂo’?). Her (?bootie roll?)
In nineteen ninety eight.”

Marco continues to pull apart envelopes. David laughs at the rhyme. He looks
at Marco and raises his eyebrows. Marco glances at the camera. He smiles.

Apparently viewing this as a social gaffe, Marco responds to David differently the

next time this rhyme comes up:

As Marco writes, David begins to chant, “In eighteen eighty eight...”
Marco says, “Your mama tried to skate. She skate so well you couldn’t even
catch her.”
He looks at David. “T he other one that I got off that movie, it’s a nasty one.”
David says, “I ain’t saying that.”
Marco pays attention by “studying” in order to be a good student. But he also
attends to the pragmatics of social interactions. As a beginning reader and writer, Marco
relies on observations and listening as his main receptive meaning making systems. He has

ﬁne tuned “paying attention” into a strategy of “learning by overbearing.”
Learning by overbearing

Within the collaborative spaces in this classroom community, children participate in
literacy experiences in a variety of social roles (Lawson, 1997). Marco’s experiences
during the small group math lesson illustrate how he learns by observing and listening.
Marco sits next to Susan in the loose circle on the gathering rug. He closely attends to
Susan’s instructions and her interactions with other children. He also attends to the work
of children around him:

Mama’s Day, Small Group Mam (Sea Appgndix B)

Susan begins. She points out the ﬁrst problem (35+18) and asks, “Can you
make thirty ﬁve with your base ten sticks?”

Marco takes out his ten sticks. He lays out three tens.

Susan asks, “How many tens in thirty ﬁve?”

Marco looks around at the other children and what they are doing. He places
three ten sticks on his clipboard. He puts ﬁve unit blocks near the sticks. He looks
over to see what James is doing.

 

3 (??) indicates inaudible speech. When I am not certain of what the speaker has said, I
include the words I think I hear between the question marks.

92

Marco is immediately able to follow Susan’s instructions, indicating that he has
an understanding of the number concepts involved. He checks his own work by
counting his unit blocks. However, he looks around at the other children’s “work” in
order to reconﬁrm his responses. Again, in many classrooms this behavior might be
considered cheating. In this case, the literacy event has the quality of most holistic
literacy events in that Marco has possibility to check and evaluate his own meaning
construction. In social literacy practices, children can evaluate their understandings on
the social as well as the personal level. In the next problem, Marco makes a mistake but
corrects himself as he watches and listens.

The group proceeds to the next problem: 46 + 17.

Marco counts out forty-six. He puts away his excess sticks. He says, “Miss

Austin. Now I have forty six.”

Susan says, “Okay, now we’re making seventeen.”

Marco puts away the forty-six and gets out seventeen. He says, “Now I got
seventeen.”

Susan is talking to Audrey, “No Audrey. This is forty-six. Now we got to
make seventeen.”

Marco listens and looks over at Audrey. He gets out more blocks. He makes
forty-six and then seventeen. He picks up ten ones and trades them for a ten stick.

Julie lies on the ﬂoor just behind Susan and works through the problems on her
own. While Marco appears to understand what he’s doing, he waits for Susan’s
instructions before proceeding. Other children use conversations to enhance
understandings, but Marco listens and watches before acting.

Susan asks, “What are we adding?” and kids call out, “eighteen.”

Susan looks around at each child’s work as she gives instructions. “Marco, put
these over here so you can see them.” Susan moves Marco’s sticks off the
clipboard and arranges them on the carpet where they are more visible.

Children repeat instructions and talk over their work. “Eighteen. She said
eighteen.”

Marco silently takes out a ten stick, and then lines up eight one cubes on the
right side as Susan did with the thirty-ﬁve sticks. Marco counts the unit cubes. He
puts the extra cubes back in the baggie. He watches as Susan works with the other
students, stopping to count his own blocks several times.

Marco’s “learning by overbearing” strategy raises questions about the importance

of direct instruction for children’s oral language learning. An inﬂuential group of

educational activists, publishers, and politicians (Taylor, 1998) advocate direct and intensive

93

instruction of phonics, particularly for students like Marco who are becoming readers more
slowly than their peers. Delpit (1995) and Reyes (1992) equate indirect language with
indirect instruction and suggest that such structures are confusing to non-European
American Children.

However, Marco’s “learning by overbearing” strategy is reminiscent of the cultural
Ways with Words Heath (1983) describes in the African American community of
“Tracton”. In this community, young children were not spoken to directly until they began
to speak by themselves. However, babies sat on the laps or hips of adults and older siblings
and were immersed in countless language demonstrations as community members spoke to
each other. In the White community of “Roadville,” adults spoke to children directly, but
children were often placed in cribs or playpens and isolated from adult conversations. In
each context, children learned to speak the language of the community around them.
Marco reads and writes

At the time of this observation, as I mentioned before, Susan and I did not view
Marco as an “independent” reader. My observations of Marco’s reading and writing in a
variety of classroom language events, led me to conclude Marco had not yet developed an
alphabetic principle (Ferreiro, 1982; Goodman, 1990) , understanding that graphemes
(letters) have a relationship with phonemes (sounds). The following exchange occurred

when I was assisting Marco with writing a book club diary entry:

’ l A i
Debi says, “And you want to write ‘made.’ How does ‘made’ start?”
Marco thinks for a while. He mouths the word ‘made.’ He guesses ‘K.’
Debi says the world slowly, “/mmai:d/. Do you know any words that start
like ‘made’? How about Marco- ‘Marco’, ‘made.’ Do you hear the same
sound?”
Marco shakes his head.

While Marco had difﬁculty reading or writing unfamiliar texts independently, he
could read and write a variety of familiar literature and functional texts within the social
literacy events and practices of his classroom community. Repeated social experiences with

literature books create a “language bank” of familiar texts and stories for reading.

94

During the debrieﬁng interview at the end of the day, Marco re-reads a familiar book
(see Figure 4), What ’s in My Pocket? (Williams, 1994b). What ’s in my Pocket? is

Marco’s “Book Club” selection, and he had read the book many times.

Marco miscues show his use of semantic (meaning) and syntactic (grammar)
cues. For instance, Marco’s substitutes “furry” for “soft” with a focus on text meaning.
After predicting “wiggly or giggly” for “fuzzy” on page 10, he turns the page and sees a
picture of a bear. Then be self corrects, saying “hairy or something.” Marco’s “or
something” suggests that he knows he has not provided the expected text He feels
comfortable providing a meaningful substitution, using pictures, language patterns, and
previous experiences with this text to help with meaning construction.

Marco’s miscues also demonstrate his syntactic understandings. All of his

substitutions for the pattern “Something that’s .” show his understanding of

 

adjectives. He uses the noun phrase pattern (a marble, a feather) to create his own ﬁnal
sentence (15) “a lots of toys.” Marco consistently changes the sentence structure of the
hint phrase “Something that’s round.” to “It’s something that’s round.” Where the
author uses a sentence fragment, Marco’s insertion of “it’s” creates a more formal, NP/V P

(It / is something that’s round) structure that might be expected in written language.

What’s in my pocket?
(It’s) something that’s round.
Marco also uses graphic cues, contrary to my initial assumptions. For example,
on page 12 (It’s something that’s gooey) Marco reads “It ’s something that’s...” He stops
to consider the text “gooey,” and then slowly re-reads the sentence leaving out “It’s,”

9,

“Something that gooey.” Marco’s self-correction of “it’s shows that he is attending to

graphic information.

95

Figure

Com:
Witter

UldSD’E

9"

.U'

10.

Figure 4 - Marco Reads

Cover: What’s in My Pocket
Written by Rozanne Lanczak Williams
Illustrated by Lucyna A. M. Green

Pocket, pocket.
What’s in my pocket?
It’s

2. A Something that’s round.

A marble.
Pocket, pocket.

What’s in my pocket?
It’s

A Something that’s square.

A block.
Pocket, pocket.
What’s in my pocket?

 
 

It’s
A Something that’
A feather.

Pocket, pocket.

What’s in my pocket?
It’s
A Something that’s hard.

A rock.

Pocket, pocket
What’s in my pocket?
It? °° wisely *

A Something that’slfuzzy.

(Marco: thglyorgéggly. Looksatbear

in picture. Hairy 01’ 50W?- )

ll.

13.
14.

15.

A bear.
12. Pocket, pocket
What’s in my pocket?
It’s

A e i t at’s * oe .
*(Talks to self, then rereads and corrects.)

A worm.
Pocket, pocket
What’s in my pocket?

(picture of many objects)
Key:
Wt: Marco’s responses to text.
c = correction
A = insertion
uc = attempted correction
line under text = regression

As I described in Chapter One, a group of Piagetian researchers (Y. Goodman,
1990) studied how young readers and writers invent the rules and principles of written
language. Ferreiro and Teberosky (1982) identiﬁed four stages in the literacy development
of young children in Argentina. Very young pre-school children appear to hypothesize that
writing is iconographic, with written symbols representing meaning directly. For example,
children predicted that the word “cat” (gato in Spanish) should be bigger than the word
“kitten” (gatito).

Children later realize there is a relationship between the spoken utterance and the
printed words and will attempt to match spoken words or syllables to units of texts (letters
or words). Ferreiro and Teberofsky call this the syllabic stage because Spanish speaking
children tend to focus on matching each spoken syllable to one unit of text While the
syllabic hypothesis does not seem as consistent among English speaking children, the
signiﬁcance of the “syllabic stage” is that the child has come to realize that there is a
graphophonic relationship (rather than conceptual) relationship between the oral utterance

and the written text

Marco’s correction of “It’s something that’s gooey.” to “Something that’s
gooey.” might indicate a syllabic stage. He is attempting to match the words in the oral
utterance with the number of words in the written string. Marco shows a sense of

“wordness” in the following discussion.

Frgm mbrieﬁng Intervigw
Marco: What’s in my pocket?

Debi: Okay, before you turn the page, can you point the words that you’re reading
Marco: What’s in my pocket? (Points to each word as he reads.)
Debi: Where does it say “pocket?”
(Marco points to “pocket.”)
Debi: Where does it say “my?”
(Marco points to “my.”)
Debi: Where does it say “in?”
(Marco points to “in.”)
Debi: And what does this say? (Points to “What’s”).
Marco: What’s

Marco notices differences between different text strands, and recognizes that
different looking texts represent different meanings.

Debi: And remember you told me this [illustrator] was a different name from this
person [author]?

Marco: Yeah
Debi: And how did you know they were different? You were looking at some of the
letters.

Marco: (points) Cause this ‘I’ and that ‘l’ are the same but ‘cept for that ‘u’ and that
‘a.’ But that ‘a’ is on there before that ‘u.’

At the time of this observation, I had concluded that Marco had not yet developed
an alphabetic understanding of the relationship between sounds and letters. As I looked
more closely at the data, I realized that Marco was in the process of constructing an
alphabetic principle. Ferreiro and Teborosky (1982) describe a transitional stage where

children move between the syllabic and alphabetic hypotheses.

Margg’s Day, “Silent Writing” (See Appgndix D)

Marco: How do you spell was?

Debi: What letter does it start with?

Marco: Wa:z Wa:z . Wa: s s s ‘S.’ I sound it out!

Debi: You hear an “S?” Yes there is an “S,” that’s right.

Mama’s Day, Bmk Clabs (Sge Appandix B)

Marco: How do you spell ‘and’?

Debi: aezndl. How do you spell ‘and’?

(Marco mouths the word ‘and’, and thinks for a moment )

Marco: That’s an ‘N’?” he says. He writes “n’” on his paper.

In each of these cases, Marco hears a sound that is close to the letter names “ES”
and “EN.” It is easier to hear the relationship between letters and related phonemes when
the consonant phoneme follows a vowel (was, ad) as they do when we say the letter names.
The association between “EM” and “made” (as in the earlier example) is less obvious.
Of course, “was” does not have an /s/ sound, it is pronounced /wAz/. However the /s/ and
the /z/ are a closely related —- they are the same sound except for the voicing in /z/. Marco
may also have a graphic image of the word “was” to draw on.

The above examples were taken from writing, rather than reading. Understandings

of the graphophonic system are more critical for writers than for readers. Readers have a

printed text to aide in meaning construction, and use minimal graphic cues to arrive at a

98

meaningful interpretation. Writers construct the printed text themselves, and must pay more
attention to each letter and word. The process of “invented spelling” engages young
writers in graphophonic analysis. While engaged in the writing process, writers’ theories
are constantly put to the test, creating the disequilibrium to expand or revise their theories.
Marco’s comment “I sound it out!” may reﬂect his awareness that he is beginning to

associate phonemes (sounds) with graphemes (letters).
Marco’s understandings about written language

While Marco was just beginning to use graphic cues in reading, be was not a non-
reader. In Chapter Five, I describe in detail how Marco uses a variety of resources in order
to read and write during the Book Club activity. Reading and writing involve a wide range
of understandings about story schema, experiential concepts, forms and functions of texts,
bow texts are constructed, etc. In addition to developing understandings about linguistic
principles, Marco is developing understandings about texts and genres, functions of texts,
social relationships among participants and a wide range of other aspects of the social
practices of literacy events. My conversations with Marco reveal some of the

understandings about literacy that he brings to his reading and writing experiences.

Ema] mg dgbriefmg interview aftar Mao’s Day
Text: Written by Rozanne Lanczak Williams (On front cover of book)
Debi: What do you think this says, right here? (points with eraser to text)
Marco: Uh. (Marco studies text and appears to think for several seconds)
Debi: What does this tell us about?
Marco: It tells about who wrote it
Debi: And what does this... what do you think it should say there? What does it
usually say?
(Marco looks at text and appears to be thinking.)
Debi: Do you know what this word says right here? (Text: by)
Marco: by
Debi: And what does this word say? (Text: written)
Marco: (looks at print, cranes neck, looks again) Wroted. ..
Debi: Good, written
Marco: Written by... (Whispers) written by...

While Marco is initially reluctant to read the author’s byline, he understands the
form and function of bylines within text In this example, Marco recognizes the word

“by,” again showing graphic awareness, and uses his understanding of the by-line form to

99

read “written by.” Michael Halliday (1975) describes children’s language learning as
“function driven” and believes that “function precedes form.” Marco’s understandings
of the nature and functions of print appear to be developing in advance of his ability to read

independently.

This exchange illustrates that a non-response to a question (“What do you think
this says?”) is not a good indicator of what a reader knows about text or what he can read.
On a bunch, I discover that Marco can read, “by.” With further encouragement, he reads,
“Wroted by.” My guess is that his initial hesitation was related to concern about
pronouncing the author’s name, rather than his ability to construct meaning with the text.
Marco knows about illustrators as well as authors.

Text: Illustrated by Lucyna A. M. Green

D. If this rs “written by Rosanne... ”what do you think this part says?
(Marco runs ﬁnger under text.)

This person wrote the story, and then what did this one do?
Illustrate it

Okay, so can you read this one to me?

Illustrated by (Points to text as he reads. Stops at name.)

3939

Marco also is aware of the publication process. What ’s in My Pocket (Williams,
1994b) is a repetitive riddle with no characters or plot. Perhaps for this reason, Marco’s
retelling quickly moves to a description of the text publication process. Marco’s comments

are made without prompting.

Marco retells What’s in My Pocket?

And so that’s how they make the book.

And then... so, when... when they got done with the book, they had get on the stage
and had... had took a bow.

And then they had... they had the pictures... then they had drew the pictures.
They went someplace to get the pictures like this. (Points to book.)

And then uh they had worked the rows and...

worked the pictures

and wroted who and um... who they was...

and then they had drawed this page all with pretty (Voice goes up.) colors.
And they wrote “a marble.”

.‘OFNQ‘MPP’ Pt"

Marco appears to have a good understanding of the publishing process. He

appreciates the aesthetics of “pretty colors” accompanied by related texts (lines 8-9). He

100

knows that the original artwork has to be processed (“worked the pictures”) in order to be
printed in the book (line 3-4). He invents his own language for technical descriptions;
“worked the rows” for “typeset the text” (line 5). Marco predicts that the last page,
depicting many different toys, might be hinting about a sequel.
Marco: And then at the end, on the last page right there, and then they had drawed a
picture with a lot of toys. They go’n show that in the new book.

Debi: And they what?
Marco: These are the toys that they might put in the other book. (Shows last page.)

Marco also compares this book to a similar, repetitive book It Looked Like Spilt Milk
(Shaw, 1947). Both books focus on objects appearing in relief, in one case within pockets,
in the other suggested by clouds.

Debi: Ozh. Have you every seen other books that did that?
Marco: Yeah, some of ‘em. Like Spilt Milk.

In addition to interpreting this text as a reader, Marco also reﬂects upon the
relationships between author, illustrator and text, and between author, illustrator and
audience. Marco appears to understand, with Anne Haas Dyson (1993), that writing is a
social performance. He imagines that “when they got done with the book, they had get on
the stage and had... had took a bow” (line 2, above). Marco’s discussion of What ’s in my
Pocket? might be compared with Davidson (1989) and others who study how literature is
socially, culturally, and historically situated. He has a sense that books have a background
including author, illustrator, and publication history. He talks about the relationship
between artist and audience. While Marco is a beginning reader and writer, he is not a non-
reader. It would be a mistake to evaluate Marco’s literacy development with a narrow focus

on his productive control of the graphophonic system.

This close analysis of Marco’s transactions with texts provides a window into the
sociolinguistic understandings that Marco brings to literacy experiences. Marco’s
understandings about texts illustrate to a small extent the “multiple layers of

communication that are part of our contextual worlds” (Taylor, Dorsey-Gaines, 1988). In

101

the next chapters I will describe how Marco uses these understandings as resources when
he participates in the contextual world of the second grade classroom. At the same time,

Marco’s participation in classroom literacy events enhances his literacy development.

A Proﬁle of Lauren

On this day in March, Lauren is wearing a black corduroy skirt, a white shirt with
black collar and cuffs, and white tights. Her hair is in two small ponytails high on the sides
of her head. Lauren is a talkative and outgoing girl. Lauren’s mother drives her to school
from the mid-town area, about ﬁve miles away. She is a “citywide” student, attracted by
the whole language alternative to the neighborhood school. Although the school’s whole
language philosophy is the focus of this school-of-choice, Lauren’s mother has some
ambivalence about whole language, and bought Lauren “Hooked on Phonics” when
Lauren was in ﬁrst grade. Lauren reports that her mother talked about moving her from
Susan’s classroom. Lauren ended the discussion by threatening to “act a fool” if her
mother moved her to another room.
Lauren has a good time

Lauren appears to enjoy herself in school. She often laughs and jokes with her
friends. Her interactions involve a good deal of play ﬁghting, a very common aspect of

Lauren’s relationship with her friends.

Lagrap’s Day, “Things to Do” (See Apmndix Q)

Alyssa comes over to the table and leans over to look at Lauren’s paper.
Lauren says, “Here, I’m done with it. Alyssa, I’m already done with mine.”
Alyssa picks up one of Lauren’s strips.

Lauren says, “Now you put that back.” and laughs.

Alyssa mimics, “Now you put that back.” She leans close to Lauren.
Lauren says, “Do you know what Alyssa means?”

Alyssa says, “Yes.” She pretends to slap Lauren, but does not touch her.

In some cases, this humorous play ﬁghting is used to mitigate potential conﬂicts. In

the following example, Lauren is holding Katherine’s math worksheet

102

Lauren’a Day, “Things to Do” (Sge Apmndia C)

Katherine picks up two answer squares from the table, looks at them and starts
to take her paper back from Lauren. Lauren waves her hand around as Katherine
tries to get her paper. Lauren holds Katherine back with her left hand as she reads
Katherine’s paper. She laughs. Alicia watches and laughs. Lauren gives the paper
to Katherine and Katherine sits down to work. She says, “All right, where’d the
glue go?” Lauren makes a raspberry sound and laughs. Alicia laughs.

This play ﬁghting is reminiscent of Marjorie Goodwin’s (1990) study of girls’ and
boys’ “street play” in one neighborhood in Philadelphia. While the boys’ arguments
tended to focus on one-upmanship and competition, girls’ disputes were carefully
orchestrated to maintain balance so that no one would emerge as being “better” than the
other girls are. In exchanges with girls who are not Lauren’s close friends, the play ﬁghting

continues though with a little more reserve:

Laarga’s Day, “Things to Do”

Lauren continues working on math, occasionally looking over at Katherine’s
paper. She pushes the purple crayon box towards Danielle. Danielle sits down to
work on her map, and pushes the supply box out of her way. Lauren pushes it
back. Danielle shakes her shoulders, miming “an attitude.” She smiles. This
mock argument has jostled my microphone. Lauren adjusts it so it faces her.
Lauren looks at Danielle out of the comer of her eye and smiles.

Getting along with classmates, at least certain of the second grade girls, seems to be
important to Lauren and her peers.

Lauren’s Day, Mam

Susan asks Danielle to switch seats with Bruce, who is having a difﬁcult time getting

along with his teammates. Sharonda says, “Yes!” in the background.

Danielle says, “Why they like that?”

Lauren responds, “They don’t like Bruce.” She lowers her voice and adds, “So

why we have Bruce here?” The children quietly talk about Bruce.

Danielle gathers her things together. “I’ll see you next year, Lauren.”

Lauren appears comfortable in the classroom community. She does her work, but
also takes advantage of opportunities to socialize as she works and between work activities.
The classroom structure of certain work periods appears to encourage these interactions,
because students are allowed to talk and move around the room within reason.

Lauren gets busy

Lauren appears to be a self-starter. When she enters the room, she studies the front

chalkboard where the “Things to Do list” identiﬁes morning assignments and choices.

She begins working on the two assignments: coloring in Mexico on a map of South

103

American and completing a math work sheet She gets involved in her work, and continues
working throughout PA announcements and other interruptions. She is anxious to

complete her assigned work, and reports her progress to herself and her friends.

Lauren’s Day, Math (See Appendix C)

Lauren says the numbers as she ﬁnds them and pastes them down, “twenty ﬁve,
thirty... this is it.”

“I only got /two" \more,” she says. She leans back and puts her hands on her
head.

Danielle looks over at Lauren, and Lauren repeats, “I only got /two \more. See,
look. One, two. One, two.”

Lauren continues working. “Now I got one more.”

Danielle is looking at her answer pieces, “Five, seven.”

Lauren glues the last piece down. “Got it. I got all of them right.”

Alyssa comes over to the table and leans over to look at Lauren’s paper.

Lauren says, “Here, I’m done with it. Alyssa, I’m already done with mine.”

Lauren appears comfortable with the open-ended participation structure of
classroom workshops. She completes assignments, working closely with her friends.
During “Things to Do”, she ﬁnishes the two “assigned” projects and gives herself a short
break, talking with Alyssa for a while and playing with Amber’s ponytails. Then she
chooses to “ﬁnish writing” her book, one of the choices provided on the “Things to Do”

list. Lauren’s book is one that she has been working on for several weeks.

Laarga’s Day, "Things to Do” (See Apmndix C)

Lauren plays with Amber’s ponytails, counting them as Amber works. The girls

look at the board, where Susan is giving out team points.

Lauren says, “I’m going to ﬁnish writing my (??) book.” She begins pulling

things out of the cubby in her desk until she finds a “book” made from folding
blank paper and stapling.

Throughout the day, Lauren appears to know what she is doing and moves from one
task to another without input from the teacher. She is what I call an “independent”
worker, although she certainly interacts with other children. Lauren needs little prompting
to participate in reading and writing experiences, and structures of this classroom

community give her the freedom to be a reader and writer.

 

" The slash marks are used to indicate rising (l) and falling (\) tones. Lauren’s voice goes
up high on two, and comes back down on more. Danielle repeats this pattern.

104

Lauren speaks up

When Lauren walks in the room, she asks Kelly, the future teacher, “And why
you’re behind the camera.” Later she is trying to copy “Mexico” off the board and tells
Kelly, “Move out of the way. I can’t see.” She goes up to Kelly and explains, “I can’t
hardly spell Mexico.” Lauren’s admission shows a conﬁdence in what she should and
shouldn’t be able to do on her own.

As mentioned earlier, Lauren also politely questions Susan’s instructions.

r n’ "Thin 3 Do” A n ix
Susan reminds the children to put their names on their papers, and then tells
Lauren that she can get the glue.

“Miss Austin,” Lauren calls out, “Do I have to glue it?”

Susan says, “yes.”

In this literacy event, Lauren is placed in the role of a passive “object” of the event,
rather than the active “subject”. However, her question indicates that she expects agency as
well as logic in classroom assignments. On an earlier observation in October, Lauren also
asks a question during a class discussion. (This discussion transcript was used for the
“James like Lily” pilot study described in Chapter Two.)

Susan: Okay... Lauren?
Lauren: Can I ask James a question?
Susan: James, can she ask you a question?
(Everyone looks at James. I can’t hear what he says.)
Susan: You can [ASK him]
Lauren: [How did] how. .. how did they know you liked... Jasmine?
Charles: <Cause Tiffany told everybody>‘5 (Chin propped on elbow.)
Lauren: Cause what?
Charles: Tiffany told everybody

In this exchange, Lauren adeptly requests permission from Susan to take on the role
of teacher in asking the questions. Lauren’s question turns the conversation in an important
new direction, and Susan later incorporates this information into her own understanding of
the topic of discussion.

Lauren’s “speaking up” is another example of her comfort and conﬁdence within

the classroom setting. Further, Lauren exhibits strong understandings about the parameters

 

5 [] Indicates overlapping speech.

105

fol-
fan

Da

diff

ind!

of participation in this social context. Lauren’s actions show that she has a sense of agency
in her role in classroom learning experiences. She is thinking critically about language
events as they occur and often plays a deliberate role in shaping ongoing events.

Lauren is an author

When I met Lauren in kindergarten, I asked her to write something for me. She was
the one child who wrote a book. It was called “The Wiggle of Oz.” Even as a
kindergartrrer, Lauren had an awareness of the literary elements of stories. She started her
story “once upon a time.” She borrowed literary elements from a movie she had seen and
also from two books her teacher had read to the class. As a second grader, Lauren’s writing
is more complex, as I describe in detail in Chapter Five. She has strong openings (“This
what I call a rainy day.”), plot development, dialogues, detail, and expressive wordings.

Interviews with Lauren reveal other aspects of her image as a writer. She tells me
that she writes at home, almost daily. She has a little table in her family’s “library” and
folders full of her works. She also describes thinking about her work while not writing. A
family trip in the rain, for example, inspired a story she wrote in October called, “A Rainy
Day.”

Literacy in a Community of Learners

I do not want to compare Marco and Lauren’s literacy use directly because they are
different children. However, considering how these children are similar and how they are
different reveals some of the interplay between the social community of school and the
individual child.

Both Marco and Lauren appear to feel a sense of conﬁdence and belonging in the
class. Lauren moves around the class as if it is her home. In fact, she would “act the fool”
if someone suggested she leave. She completes all of her assignments, selects from a

number of choices. She shows interest and enthusiasm in class activities. She especially

6 < > Indicates a very quiet tone of voice.

106

(a

CS

10;

'53

C01

ﬁts

all:

enjoys her friends and peers, working closely with her “teammates,” and talking and joking
through the day.

Marco takes a variety of roles in class learning experiences, but he participates in
each language event attentively. His pride in his work comes through in his meticulous
attention to details; be carefully unglues each envelope for his Book Club project and stacks
them in a neat stack to his side. He is attentive during class events, and feels successful with
his work, saying to his friend David “I did all these.”

Establishing a “community of learners” is a basic tenet of whole language teaching.
A growing group of whole language teachers have written books about their classrooms and
each stresses this foundational principle [See for example Avery, 1993 #81; Hindley, 1996
#82; Fisher, 1998 #79; Atwell, 1998 #80]. Ralph Peterson details the process of
establishing a caring Ieaming community in his book Life in a Crowded Place (Peterson,
1992). Susan has worked hard to encourage her 28 ﬁrst and second graders to work
together. She begins the year with a unit on “Peacemaking” and talks to the children about
great peacemakers. She helps children to avoid the “conﬂict escalator” by resolving
conﬂicts peaceably.

Frank Smith talks about “joining the literacy club,” and says that children join the
literacy club if they feel welcome and if they feel like the people around them, the people
they care about are members of the literacy club. Both Lauren and Marco described
themselves as readers and writers during my interviews with them throughout kindergarten,
ﬁrst and second grades. They each participate in a variety of literacy events as members of

a literate community.

107

Conclusion

In this chapter I provided an overview of Marco and Lauren’s Days of School. I
described how Susan, with the children, developed classroom structures that foster social
spaces for Ieaming. I described how social literacy practices in this classroom involve
collaboration within a community of learners. I also discussed the negative impact of
testing on the texts, genres, and practices within classroom literacy events. Marco and
Lauren were introduced, providing a portrait from my perspective as I participated in their
school days.

This chapter describes some of the perceptions of the classroom and the children I
had developed through three years of observing and recording Lauren and Marco’s literacy
experiences. In Chapter Four I will describe the social practice of literacy in the classroom,
focusing on the question: What are the social and cultural literacy events and practices in
the schooling of two second-graders? In Chapter Five I will describe Marco and Lauren’s
literacy development, particularly their roles as meaning makers, focusing on the question:
What factors and principles appear to be related to the literacy learning of these

developing readers within this classroom culture?

108

laurc'
pram

but

31135315
“’n'ltr, 1
Possibjﬁ
item 1
tlplgn'n'
Mint

is ﬁrm

Chapter Four

Literacy Events and Practices in Lauren’s and Marco’s School Days

In this chapter, I describe and discuss the literacy experiences in which Marco and
Lauren participated during the two days of observation. This chapter explores the social
practices of literacy during the events of Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day. My intention is
to explore what it means to be literate for Lauren and Marco within this classroom culture.

Underlying the discussion of Lauren’s and Marco’s literacy experiences is an
assumption that the children are learning language as they are using language. To
illustrate this connection, I begin this chapter with an example of Marco’s literacy learning
as he listens when a classmate reads a story to the class. Next I discuss how literacy events
were identiﬁed and grouped in Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day ﬁrst by text and genre, and
then by social activity. Examples and discussion of the literacy activities are grouped into
three general categories: reading and writing literature, reading and writing while engaged in
another social activity; and reading and writing school exercises. I also describe the texts
and genres within each category.

Marco and Lauren were participants in each of the literacy events catalogued for
analysis. However, they participated in these events in various social stances such as reader,
writer, listener, observer, discussant, bystander, apprentice, or “teacher.” It is not always
possible to discern how Marco and Lauren experience an event, or what they learn from the
event Language Ieaming is not usually observable in the child’s actions or talk. However,
exploring the nature of literacy events and practices provides opportunities for
understanding the potential impact they may have on Lauren and Marco as human beings,
as members of this community, and as language learners.

Introduction
At the end of Marco’s Day, I interviewed him about his experiences that day and

some of the literacy events I had observed. Marco had just read his Book Club book,

109

ll‘i.‘
Boo

into

“ha

m

What’s in my Pocket? (Williams, 1994), a book that he has read many times during the

Book Club meetings. After the reading, I asked Marco questions designed to gain insight

into his view about reading and his strategies as a reader7.

Researcher:
Marco:

Researcher:
Marco:

Researcher:

Now when you’re reading and you come to something
you don’t know:8
=1 go back:
=how do you ﬁgure it out?
(Shows book page with text: “Pocket, pocket. What’s in my
pocket?”)
I just go back from that word
and then I go, when I read that word (“Pocket pocket”)

and I don’t know that word (“What’s”)

I just skip them two words (“in” and “my”)

And I read pocket (“pocket,” end of sentence)
And then I go back to these words (points to “What’s in my”)

Then I say, pocket

At ﬁrst I just, “That ’s in my pocket ”

Then I just go back and go, Pocket, pocket. What ’s [N my pocket?
That sound much better

So that... What’s in my pocket? (Reads slowly, pointing to each
word.)

So you just keep going back and forth.

And you keep going until you ﬁnd what sounds right?

My question (When you’re reading and you come to something you don’t know,

what do you do?) is meant to elicit Marco’s description of the strategies he believes he uses

with unfamiliar text. Marco’s “I go back” strategy includes several steps:

PPNS‘

Skip over the unfamiliar text and read to the end of the sentence.

Reread the sentence, providing a placeholder for unfamiliar text.

Come up with a prediction that “sounds much better.”

Continue to re-read and read ahead until satisﬁed with text construction.

Marco appears to have a strongly formed understanding of this reading strategy; he

begins to describe it before I am ﬁnished with my question. He describes a process where

he works on unfamiliar texts without assistance, demonstrating a conﬁdence in his own

reading abilities. Marco’s response does not necessarily describe his actual reading

 

7 Questions were based on Carolyn Burke’s Reading Interview from the Reading Miscue
Inventory (Y. Goodman, Watson, Burke, 1987)
8 = Indicates slight overlapping speech.

110

pro

the

focr

W01

ahez

“ts
him
beta
low
36111;
belle
Fine
lWill
lttOr
Wadi

him

process, but his view of his own reading process. A common response to this question is

the folk strategy “sound it out,” which suggests a phonetic approach to reading.

Marco’s “I go back” strategy suggests a meaning focused view of reading. He
focuses on concept carriers, or content words. He suggests skipping over the function
words (in my) in order to get to “pocket.” In the question structure (What’s in my
pocket?), the actor/ subject (my pocket) comes at the end, so Marco’s strategy of reading

ahead makes a lot of sense.

When Marco described this reading strategy in March of his second grade year, I
was astonished. I had spent three years observing and talking with Marco, and felt I knew
him pretty well. I was not surprised that Marco would describe a meaning focused strategy
because Marco had spent three years in classrooms where “making sense” is always the
focus of reading. But this particular strategy process appeared to go beyond Marco’s
actual abilities as a reader. As I discuss in Chapter Three, at the time of the interview I
believed that Marco had not yet developed an “alphabetic principle” (Goodman, 1990,
Ferreiro & Teberosky, 1982). I attributed Marco’s ability to read What ’s in My Pocket?
(Williams, 1994) to “holistic remembering”—- using pictures and familiar language to
reconstruct a familiar text. It is now clear, after close analysis of the data, that Marco’s
reading abilities extended beyond my initial assessment after observing and talking with
him.

But Marco’s “I go back” strategy is still powerful and surprising because he not
only shows linguistic understandings of the reading process, but demonstrates
metalinguistic awareness in articulating these understandings. How is it that Marco could
describe a reading strategy that extends beyond his apparent abilities? Earlier in Marco’s
Day, during “Books to Go,” Marco is actively listening to Amber read a non-ﬁction book
called Snakes by Patricia Demuth (1993). He wriggles his body back and forth when she

mentioned that snakes “slither,” and he looks at each picture intently. When Amber needs

111

help with her reading, she turns to the “kids on the rug”, the group of children who sit

nearby the reader ready to help.

Marcg’a Day, “Bogks t9 QQ” (Sac Appandix B)

Amber reads, “In a ﬂash the rattle snake... ”

She stops and Darryl and Terrence stand up to look.

“Give her some time.” Susan says.

The listeners wait, while Amber studies the text. Amber turns towards the ﬁrst row
and says, “Alicia.” Alicia, Darryl, and Terrence all study the page with Amber.

Someone says, “Stricks,” and Amber repeats it, but then stops and says, “Miss
Austin, what’s this word?”

Susan begins to walk around the children towards Amber.

Susan: Can you go on with the sentence. Let’s listen to the rest of the sentence.

Amber. ...the mouse.

Susan: Okay, start at the beginning.

Amber In a ﬂash the rattlesnake something the mouse.

Susan: And I heard someone over here say “stricks,”

I think that’s cause it starts with s-t—r.”
Terrence: (quietly) ssss sstrike.
Susan: So what do you think would make sense?
What’s the rattlesnake going to do to the mouse?

Terrence: Strike.

Voices: STRIKE! (loud staccato, like a snake striking a mouse)

Amber continues reading, “It grabs it with its needle sharp teeth, then it... ”

When the “kids on the rug” strategy falters, Susan provides a “teachable moment
strategy lesson” (Y. Goodman, Watson, & Burke, 1996), helping Amber and her
classmates to make sense of the unfamiliar text. Susan’s suggestions are very similar to

Marco’s “I go back” strategy:

Susan’s impromptu strategy lesson:

1. Read to the end of the sentence.

2. Reread the sentence, providing a placeholder for unfamiliar text.
3. Make note of graphophonic cues.

4. Think about what would “make sense.”

Marco’s “I go back” strategy:

.Skip over the unfamiliar text and read to the end of the sentence.
Reread the sentence, providing a placeholder for unfamiliar text.
Come up with a prediction that “sound much better.”
Continue to work at the text, re-reading and reading ahead.

+ww~

Marco’s “I go back” strategy mirrors the process that Susan works through with

Amber. Marco’s “sound much better” may be another way of saying “it makes sense.”

 

9 Italics indicate a written text is being read aloud.

112

syr

tea
Me
He
he
for

CSL

(in

in

Or he could be implying that the text “sounds like English” indicating a focus on the

syntactic structure.

This anecdote is a strong example of how Marco “learns by overbearing” as a
participant in reading demonstrations. Because Susan also viewed Marco as a holistic
reader not yet focusing on graphic cues, it is highly unlikely that she would respond to
Marco’s reading with the same type of strategy lesson that she provides for Amber.
However, Marco has had many opportunities to hear his classmates read. On Marco’s Day,
he heard three books read to the class and one poem as a choral reading. On Lauren’s Day,
four books were read to the class, and two songbooks were sung in chorus. A conservative
estimate would be that Marco had heard over 300 texts read aloud in the 120 days of second

grade up to this date.

Marco has been a participant observer in countless reading and writing
demonstrations, involving many teachable moment strategy lessons. Brian Street (1995)
writes “reading and writing are located within the real social and linguistic practices that
give them meaning. (p.3)” As I observe Marco within classroom literacy practices, I
become more and more convinced of the importance of social interactions in literacy
learning. Mario is not “the reader” in the anecdote above, and yet he gains understandings

about reading and what it means to be a reader, not to mention snakes.

The “Books to Go” language event involves literacy practices that are socially
constructed by this particular community throughout the school year. Children take turns
being “the reader,” taking books home and practicing them with their family before reading
to the class. When the reader needs assistance, she turns to the “kids on the rug” -- the
group of children sitting right in front of the reader. In general, the readers are not assisted
unless they request help. Susan says, “Give her some time” when kids move to assist
Amber before she is ready. This is a reminder of an informal language policy that Susan
has established for this recurring event The term “kids on the rug” came from an

interview with Victor:

113

one I
“flint
comr
areas
quest
3 par
justif

Will 1

01 or
dtmr
are ll
they
50m;-
Close
and r

them

leam
past,
mean

an

Debi: When you’re reading and you come to something you don’t know, what do
you do?

Victor: And the kids on the rug don’t know it either?

Victor’s clariﬁcation of my question suggests a classroom community where “what
one knows we all know.” This perspective is reminiscent of Moll’s (1994) concept of
“funds of knowledge” within communities. Moll describes how members of the barrio
communities he studies share a wide range of expertise with other community members in
areas such as: auto mechanics, religion, crafts, education, etc. Such examples raise
questions about the typical ways readers are evaluated within contrived situations outside of
a particular social context. If reading and writing are social activities, it becomes difﬁcult to
justify typical assessments where children are evaluated based on individual performance. I
will return to this issue in Chapter Six.

I introduced this chapter with Marco’s “I go back” strategy to illustrate that
participating in literacy events has an impact on developing readers and writers. In a study
of oral language development, Brian Camboume (1988) found that immersion and
demonstration are essential conditions of language Ieaming. In literacy events, participants
are immersed in written texts, and engaged in making meaning with texts. At the same time,
they experience demonstrations of how readers and writers use texts within particular social
contexts. Language events that support social interactions and social literacy development
closely resemble the social language learning of the home. It is through the literacy events
and practices of Lauren’s Day and Marco’s Day that we can best understand and describe
them as readers, writers, and learners.

Identifying Literacy Events

The vignette above demonstrates the power of literacy events for Marco’s language
Ieaming. However, it’s important to acknowledge that literacy events are not inherently
positive and valuable experiences for participants. School literacy events that include
meaningless exercises with little relationship with how language works outside of school,

often have a negative impact on language and literacy Ieaming. In addition, each participant

114

in a
relc

pan
the

qua
dist
Whr
con

bet.

met

Says
Pits
6"be;
incl

hou

in a literacy event may have different experiences in terms of meaning construction,
relevance or importance, positive or negative impact, etc. Differences can depend on
participants’ interpretation of a literacy event, or on the participants’ social position within
the literacy event

In order to discuss literacy events generally before making assumptions about the
quality of the experience for the participant, I ﬁnd it useful to adopt Edelsky’s (1991)
distinction between “literacy” and “reading (or writing)” Literacy is any social event
where participants interact with written texts, while reading and writing involve meaning
construction. Identifying letters on chart in order to get a driver’s license is a literacy event,
because it involves a printed text, but it does not involve “reading” because there is no

meaning construction.

My initial lists and descriptions of the literacy events of Marco’s Day and Lauren’s
Day deliberately include all events involving a written text where the child was a participant
It is not easy to deﬁne a literacy event I debated over whether artifacts involving numerals,
such as a model of a thermometer, should be considered a “text”. After observing these
events carefully, I decided to consider any object that has letters or numerals a “printed
text”. I decided not to include events involving “tools of literacy”, such as when Lauren
says to Amber, “Let me see your pencil”. I do include events where the written text is not
present, such as Lauren using a “name book” as a reference in an argument. A literacy
event, for the purpose of this study, is any social activity that involves a written text. This
inclusive listing allows for qualitative discussions of the meaning potential of the event and

how these events impact Marco’s and Lauren’s literacy development.

Marco and Lauren sometimes participate in the event as a reader or writer, but also
may be a listener, observer, or peripheral “overhearer” of the literacy event. Because of the
complexity of literacy events, identifying the speciﬁc events of Marco’s and Lauren’s Day
is a somewhat arbitrary process. For example, “Writing Time” can be described as a

single literacy event (Lauren and her tablemates prepare and write literature texts), or it

115

C0

tn

An

1 dl
liter
thar
list:

llh

deﬁr
com

Cien

was 1
“$13 1
was r
in [>11

Shade

“Nkﬂr
“are

5half:
maigd

could be several overlapping events (Lauren writes a ﬁction story, Alicia makes a blank
book, etc.) In order to look more closely at the practices, texts and genres of these events, I
tend to separate literacy experiences into smaller, rather than larger, events.

Literacy events are contained within other events. For example, I decided to classify
Amber’s reading of Snakes (Demuth, 1993) as three events: Amber reads Snakes, “kids on
the rug” assist Amber, and Susan provides on-the-spot strategy lesson. On the other hand
I did not carefully document every single occurrence of one reader helping another as a
literacy event. Because I was interested in understanding the nature of various events rather
than counting every event, the exact numbers and percentages of each type of literacy events
listed later indicate trends and patterns and have no statistical signiﬁcance.

What is a “text”?

Because a literacy event is any social event involving a written text, I should also
deﬁne what I mean by “a text.” In order to be as inclusive as possible about what
comprises a “literacy event,” I decided to deﬁne a “written text” as any object of a social
event that contains letters or numerals. In a small number of events, such as Lauren’s use
of “name books” to support an assertion about her own name, the text was not present but
was the object of discussion. Written texts included: trade books, children’s rough drafts,
lists on the board, the classroom calendar, math worksheets, and so on. In a few cases there
was very little writing on the text. For example, the “Missing Person’s Graph” was named
in print on the top, and a row of dates along the bottom with the number of students absent
shaded in above each date.

The only case where a “written text” does not include letters or numerals is
“Marco’s Outline.” During the “What ’3 In My Pocket? Book Club” meeting, Marco
creates an outline for the group writing project consisting of two rows of geographic
shapes. These shapes represent objects (i.e. something round, something square) to be

Placed in each pocket. I include Marco’s outline as a “text” within a literacy event

116

bee

.\la
lite

ere

less
ene

dire

pra
l9l
ml

the

because Marco is practicing what writers do, using a symbolic model to plan a text. Figure
5 provides a list of texts read and written on the two target research days.
Looking for “Social Practice” in Literacy Events

After reviewing the data for Marco’s Day, I catalogued 30 literacy events where
Marco was a participant, involving 27 written texts. For Lauren’s Day, I catalogued 37
literacy events involving 29 written texts. A detailed, chronological charting of the speciﬁc
events is listed in Appendix D: Literacy Events and Practices of Marco’s Day and
Appendix E: Literacy Events and Practices of Lauren’s Day. The number of texts is a little
less arbitrary than the number of events, because I included all of the texts that the children
encountered in some literacy event, and only those texts that the children encountered
directly. There is some grouping of texts within this category; for example Lauren and
Katherine choose a stack of nine books for silent reading.

After cataloguing the events, I attempted to group or sort them in order to gain a
understanding of how Lauren and Marco experience literacy within this cultural context. I
ﬁrst grouped the events by text and genre (Figure 5). While this list yields interesting issues
for discussion, it does get at the essence of the literacy event - the underlying social
practices. For example, Marco experiences the poem “Three Toed Sloth” (Prelutsky,

1983) as a text within a handwriting lesson, a scientiﬁc discussion, a search for the long-o
vowels, and a choral reading. The nature of the text, while always remaining a poem,
changes as participants use the texts in different social events.

In my initial cataloging of literacy experiences in the classroom, I did not distinguish
between literacy events and literacy practices. Literacy practices are the more generalized
social practices involving literacy. For example, “Amber reads Snakes” is a literacy event
that occurred on Marco’s Day. This event can be related to a set of literacy practices
involving reading aloud. Literacy practices do not just include the transaction of reading,

but also include texts, genres, settings, social roles and relationships, and social activities.

117

m A;
E...

\J
21456ﬁrr_.00..hln

.214.5

J . 1
.s\c
nu . r

Figure 5: Texts and Genres
Texts and Genres of Marco’s Day:
(30 literacy events/ 27 texts)

D'tgramre - Pery/Songs:

Texts/Genre’s of Lauren’s Day
(37 literacy events/ 29 texts)

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Three Toed Sloth, Jack Prelutsky I. This Old Man, Pam Adams
2. If a Tree Could Talk, Rozanne Williams 2. Song books Sharonda reads during SR
3. Ten in the Bed, MarLRees
Litamm - Fiction:
1. A Snake Mistake, Mavis Smith 1. Lunch Boxes, Fred Erlich
2. D.W. All Wet by Marc Brown 2. Two Dog Biscuit, Beverly Cleary
3. My Best Friend’s New Baby Sister, by 3. My Best Friend’s New Baby Sister, by
Lauren Lauren
4. What’s in my Pocket, Rozanne Williams 4. How do I love you? Class book
5. What’s in my Pocket- group writing project 5. Who Sank the Boat?, Pamela Allen
6. Teddy Bear for Sale, Gail Herman
Litgrature - Non-ﬁction:
1. Autobiographies of Marco’s team mates 1. Name books
2. Digging up Dinosaurs, Aliki 2. Rudy’s autobiography
3. Jackie’s book on dinosaurs 3. The Daily News (reports by children)
4. Marco’s autobiography 4. Our Trip - Class Authored book.
5. Snakes by Patricia Demuth
‘ - nr wn
1. Blank books: Alicia, Amber, Jonathan
2. Lauren & Katherine’s stack of books
for Silent Reading
3. Lauren’s “Books to Go” bag
In me x - fo charts and li ts:
1. Attendance book (“Morning Meeting”) 1. Attendance book
2. Book club diary 2. Book club evaluation form
3. Book club folders 3. List of girls names, list of boy’s names
4. Destine’s autobiography math problem 4. Sign in sheet
.5. List of boy’s names, list of girl’s names 5. “Things to Do” list
6. List of math choices
‘7. Mario’s “outline”
8. Writing folders
I nmmental texts - Chaﬁ, mﬂgls, etc.
1 . Attendance tally 1. Attendance tally
2. Classroom calendar 2. Days of school numberline
3. Days of school numberline 3. Maps of North, South America
4- Missing person’s graph 4. Team behavior chart on chalkboard
5. Outdoor thermometer model 5. Classroom calendar
6. Outdoor thermometer model
ns ’ C er ial texts:
1. Days of school units chart 1. Days of school units chart
2. Math worksheet 2. Math texts books (consumable)

118

3. Math worksheet

lit:

wi

In Susan’s classroom, reading aloud includes a familiar set of literacy practices: a
class member reads, a large audience of listeners, times when pictures are viewed, comments
and questions, kids on the rug helping the reader, and so on. There is a participation
structure to this event in terms of where and how participants sit and how and when
participants speak and listen. Reading aloud at home involves a set of literacy practices with
sinrilarities and differences from the “Books to Go” literacy practices in the classroom.

As I struggled to understand Marco’s and Lauren’s literacy experiences, I realized I
needed to gain an understanding of the social practices of literacy and how they worked
within this classroom community. I began to think about the “social activity” that occurs
in relation to a text I categorized each event in terms of what is being done with or around
a text: reading, writing, listening, recording, reporting, discussing, etc.

Social activities within literacy events are not the same as literacy practices, because
the practice includes the social and physical context, the reader or writer, the texts and
genres, and the roles and relationships of the participants. However, grouping literacy
events by activity allows me to consider the nature of literacy practices in the classroom.
For example, the literacy event “Amber reads Snakes” is associated with the activity of
“reading aloud”. By identifying and grouping other literacy events with the activity of

“reading aloud”, I am able to describe the literacy practices in this classroom associated
with “reading aloud”.
Literacy Activities within Literacy Events

The chart “Literacy Activities” (Table 4) provides an overview of the patterns of
literacy activities during the 69 literacy events on Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day
combined. This list of literacy activities was constructed by ﬁrst identifying a “major
activity” of each literacy event such as: read a book or poem, write a creative text, discuss a
ten, record or report information, plan or organize activities or behavior, and do a worksheet
01' exercise. Then I grouped the literacy events by activities. A few events (six) are

included in two places but, for the most part, each event involves a single major activity.

119

Table 4: Literacy Activities within Literacy Events Catalogued

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Literacy Activity: Occurrences:
Events involving Reading or Writing Literature 42/69 events
Rading (listen to) a book or mam: (18 /69 events) ﬂ
0 Reading to class / listen to book read aloud 7
° Choral reading 4
0 Reading to “a friend” / listening to “a friend” read 3
° Reading to self 3
° Reading book excerpts as reference or model for writing 2 *
Writg a “grgative” tan/observe classmata writing; (6 / 69 events) 2%
0 Writing a “book” 5*
0 Writing a group project 1
Wm to reaai or write literature: (5/ 69 events) 7_%
' Selecting reading materials, writing materials 3 *
Making a blank book 2
' Outlining a written work 1
flfalking about text“ (13/69 events) 19%
° Discussing unfamiliar text/ assist a reader 4*
° Discussing “how a text works” 4
° Discussing information, using text as reference 3 *
' Discussing text as an author 3
' Discussing a “mistake: 1
Reading and Writing in Pursuit of other Social Activity
Recording or rep_orting information (17/69 events) 25 %
° Reporting information - using visual aides. 7
' Using tally, chart or graph to compile information 4
° Using list, charts, or forms to keep classroom records 3
' Reporting (read) News 1
° Reporting (write) progress on class activity 1
° Requesting/ gathering texts for display 1
Elapjpg, organizing or regulating activities and behavior (M 69 events) 11%
0 Reading or writing to label, sort, identify, locate 5
° Organizing or planning classroom activity w/ list 2
° Recordin and re ulatin behavior 1
Doing a School “Exercr'seﬁ (87 69 events) We
0 Writing (or pasting) “answers” on math worksheet 3
' Participating in a guided lesson on doing a math sheet 3
' Circling, labeling or coloring targeted responses 2

* Six events were included in more than one category, so the total of all percentages is
108%. Items with an * include one or more literacy events that were tallied in two
activities.

+ Texts are discussed w/in many events, however in these cases the primary “activity” of
the event is to discuss the text rather than read or write.

120

liter
llSte
“tea
SUrp
integ
Ste 1
Seho
tipe
Panic

After identifying a list of activities, similar activities were grouped together, arriving at
seven general categories. These general categories can be grouped under four headings:
1. Reading and writing literature texts (ﬁction, non-ﬁction, poetry or song)
0 Reading (or listen to) a book or poem

' Writing (or observe the writing of) a creative text
° Preparing to read or write a literature text

2. Talking about texts

3. Reading or writing in pursuit of other social activities
' Record or report information,
° Plan, organize or regulate activities and behavior

4. Doing school exercises

The sheer number of literacy activities that Marco and Lauren experience is striking.
On just two days of school, Marco and Lauren participate in 29 literacy events involving
literature texts (ﬁction, non-ﬁction or poetry). These literacy events include reading, writing,
listening, observing other writers, and preparing to read and write. Literacy events involving
“reading and writing literature” comprise 42 percent of the events catalogued. This is not
surprising because literature is a foundation of a Whole Language classroom, and is
integrated into thematic studies as well as the Language Arts Curriculum. I was surprised to
see that Lauren and Marco encountered 18 different literature texts in just two days of
school, when reading and writing are combined. Marco participates in reading or writing
experiences related to 12 different literature texts on his day of school, while Lauren
participates in activities related to 13 different texts during the day I observed her.

But, the events that I listed as “Talking about Texts” for this analysis are those
where the major activity of the event is talk focused on a text For example, Susan
recommends the book A Snake Mistake to the class after Amber reads a book about snakes.
In this case, the actual text is not present The category “talking about texts” is somewhat
misleading because talking occurs in almost every literacy event This is particularly true
With young children, who tend to read aloud and verbalize as they write even when they are

WOrking alone. During the Silent Reading on Lauren’s Day, I observed Sharonda having

121

dialogues with herself about the pictures. In chapter four I describe some of these examples
in terms of meaning construction.

There are 25 different literacy events (36 percent of all events) where reading and
writing are the vehicle or instrument for other activities such as reporting information,
planning a work session, or calling on children to go to the bathroom. After many studies
of home literacy with my own students, I am aware that the majority of encounters with
literacy in our highly literate days involve reading labels and signs or writing notes or lists.
However, it is interesting to see this pattern repeated in a classroom, because classrooms do
not often reﬂect the literacy experiences of children outside of school.

The percentage of literacy events where reading and writing are involved in other
activities (36%) is almost the same as the percentage of literacy events involving literature
texts (42%). However, this number is a bit misleading because of the time factors involved.
Reading a book generally involves more time (at least ﬁve rrrinutes during my observations)
than ﬁnding your writing folder, or taking attendance. Amber’s reading of the book Snakes
(Demuth, 1993) on Marco’s Day involved thirty minutes, broken into two ﬁfteen rrrinute
sessions.

Most of the activities I identiﬁed during Marco’s and Lauren’s school days involve
reading or writing literature or using reading and writing instrumentally in pursuit of other
Social activities. Only 8 literacy events (12%) involve purely instructional exercises.
Edelsky (1991) uses the term “exercise” to identify school practices where the main
Purpose of the literacy event is for language instruction or evaluation. Most of the activities

in the category are actually math exercises rather than language exercises. These include
three math sheets that are the focus of instruction followed by independent work, thus listed
twice_ There is only one such instructional event involving language arts. All of these
literacy activities were introduced in preparation for a standardized testing period which

Occurred the third week of March. These eight events were the only events that stood out as

122

’7

obvious examples of “doing school.” Whether an event is an exercise is somewhat more
complex, as I will explore in Chapter Five.

In the next sections I discuss each of the four major categories of literacy activities
described above providing examples and considering the implications for understanding
literacy and literacy learning in Marco’s and Lauren’s classroom.

Reading and Writing Literature

In Marco’s and Lauren’s Classroom, children love to read and write. When I asked
Lauren what she liked about second grade she said, “I love Miss Austin’s books.” Kids
ask all morning when writing will start, and groan when the timer announces that writing is
over. One picture that always sticks in my mind is choral reading of “This Old Man”
(Adams, 1974).

r ’ D Transition to “Momin Meetin ” A n ix

Susan says, “Daily helpers, you can read if you want.” As the class begins clean
up, Brent and Destine pick out a songbook from the large basket under the table.
Danny comes over and suggests a different book. They exchange the books and
take out This Old Man. (Adams, 1974) Terrence joins them, and the four children
stand in front of the rug that marks the gathering area. The four song leaders
huddle together, holding the large book facing the gathering “audience,” and
reading the book upside down or sideways as they begin singing.

Children hurry over and sit down to join with the song leaders. The four
“readers” smile at each other as everyone enjoys the song. Together they lead the
reading of this book, singing the words with wide smiles on their faces, looking at
each other to share the enjoyment as the rest of the class gathers for “Morning
Meeting”.

In Creating Classrooms for Authors and lnquirers (Short, Harste, & Burke, 1996)
the authors discuss the potential of “invitations to learning” where the teacher, as an
experienced learner, offers possible Ieaming experiences without imposing experiences on

Young authors and inquirers. In this vignette, Susan offers an invitation to read which the
daily helpers, who will lead the “Morning Meeting”, eagerly accept Children have
allthority over the learning experience. They are able to negotiate the content of the literacy
event, and lead their classmates in the song reading.

This brief event illustrates that “reading literature” is both curricular content and

social practice. Through invitations such as this, children become familiar with literature

123

texts, in this case the lyrics and artwork of a large group of illustrated songbooks. At the
same time, the songbook reading draws the participants together in a joyful celebration of
the community created through written language.

Within the general category of activities involving reading and writing literature there
are the following sub-categories: Reading (or listening to) a book or poem, writing a creative
text (or observing a classmate writing), and preparing to read and write literature.

Reading (or listening to) literature:

Literacy events involving reading of literature (ﬁction, non-ﬁction, poetry or songs)
include ﬁve different reading activities: reading to the class, reading to a “friend,” reading
to yourself, choral reading, and reading excerpts as a reference or model for writing (See
Table 4). All of these events involved oral reading because the second graders tended to
read aloud while reading to themselves as well as while reading to others. However, some
readings were rehearsed performances, while others were more like “rough drafts.”

mamas:

Reading to the class was the most common “literacy activity” involving literature on
Marco’s and Lauren’s days. Seven illustrated books were read to the class, three on
Marco’s Day and four on Lauren’s Day. Reading to the class varied from ﬁve to thirty
minutes per text Reading aloud introduces listeners to a wide variety of texts and genres.
On Marco’s Day, for example, listeners hear a ﬁction story (D. W. All Wet), an illustrated
poem (If a Tree Could Talk), and a non-ﬁction book (Snakes). On Lauren’s Day, they
hear three ﬁction stories, including a mystery (Who Sank the Boat? ), a fantasy (Teddy Bear
for Sale), and a realistic ﬁction story (Two Dog Biscuits). In some cases, the books are new
to the children, and in other cases the books are so familiar that children are mouthing the

words along with the reader.

Magda Day, “89ka to ﬁg” 2 (See Apmndix B)

Susan says, “This is my favorite page.”

When Destine is ﬁnished reading, Susan talks about how much “we like this
book,” even though they’ve heard it over and over. “That’s why it’s a good book,
cause you want to hear it again.”

124

ere
eat!

and

read

that '

All of the books read to the class are picture books, and the illustrations are an

important aspect of the literacy event

Margo’s Day, “Books to Go” (Appgndix B)

Amber reads, “It can be as long as a school bus. And weigh as much as two

grown men. ”

Darryl says, “Jeesh.”

Marco says, “Let me see the picture.”

Other kids call out, “000. Show the picture.”

Viewing the illustrations provided a time for informal reactions to the texts, generally
exclamations, gestures, or brief comments. There is no formal discussion time following
each book, but quite a few informal responses and dialogues occur as the text is being read
and during intervals before and after readings.

’ D “B ks to Go” A ndix

Danny reads, “Was it the pig as fat as butter?, ” and Lauren looks up and

smiles.

Willie says, “Miss Austin, I know who sank the boat.”

Susan says, “Don’t tell.”

Someone says, “Miss Austin, on one page is a page with color. On the other

page is a page without.”

Reading to the class is a social performance. On these two days, most of the
readings occurred during “Books to Go”. In this classroom program, children take turns
carrying book bags with two books: one for a family member to read to the child and one
that the child rehearses for reading to the class. In addition to providing children with
experiences with a wide range of literature, the “Books to Go” experience provides
opportunities for children to see demonstrations of their classmates’ reading. Most of the
readings are ﬂuid and expressive, with children taking on roles of characters in dialogue,
and highlighting humor and irony. But the audience is patient and attentive, even if readers
read slowly and have obvious rrriscues. In this classroom community, miscues are a part of

the reading and Ieaming process. On Lauren’s Day, Sharonda reads Teddy Bear for Sale

(Herman, 1996) in a hesitant manner. Susan stands nearby for support.

125

Cl

pr

THE
joi
[he
Chg

0n

Hp

it
1*

Lagr a’s Day, “Books to Go” (Sea Apmndix Q)

Sharonda smiles at Susan as she reads. Lauren looks at her bracelet in her lap,

and up at the pictures. She mouths words at Katherine. Sharonda asks for a word.
Susan has her read to the end of the sentence and then reread.

Susan says, “Now what would make sense?”

Sharonda ﬁlls in a meaningful word.

When Sharonda ﬁnishes reading, children applaud. Susan compliments

Sharonda saying this was a difﬁcult book for her. “Sharonda is growing,” Susan
says. Lauren smiles.

“Remember what Goofy says?” Susan asks.

The children chant, “Keep on growing, keep on Ieaming.”

Reading to the class is also a celebration of literacy Ieaming. Unlike the practice of
“round robin reading” this oral reading experience is orchestrated so that readers are
successful. Children have time to rehearse their books at home. Miscues are never
corrected by the audience unless the reader asks for assistance. When each reading ends,
the children applaud enthusiastically.

Wu:

Choral reading involves a group reading of a text. Choral reading is a common
activity in this classroom, occurring once on Marco’s Day and three times on Lauren’s
Day. Half of the four choral readings I observed on these days are actually choral singings,
as described in the earlier. The children’s familiarity with choral reading is illustrated on
Lauren’s Day, when the “Lunch Boxes Book Club” selects a choral reading as a way to
present their book to the class. The group sits on six chairs in front of the class, with
Lauren and Alyssa in the middle. When they are ready to start, Lauren looks around to
make sure that she has eye contact with group members. She begins reading and the others
join with her. The rhythm of the couplets helps them to stay together but, for the most part,
the lines are clear as the six voices speak in unison. As a teacher who has lead many a
choral reading, I know this is no small feat for a group of ﬁrst and second graders working
on their own.

Choral readings allow children to experience the prosodics of the text as they

explore the text rhythms and emotions. Texts are often read again and again, providing

repeated opportunities for meaning construction. Choral reading supports beginning

126

readers because they can participate to the extent that they are able. On Marco’s Day,
Susan leads a choral reading of Three Toed Sloth, a poem the children have copied for
handwriting. Marco reads the title and the ﬁrst line and then listens as his classmates
continue reading. Susan introduces the Book Club presentations on Lauren’s Day by
explaining that children do not need to be concerned if they have chosen a challenging book
club, because they will be “reading together” during the presentations.

Raading tg/with “a frignd”

In these literacy events, a reader reads a literature text to a small, selected audience.

The reader always initiates these events on the days I observed.

Laurgn’s Day, “Things to Do” (See Apmndix C)
Lauren looks in her desk and pulls out a book she is writing My best friend ’s

little baby sister. It is made of blank paper folded and stapled on the side. Lauren
looks through her book, and then says to Amber, “Let me read this book to you.”

Lauren begins reading to Amber, and also to me because I am sitting nearby.

She holds the book “teacher style,” showing the picture as she reads. Amber leans
over to watch and listen as Lauren reads.

Marco does not participate in any “reading to a friend” activities on these particular
days. During the debrieﬁng interview, he described Ieaming to read the book What ’3 in my
Pocket ? by reading with his group members at an earlier book club meeting. I describe this
event in the discussion of “Literature Reading and Writing” later.

a in t ourself

The three activities involving reading literature to “yourself” all occur during the
“ﬁfteen minutes” of “Silent Reading” provided on Lauren’s Day. Although many
children were reading during this time, I focused on the three overlapping literacy events
where Lauren was a participant: Lauren reads a book, Katherine reads a book, and Sharonda
reads ﬁve songbooks. During this time, Lauren read most of the book Dragon ’s Fat Cat
(Pilkey, 1992). Her oral rendition of this text is discussed in Chapter Five.

“Silent Reading” did not occur on Marco’s Day, and Marco did not read an entire

literature text, except during the debrieﬁng interview. During the “Silent Reading” on

Lauren’s Day, children were given an option to read or write during this event, and Marco

127

elected to write. Susan opened up the language event by saying that they hadn’t had silent
reading in a while, perhaps because class members were engaged in “Book Clubs” during
the two days that I observed.

Rgagjng mgk axcerpts as reference 0; modal for writing

On Marco’s Day, there were two literacy events where book excerpts were read as a
reference or model for writing. During “Silent Writing”, Jackie came to talk to me about
the book about dinosaurs she was writing. Jackie brought over Aliki’s Digging up
Dinosaurs and ﬂipped from page to page, reading brief excerpts as she talked about her
own book and how she was using information from Aliki’s book. Marco listened to
Jackie’s talk as he worked, and sometimes leaned over to see the book.

Later that day, Marco and David were working on a book club project, creating their
own version of What’s in my Pocket? based on the book by Williams.

’ B Clu s e A n i B
Marco opens one envelope and places it on the table. He opens the book and
reads, “Pocket, pocket. What’s in my pocket? It’s something round.” He looks
over the next few pages, and then turns back to the ﬁrst page.

Marco reads excerpts from the book aloud as he uses the book as a reference for
planning, content, and spelling of the group book.
Writing a literature book

During these two days of observation, all of the documented literacy events
involving writing ﬁction, non-ﬁction or poetry were examples of the activity “writing a
book.” The activity “writing a literature book” started with a blank book, usually made by
folding and stapling plain sheets of 8x115 paper. Children wrote and illustrated rough
drafts of ﬁction stories or informational texts.

On Marco’s Day, the class was working on autobiographies. At the beginning of
the writing time, Susan calls Marco over and bands him the autobiography book and talks
with him about the project. Marco spends his time illustrating the cover of his

autobiography. At the end of the “Silent Writing” time, he is ready to begin writing:

128

lit

11,.

bl;

do.

’ D “ianriti ”A nixB

Marco says, “I’m bout to write my page GOOD.”

He looks at Debi, “You want to know my title?”

I ask why Marco hasn’t started yet. He says, “I’ve just been thinking.

“What have you been thinking about?”

“I’ve been thinking I’m gonna write, I was four years old... When I was four I

had went... I mean six.”

“I know where you went,” Jackie says “It starts with an ‘M’... Oh, Major Magic.”
Jackie reminds Marco about Major Magic, a pizza fun house. I ask Marco if he and
Jackie know each other outside of school. He agrees, saying they know each other
in school too.

Marco’s oral composition (“1 was four years old... When I was four years old”)
includes a revision from a direct statement to an indirect clause, shifting to the more
complex sentence structure of literature texts. Marco also demonstrates his understanding
that books have “titles,” and qualities (I’m ‘bout to write my page good.)

When not working on class projects, children worked on writing projects of their
own choice. Jackie was working on a “dinosaur book.” Her “book” involved many
sheets of notes, drawings, and original writings. Lauren was writing the ﬁction story My
Best Friend’s Little Baby Sister. Lauren’s stories generally focused on family and friends
and were written in ﬁrst person. This led me to think they were personal memoirs, until I
asked Lauren, in ﬁrst grade, about her sister and she replied, “I don’t have a sister. That’s
ﬁction.”

Preparing to read or write literature

Preparation activities are often overlooked as “reading and writing activities” in a
theoretical framework where reading and writing are deﬁned as a set of “decoding skills.”
However, if reading and writing are viewed as creative social processes, selecting and
planning written texts become critical “skills” for literacy. Preparation is an aspect of most
literacy events where children are reading and writing literature. Six of the literacy events on
these two days involve preparing to read and write literature texts.

Activities involving preparing to read and write include selecting materials, making a

blank book and “rehearsals” for a written text (i.e. drawing, talking or outlining). While I

document six literacy events where participants are “preparing to read and write,”

129

preparation is an on-going element of many literacy events, particularly literature writing.
During “Silent Writing”, “Things to Do”, “Book Clubs”, and other open work times,
children frequently left the tables to get supplies and materials.

Susan encourages and supports the “selecting and preparing process” through the
class schedule, the room arrangement, and procedures for work times. Materials and
supplies in the classroom are organized so children have easy access to them. Books are
displayed in the library comer and in several carts and baskets so children can ﬁnd their
favorites easily. A caddie on each table has crayons, pencils, scissors and glue. Additional
writing materials are organized in the writing center including a variety of kinds of paper, art
materials and writing and illustration implements. During workshop times, children are free
to get up to get materials or check references.

Sglggting matgg'als for reading

On Lauren’s Day, Silent Reading (and Writing) begins with ten minutes to select
materials and get settled. When Lauren’s team is called, she and Katherine go to the book
comer and choose nine books. They take these materials and sit down on the ﬂoor near the
door. They each select a book to begin reading, and the other seven books were arrayed
between them. Sharonda selects four songbooks from the basket under the calendar table,
and sits down nearby. While the girls are reading, James comes over and asks Katherine
for a particular book he wants. Lauren tells him to ask Sharonda and James goes over and
got the book.

These book selection activities suggest several elements of book selection in this
setting. Children are familiar with a number of titles and types of books available in the
classroom. Children know how to choose enough books to have some selection that will
last for the entire time. Children also know which books they like, which books they will be

able to read, and where books are found in the classroom.

130

At the beginning of “Silent Writing” children either locate a writing project they
have been working on or select and prepare materials for writing. Materials include lined or
unlined paper, blank books, or other arts and crafts materials. Staplers, scissors, glue, tape,
and staple removers are all available to the children. Susan allows for a fairly long
transitional time before “Silent Writing”, silent reading, and other project type activities.
On Marco’s Day, there is a nine-minute transition between the end of math time and the
moment when Susan sets the timer to announce the beginning of “Silent Writing”. During
this time, children ﬁnish up their math activities, clean up their materials, prepare for writing,
and then begin writing. Because the materials are available to the children and do not need
to be distributed, children do not have to wait for classmates but can move from one activity
to the next at their own pace.

Mam

On Lauren’s Day, while Lauren is working on an on-going story, Amber and Alicia
are working on blank books. Amber makes herself a book that involves folding paper in
half and stapling it along the side. She has problems with the stapler and starts over several
times before she has a book she is happy with. She starts writing near the end of the
writing period and completes almost a full page of writing before it is time for lunch. Alicia
takes sheets from a pad of scrap paper, counts them carefully, stacks them and staples them
along the side. This takes most of the class time.

Amber and Alicia work together, helping each other and talking about their plans as
they work. When Alicia’s book is ﬁnally ready, Amber begins decorating the cover with
ﬂowers. Amber continues on the ﬂower arrangement during the “silent reading (or
writing)” time after lunch. Amber is a greatly admired illustrator and creates a beautiful
blank book for Alicia. This lengthy preparation time is quite time consuming, although the
girls may then spend many days writing a text in their blank books. Making and decorating

131

I."

blank books is a part of the creative process, a time for thinking, planning and rehearsing
ideas for the text to come.

Dpdining a written text

During the “What 's in My Pocket? Book Club” meeting, Marco comes over with a
stack of envelopes and begins pulling them apart. He explains to me that these are going to

be the pockets for a book his group would write, modeled after the “Book Club” book.
Mama’s Day, “Books to Go” (See Appendix B)

Marco takes another piece of paper and draws a line. He draws a triangle,

square, circle, and diamond on the line. As he draws, he looks up on the wall, where
the square hangs marking their table, as a reference.

Marco says, “Okay, them the ones we going to put in.”

David goes over to the supply table. He returns with some glue. Meanwhile,

Marco draws a second line and adds two more shapes.

Marco says, “These the ones we’re going to draw in there.” He points to the

envelopes.

Marco had invented an outline. He uses his outline as a reference for planning the
book. On all of the days I observed in Susan’s room, I did not observe any literacy events
involving outlining. However, there were other events where “temporary texts” were used
for planning, such as the list of "Things to Do” that “outlines” the choices for that
workshop time, or the “List of Math Choices” that Susan uses on Marco’s Day to outline
choices for math. This literacy event is described in more detail in Chapter Five.
Discussion of “reading and writing a literature text”

Literacy activities involving reading or writing literature engage Lauren and Marco in
meaning construction processes as listeners/observers as well as readers/writers.

While Susan’s schedule demands that children read, write and listen, children are able to
select books to be read and topics and projects for writing. Even “assignments,” such as
the autobiography project, allow authors a good deal of autonomy as they work.

Student involvement makes it more likely that reading and writing experiences are
relevant and interesting to Marco and Susan. Within these literacy events, children read and

Write literature for many of the same reasons people read and write literature outside of

SChool: enjoyment, discovery, information and human connections. They also have

132

opportunities to learn what it means to be a reader and writer, within the social community
of readers and writers in the classroom.

The social community plays a role in both Lauren’s and Marco’s book writing. As
Marco and David worked on their autobiographies “silently,” they sat slightly facing each
other. Marco would often show David his writing, or lean over to see what David was
doing. At times, Marco would point to David’s picture and laugh. Marco’s decision to
start writing is prompted by David:

Mama’s Day, “Silant Writing” (Appendix B)

David shows Marco his work, and Marco listens while David reads the page. I ask
David, “With this page you’re going to be one?”

Marco says, “I’m bout to write my page GOOD.”

Amber and Lauren work side by side. Lauren reads her books to Amber, and
Amber helps illustrate Lauren’s texts. The social sharing and awareness of the writing of
friends and classmates appears to thrive even when writing is “silent.” This may be
because writing occurs at other times throughout the day, and children have times to share
their writing outside of the “Silent Writing” period. However, Marco’s oral composing

through a dialogue with Jackie and me seems to help him in the process of writing his own

text

Magcg’s Day, “Silent Writing” (Apmndix B)

I ask why Marco hasn’t started yet. He says, “I’ve just been thinking.

“What have you been thinking about?”

“I’ve been thinking I’m gonna write, I was four years old... When I was four I had
went. I mean six.”

“I know where you went,” Jackie says “It starts with an ‘M’... Oh, Major Magic.”
Jackie reminds Marco about Major Magic, a pizza fun house.

The structure of “Silent Writing” works well for Lauren, who works intently on her
story for the full twenty nrinutes. Marco also works diligently on his illustrations.
However, the beneﬁt Marco gets from dialogue during this time makes me question the
policy of “silence” while writing. On the other hand, Susan instituted this policy based on
earlier experiences where some children chose NOT to write or illustrate texts during the

writing time. The choice NOT to write had a somersaulting effect as alternative choices

133

disrupted other children’s writing as well. “Silent Writing” is recommended in Bobbi

Fisher’s (1998) Joyful Learning and Susan found it helped children to focus on writing.
Examining Marco’s and Lauren’s activities during these literacy events, further

reveals how the structures of literacy events support reading and writing development.

Figure 6 lists Lauren’s and Marco’s activities during the literacy events involving Reading

or Writing literature.
Figure 6
Marco’s and Lauren’s Activities Related to Reading and Writing Literature
What Marco does an Maggo’a Day. What Lauren does op Lauren’s Day.
Ofﬁcial class activities: Ofﬁcial class activities:
' listens to books read aloud ° listens to books read aloud
° listens to choral reading ° Choral reading/ book club presentation
' illustrates autobiography ' illustrates ﬁction book
° starts to write autobiography page ' writes three pages of ﬁction book
0 makes symbolic outline for writing ' selects books to read
' reads book excerpts while writing 0 reads book to self during silent reading
Unofﬁcial activities Unofﬁcial activities
0 listens to Jackie talk about her writing 0 reads her own book to Amber
and reading ° assists Sharonda, Kristine with

unfamiliar texts

The “ofﬁcial” activities are those that Lauren and Marco do as part of an organized
class Ieaming experience. The “unofﬁcial” activities are those that Lauren or Marco
initiates. When I constructed this list, I thought it would show that Lauren takes more
initiative than Marco in terms of reading and writing. However, I discovered that both
children are equally engaged in literacy experiences, both ofﬁcial and unofﬁcial. One
distinction is that Lauren takes on a “teacher” role in assisting other readers, while Marco
takes on an apprentice role in listening to Jackie’s conversations. Marco frequently came
over to listen in when Jackie was talking to me, and Jackie always had interesting things to
say.

Another difference between Marco and Lauren, at least on these particular days, is
that Lauren does more actual reading and writing than Marco does. This discrepancy
makes sense because Lauren is able to read and write a variety of texts independently, while

Marco tends to need the support of other meaning making systems such as listening,

134

illustration, or dialogue. Also, on the two days that I observed, activities involving literature
reading were weighted towards whole class and/or listening experiences: read to class (7),
choral reading (4), read to a friend (3), read to self (3), read book excerpts (2).

During the Book Club meeting that I observed, Marco re-read excerpts of the book
as he wrote his own contributions to the group project. While Lauren did more reading
than Marco, she was reluctant to stop reading when the silent reading time ended. She also
created reading experiences by offering to read her own book to others.

Lauren and Marco experienced rich and varied social relationships with literature on
the days I observed. I believe the listening, choral reading, and illustration experiences are
important ones, and especially for Marco because he is able to organize ideas symbolically
through these sign systems. However, both Marco and Lauren might do aven mom reading
and writing if there were more opportunities for reading and writing independently, with a
friend, or in small groups. I also believe that both children, but Marco in particular, would
especially beneﬁt from more opportunities for dialogue while reading and writing.
Literacy Events Where Talking about Texts is the Major Activity

n’s D “Thin s ” ee A ndi

Alyssa picks up one of Lauren’s answer strips.

Lauren says, “Now you put that back.” and laughs.

Alyssa mimics, “Now you put that back.”

Alyssa leans close to Lauren.

Lauren says, “Do you know what Alyssa means?”

Alyssa says, “Yes.” She pretends to slap Lauren, but does not touch her.

Lauren says, “My mama got a name book. What does it mezL?”

Alyssa says, “I don’t know what it means. I know what Lauren means.”

Lauren, “What?”

Alyssa, “It means soft and gentle and meddlesome and (?blavely.)”

“No, it doesn’t.” Lauren tells what her name means.
Alyssa repeats Lauren’s deﬁnition and laughs.

Lauren says, “Yeah. I got a name mk. So you’re a liar.” She smiles at
Alyssa.

Alyssa leans backward. She leans forward again. “ y aunt has a name book
and she told my mama what Lauren means. But then I forgot”
This exchange illustrates the playful back and forth teasing that is a common feature
of Lauren’s interactions with her friends. Here Lauren appeals to the “name book” as an

ultimate authority, proving that Alyssa is “a liar.” As mentioned earlier, “talking about

135

texts” is a rather fuzzy category because almost every literacy event involved talking in
relationship to text The events that are included in “reporting using a text as a visual aide”
(such as the classroom calendar) certainly involve talking about a text. However, this tally is
limited to events where the focus of the activity is to discuss a text.

In some cases, such as in the “baby book” vignette, the text was not present during
the discussion. In other cases, the activity involves talking about some feature of a text such
as content, unfamiliar language, the form or interpretation of a text, or the process of reading
and writing.

Disgass “unfamiliar languaga” in a taxt

This was the most common type of event involving discussing a text The activities I
observed include: children asking for assistance while reading to the class, or children

asking neighbors for assistance.

Lagran’s Day, Silent Reading (See Appendix D)

Sharonda asks Lauren, “Does this say (??)”

Lauren goes over to look. She says something to Sharonda. She is sitting down
when Sharonda calls again. “When... is this ‘when’?” Katherine returns and both
girls go over to look at Sharonda’s book.

When Susan was asked to assist with unfamiliar language in a text, the request often
lead to a strategy lesson, such as the “teachable moment” when Susan walked Amber
through a strategy during the reading of Snakes. In one other case, Susan interrupted
Danny’s book reading to ask if children understood the word “din.” These events are very
common, and I did not tally all the occurrences because they usually occur during another
reading or writing event

ti n sin a tex f re

The “baby book” exchange above is one example of using a text as a reference.
This occurs two other times. Susan interprets lines from the poem “Three Toed Sloth”
(Prelutsky, 1983) in a scientiﬁc discussion of the animals. Jackie uses the book Digging

Up Dinosaurs (Aliki) to talk to me about the dinosaur book she is writing.

136

 

Margo’s Day, “Silent Writing” (Appgndix B)

Jackie shows a picture of dinosaur teeth. Marco gasps. She talks about the
biggest dinosaur teeth, “They have sharp teeth.”
“Rats have sharp teeth,” Marco comments.
Jackie shows me pictures and talks about the information in the book. Marco
and David listen. Marco leans across the table to study the book illustrations.
Use of texts as a reference is often associated with research or scholarly work.
It is an unusual activity for ﬁrst and second grade children. These examples show the
reﬂection and thought that occurs when children are engaged in reading and writing
experiences with a wide range of texts. In addition, these children have experienced the
discourse of research through earlier literacy events.
Discuss text as an author
Children sometimes talked about their texts as the author. An adult often initiated
this discussion. However, I did observe spontaneous conversations from authors, as this
case where Rudy tells Terrence about his autobiography.
r n’s Da Math See A n ix
Rudy and Terrence stand behind Lauren. Rudy says, “Terrence, I ﬁnished my
autobiography. It was funny, you can ask Miss Austin. It was funny, wasn’t it
Lauren?” Rudy recites segments of his autobiography for Terrence.
In this brief vignette, Rudy shows his pride in completing his autobiography and
being able to write with humor.
Discuss how texts work
There were three literacy events where the activity focused on talking about how

texts work. In this example, Susan has just introduced the “day’s temperature” into the

“Morning Meeting” weather report, and children aren’t sure how to interpret this new text.

15mm Margo’s Day, “Morning Meeting” (See Appendix B)

Alyssa holds up a large cardboard model of a thermometer, with the temperature
marked by moving a piece of elastic. Alyssa says, “Today was 16 degrees.”

Susan tells Alyssa and James to ﬁx the line, “It looks like it’s on the ten.”
Several children ask questions about how to interpret the temperature. Susan points
out that each line is two degrees. She takes the thermometer model and shows it to a
group at the back of the rug, explaining that only the tens are written down, and then
you have to count by twos.

Another example involves my ﬁeld notes. Alicia wanted to know what I was writing

about, and what my notes were for. My ﬁeld notes had been a common interest throughout

137

my three years of observing the children. When they were in ﬁrst grade, some of the
children tried writing ﬁeld notes themselves. Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) describe a
similar experience when they observed “Shaunda’s Day of School” in Growing Up
Literate.

Discuss reading, writing process

Discussions of language and thought processes are a frequent occurrence, though
usually embedded in other discussions, as for example the discussion of texts as an
“author.” In one case, Darryl raises his hand and asks about a mistake that the Daily

Helpers have made in writing today’s number on the Days of School number line:

Margo’s Day, “Morning Meeting” (See Appandix B)
Darryl: Miss Austin, they put twelve zero zero. (On the “days of school” number

line.)
Susan: You know what, James got confused. He thought nineteen and thought 20,
and got excited and put two “O”s=

Terrence: =Twelve=

Susan =and made two hundred:
Terrence: =twelve hundred
Susan: So I just Xed out one of the zeros. It’s one hundred and twenty.

(Jackie stands up, raising her hand, then sits back down.)
You can see. There’s the one, the two, and the zero.

In this example Darryl is concerned with the process of writing on the number line.
Susan speaks for James, interpreting his thought processes. Susan told me that one reason
she has “daily helpers” rather than “captains” is so that each child has an opportunity to
do every job, and so she has an opportunity to assist every child and see how well they
understand the various roles involved in the daily helpers job.

Discussion of “Talking about Texts”

Literacy events involving “talk about text” illustrate the interest and curiosity that
children have about text. After repeated exposure to a variety of texts within authentic social
literacy practices, children pay attention to many details including how texts are written and
illustrated. On Lauren’s Day, during the “Books to Go” reading one child said, “Miss

Austin, on one page is a page with color. On the other page is a page without.”

138

 

In the examples described above, the talk about text occurs in the social process of a
literacy event In the example of the outdoor thermometer children learned how to represent
and interpret information on the thermometer within the context of a weather report In a
similar example, Susan holds up an evaluation form for the Book Club project and explains
the items on the form.

Fro uren’s Da Book Club Presen tion 11 i

Susan shows the class an evaluation form, and says she is going to tell them

how they did on reading to the class, diary pages, project one, project two, and
teamwork. Children ask about another form. Susan says those (self-evaluations)
forms were their chance to say how they did on book clubs and this is her chance to
evaluate their work.

Children are curious about how these texts work, and ask questions to understand
how to read and write these texts. I did not observe any cases where Susan taught lessons
on how to read or write a speciﬁc text or type of text. Instead children engage in texts in an
aesthetic transaction, “evoking the poem” (Rosenblatt, 1978), whether authors, readers,
listeners, or observers. However, the contextual nature of these experiences immerses
children in the social practice of reading and writing and arouses their curiosity about how
the underlying processes worked. Further, because of the holistic nature of these richly
contextualized events, these literacy experiences have greater potential for providing
meaningful and accurate instruction about underlying language processes than typical
school exercises.

Reading and Writing in Pursuit of Other Social Activities

In this classroom, children are constantly engaging in literacy activities while
involved in other tasks. For example, at the beginning of “Silent Writing”, James
distributes the writing folders to each table.

’ “ 'len Writin ” A ndix
James brings the writing folders (legal sized pocket ﬁles) to the square table.
Terrence says, “Cool, cool.” He takes his folder from the ﬁle. David looks through
the folders. James comes back and stands by his chair. He looks through the

folders, reading the names out loud, until he ﬁnds his own folder. David watches
and then ﬁnds his folder.

139

The writing folders not only organize texts but also have labels (children’s names)
that allow these texts to be quickly distinguished from each other. I am calling these
“instrumental texts” because the reading or writing is instrumental to another social
practice. Children in this classroom appear quite proﬁcient readers and writers of
instrumental texts, perhaps because experiences with these texts within school are similar to
experiences with similar texts outside of school. Terrence is one of the “kids on the rug,”
always ready to help other readers. David and James are less conﬁdent of their own reading
abilities, yet all three boys are able to identify their own writing folder, and distinguish it
from others at their table.

The use of instrumental texts in literacy practices is so familiar that it almost
becomes invisible. Just before lunch, as writing time is winding up, the daily helpers stand
by the door and call off the names of boys and girls. Although I had observed the video
tapes many times and recorded this activity in catalog and narrative form, it wasn’t until I
began writing about instrumental texts that I “noticed” that this activity is a literacy event
involves reading. Each helper is reading the names from a list posted on a piece of
cardboard.

I have asked students in elementary classrooms and teacher education classes to
keep track of what they read or write for a day in order to appreciate the variety, type, and
function of real - life literacy. Students are always surprised by the volume of reading they
do. However the bulk of the “activities” do not involve reading literature. In our daily lives
we tend to read and write phone messages, directions to get somewhere, signs and logos,
phone books, e-mail, advertisements, labels, etc.

In studies of literacy in families outside of school (Heath, 1983; Street, 1995)
community members often contribute and aide each other in the reading and writing process
with some “real-life” (non-instructional) goal. Barton (1994) describes a family where a

retiree takes phone messages for his working son, while the son helps his father with

140

business correspondence. Literacy “is tied up with particular details of the situation and...
particular to a speciﬁc community at a speciﬁc point in history” (Barton, p.3).

This balance of literature texts and instrumental texts is true in Marco’s and
Lauren’s classrooms as well (See Figure 5). The larger number of texts read and written are
not stories and informational pieces, but lists, charts, labels, and other organizational texts.
As stated earlier, this list includes only those texts that were the focus of some activity where
Marco or Lauren was a participant The classroom environment includes a vast range of
other such charts, signs, and labels.

Literacy events where reading and writing is embedded in other activities include two
general areas: events where reading and writing are used to report or record information, and
events where reading and writing are used to organize or regulate activities and behavior.
Literacy Events involving Recording or Reporting Information

'n ' 0 tion usi visu l aides

Reporting information using visual aides is the most common activity in this
category, involving seven literacy events. During the “Morning Meeting”, the daily helpers
present information to the class focusing on several different charts or models. A number
line at the top of the calendar bulletin board keeps track of the “Days of School,” printed in
children’s handwriting. The daily helpers lead a discussion of the factors of the current day

of school.

Margo’s Day, “Mgming Meeting” (Apmndix B)

James begins the “Morning Meeting,” “Today’s one hundred and twenty. It’s
a four, two, and a ten.” The factors of 120 are indicated on the number line with
symbols below the numbers: a square for multiples of four, two dots for multiples
of two, etc. Children call out, “ﬁve” and James puts his hand on his head, miming
“I knew that.” Someone calls out “ten,” and James says, “I said ten.”

The calendar is the focus as children talk about the day of the month, and indicate
the tens and ones in straw bundles in two plastic cups near the calendar. Finally, the
children show today’s temperature on the thermometer. In this procedure, the daily helpers

record information before the “Morning Meeting” and then use their records to report

141

information to their class. These events occur seven times because they are daily events and
most of them occur on both days that I observed.

I considered the nature of this group of activities for a long time, in terms of whether
they are “school exercises” contrived to teach math skills, or more authentic literacy events.
I decided they are not unlike news reports and analysis, particularly the weather report. I am
not completely convinced about the authenticity of these experiences as examples of how
people use math in the world outside of school, but they are certainly literacy experiences

growing out of events connected with children’s lives.

Dsing lists, charts, and forms to keep classroom pecords
Using tallies, gharts or graphs to compila information

Susan uses an attendance book to keep ofﬁcial records as she greets each child
during “Morning Meeting”. As Susan takes attendance, the daily helpers tally the number
of children present and absent on a chart written on the chalkboard. The daily helpers then

record the number of children absent on an ongoing “missing person’s graph”:

Mama’s Day, “Morning Meeting” (Appendix B)

Latrice selects “Jambo,” a Swahili greeting, for the attendance.

Susan reads the children’s names from ofﬁcial attendance sheets compiled in a
black binder. She notes a child’s absence with a mark on the printed form.

Susan greets each child as she turns the pages in the attendanca record book.

“Jambo, Alicia.”

“Jambo, Miss Austin.”

The daily helpers have written a ﬂly ghart on the chalkboard. As Susan reads,
Alyssa tallies students present, while James tallies those absent.

Most children, including Mario, respond with, “me0, Miss Austin.”

However, some children are creative in their response. Jonathan says, “Jambo
Madam Miss Austin. Happy Good Morning.”

As Susan calls the children’s names, she makes personal comments about children
who are absent. Sharonda “might come, but we have to mark her absent for now.”
Students chime in during these personal asides:

Susan: Sarina’s hardly ever absent.

Voice: 1 know.

Susan: She hasn’t been feeling well. She told me she has a cold.
Voice: Every day she said it

Susan compliments Danielle on coming to school four days in a row, and lets her
know that she will have been in school an entire week if she comes on Friday.

When Susan is ﬁnished taking attendance, she and the daily helpers begin to count
the tally marks on the chalkboard. “Five, ten.” Then Susan says, “I’m not going

142

alone.” She begins counting again, and the class chants, “Five, ten, ﬁfteen, twenty,
twenty one, twenty two, twenty three, twenty four.”

There are twenty-four children present and four absent

“Stand up,” Susan says. Most of the children stand and begin chanting and

dancing together, “Clap, clap, clap your hands. Clap your hands together.”

The daily helpers pull the Missing Person’s Graph down from the chalkboard. It is

a large piece of butcher paper marked off in inch squares. They put the date 3/7 on the
ﬁrst empty box on the bottom row, and then shade in the four squares above it with
crayons. They put the graph back on the chalkboard with large magnets and join in the
singing and dancing.

This four-minute event is marked with social rituals that are highly familiar to the
classroom community on this 120th day of school. These literacy practices bear a
relationship with other “taking attendance” rituals, while at the same time being a speciﬁc
to this social community. Some activities may not initially appear to be related to literacy,
such as Susan’s personal comments. However, they are as social practices involving text
construction. Susan’s compliment to Danielle on her presence for four days in a row, for
example, is based on her interpretation of the attendance record sheet As Susan interacts
with children around this text, children participate in the social world of their classroom,
school and society.

On Lauren’s Day, the attendance tally was used to resolve a problem. After Susan
called attendance, Danny said she had not called his name. Susan suggested they see what
the tally showed. The number of absent and present added up to the number of children in
the classroom, 28, which showed that Danny must have been included. Danny suggested
that Susan had called him, but he had not responded. Susan apologized for overlooking
him.

WM

Another aspect of the “Morning Meeting” was the “Daily News.” During
“Things to Do,” children were invited to write personal news down on a large sheet of
butcher paper. The reporter than read his or her news to the class during “Morning

Meeting”. On Lauren’s Day, three children read their news. Interestingly, each of the

three reporters is a very quiet child who did not participant in other class discussions.

143

r res
Each book club group had a “diary” used to report progress at the end of each
meeting. This activity encouraged the children to talk to each other about WHAT their
group had done during the meeting. At the end of the Book Club meeting on Marco’s
Day, Susan asked the group to “write what you did.” Marco and David were not sure what
the “book club diary” was, and I helped them to locate the diary and record their progress.
In this literacy event, Marco and David are introduced to a new genre, a group diary.
Susan introduces this genre within the discourse community of the “Book Club” and the
diary is similar to how clubs might keep records or minutes. In the next chapters I discuss
the importance of events such as the “book club diary” in building connections between
familiar literacy practices of the home (i.e. listing) and literacy practices within other
discourse communities.
t r di 1
During “Things to Do” Lauren is coloring in Mexico on a map of North America
when Susan requests some South America maps for display.
n’ “Thin s to Do” A ix
Susan asks about their South America maps. Lauren says, “I took mine
home,” and then repeats more loudly, “I took rrrine HO:ME‘°. ”
Susan comes by the table and Alicia hands her a South America map. “Can I
hang it up?” Susan asks. “I wanted a couple to hang up.”
Lauren sings, “I took mine home.” She smiles, rocking back and forth with
the rhythm of her speech.
This exchange illustrates the potential inﬂuence of peripheral events, one reason why
I included such examples on the list of events of Lauren’s and Marco’s Days. While

Lauren is not involved in the text exchange, she involves herself in the interaction and enjoys

her own language as well.

 

1° Capitals indicate emphasis and raised voice. The colon (HO:ME) indicates that the vowel
is elongated.

144

Literacy Events Involving Flaming or Organizing Class Activities

Literacy events played an important role in classroom planning and organization.
While a lot of these events occur in many classrooms, Susan consciously uses reading and
writing activities to assist with classroom organization. She is certainly aware of the
potential in these literacy events for “real life” language learning.

i writin to la 1 s identif r locat

The literacy activities involving “ﬁnding your writing folder” and “calling the
names of boys or girls for the bathroom,” described above, are examples of these functional
literacy events. For young readers and writers, the events are often learning experiences.
For example, it takes three nrinutes for the entire group of second graders to ﬁnd a
workbook page in their math workbooks.

Drgaajg'pg gr plaaning an activity with a list

It was common for Susan to use a list to help plan or organize an activity. The
“Things to Do list” is posted on the board every day as the children came into the room.
Children read the list as they enter the room, or confer with each other about what they are
“pose to do” that day. Next to the list, there may be models and additional instructions.
On Lauren’s Day, the North America map is posted on the board. Children often work on
the ﬂoor near the board near the board, sitting on the ﬂoor and using chairs as small desks.

During this time, Susan greets children as they entered the building. Then she
comes in, assists the daily helpers to prepare for “Morning Meeting”, and circulates among
the children as they works. The list on the board creates a structure for Susan and the
children to move into the day with opportunities to talk, get important things done, and get
started on work without waiting for verbal direction by the teacher. Required assignments
are marked with stars, and are followed by choices. Within this structure, children planned

their own agenda for the “Things to Do” workshop time.

145

' or writin t record u h vi
There was only one literacy event involving student “behavior,” as opposed to
Ieaming experiences or procedures. On Lauren’s Day, Susan uses a chart to record the
behavior of “table teams” as they work. These “points” are posted towards the end of the
event as children begin to ﬁnish assigned work. Lauren has ﬁnished her math and is taking

an unofﬁcial break to visit with friends.

Lauren’s Day, “Things to D9” (Appendix C)
Lauren plays with Amber’s ponytails, counting them as Amber works. The girls

look at the board, where Susan is giving out team points.

Lauren says, “I’m going to ﬁnish writing my (??) book.” She begins pulling
things out of the cubby in her desk until she ﬁnds a “book” made from folding
blank paper and stapling.

Amber picks up the book. Lauren puts her other stuff back in her desk and
looks up, “Where is... EH!.” Amber laughs and Lauren takes the book back. She
looks at the board. “Oh. Check minuses.”

Danielle says, “Everybody got a check minus.” Alicia, Danielle and Amber are
working on their maps.

Lauren sits with her book on her desk and her pencil in her mouth. She looks
at the board and then towards Susan. Lauren turns in her chair and is talking to the
group at the round table. She also talks to Katherine, who is standing nearby.
Katherine leaves and Lauren turns back to face the table.

Susan asked the students to ﬁnish their work “quietly,” and I assume that she is
using this chart to encourage behaviors involving “working” and keeping relatively quiet.
Lauren and her teammates all look up to read the chart, and appear concerned about their
“score.” When Lauren sees Susan posting points, she decides to work on her writing.
She takes a few moments to started, but is aware of the behavior expectations implied by the
chart

The workshop approach places responsibility on the children for their behavior.
This freedom involves constant choices about what behaviors are “appropriate,” as children
learn to take responsibility for their own Ieaming. Susan’s behavior chart subtly reminds
students of these responsibilities. Although this chart is “indirect language,” Susan
frequently deﬁnes her expectations about children’s “behavior.” For example, at the

beginning of “Books to Go” on Lauren’s Day, Susan says, “Let’s see who’s ready.”

146

Then she proceeds to describe what behaviors she is looking for, “I’m looking for people
who are looking at the reader, etc.”

The behavior chart is an example of using written language to control or coerce.
Susan uses the chart to encourage children to make responsible choices about work time.
When children are taking responsibility for their own Ieaming and their interactions with
classmates, behavior charts are unnecessary. Again, I saw few examples of regulatory
literacy events during my observations.

Discussion of “Reading and Writing in Pursuit of other Activities”

Children in literate societies such as the United States tend to be universally familiar
with instrumental texts. Just think of a four year old’s reaction to seeing the logo
“McDonald’s.” Y. Goodman, Altwerger and Marek (1989) studied preschooler’s
responses to what they call environmental print, particularly signs and logos. Experiences
with these types of texts appeared to be universal across background and income, while
experiences with what Goodman calls “connected discourse” of books, magazines, and
newspapers may vary widely. Children’s strong and familiar experiences with instrumental
texts within the United States makes the practices involving instrumental texts particularly
interesting and important Literacy events involving instrumental texts in this classroom

appear to “act like” events outside of the classroom.

Margo’s Day, Transition to Math (Apmndix B)

Susan walks over the chalkboard and begins giving instructions for math.
Someone asks, “Can we do writing?”

Susan says, “We’ll do writing in a few nrinutes. I want the kids who were
working on math with me to stay here today. Kids who don’t have math sheets can
choose.”

Susan explains the choices as she lists them on the board. In one case, she
demonstrates how a math game is played. James and Terrence signal each other
silently, perhaps planning out their activities. Marco signals at Jonathan.

Susan says, “Okay, let me read the names of the kids who are going to stay with
me. Get a clipboard and a pencil. If I don’t call your name, you know you can
make choices.”

In this vignette, Susan creates a list while talking about plans for math time.
Children attend to Susan’s talk and writing, and use the text to think about and plan their

activities. The text is very relevant to the children because it represents available choices.

147

While the text serves to regulate the children’s activities- delineating what they may or may
not (by omission) do — it also gives children a measure of control over their activities. When
Susan ﬁnishes the explanation, the children make choices and begin to get settled very e
quickly, to Susan’s apparent surprise:
Susan ﬁnishes calling the names, and the remaining children get up and move
quickly to get materials for choices. Susan says, “You know what? Everyone stop.
I made a mistake.” She walks over to the table area, but sees the children have

selected materials and tables without a problem.
She says, “Oh you worked it out.”

Such examples of proﬁcient reading and writing within “real life” social activities
have prompted social literacy theoreticians to question how we evaluate readers based on
contrived situations outside of these particular contexts, such as the “functional literacy”
tests often used to access adult literacy. In a study of “functional literacy tests” Acland
reports that, while 61 percent of one sample population had trouble interpreting a tax table,
the IRS indicates that only 6 percent of ﬁlers made arithmetic errors in their returns
(Acland in Kaestle, 1991). Acland’s study suggests that a reader/writer’s performance
within the “real life” social setting of a literacy event is quite different than their
performance on an examination sample question.

When we observe children’s responses in situations such as the “writing folder”
and “math choices” events described above, it becomes difﬁcult to justify typical
assessments where children are evaluated based on individual performance. In Susan’s
classroom children are encouraged to read and write together as people do outside of
classrooms. This creates a social zone of proximal development where children’s abilities
and performances are enhanced by interactions and support of classmates.

Literacy events such as “calling off names for the bathroom” seem so
unremarkable that we don’t even think of them as reading and writing. Yet these practices
are probably very signiﬁcant for young children Ieaming to read and write. On Marco’s
Day, he makes a triarama during Book Clubs and decides to label it with the members of his

book club group. It is less common for children to talk about instrumental texts than they

148

do about literature texts, perhaps because the events are so familiar. One exception is the

discussion of how to read the model of the outdoor thermometer, prompted by children’s

questions. Another example of talk about instrumental texts is Marco and David’s o
confusion about the “book club diary”, which I discuss at length in Chapter Six. The

unfamiliarity of the literacy event makes the text more visible and problematic. The literacy

processes also become more visible as children negotiate new literacy practices.

While Susan makes conscious use of these types of functional texts, I’m not sure

 

that even she would consider the children’s responses exemplars of their “reading ability.”
The children appear to be highly proﬁcient at reading and writing these texts, however they
may not be aware that they are reading and writing. One concern about these examples is
that while this is an area of high proﬁciency, the participants do not see themselves as
readers and writers- and do not attach this to their image of self as reader /writer.

Yetta Goodman (1997) highlights children’s proﬁciency in “environmental print”
as one of the “multiple roads to literacy. (p.58) ” Goodman expresses concern over the
popular and professional belief that being read to by parents is “the only and most
important road to literacy learning.” In addition to “being read to,” Goodman’s “multiple
roads to literacy” include: reading of newspapers, magazines and comics, writing, playing at
using literacy, environmental print, seeing others read (the demonstration road),
technological literacy, family literacy traditions, child and adolescent cultural traditions, and
unique and personal literacy experiences.

Texts as “contested” grounds

Another concern about the invisibility of literacy practices involving instrumental
texts is literacy practices and texts are “contested” grounds (Street, 1995) , and are not
politically neutral. My favorite invisible example of “calling the names of boys (or girls) to
go the bathroom,” is an example Henkin (1998) uses of school practices that unnecessarily

highlight gender differences in elementary children.

149

The “taking attendance” event provides an example of the socio-political nature of
literacy practices. The attendance book is a legal document As with many institutional text,
the attendance sheets are impersonally called by a number “the 29.” Although each
attendance sheet contains personal student information, only the teacher writes in this book.
The records can be read by any school ofﬁcial, but are not usually read by the children or
parents. This document is imposed on teacher and students. In the school district,
attendance, test scores and grades are criteria used as an indicator of a school’s success.

Therefore, this document may also be used to deﬁne the teacher’s performance.

On the back of the attendance sheets, teachers often document additional
information about the children such as behavior problems or parent contact. In the brief
exchange above, we see evidence that these records are used to deﬁne children. For
example, we learn that Sarina is seldom absent, Danielle is frequently absent, and Sharonda

is often tardy.

However the taking attendance routine in this classroom provides a time for
greetings and conversations. Susan greets each child personally, and the children respond
with their own greetings. Susan uses the institutional text to compliment and encourage
Danielle, rather than chastising her for absences. The potentially “toxic text” (Taylor,
1996) is humanized within a ritual of personal connections with the community members.

Those who are absent are “missed” with comments expressing interest and concern.

Further, the children participate as readers and writers (and mathematicians) in the
social and transactional practice of “taking attendance.” Denny Taylor (1999) recently
deﬁned a “toxic text” as “one you can’t transact with.” In this case, the class consu'ucts a
temporary text, the attendance tally, in order to record information that is interpreted and
transferred to the missing person’s graph. They have taken attendance records and made

them their own.

150

Literacy events involving “doing school work”

On Marco’s Day, Susan calls Marco and some of his classmates together for a
small group math lesson focused on solving two digit arithmetic problems involving 0
regrouping. This exercise was augmented by “hands on” materials. Each child had a bag
of “unit blocks” with 1x10 cm sticks representing “tens” and 1x1 cm blocks representing
ones. Each child had a math worksheet for “reading” the problems and recording their
answers. The small group engaged in this lesson provided opportunities for Susan to work E
closely with the children and Marco had more direct interactions with Susan at this time A
than he did during the rest of the day.

As written texts, however, the math worksheets, do not “make sense” to students in
the same way that the list of math choices does. They do not represent any choice or
activity in the children’s lives. The numerals on the sheets do not represent objects that the
children understand. The worksheets are exercises (Edelsky, 1991) designed to help
children learn an algorithm. During Lauren’s Day, the class worked on two additional math
sheets during “Morning Meeting” and during a whole class math lesson.

Determining which “activities” are exercises is more complicated than it initially
appears. These activities are not “fake” literacy practices because they are common
occurrences in school communities. Edelsky (1991) deﬁnes exercise as a literacy event
where the primary focus of the event is language (or math in this case) instruction or
evaluation. My initial inclination was to look for texts that were published for instructional
purposes such as: the math worksheets, the maps of North America, etc. While the
commercial nature of these texts give a strong clue about their inﬂuence on the nature of the
literacy event, the publication history does not determine how texts are used.

The “outdoor thermometer,” described above, involved the Daily Helpers reporting
the temperature to the class. My original response was that this was an “exercise,” after all
it was a commercial teaching tool and it wasn’t even a real thermometer. However, I realized

that this model was used in a similar way to the models and charts that weather reporters

151

might use on TV. This would be a familiar context, within children’s life experiences, to
introduce daily temperature. In reviewing this event, Susan explained that the daily helpers
used an actual outdoor thermometer on the classroom window to read the temperature,
making this event very much like weather reporting.

Literary texts, while most likely to be used in “real life” contexts, are also used in
Ieaming exercises. When Susan uses Jack Prelutsky’s poem Three Toed Sloth as a
handwriting lesson, or to “circle the long 0 words” it becomes an exercise. Children copy
down the poem in order to improve their handwriting, rather than for meaning construction
or to accomplish some more functional activity. On another day that I visited, I asked
Lauren to read me a text she had copied. She was reluctant, and said she hadn’t read as she
copied. It turned out she was able to read the poem, but her original understanding of the
“activity” was that it was an exercise (Copy something down.) rather than a meaning
making experience (Read a poem.). There are only eight literacy events (11%) that appear

to be clearly instructional exercises.

Earticipating in a guided lesson on “dging a math shest”
Writing (gr pasting) “right answers” onto a math worksheet

On these two days, I observed three guided lessons where Susan works through
several problems on a math worksheet. After the “lessons,” the children complete the
worksheet on their own. In Chapter Two I describe the impact of these events on the overall
experience of Lauren’s Day. Here I describe them as literacy events and Ieaming
experiences. Susan used a Socratic approach to the lesson, asking questions focusing on
concepts “So how many tens do we have?,” and guiding the children through the problem.
In each case, as described above, she uses manipulatives to show the concepts. In some
cases individual children provide answers, and in other cases the group chants responses in
unison as Susan worked through the problems. In every case children are encouraged to
“work together,” and both Marco and Lauren looked around at other children’s papers as

they work.

152

During the worksheet activities, the children worked out answers to questions
supplied by the worksheet and then wrote or located the correct answer and placed it in the
space provided. This activity appears to be an instructional “set up” on a number of levels.
The “problems” are dictated by the math sheet, and the correct answers are already
“known.” The worksheet allows children to show that they know a skill, rather than to
pose and solve real problems as mathematician. As a contrast the “attendance tally”
activity, described above, was used to answer the question “How many are present and
absent today?” and - in one case - was actually used to check whether Susan had forgotten
to call Danny’s name.

As Lauren works on her math sheet, she reports her progress to herself and her

friends as she works:

Laupan’s Day, Math (See Apmndix C)

“I only got /two \more1 ‘ ,” she says. She leans back and puts her hands on her

head.
Danielle looks over at Lauren, and Danielle repeats Lauren’s phrase, “I only got
/two \more. See, look. One, two. One, two.”

Lauren continues working. “Now I got one more.”

Danielle is looking at her answer pieces, “ﬁve, seven.”

Lauren glues the last piece down. “Got it. I got all of them right.”

Lauren’s comment “I got all of them right.” emphasizes the nature of this literacy
event, with a focus on accuracy over meaning construction. Lauren also tends to follow her
own progress as she reads and writes, telling me that she has added three pages since I saw
her last, or has three pages left to go in her book. But as she ﬁnishes writing her text, she
says “Let me read this to you,” not “I got it all right.” Marco has a similar conclusion to
the Three Toed Sloth paper, when he shows his paper to David and says, “I did all those.”
Although the children are anxious to ﬁnish their work, and proud of their accomplishments
their responses are more the procedural display (Bloome, 1989) of doing school than

meaning construction with lasting social implications.

1' The slashes indicate rising (l) and falling (\) tones or intonation. Lauren’s voice goes up
on two and down on more, almost singing the phrase.

153

Qigclipg, lamling gr coloring a targeted resmnse

On Lauren’s Day, children were to take a map of North America, and then color and
label the country of Mexico. For Lauren, at least, this activity did not involve meaningless
copying because she asked for the map by saying, “I don’t hardly know how to spell
Mexico.” On Marco’s Day, Susan asked children to circle the “long 0” words in Jack
Prelutsky’s poem Three Toed Sloth. This is the only phonics exercise that I observed in
the two days, and was an unusual occurrence in my Observances in Susan’s classroom.
Like the math worksheets, this phonics mini-lesson was introduced in preparation for the
standardized test the children would take later in March.

The “circle the long 0 words” activity took just a few minutes of class time, while
the math work sheets on Lauren’s Day took over twenty minutes of whole class instruction
and another 45 minutes or so for Lauren to complete the math worksheets (including
“Things to Do” and “Math Lesson”). This discrepancy suggests that Susan has greater
conﬁdence about the children’s abilities to negotiate a reading test based on her regular
curriculum than they will to negotiate a math test. This may be because the math test has
less similarity to Susan’s holistic math instruction, or because Susan has more conﬁdence
in her language arts instruction.

In any event, Susan believes these exercises will be more like the kinds of literacy
tasks children will experience on the standardized tests, than like the more authentic literacy
and math practices they experience in her classroom. Even on these pre-testing days, these
activities represent llpercent of the literacy events, which shows that Susan values literature

focused events and instrumental activities over school exercises.

154

Conclusion

In this chapter I discussed the social literacy events and practices in Marco’s Day
and Lauren’s Day. The sheer number and range of literacy events was surprising. I
observed Marco on the 120th day of school. On that day, Marco participated in some 30
literacy events and encountered 27 written texts. Lauren participated in 37 literacy events
involving 29 written texts on her 124th day of school. At this rate, over the course of a 180
school year, Lauren and Marco are likely to encounter well over 3,600 texts within about
4,500 literacy events.

Lauren and Marco experienced literacy in 27 different types social activities. They
participated in literacy events involving demonstrations of 27 different ways that members
of their classroom community use reading and writing. Only three of these social activities
were school exercises, with a focus on language instruction or evaluation. Within the other
social activities, the children experienced reading and writing to enjoy literature, learn,
organize, plan, communicate, and otherwise experience their social worlds. A close
examination of these events led me to the following conclusions:

’ Marco and Lauren participate in literacy events through listening, observing, illustrating,
singing, and talking as well as through reading and writing. All of these sign systems
support Marco and Lauren as participants in social literacy practices.

' Reading and writing literature involved a wide variety of ﬁction, non-ﬁction, and poetry
genres. Literature activities focused on constructing meaningful texts and aesthetic
experiences with texts. Literature reading and writing involved choice and agency.
Literature was seldom involved in school type exercises.

° Reading and writing literature are social meaning making events for both Marco and
Lauren. Both Marco and Lauren work closely with the children around them, view
classmates as resources, and use dialogue to share, rehearse, and celebrate their work

and the work of classmates.

155

° Children in Marco’s and Lauren’s classroom are exploring “literacy” as they
participate in literacy events. While I did not observe a lesson in “how to read” or
“how to write,” reading and writing processes were demonstrated throughout the day.
Children’s talk about text revealed that they were exploring questions about literacy
processes and practices within the social context of literacy events.

° Many literacy events involved reading and writing for other social activities, and more
than half of the texts Lauren and Marco encountered were “instrumental texts.” These
literacy events closely match Rosenblatt’s description of “efferent” reading: “the
reader’s attention is focused primarily on what will remain as the residue after the
reading -- the information to be acquired, the logical solution to a problem, the actions to
be carried out” (Rosenblatt, 1978, p.23)

° Literacy events where reading and writing were used for other social activities, were so
familiar to participants, that the reading and writing became almost invisible. Literacy
practices were similar to those outside of school. Participants collaborated and

supported each other in reading and writing to get things done.

The literacy events involving “exercises” in preparation of a standardized text drive
home the disruptive nature of standardized testing on curriculum and children’s literacy
development. Susan minimizes the impact of tests with brief mini-lessons and a few
worksheets in the weeks before the test. But it seems a shame that even one rrrinute of class
time is devoted to test preparation when Marco and Lauren might be solving problems in a
math journal, or reading a book with a friend. In addition, the power of social literacy events
raises questions about assessment practices where children are evaluated based on
individual performance. In these testing situations, children are separated from the “funds
of knowledge” within their classroom community. In addition, literacy events are separated
from the “real life” contexts that support reading and writing.

Another implication for Ieaming and teaching is the potential of functional,

“efferent” literacy events in creating connections between family literacy and school

156

literacy. Susan brings so many “roads to literacy” into the classroom with the lists, charts,
graphs, calendar, and thermometer as well as the autobiographies and books about snakes.
We might give more thought to the “multiple roads to literacy” as we consider classroom
curriculum.

As a classroom teacher, I would want to explore more ways of engaging children in
talking about texts, encouraging the sharing, oral composing and rehearsing that I observed
in Lauren and Marco. As I looked closely at the literacy events of Marco’s and Lauren’s
school days I was more and more impressed by the importance of opportunities for social
interactions while reading and writing. I wonder how children ever learn to read in straight
rows with little opportunity to watch and overhear what other readers and writers do when

they read and write.

157

Chapter Five
Making Meaning in a Classroom Community

In the last Chapter I describe Marco’s and Lauren’s literacy experiences with a
focus on the social activities within the literacy event In this chapter I explore more closely
the nature of literacy experiences in term of meaning construction, social function, and the
roles and relationships of participants. I closely examine literacy as a language process
within social events and practices of the classroom.

Psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic studies of literacy and literacy development
generally focus on the transaction between reader/ writer and text, and may not address
social context. Miscue analysis studies, catalogued by Brown and K. Goodman (1996)
usually involve an interview setting outside of the classroom literacy event. Studies of
beginning literacy in young children also involved interviews and may involve contrived
tasks (Y. Goodman, Altwerger and Marek, 1989, Ferreiro, 1982). Studies of the writing
process (Graves, 1983, Milz, 1983, Y. Goodman et al, 1992) tend to involve observations,
and include discussions of how the child interacts with the classroom environment and other
learners. However the focus remains on observing the text construction process as a
transaction between writer and texts. Studies such as those described above have
contributed to a theoretically grounded understanding of literacy processes and literacy
Ieaming that has widely inﬂuenced current research and practice.

Social literacy studies focus on the socio-cultural practice of literacy. Researchers
in New Literacy studies (Barton, 1994; Street, 1995) explore the “multiple literacies” that
are socially constructed within literate communities. Denny Taylor (1983) describes the
practices and functions of literacy in families, and Taylor and Cathe Dorsey-Gaines (1988)
extend this study to inner city families. Ann Haas Dyson (1984) studies the social

construction process of young writers in classroom settings. These studies take literacy

158

beyond language processes and consider how community, culture, and other social
structures inﬂuence literacy practices and literacy development

Few studies do a close analysis of reading and writing transactions within social
literacy events, bringing together these research perspectives. In an effort to consider
classroom literacy events as both language process and social practice, Carole Edelsky
(1991) makes “some purposeful distinctions” based on three aspects of a literacy event:
meaning construction, social function and the role or position of the participant. Goodman
(1996) describes literacy Ieaming as a balance between “personal invention” and “social
convention.” For example, Marco invents a symbolic outline for his group writing project.

In this chapter, in order to look more closely at the meaning construction processes,
I am shifting lenses from the social activity to the transaction between meaning maker and
text There is the danger in case studies of seeing literacy as an individual endeavor between
the child and the text or the Ieaming experience. I avoid this narrow view of literacy by
describing meaning making within the literacy events of Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day.
In addition, I organized examples of meaning construction around Lauren’s and Marco’s
social roles or stances (listener, overhearer, author, reader, expert, illustrator, assistant, etc.)
as participants in literacy events.

The chapter begins with a discussion of meaning making within this classroom
community. Next I discuss distinctions within literacy events based on meaning
construction, social function, and the participants role within the event. Not all literacy events
involve making meaning, and participants experience literacy events differently. I explore
how social roles and relationships emerge within literacy events. These roles are “mutually
constituted” (Larson, 1997) by the interactions and activities of a literacy event. A
description of Marco’s meaning making is organized around these roles, followed by a
similar discussion of meaning making in Lauren’s Day. Finally, I compare Lauren’s and

Marco’s experiences as listeners, and as readers and writers.

159

Meaning Making in Lauren’s and Marco’s Classroom Community

Ezgm Margg’s Day, “BQt_)ks t9 G9” (Apmndia B)

Amber begins reading, “There are over 2,400 different kinds of snakes in the
world.”

The children gasp and look around at each other. Terrence and Darryl open
their mouths wide, rrrirning amazement.

Amber continues, “Snakes slither and slide on their belly. ”

Marco places his hands together in front of his chest like a snake’s head. He
makes a slithering motion with his upper body as Amber continues to read. He
continues for a time, appearing to enjoy the movement Amber shows the picture to
the group. Darryl holds the page to look closer. Alicia leans over to see. Marco
looks at the picture. He makes a comment to Jackie.

Amber reads, “The giant of all snakes is the Anaconda.”

Darryl leans back onto his knees, miming being impressed. Terrence points to
the class model hangin g across the room...

Amber reads, “It can be as long as a school bus. And weigh as much as two
grown men. ”

Darryl says, “Jeesh.”

Marco says, “Let me see the picture.”

Other kids call out, “000. Show the picture.”

Amber shows the picture to the class.

Children cry out in amazement, “Whoa!”

While Amber is “reading” the non-ﬁction book Snakes (Demuth, 1993), the
listeners are also active participants in the social construction of the text In this brief
vignette, the listeners are engaged in many layers of meaning making involving a range of
semiotic systems including body language and art along with oral and written language.

In Notebooks of the Mind, Vera John Steiner (1990) refers to “thinking with the
body” as the ﬁrst “language of thought.” In the example above, children use body
language for several purposes. When Amber reads that “snakes slither and slide,” Marco
expresses his parallel text construction with his body, minring the motion of a snake.
Marco’s body language suggests the “lived through” aesthetic experience that Louise
Rosenblatt (197 8) describes as “evoking a poem.” Rosenblatt ﬁrst used the term
“transaction” to describe the reading as a dynamic process where reader and text both act
on each other. She compares the process to conducting an orchestra.

Body language was also used for nonverbal “conversations” without interrupting
the reader. Terrence points to the class model of an Anaconda, making a connection

between a class experience and the text. The children mime amazement and shock in

160

response to the information presented in the text. Miming and eye contact add to the social
experience of each listener’s meaning construction. The children share their reactions in the
same way we enjoy watching a movie with a friend in an appreciative theater audience more '
than we do when we’re alone.
During this text reading, listeners are also “viewers.” All of the books read are
picture books, and the illustrations are an important aspect of the meaning construction
process. Listeners almost always looked up when a picture was shown, even if their gaze E
was focused elsewhere during the readings. Children look to the pictures to extend i.
meanings and convey new meanings.
Amber reads, “It can be as long as a school bus. And weigh as much as two
grown men.
Darryl says, “Jeesh.”
Marco says, “Let me see the picture.”
Picture book illustrations provide an additional symbolic system to engage
children’s meaning making. Illustrated picture books include a wide range of contemporary
art for children to interpret as meaning makers. Children’s attention to illustrator’s work is
revealed in some of their comments during a read aloud on Lauren’s Day.
n’ D “B okst G ” A n 'x
.Danny reads, “Was it the pig as fat as butter, ” and Lauren looks up and
smlle\hfillie says, “Miss Austin, I know who sank the boat.”
Susan says, “Don’t tell.”
Someone says, “Miss Austin, on one page is a page with color. On the other
page is a page without.”
Viewing the illustrations provides a time for informal reactions to the texts, generally
exclamations, gestures, or brief comments. During the two days that I am describing, there
is no formal discussion time following each read aloud, but quite a few informal responses
and dialogues occur as the text is being read and during intervals before and after readings.
Snakes (Demuth,1993) is a non-ﬁction text, suggesting an efferent (Rosenblatt,
1978) reading, where the text is a vehicle for gaining information as quickly as possible.

However, in this case, listeners respond with emotion and animation. The animated

responses may be a response to the context, where the text is read or heard for its own sake.

161

Listeners also respond to the metaphoric language. Marco remembered that the snake was
“long as a school bus” when we talked about this event at the end of the day. However, the
social community is an important element of the meaning making experience.

Laursp’s Day, “Bng Clubs” (Apmndia C)

“When Rosa ’s milk spills on the ﬂoor, she tries to drink it with a straw. Maria

takes her hard boiled egg and throws it to her best friend Craig. ”

There is loud laughing and children call out “ewww” and “yeech.” The book
club group smile at each other over the reactions to the text, and continue with even
greater enthusiasm.

In these shared reading experiences, meaning making is a socially constructed
transaction between readers, listeners and texts. Halliday describes three layers of meaning:
ideational, interpersonal, and textual. (Halliday, 1975) Children are constructing
understandings about the content and concepts (ideational) of the text At the same time,
they are constructing social meanings (interpersonal) as they participate in a group reading
and listening event. They experience aesthetic (textual) elements of the text as well.12

In the example above, the social meaning construction process are made obvious by
children’s reactions, movements, and comments. However, listeners are meaning making
participants in literacy events even when they are still and silent Joanne Larson (1999) has
shown that children are making meaning, even as peripheral “overhearers” of a literacy
event, as I will describe in detail later. As children participate in social literacy events, they
are participating in meaning construction, even if they are silent

In Chapter Four, I described the types of events that Marco and Lauren experienced.
A signiﬁcant aspect of these social literacy experiences is the way that the classroom
community creates and enhances the meaning potential of literacy events. These events can
be viewed as having a meaning potential for these young readers and writers. In this chapter

I focus the research lens on the language transactions and describe Marco’s and Lauren’s

meaning making within this classroom community.

 

‘2 I am borrowing from Geoffrey Leech’s (1983) model of language in Principles of
Pragmatics. Leech deﬁnes ideational meaning as residing in the grammatical or semantic
system. He places pragmatics, including conversational maxims and politeness maxims, in
the interpersonal layer of meaning. He includes principles of style, humor, and -by
extension - aesthetics in the textual layer of meaning.

162

A Community Focus on Meaning
Whole language is meaning-based. The best Ieaming experiences are those that
are meaningful to the child. Leaming experiences such as letter writing, storytelling,
ﬁeld trips, interviews, reading ﬁction and non-ﬁction books, and drama help children
to construct meaning and understand the world around them. Even beginning
readers can start with signs or familiar stories. Language skills are easy to learn
when the focus is on making sense. (Dewey Center Teachers)

This statement is an excerpt from eight principles of Whole Language written by
Dewey Center teachers for parents and community members (See Figure 1, page 8).
Language is “whole” when it has meaning for the participant in a language or literacy
event. The “Books to Go” event is an example of Susan’s focus on meaning making in
language arts instruction. Susan selects one book for the child to read to the class and
another book for their parents to read. In the home and school reading aloud experience,
children experience texts that they might not read to themselves. The wide range of texts
read in the classroom increases the body of literature (in terms of topic, genre, style, author,
illustrator, etc.) available to children far beyond books they might select to read. While
immersed in a literature experience, children also experience demonstrations of what it
means to be a reader as they listen to their classmates read.

Smith (1988) and Camboume (1988) both discuss the role of demonstration in
language learning. Demonstration does not mean overt instruction, but the opportunity for
learners to observe language users (in this case readers and writers) engaged in the process
of using real language for real purposes. In Susan’s classroom, Marco is able to observe
and participate in countless demonstrations of readers and writers engaged in the process of
reading or writing.

The Language Arts program in Susan’s classroom is organized to maximize
opportunities for immersion in meaningful literacy events, and demonstrations of reading
and writing. Children use spoken and written language to explore their world. In “real
life” literacy events, the focus of participants is on the social practice, what it is we’re doing

with language, and the process is a secondary concern. Literacy events in Susan’s

classroom also focus on “what it is we’re doing with language.”

163

From a whole language theoretical perspective, reading and writing are the tools for
Ieaming and not the content of Ieaming. Learning experiences are organized around using
language to explore content: literature, science, social science, etc. Procedural activities, such
as organizing the math workshop, also involve using language as a tool to get things done.
As children engage in Ieaming about the world or organizing learning experiences, they are
Ieaming language. This is the teacher’s not- so- hidden agenda in what some call
“process” classrooms.

Whole language focuses on the learning process. In a whole language

school, children are learning how to learn. Children participate in drama, role-
playing, research and other experiences that give them tools for life—long Ieaming.
Children learn how to ask questions, select topics, ﬁnd materials, read, write,
interview, share and present as they focus on science, social studies and literature
themes. (Dewey Center Teachers)

In Lauren’s and Marco’s classroom, demonstrations of reading and writing within
meaningful literacy events highlight the underlying processes. The reading process is
demystiﬁed as less proﬁcient readers learn that the “best” readers in the class do make
miscues. When children deal with unfamiliar or complex text, they observe the strategies
and the suggestions made by other classmates and teachers.

There is a “dual curriculum” (Goodman, 1986) in Whole Language classrooms as
teacher and children focus on content areas with an underlying awareness that children are
“learning how to learn.” To some extent, the learners’ agenda is what I ’m using language
to do while the teacher’s agenda includes how children are using language. However, from

time to time Susan and the children stop to reﬂect on the language and thought process

involved in classroom experiences.

164

Making the process explicit
In Chapter Three, I described a “teachable moment” strategy lesson where Susan
assists Amber with unfamiliar text
Marco’s Day, “Books to Go”, Appendix B
Susan: Let’s listen to the rest of the sentence.
Amber. .. ..the mouse
Susan: Okay, start at the beginning
Amber In a ﬂash the rattlesnake something the mouse.
Susan: And I heard someone over here say “stricks,”
I think that’s cause it starts with s-t-r.”
Terrence: (quietly) ssss sstrike.
Susan: So what do you think would make sense?
What’s the rattlesnake going to do to the mouse?

When Susan works through this reading strategy with Amber, she demonstrates the
process to the class. Susan’s reading strategies are meaning focused, involving reading
ahead to gain meaning, re-reading to reconstruct meaning, and then stopping to think about
“what makes sense.” Terrence and “the kids on the rug” actively participate in the
exchange, while Marco and his classmates listen. In Chapter 4 I described how Marco later
describes an “I go back” strategy that is very similar to Susan’s strategy lesson
demonstrating that these on-the-spot conversations have long range inﬂuence on the reading
of all participants.

Susan’s strategy lesson is one example of making the process explicit. When

Amber reads that “Snakes shed their skin two or three times a year.” Alyssa poses a

math problem to herself.

Margg’s Day, “Books to Go” (Appendix II)

Alyssa has been counting on her ﬁngers. She says, “If a snake were seven
years old, it would shed its skin twenty times.”
“How did you ﬁgure that out?” Susan asks.
“I just counted by threes.”
Susan frequently asks, “How did you ﬁgure that out?” in order to highlight the
thinking process when children make interesting discoveries. When Susan asks Alyssa to
share her thinking process, she is making the process explicit for Alyssa and for her

classmates. Other members of the classroom community share Susan’s focus on language

165

and thinking processes. Before Morning Meeting begins, Darryl raises his hand and asks
about a mistake James, a daily helper, made while writing on the Days of School number
line:

From Marco’s Day, Morning Meeting (Apmndix B)

Darryl: Miss Austin, they put twelve zero zero.
Susan: You know what, James got confused. He thought nineteen and thought 20,
and got excited and put two “O”s=l3

Terrence: =Twelve=

Susan =and made two hundred:
Terrence: =twelve
hundred

Susan: So I just xed out one of the zeros. It’s one hundred and twenty.

(Jackie stands up, raising her hand, then sits back down.)

You can see. There’s the one, the two, and the zero.
Susan: Jackie?
Jackie: That’s how you learn cause you know

How (?the line is?)

I did that before but I thought about it

And I crossed it out

But before I crossed it out, I looked at it a couple of times.
Susan: That’s right. Jackie says, “That’s how you learn.”

In this example, Darryl, Terrence and Jackie are all concerned with the process of
writing on the number line. Susan speaks for James, interpreting his thought processes.
Darryl and Terrence are interested in a writing “problem” and may also be critiquing the
Daily Helper’s job. Susan and Jackie consider James’ feelings, an interpersonal level of
this conversation. Susan’s explanation also implies that mistakes involve thinking.

Jackie’s comment reveals not only an explicit interest in language processes, but
particular values about meaning construction. She suggests that everybody makes mistakes,
uses herself (a highly conﬁdent learner) as an example, and asserts that making mistakes is
a part of the Ieaming process. Susan repeats Jackie’s statement, emphasizing her
agreement Jackie and Susan appear to view language learning as a tentative process,
involving mistakes and development, rather than accurate acquisition of skills. These

particular values —- that meaning construction is a process, and learning involves growth --

are expressed in various ways throughout the days that I observed.

 

‘3 The equal sign (=) indicates lightly overlapping speech. When I am uncertain what the
speaker says, the wordings are marked with question marks within parentheses.

I66

When Susan asks Alyssa to explain her thinking, she shifts Alyssa’s talk from
cognition (what I know) to metacognition (how I know what I know). It is important to
distinguish between these two types of meaning making. Language users have implicit
understandings of language and thought processes, but that does not mean these processes
are explicit. For example, Marco’s reading of What’s in My Pocket shows that he has
implicit understandings of adjectives:

Text: What’s in my pocket? Something that’s fuzzy.
Marco: What ’s in my pocket? It ’s something that ’s Wiggly or giggly...
(M turns page and looks at picture of a stuffed bear) hairy or something.

Although Marco is able to use adjectives appropriately while reading, this does not
mean that he can talk about how he made these particular predictions. It is not necessary for
Marco to know the term “adjective” in order to understand how to use adjectives. Teachers
sometimes assume children don’t have language because they can’t talk about it. Tests
designed to determine a child’s dominant language have found them to be “a-lingual.”

Lisa Delpit (1995) expresses concern that progressive white teachers in “process”
classrooms often use indirect language that may cause cultural miscommunication with
African American children. Delpit draws connections between open-ended classroom
structures and indirect language, and between explicit language and direct instruction. 1
don’t think there is a direct link between direct instruction and explicit language. I believe
that making the process explicit provides a connection between a child’s implicit
understandings and the explicit understandings of “the culture of power.” These
discussions help listeners like Marco and Lauren to understand how their classmates are
making meaning as they participate in the meaning construction experience. I discuss this
further in Chapter Six.

Distinctions between literacy events and meaning making

Literacy events include any social event related to a written text However, literacy

events do not always involve meaning construction. As a visitor to Taiwan I participated in

many literacy events where I was unable to construct meaning with print Negotiating the

167

signs, tickets, and other printed messages in a local airport was difﬁcult or impossible and
the announcements on loudspeakers did not help me to “read” or make sense with print
My experience illustrates Edelsky’s distinction between “literacy,” social activity involving
print, and “reading,” literacy events involving meaning construction.

An event can be categorized as “reading” or “NOT-reading” based on whether the
reader/ writer is constructing meaning. In Edelsky’s deﬁnition “reading” includes reading
or writing. In the case of young children, I extend the question of meaning construction to
the listener lobserver as well as reader/writer. This distinction is important for classroom
research because many of the literacy events in skills oriented Language Arts programs
include activities involving text with little or no meaning construction. Examples are
numerous, including spelling tests, handwriting assignments involving coping without
meaning making, phonics worksheets, etc. Edelsky (1991) calls these activities NOT -
Reading.

While my literacy experiences in Taiwan were “NOT reading” events, they had a
different function then a spelling test. The printed plane ticket that I was “NOT reading”
allowed me to board a plane, while the spelling test has the purpose of assessing the writer’s
ability to spell. Edelsky distinguishes between “exercise” and “NOT-exercise” to
consider the social function of the event. If the purpose of the literacy event is primarily for
language instruction or evaluation, then the event is considered an “exercise.”

Edelsky borrows from Freire (1994) to suggest that readers/ writers can be
positioned as the “subject” or “object” within social literacy events. This dichotomy
describes the amount of control the reader/writer has with the text and the literacy event.
These distinctions are relative because texts act on readers, and cultural understandings and
constraints scaffold meaning construction. While my Chinese language text was purchased
for me, I was the subject of the event as the traveler making a trip to the Taiwan coast

Edelsky provides some examples of these distinctions.

168

Figure 7: Examples from “Literacy: Some Purposeful Distinctions” (Edelsky, 1991)

0 Read an essay for personal entertainment.
0 Write a movie review for publication.
Readin , NOT an Exercise, Object 0 Parent orders child to write a thank you note.
Readrng, Exercise, Subject ° Write a trial movie review for a job as critic.
0 Child selects a worksheet during a classroom
workshop.
0 Take a readﬁrg test.
0 Read an essay to answer questions for a grade.
NOT Reading, NOT an Exercise, ' Doodling decorative letters

0

Reading, NOT an Exercise, Subject

Reading, Exercise, Object

 

 

 

Subject * ? Pronouncing foreign language print (i.e. in
religious rituals) without understanding.

NOT Reacﬁng, NOT an Exercise, 0 “Reading” an eye chart during an eye exam.

Object

NOT Readin , Exercise, Subject* 0 ? Self initiated calﬁgraphy practice.

NOI Readrng, Exercise, Object ° Letter naming, ﬂashcard lesson

0 Read nonsense syllables in testing situation.
*? Where there is no meaning construction, IT is difﬁcult to ﬁnd examples where the reader/
writer is the subject of the literacy event

In determining what is “reading” the question is, Is the participant (whether
reader, writer, speaker or listener) engaged in meaning construction with a printed text?
In Susan’s whole language curriculum, cases of NOT -reading are rare, but the answers to
this question are not always clear cut. I illustrate the complexities of this issue with
Marco’s experiences during the “Three Toed Sloth” language event.

The Three Toed Sloth
The three-toed sloth is in a deep
and curious wakeless sleep.
The boughs and branches bend and break
but seldom does the sloth awake.
The noisy jungle far below
is not for three-toed sloths to know.
Jack Prelutsky (1983)

Marco ﬁrst encounters the poem “The Three Toed Sloth” as a handwriting
exercise. He and his classmates have copied down the poem during the “Things to Do”
workshop ﬁrst thing in the morning. Now, Susan conducts a ﬁve-minute mini-lesson

focusing on the poem. The poem is written on the board, and a picture of a sloth hangs

near the poem. The children have their handwritten copies out on their tables. During this

169

ﬁve-minute language event, Three Toed Sloth, there are three brief literacy events involving

the same text: a scientiﬁc discussion, a phonics lesson, and a choral reading

Ergm Mapgp’s Day, Three ngd Sloth (Appandix B)

Susan refers to the ﬁrst two lines of the poem, explaining that sloths sleep about
18 hours every day. Alyssa does some rapid ﬁguring, and says that the sloth is only
awake for six hours out of the day.

Susan reads, “The noisy jungle far below is not for three toed sloths to know.”
She explains the sloth “hardly ever goes down on the ground” because it has long
claws, good for climbing but not walking. Susan points out a greenish tinge on the
sloth’s fur in the picture. She asks if the children have seen algae in ﬁsh tanks. She
wonders if the green-brown fur makes it hard or easy to see sloths in the rain forest
Jonathan responds with, “hard.” Susan suggests that algae is good camouﬂage.

In this literacy event, Susan interprets the poem in a scientiﬁc discussion of the
sloth. Alyssa gets involved in the discussion, once again setting herself a literary math
problem. After this brief discussion, Susan asks the children to circle the “long 0” words
in the poem.

Susan says. “Julia and Brent were trying to ﬁgure out, today, which vowels

we’re going to look for in the poem.” After reviewing vowels discussed previously,
Susan says, “We’re looking for the long “0,” or when we hear it say...”

Children call out, “0,” or “Its name.”

Children call out words and Susan circles them on the board. She walks around for
a few moments and gives children time to complete the activity. Then Susan invites the
children to do a choral reading of the poem. Children participate in a variety of manners
with the choral reading activity. During the ﬁrst part of the lesson, the camera is focused
on Susan. As the children begin to “circle the long 0 words,” the camera shifts to Marco,
who sits at the “square team” table between David and James:

Marco holds his pencil poised to write; peers closely at the board and then down

at his paper. On Marco’s right, James is circling words on his paper. Marco looks
at the board, moves his mouth, and looks down at his paper again. He points at the
paper with his pencil, and says something to David. He glances over at the camera.
Susan leads a choral reading of Three Toed Sloth. Marco recites the title and
ﬁrst line, which also begins “The three toed sloth...” After the ﬁrst line, Marco
holds his pencil poised and listens to his classmates. Next to Marco, James reads

from his paper while Terrence reads from the board. Destine, who also sits at
Marco’s table, is drawing a picture on her paper.

170

When the choral reading is over, Susan tells the children to put their papers away
and come to the area rug for morning meaning. As Marco leaves the table, he shows his
paper to David and says, “I did all those.”

As Susan and I watched this vignette later on videotape, we were struck by Marco’s
attentive posture and scholarly pose. His demeanor is one of “paying attention.”
However, in this case, it seems likely that Marco is engaged in “procedural display”
(Bloome, 1989), participating in the activities involved in “doing school.” While he
appears conﬁdent and indicates a sense of pride in his “work,” his comment “I did all
these.” hints at a focus on completing an assignment, rather than constructing meaning.

From a transactional perspective, meaning does not reside in the text, but is
constructed during the transaction between reader and text (Goodman, 1996). However, a
text has “meaning potential.” It has a variety of linguistic and cultural cues that the reader
must interpret in order to construct meaning. In social literacy events the text, the talk of
participants, and the activities of participants in relationship to texts all have meaning
potential. However, participants’ interpretations of the same literacy events vary.

In the vignettes above Alyssa provides a mathematical interpretation of the text
Three Toed Sloth, James and Terrence participate in a choral reading, and Destine interprets
the text in art. Marco is a direct or peripheral listener/ observer of each meaning
construction activity. Figure 8 considers the meaning potential and meaning making that
occurs during this language event from Marco’s perspective. When I talk about “meaning
making” I am including meaning construction through listening or reading. Meaning
making includes any text interpretation; I am not addressing how closely Marco’s
understandings of a text match my own. I assume that meanings differ among readers and

may include “misconceptions” compared to my own text interpretations.

171

Figure 8
Meaning Potential and Meaning construction in Three Toed Sloth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marco
Literacy event Marco listens/ observes Marco reads/ writes or constructs
NOT reads/ writes meaning
la. Text interpretation, Susan talks about sloths ‘7
discussion of poem. '
Alyssa and others
participate in disc.
lb) Text analysis, circle Susan and children NOT - Marco peers at NO
the “long 0 words.” identify & circle words board, circles words
1c) Choral reading Susan leads choral Marco recites title and Yes?
reading of poem. ﬁrst line. '
Charles reads from paper (Marco listens with
pencil poised)
Terrence reads board
Destine draws picture

 

 

 

During the interpretive text discussion, Susan is engaged in meaning construction,
interpreting the text and expanding on text language with her own information. Alyssa’s
self-selected math problem shows her own engagement with the discussion of the text.
However, Marco does not participate in the discussion. When I asked Marco about this
event later during the debrieﬁng interview, he did not appear to remember it

D: That one. Did you talk about three... do you remember learning about a three
toed sloth today?

(Marco shakes head, no.)

D: No? You don’t remember Ieaming about the three-toed sloth?
M: (Shakes head) Nope.

In answer to the question “Is Marco constructing meaning?” during this event, I
can only put a question mark in the meaning construction box. Experience with reading
miscue analysis has led me to conclude that I can learn what readers do understand from
their responses, but I can’t really learn what they don’t understand. Marco’s responses
may have been different if I had asked a different question: Did you copy a poem today?
Did your class read a poem called Three Toed Sloth today? Marco’s attentive silence

during the actual event is not a good indicator of meaning construction.

172

On the other hand, the “circle the long 0 words” is certainly NOT reading. While
Marco does a paper and pencil task with the other children, this task does not involve
constructing a meaningful text. A key aspect of literacy events of social communities is
constructing shared meanings. In this case there is a shared understanding of the
assignment, and children successfully negotiate the task “circle the long 0 words.”
However, the activity itself disrupts the meaning construction of the poem, Three Toed
Sloth. The focus is on identifying words with certain sounds, and not on understanding or
interpreting the message of the poem. This literacy event has no meaning potential. It is an
example of a school exercise focusing on instruction or evaluation. In fact, Susan
introduces this mini-lesson in anticipation of a standardized testing period coming up at the
end of March.

When Susan introduces the choral reading, Marco reads the title and the ﬁrst line of
the poem along with the class. He then listens to the class recite the poem in unison. Again,
I can’t know what meanings Marco is constructing through this choral reading experience.
I suspect that there is some meaning construction, based on his reading of the title and ﬁrst
line and his attentive listening as the poem is read.

This example illustrates several points about meaning making within literacy events.
First, not all literacy events involve meaning construction. Secondly, meaning making
experiences vary among participants in a literacy event Participants interpret texts
differently, as illustrated by Susan’s scientiﬁc interpretation, Alyssa’s math problem and
Destine’s artistic interpretation in response to Prelutsky’s poem. Participants may also
have different interpretations of what the event is about I did not discuss the handwriting
lesson where children copied down the poem because I did not record that event However,
it is likely that some students (such as Alyssa) were engaged in “reading a poem” during
that event, while others (such as Marco) were engaged in a meaningless exercise.

A ﬁnal point is the relationship between meaning construction and meaning

potential. Some literacy events, such as “circle the long 0 words” have no meaning

173

potential, resulting in “NOT-reading” experiences for all participants. Other events have
great meaning potential. Choral reading is a good example, particularly because texts are
often read and discussed on several occasions providing many opportunities for meaning
construction. Overall, the Three Toed Sloth mini-lesson has strong potential for meaning
construction since Susan introduces a variety of literacy events related to the poem.
However, this does not guarantee a meaning making experience for every participant Close
observations of the leamer’s meaning construction during social literacy events provide
insight into the child’s literacy learning.

Considering meaning making in relation to social function and social role provides
additional insights into the relationship between particular school literacy practices and
language learning. Again, the event must be viewed from the leamer’s perspective. Susan
and other participants play an active role in text interpretation with a scientiﬁc discussion
and aesthetic choral reading experiences. Marco appears to experience this event as a
school assignment he negotiates successfully (“I did all those”). It is likely that Marco
experienced these three events as a school exercise designed to help him learn to read and
write, rather than having any other social function for him.

Figure 9
Marco experiences “The Three Toed Sloth”

Marco’s meaning Exercise/ NOT Subject / Object

- 93.3“?! "39!. - _ - - - - SQ“§‘I‘!.°§.°.“ ....... EXPECLSE ...................
la. Text interpretation. ? Exercise? Object?

_ 4i 9:0.“ £810.09! r3261“. .........................................
1b) Text analysis, circle No Exercise Object? Subject?
-912 “109s awards.” ............................ - - .......

1c) Choral reading Yes? Exercise? Subject?-

Marco’s role as a subject or object within the literacy event is unclear because of the
complexity of literacy events, as well as the problem of interpreting the event from the

leamer’s perspective. Susan selected each of these events, and certainly has coercive power

174

to require participation in her role as classroom teacher. From this stance all classroom
Ieaming experiences place children in the “object” role.

However, the fact that children responded and participated in a variety of manners
suggests that they also had some degree of control over the literacy experiences. During the
choral reading, for example, Marco begins to read with the group and then listens to the
remainder of the poem as his classmates continue reading. This reading experiences can be
contrasted to a “round robin” reading, common in many classrooms, where Marco might
be required to read a segment of the text selected by the teacher. In this case, Marco’s
participation is under his control and he has the choice to be a listener rather than a reader.

As ﬁgure 9 indicates, it is difﬁcult to code literacy events according to Edelsky’s
distinctions, and Edelsky describes many “fuzzy examples” in her discussion of these
qualities of literacy events. However, these distinctions are useful in discussing the
relationship of literacy experiences to literacy learning, assuming that learners gain more
when they are the subject participant of a meaningful literacy event with a real life social
function.

The Three Toed Sloth language event does not seem to be a supportive language
Ieaming experience for Marco. I selected this event to discuss the distinctions between
meaning making, social function, and social role because it provides a rare example, in my
observations of Susan’s classroom, of literacy events that do not involve meaning
construction. The other language events that occurred on Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day
provide a contrast in their potential for meaning construction and language Ieaming through
participation. These events are discussed when I address Marco’s and Lauren’s social
roles as meaning makers.

Social roles in classroom literacy events

I have discussed how Marco and Lauren participate in literacy events in a variety of

social roles such as listener and observer as well as reader and writer. Joanne Larson

(1997) observed interactions between teachers and kindergartners during journal writing

175

activities. Larson notes that when the teacher has a conference with one child, the child’s
tablemates participate in the exchange in a variety of social roles. She identiﬁes ﬁve roles of
participants during these conferences including teacher/scribe, primary author, overhearers,
peripheral respondent, and pivot The “overhearers” are children who sit quietly nearby
and appear to focus on their own work. The “peripheral respondents” are children who
respond to the teacher’s interaction with the primary author. The pivot, a term Larson
borrowed from Goffman (1981), is a child who picks up on the talk between teacher and
primary author, prompting a discussion outside of the teacher / child interaction, as Marco
does while I’m talking with Jackie.

Frgm Marcp’s Day, Silent Writing (Appsndix B)

Jackie sits down next to me, in the chair across from Marco, and talks about
dinosaurs. “And then once dinosaurs was extinct they found these big heavy rocks
and that’s how... the book tells you about how they found them.”

Marco and David look at Jackie. Marco applauds Jackie’s talk. Jackie tells me
about her plans for the book she is writing. Marco draws. He looks up at Jackie.

He tells David, “They been working on that book about twenty days.”

These roles are not assigned to the children, as some teachers do in cooperative
Ieaming approaches, but they “are mutually constituted and emerge over time in daily
interaction (Larson, 1997, p. 501).” Children are not conﬁned to one role but shift roles
over the course of writing time and across the school year. The importance of Larson’s
work in relationship to this study is her ﬁnding that children are Ieaming language as
participants in literacy events, even if they are not the reader or writer.

I observed Lauren and Marco in a variety of social roles during the school day. I
describe many of these roles in Chapter Three, for example Marco’s looking out for others
and Lauren’s play ﬁghting with her friends. For the purposes of this analysis, I have
selected social structures where Marco and Lauren take roles as meaning makers. I

describe Marco’s meaning making as listener, overhearer, reader and writer. I describe

Lauren’s meaning making as (selective) listener, writer, storyteller, and reader.

176

Meaning Making in Marco’s Day

I have discussed Marco’s frequent strategy of “learning by overbearing.” In this
section, I look closely at this meaning making process. The ﬁrst example is “Books to
Go” where Marco participates as a “listener.” In the second example, Silent Writing,
Marco participates as an “overhearer” of my conversation with Jackie. The difference
between these two roles has to do with Marco’s position in relationship with the principal
“reader or writer.” In “Books to Go” the reading is directed at Marco as a member of the
audience. In Silent Writing, Jackie is having a conversation with me and Marco is on the
periphery of this dialogue.

In addition to “learning by overbearing,” Marco also learns by reading and writing.
We capture a glimpse of his composing process at the end of Silent Writing. At the end of
the day, during “Book Clubs”, Marco takes the lead in the writing project. In this language
event Marco uses a wide range of meaning making strategies in order to construct written
text I have used brief examples from these language events in other chapters, but I
introduce them again here in more detail for the purpose of taking a close look at Marco’s
meaning making processes.
Marco as listener

Marco shows his interest in listening experiences by where he sits. During
Morning Meeting, Marco sat in the “ﬁrst row,” but to the side of the 6 x 8 area rug that
marks the classroom meeting area.

(Daily Helpers)

 

.-..- ‘ --- .- -mm- *Mmm

Ariel iAmber Lauren Alicia Darryl Jonathan Terrence Niarm
i l

i

177

When the class settled down to hear James read after the songs, Marco sat in the

middle of the group, not far from reader.

(JamCS)

Terrence Amber Lauren Tiffany Danielle

 

Jackie Marco Kenneth Jonathan

 

 

 

After lunch, when “Books to Go” continues, Marco sits on the front of the rug, but

next to the children clustered around Amber, the reader

(Amber)

Katherine Lauren

 

Darryl Alicia Jackie Marco Kenneth
David Ariel Alyssa

 

 

 

Marco places himself where he can attend to what’s going on. However, Marco
does not sit right next to the reader. This spot is unofﬁcially reserved for the “kids on the
rug,” those willing to help the reader, and Marco may not see himself among this group.
When I observed Marco on other days when Susan reads aloud or leads a class meeting,
Marco is more likely to sit directly in front of her. During the small group math lesson, he
chooses a spot right next to Susan. During “Books to Go”, Marco places himself close to
the action but not in a spot where he might be called upon to help the reader.

I have described Marco’s involvement in the “Books to Go” language event at the
beginning of this chapter. Marco is especially interested in the book Snakes (Demuth,
1993). On one occasion, he points to the picture and asks Amber, “What kind of snake is
that?” She answers, “A rattle snake.” Marco initiates a brief discussion when Amber

reads about snakes shedding their skin.

178

Marcg’s Day, “Books to Go” (Appendix B)

Marco looks at the picture and says, “He changing.”

He looks at Susan, “Miss Austin, why be changing?”

Susan says, “Cause he’s growing. He doesn’t ﬁt his skin anymore.”

“Cause he’s... he’s getting bigger.” Jackie says.

Susan says, “Just think if every time you got... your mom says, “Oh you’ve
grown, I have to get you new pants or shoes. Just think if your skin had to peal off
and you had another skin underneath.”

Kids laugh.

In these examples, Marco has shifted from “listener” to “inquirer.” Amber’s
reading and the illustrations in the book prompt inquiry questions, which Marco asks out
loud. Although Susan tends to discourage interruptions, she supports Marco’s inquiry with
a brief discussion. In these exchanges, Marco sees both Amber and Susan as potential
“teachers.” Jackie gets into the discussion as an expert as well. Marco’s inquiry into
snakes was reﬂected during the debrieﬁng interview:

Debi: Did you like that story about snakes?

Marco: (Nods his head, “Yes.”)

Debi: What was your favorite part?

Marco: About the snake? I liked when his skin came off and he changed to another
(?skin or snake?) Cause I like black and orange too.

Did you know that snakes shed their skin before you read that book?

No

What else did you learn about snakes today?

That sometime that they can’t see very well. And other snakes, when they
sleep, they eyes be open a little so they can see. And then if they see a rabbit
on top, he ain’t gonna get it because he just [a]sleep.

Anything else about snakes you learned?

When his skin come off, when they skin come off, they change to another
color. (pause) Sometimes when he see something, he might stick his tongue
out and it like be poison, and then he might go get it sometime (sticks tongue
out like a snake) like that with his tongue.

Who made this snake? (Snake hanging across room.)

Jonathan and Miss Austin and (???) brother.

What kind of snake is that?

It might be a rattlesnake. It might be. It’s long though.

Why is it so long?

(shrugs) It’s longer than a school bus.

39;?

as:

3939;?

Marco’s responses suggest that he did not know a lot about snakes before Amber
read the book He remembers quite a few details from the text. He makes sure I know that
he’s not sure what kind of snake Jonathan and Miss Austin made, but he remembers

hearing about a “rattlesnake.” He does remember that the Anaconda is “longer than a

179

school bus.” While Marco’s retelling includes some misconceptions, he is beginning to
construct schema around a new t0pic, snakes, which he learned about through listening.
Perhaps because of his interest in this story, Marco gets involved in the reading

performance at one point. Marco makes a prediction out loud:

Margo’s Day, “Bmks to G9” (Appendix B)

Amber continues reading, “It grabs it with its needle sharp teeth, then it.. ”
“Swallows it,” Marco whispers loudly as Amber pauses.

Susan says, “Marco has a prediction. Say it out loud Marco.”
“Swallows it,” Marco says.

”. .. sinks its fangs into the mouse, ” Amber continues.

James says, “000. Dang!”

When Amber ﬁnishes reading the page and is showing the picture, Susan says,
“I want to ask Amber something. Marco thought it was ‘swallowed’. How did
you know it was ‘sinks’ and not ‘swallowed’?” Amber responds that she just
knew the word. Susan goes on to explain that Marco’s prediction made sense with
what came before it, but not with what came after.

Marco’s prediction shows that he is engaged in the text and constructing meanings
as he listens to Amber read. Since the meaning construction of listeners is generally silent,
it is rare to have such a clear example of the active listening process. Although Marco has
spoken out of turn, Susan highlights his prediction, in part because she is impressed with
his thinking. It is also likely that Susan is validating Marco’s reading strategy (predicting)
because of Marco’s position outside of the “kids on the rug” group. It is rare that Marco
speaks out to “assist” the reader, and Susan is celebrating this milestone by calling
attention to it

Susan labels Marco’s comment as “a prediction,” using the discourse of reading
process theory. She points out that his prediction “makes sense,” emphasizing that
reading is a process of making meaning. She also asks Amber to share her own thought
process, “how did you know...” This exchange is another example of Susan highlighting
an implicit reading and thinking process in order to make it explicit; Marco demonstrated a
prediction strategy. Susan has noticed Marco’s linguistic abilities and has connected these

abilities to the wider community of people who study the reading process.

180

This literacy event “Amber reads the book Snakes.” illustrates the role of listening
in Marco’s meaning making and literacy learning. Marco’s active meaning construction
process is expressed through his body language, his interest in the pictures, his questions,
and the oral comments and predictions that he makes as Amber reads aloud. As a listener,
Marco has opportunities to experience the content, style, language, and art in a range of texts
extending beyond his abilities for making meaning as a reader.

Many researchers have stressed the importance of listening experiences for young
literacy learners (Camboume, 1988; Hall, 1987; Teale and Sulzby, 1986; Wells, 1986).
Marco is not only Ieaming about snakes, but he is Ieaming language as he listens to Amber
read. He is Ieaming how to read as he experiences the literary language of a variety of
authors and text genres, revealed through his predictions and his comments (“long as a
school bus”). He learns speciﬁc reading strategies as he observes interchanges between his
classmates and his teacher.

When Marco listens to Amber reading a book to the class, social functions of the
literacy event include experiencing the text, learning about snakes, enjoying the language
and the illustrations. There is a social meaning construction occurring between reader,
listeners and text. There is an active “literacy club” (Smith, 1988) of subject participants
who help each other to read and understand the text As he participates in the social
demonstration of reading in his classroom, Marco is Ieaming how to read and what it means
to be a reader.

Marco as overhearer

In addition to participating in literacy events as a listener, Marco often participates in
the role of overhearer, listening in as other participants interact Silent Writing provides an
example of Marco’s meaning making as an overhearer. As children are getting ready for
writing, Susan calls Marco over and gives him a blank book for his autobiography. At the
“square team” table, Destine begins working well before Silent Writing begins, and sits

writing page after page for a full thirty minutes. Marco and David sit side by side and

181

illustrate the covers of their autobiographies. They are facing slightly towards each other,
and Marco often looks over to see what David is doing or to show David his book. Next to
Marco and David, Terrence and James work in similar postures.

Terrence James Marco David The “Square Team"

 

 

(Small, two seat “ﬁrst grade” tables.)

 

Destine Me / Jackie

 

 

 

 

As Marco and David are working, Jackie talks with me about her writing.

Margo’s Day, Silent Writing (Appandix B)

Jackie comes over with an illustrated page she is writing about dinosaurs.

Marco looks at her picture. He gasps and rolls his eyes bask, mining fear. I say to
Jackie, “You’re into dinosaurs now, huh?” I remember that Jackie has “BEEN
working on dinosaurs, haven’t you?”

Marco says, “Yep. They got. thsy go’n make a big Mk.”

Jackie leaves to get the rest of her “book.” I ask Marco, “A big book? How
do you know all about it?”

Marco says, “I know because... (He thinks for a moment before continuing.) I
just seen them write it.” Jackie returns with a folder ﬁlled with many pages of
writing and drawing. Marco says, “They... see there go the book.”

Jackie begins to sift through the papers, showing them to me. Marco stands up
to look at Jackie’s book. Marco says, “This an information book.”

I ask, “An information book? What kind of book is yours?”

“Biography.” Marco sits back down and starts to draw again.

Using Larson’s (1997) temrinology, described above, Marco is initially an
“overhearer,” on the periphery of my conversation with Jackie as he and David work on
their own writing. However, he takes the role of “peripheral respondent” when he answers
my question for Jackie. When I respond to Marco’s comment, I legitimatize his role in the
discussion. Marco’s response (“they go’n make a big book”) shows he is familiar with
Jackie’s work. This suggests that Jackie and Marco have opportunities to share their work
outside of the Silent Writing time. Marco’s comments also reveal that he is learning about

genre through the literacy events in this classroom community.

182

Marco’s Day. Silent Writing (Appendix B)
Jackie shows me the book Digging up Dinosaurs by Aliki. She stands ﬂipping

through the pages and talks about how she has used this book as a reference. “I’m
copying all this information.” Marco continues drawing. David looks over at
Jackie and back at his paper. Marco looks at David’s paper. He rolls his eyes,
miming amusement Marco takes David’s book and looks closely at the picture.
David watches Marco. .

Marco says to me, “Hey, you want to see this pretty picture?” He laughs.

David grabs at his book, but Marco holds it away. Marco starts to write or draw
in David’s book. David takes the book saying, “Don’t draw on my..” Marco
laughs.

Jackie sits down next to me, in the chair across from Marco, and talks about
dinosaurs. “And then once dinosaurs was extinct they found these big heavy rocks
and that’ s how.. .the book tells you about how they found them.”

Marco and David look at Jackie. Marco applauds Jackie’ s talk. Jackie tells
about her plans for the book she rs writing. Marco draws. He looks pp at Jagki 1.;

1;]; tells David. “They been working on that book about twenty days.”

Jackie talks about the people who found dinosaur bones. She wants to be a
paleontologist. She talks about her great grandmother who told her that “if you
look and see your dream... don’t say you can’t be anything you want.”

Marco draws. He looks up and listens as Jagkie pontinues galking ampt hpw
fpssils are found. Marco looks at David. He hides his picture in his lap, and
continues drawing.

Jackie shows a picture of dinosaur teeth. Marco gasps. She talks about the
biggest dinosaur teeth, “They have sharp teeth.”

V b tee ” M rco comm nts.

 

As Marco works, he “overhears” my rich conversation with Jackie. He appears
impressed, and even applauds Jackie’s talk - which was much more extensive than this
synopsis. Marco comments on Jackie’s writing process (“They’ve been working on this
book about twenty days”), and relates Jackie’s talk with his own experiences (“Rats have
sharp teeth.”) As “overhearer” of Jackie’s conversation with me, Marco is Ieaming about
dinosaurs. He is also Ieaming about why dinosaurs are interesting, and how she is reading

and writing about them.

Later, David ﬁnishes the ﬁrst page of his autobiography and shares his work with

Marco.

David shows Marco his work, and Marco listens while David reads the page. I
ask David, “With this page you’re going to be one?”

Marco says, “I’m bout to write my page GOOD.”

He looks at Debi, “You want to know my title?”

I ask why Marco hasn’t started yet. He says, “I’ve just been thinking.

“What have you been thinking about?”

“I’ve been thinking I’m gonna write, I was four years old.. When I was four I
had went. I mean six.”

183

“I know where you went”, Jackie says “It starts with an ‘M’... Oh, Major
Magic.” Jackie reminds Marco about Major Magic, a pizza fun house. I ask
Marco if he and Jackie know each other outside of school. He agrees, saying they
know each other in school too.

The timer rings signaling the end of “silent” writing. The class gets noisy as
children start to prepare for lunch. Marco gets up, but Susan asks the children to
return to their seats and begins giving instructions for cleanup and lunch
preparation.

Marco comes back and stands by the table. He turns to the ﬁrst page of his
book and writes, “I.” He says, “How do you spell was?”

I ask him, “What letter does it start with?” Marco says the word to himself,

“Wa:z Wa:z . Wa: s s s ‘8’”. I sound it out!”

“You hear an “S”? Yes there is an “S”, that’s right. Start with a “w”, then
put the “s”.

David looks over as Marco writes. “Ain’t it ‘W’, ‘A’, ‘S’?” he asks.

I agree, but suggest that “ws” is close enough for the sloppy copy.

Marco writes “4” next to the “ws.” He reads, “1 was four”, pointing to each
word, and then completes the sentence orally, “when I went to Major Magic. ”

He and David talk about how to spell “Major Magic”.

If I focus only on Marco’s writing as evidence of meaning construction, I might
describe Marco’s literacy experiences during Silent Writing as follows: Marco spent most
of the time drawing. At the end of the writing time, he wrote three words on his paper “I

was four.” Marco asked for help with spelling “was,” and “sounded it out,” predicting

6‘ ’9
C

an 8 He spelled the word “1” independently, and used the numeral “4” for the word
“four.” If I consider Marco’s “pre—writing” experiences, I might say that Marco’s text
construction begins when he orally composes and revises his text: “I was four years old...

When I was four I had went I mean six.”

However, looking closely at this brief segment of a thirty-minute language event, it
becomes clear that Marco is engaged in meaning making on many levels. He makes
meaning through art illustrating his own autobiography and observing David’s illustrations.
He makes meaning through overbearing my conversation with Jackie. He makes meaning
through listening to David read his autobiography. He plans his writing through oral
composing and discussion. And ﬁnally, through discussion with others at the table, he

begins to “write his page GOOD,”.

 

"’ Quotation marks indicate the letter name is being pronounced. For example “S” is
pronounced /Es/. Italics indicate the speaker is reading or writing.

184

During “Silent Writing” Marco constructs meaning through listening, overbearing,
illustrating, and oral composing as well as writing. Marco’s work is connected to the works
around him, as he is closely connected to the people around him, particularly his friends.

As Marco writes and interacts with other writers, he is learning how to be a writer. As he
observes my exchange with Jackie, he learns about what it means to write a book as well as
what it means to be a paleontologist. Through his experiences writing an autobiography in
a group of children who are also writing autobiographies, he is Ieaming how to write an

autobiography as well as how to be an author.

Figure 10 addresses the meaning potential and meaning construction of the Silent
Writing language event. These literacy events are NOT exercises, but experiences where
children are in the role of authors writing for authentic purposes. The autobiographies are
later published and shared with family members at an author’s celebration day. The Silent
Writing language event provides Marco with many opportunities to “learn by
overbearing.” Marco observes interactions between teachers and other students, and

demonstrations of other students’ reading and writing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 10
Meaning Potential and Meaning Construction in Silent Writing
Marco’s
Literacy practice: Marco listens/ observes Marco reads/ writes meaning
makin .
6a. Writing Susan gives Marco blank (listens) Yes 5
autobiographies. book, explains ’
autobiographies. oral
6b. Marco’s table mates Marco attends to Marco illustrates YCS art
work on David’s work. cover of his ’
“autobiographies. autobiography .
Marco writes the first YCS
page of his autobiog.
6c. Jackie talks about Marco listens and YCS
her dinosaur book. comments.
6d. Jackie talks about Marco listens and YES
Aliki’s book.‘ comments
6e. James calls Marco’s Marco goes to get ready YCS
name from list for lunch.

 

 

 

185

It strikes me that in some classrooms, where children’s Ieaming is measured by
individual performance, Marco’s strategy of watching his classmates closely might be
viewed as cheating. When I see how much Marco beneﬁts from observing the actions and
interactions of other learners, I am convinced that it is essential that children have
opportunities to observe their teacher interacting with other students and to observe their
classmates reading, writing, and talking about their work.

Marco reads and writes:

For much of the day, Marco took the role of “novice” and looked to others for
expertise. During Small Group Math (described in Chapter Three) he was likely to respond
to Susan’s questions, but waited for Susan’s instructions as he worked on a task. During

literacy activities he was likely to listen and observe. All this changed during “Book

Clubs”.

’ Da “ o Clbs” i B

Susan calls off the names of the “Book Clubs”, beginning with What’s in my
Pocket? Marco gets up when he hears the title.

A child calls out, “Patrice is not here.”

Marco says, “I here.”

Susan says, “Marco, were you in this group? Okay.”

Marco walks over to David, who is sitting on the ﬂoor by the door. Marco says
something to David. David shakes his head, “No.” Marco waves to David,
“Come on.”

Susan calls the Lunch Boxes group. The group members get up and begin
moving toward their group area. David gets up when he sees the other students
standing.

Always alert, Marco gets up when he hears the title of his book club. The responses
of classmates (Patrice is not here) suggest that Patrice is a “leader” of the group. With
Patrice absent, Marco appears willing to take charge of the meeting. However, David is

reluctant to acknowledge Marco’s leadership.

David sits at the “square” table in his usual seat by the window. The book club
folder, a loose-leaf binder, is open on the table in front of him. One pocket holds
several copies of the book What’s in my pocket? (Williams, 1994). Marco comes
over and picks up a book. David takes the book and puts it away. David talks to
Marco about “what we’re ‘pose to be doing.”

Marco leaves the table to confer with Susan. He returns to the table with a stack
of white envelopes. He waves at David, who is getting something from another

186

table. Marco calls David’s name. Susan tells them not to shout across the room.
David returns and sits down by the window, facing Marco.

Marco sits with the pile of white card size envelopes in front of him. He picks
up an envelope and opens all the glued seams. Then he closes up the sides and
neatly stacks the “ﬁnished” envelopes on a separate pile.

Marco says to David, “You ain’t go’n help me?”

Marco and David begin by negotiating the activity. Marco goes over to confer with
Susan. He returns and starts working. He asks if David is going to help him, but has some
difﬁculty involving David in the project

Marco says, “You ain’t go’n help me?”

David looks over at Susan, “Oh, Miss Austin got some paper.”

David gets up and starts towards Susan’s desk.

Marco calls, “But we already got the envelopes.”

David says, “I know but she giving out paper.

David returns with a used, blue legal sized ﬁle folder. He looks at Marco and
asks, “Why you doing that?”

“CAUSE. That’s what Miss Austin says we GOT to DO:O.” He shakes his
shoulders to emphasize his words. “Then we put it in there and then we be... draw
something in there and then we be done.” He indicates that the envelopes will go in
the blue folder.

David says, “Then we go’n to make a triarama. I’m...”

u N o . 99

“I’m going to make a triarama.” David leaves and goes over to the supply
table. He returns with green “handwriting” paper and begins to fold it for a
triararrra.

In explaining the project to David, Marco uses Susan’s authority to enforce his

leadership over the group project However, Marco explains to me that the decision about

the project was not Susan’s decision.

I ask how the group decided on the project.

Marco says, “The reason...because that... cause when we heard... when we said,
“What’s in my Pocket?,” I had thought of it. And then I decided to make this one
up and so then I got it and then when we open it (the envelope) there’s going to be a
little picture in there.”

In this project, Marco and David are subjects of the literacy events, negotiating
activities and procedures with each other. Marco looks to Susan for direction, and borrows
her authority as he begins to move into more “independent” writing. When Marco has
difﬁculty including David in the book making project, he asserts his leadership by taking

charge of David’s triarama project.

187

I ask, “What’s David doing?”

Marco explains, “He making a triarama.” He looks over at David. “You got
the wrong paper.” Marco takes David’s paper and tries to form a pyramid shape
by overlapping two of the four sides. It works, but the paper is ﬂimsy.

David says, “This will work.” He goes to get a stapler.

Marco decides, “We go’n make a triarama too. I’ll go get a piece of paper.”

He goes to the supply table and returns with a sheet of stiff manila paper. He
folds the paper and cuts off the side so it’s square.

David explains to me, “First you got to fold it, then you got to cut it.”

Marco folds the square twice from comer to comer so there is a X creased
across the middle. He cuts from one corner to the center of the X.

I ask, “How did you learn?”

Marco says, “Miss Austin.”

Then he says to David, “Ain’t that one hard to make?”

David starts to write on his triarama with a marker. I suggest a pencil, but be is
resistant

Marco folds one side overlapping another, forming a three-sided pyramid. He
staples the sides together and sits the triarama on one surface of the pyramid so he
can write or draw inside.

“Is that David’s?,” I ask.

“It’s all of ours,” Marco says.

He writes his name on the triarama. “So David, it’s your turn.”

David spells his name for Marco to write. “Don’t write it sloppy,” he says,
“And don’t write it that big.”

As Marco and David work, they talk about the construction process. The boys are
concerned with the quality of their projects. Marco scolds David for using the wrong paper;
David admonishes Marco not to “write it sloppy.” There is an ongoing concern for the
quality of the writing, which may relate to the knowledge that these projects will later be
shared with the class. Marco and David both appear to view their work as a group project
Marco insists that the triarama is “all of ours,” and David appears to feel Marco’s work

reﬂects on him.

Marco returns to the group book writing project During the Silent Writing, Marco
appeared to be a novice writer, having difﬁculty with getting his words down in paper.
However during this project, Marco has a strong mental image of the ﬁnal project, and the

writing process involved. He describes this mental plan to me as he works.

188

Marco says to me, “Look what we making. I’m going to draw a picture.”

“What are you going to do?”

“We making What’s in my Pocket? books like this.” He pulls a copy of the
book out of the group binder. “And we got to draw in something. We can draw.
We can get some of the ideas out of here [the book], but then when we don’t want
to get the ideas out of here, we can just think of some.”

Marco explains, “We’re going to use these [envelopes] for the pockets.”

“Those are the pockets?”

“And this what we go’n put them in,” Marco says, pointing to the blue folder.

One reason for the discrepancy between Marco’s apparent writing ability and his
conﬁdence during the Book Club project is that writing is much more than knowing which
letters to place on the paper. Marco’s explanation is another example of text composing,
what writing process researchers (i.e. Graves, 1994) call “rehearsals” or “prewriting.” He
is thinking and planning as a writer. Marco continues to plan the project with an “outline,”

which I described in Chapter Four.
Mama mas gather piece of pamr and draws a ling. He draws a triangle,

square, circle, and diamond on the line. As he draws, he looks up on the wall, where
the square hangs marking their table, as a reference.

Marco says, “Okay, them the ones we going to put in.”

David goes over to the supply table. He returns with some glue. Meanwhile,
Marco draws a second line and adds two more shapes.

Marco says, “These the ones we’re going to draw in there.” He points to the
envelopes.

David sits trying to open the glue. “Why we need glue?” Marco asks.

Marco studies the paper with the lines and shapes. “Okay,” he says. He
counts off six envelopes, moving them from one pile to another, while looking at the
shapes. Then he counts the shapes, pointing to each one with his ﬁnger. He counts
the shapes three times, and counts the envelopes once more.

“We don’t need these,” he says. He moves the extra envelopes to a comer of
the table. David is still working on the glue. He looks over to see what Marco’s
doing.

Marco has invented an outline for his book. What’s in My Pocket is a riddle book,
where the pockets initially hold “something round,” and then “something square.” Marco
draws shapes to represent “the ones we’re going to draw in there.” He uses signs posted
around the room as a reference for his drawing. He then matches the number of pockets
(envelopes) to the number of shapes on his outline. Susan and I were amazed at Marco’s
resourcefulness in developing this outline. Susan can not think of any sirrrilar outlining

experiences that Marco may have observed, Marco has participated in literacy events where

189

temporary texts were used to organize other activities: such as the Math Choices list, or the

attendance tally.

Marco’s question to David (“Why we need glue?”) and his use of “we” in his
explanations, highlight his continued belief that be and David are working together. In
another example of pre-writing, Marco then opens the book What ’s in My Pocket?
(Williams, l994b) and reviews the pattern that the author uses to write.

Marco opens one envelope and places it on the table. He spans the bo_bk and

rpads, “Rocket, pocket. What ’s in my pocket? It ’s something rQund.” He looks

over the next few pages, and then turns back to the ﬁrst page.

Marcb stag tb gopy from the book to thb inside bf (be envelom. He is using
the thick, black marker.

Marco uses oral language, outlining and reading in order to plan and organize his
writing project. Unfortunately, at this point, my teacher instincts take over and I intervene

with Marco’s process:

Mada sgrts to cbpy from the book to tbs inside of the anvelbm. He is using
the thick, black marker.

I say, “Honey, don’t you want to write that with a pencil?”

Marco shakes his head, no. “I’m writing this- pocket, pocket

I am sitting in the chair on Marco’s right side. “Wait a minute.” I take the
envelope and close it up. “Do you want it closed like this, and then you open it and
the surprise is inside.”

David takes an envelope and glues it to the blue folder.

I say, “Let’s see if we can plan that a little bit. What I’m thinking is maybe...
what’s going to be inside this one.”

Marco says, “Marble.”

“Okay. Draw what’s going to be inside.”

Marco draws a marble inside the envelope.

“Okay. So you want to write, “a marble.”

Marga writes a marble . copying the words from the book.

“So on the outside.” I write on the outside of the envelope. “Pocket. See I
think a marker’s going to be too fat to write all these words.”

r s the envelo as I write “Pocket ocke w ’ i o .

I say the words slowly as I write, “Something... tha:t’s... rou:nd. Then you
open it up.”

M ints to the text inside the envelo . We b th read “ mar l

 

D,

My intervention is intended to support Marco’s plans. Marco does engage in
reading and writing within this vignette, but I have taken the leadership away from him, at

least momentarily. It may be that Marco would have needed assistance eventually, I just

190

wish I had let him work on his own a little longer. Marco wants David to participate, but is
concerned about David’s role. In the vignette above, David has glued a blank envelope to
the blue folder.

Marco takes the folder from David, “What did you do?” he asks. He laughs.
“You ‘posed to wait.” David, Marco, and I talk about how the folder should be
oriented. Marco wants it horizontal, “That way, ‘cause that way we got more.”

Marco suggests we might need tape. I say we can use glue, but should line the
envelopes up. We take David’s envelope off and wipe off the glue. “Glue this one
down here so you can put more on.”

Marco does the gluing, even though I suggest that David do it He places his
envelope on the left side, beneath the fold.

Marco’s laugh mitigates his criticism of David, but he asserts his leadership with his
suggestion of using tape, and his insistence on gluing the “pocket” down himself. He
realizes David should be included in the activity, but clings to his role as writer and group
leader.

David says, “This time Ima do it. Let’s trade seats.”

Marco pastes David’s envelope below the ﬁrst one.

David says, “I don’t get a chance to do nothing. Why you have to do
everything?”

Marco says, “Now what we go’n write up here?”

We decide on something square.

David says, “Write it, just like that.” He points to the envelope that I wrote.

Marco says, “You know I can’t write that neat”

Marcb begins to copy from the frbnt bf my envslbm to tbs bps updbmsath it.
David leans over to watch.

“That’s neat enough, huh?” Marco says, looking over at David.

David reaches for the pencil. “Let me see.”

Margo hangs ontb the pencil and bpnb’ppes wdtipg.

“I don’t get a chance to do nothing. All I have to do is...”

“You ‘bout to do something.”

“Why you get to do everything?”

Marco shakes his head.

I say, “Hey, David, where’s your pencil? You can do this one.”

I show him another envelope. David looks around for a pencil.

Marco says, “Hold on. I think I got a pencil.” He ﬁnds a pencil for David.

Marco involves David in planning (“Now what we go’n write up here?”) and
discussion, but does not know how to involve David in writing without giving up his own
authority. When I suggest David can write on another envelope, Marco ﬁnds him a pencil.

But he is concerned about what David writes:

191

David sits for a few seconds. He says, “Pocket, pocket, what’s in my pocket.”
He takes the envelope and starts to write.

Marco waves his hands in annoyance. He is concerned that David is copying
from the same page that he is copying. He says, “You you STOP. You got to do
the next page.”

David starts to turn the page in the book. Marco stops him. “I know. But I got
to do this page.”

Marco points to each word in the mk as ha reads, “All you do is write Pocket,
pocket, what’s in my pocket. That’s all you got to write.”

For the next few minutes, tbs boys write gpietly. Margo copies from my
envelop_e. David copies from the book.

While working on the book club project, Marco and David constantly move back
and forth between reading and writing. This project creates many Opportunities to read and
re-read the literature book, and other texts. When Marco ﬁnishes his ﬁrst envelope, he

reads it aloud to himself:

After a time, Marco looks over at me. “I wrote . . It say, ‘Pocket. pocket,
’ i m ocket.” He ta 8 each w rd on the nvelo wi hi n il ras r.
Marco looks over at David’s work. He moves David’s pencil so be can see
what he’s doing.

As Marco and David work, Marco also has opportunities to practice and think about
many aspects of the writing process:

I ask Marco, “Are you doing something square? Something that’s square?”

Marco puts his pencil down. “You can write that,” he suggests.

I refuse. “No. You go ahead. You’re doing a really good job. You’re almost
done?’

Mmo continues to write: Something that ’s sg.

“I don’t got enough room.”

“Write ‘square’ down there,” I suggest, “Erase the ‘s’ and ‘q’. See how I
wrote ‘round’ underneath it.”

Marco uses the book to copy the word ‘square.’

“How’s that ‘p’ look?” he asks.

“That’s a ‘Q’. It’s like a ‘P’ backwards.”

“I mean..” Marco starts to erase the Q.

“No, you got it. It’s s’posed to be a ‘Q.’ S-q-uare.” I emphasize the
phoneme /k/.

Marco and David also discover, as most writers do, that we often underestimate the

work and time involved in a project while planning.

“I’m tired,” Marco says. He leans back in his chair. Then he leans fbrwgd

s omethin .
“I’m tired too,” David agrees. He starts writing again.
“It’s gonna take DAYS for this,” says Marco.

192

In Silent Writing, Marco appears to have difﬁculties writing his autobiography
without assistance, although he does use drawing and oral language in his meaning
construction process. During this book club meeting, Marco plans out a writing project,
invents a symbolic outline, reads his book club book, writes and reads his own writing, and
writes an entry in the book club diary. While Marco is a beginning writer in terms of the
mechanics of text construction, be is able to use a wide range of resources such as farrriliar
books, language patterns, art, visual mapping, thinking, and the people around him. Where

he is a follower for most of the day, Marco takes a leadership role in this activity.

Marco’s abilities as a writer during this language event appear to reach beyond his
understandings of writing as a language system. However, writing is much more than
knowing which letters to place on the paper. Being a writer also involves knowing
something about books and the language of stories, composing texts in thought or spoken
language, outlining or organizing the format of a text, using other texts as models, and
having something to say. It involves having a group or friend nearby with whom to share
these experiences. In this setting, Marco has many reading and writing abilities and

strategies to draw from.

Figure 11 considers the meaning potential and meaning construction in Marco’s
experiences during the Book Club activity. The participation structure of a club provided
children with considerable freedom to plan social literacy experiences in relationship to a
book they enjoyed. As David and Marco negotiated and worked on their book club
projects, they had multiple opportunities for text creation as readers and writers as well as
listeners and observers. During much of the day, Marco was in the role of novice and
participated in literacy events as a listener or observer. However, given the opportunity,
Marco engaged conﬁdently as a leader during the Book Club meeting. In his role of leader,

Marco uses a variety of resources and strategies for meaning making.

193

Figure 11
Meaning Potential and Meaning Construction in “Book Clubs”

Meaning
- Litezasx treatise ...... Marge Fae/seems - Mareorsasélyrites- _ .. senseless“: .
7a) A group project in Marco and David YCS
response to a book. negotiate project
Marco explains project Marco makes a Yes
orally. symbolic outline
Marco reads from book YCS
as model.
Marco reads what I YES
write.
I suggest plan, write one Marco writes, using my YCS
“pocket.” work as model.
David writes, using book Marco reads his own Yes
................. asmoslel;-----_----!vet.in_g-_----------_------.

7b) Making triaramas David makes a triarama. Marco makes triarama, Yes
and writes names.
"‘76) B'éSk'ClirE Diaiy' " ' 'MSrES Erid‘l'd’r's'éris'é ' ' ’ 'Maic'o'yir’r'tés'iri 566k" ' "y'é's """
diary. club diary.

Marco is learning language as he and David negotiate the literacy events of the book
club meeting. His exchanges with David show a concern for the form and appearance of
the project as well as the composition process. Marco writes his name on the triarama and
turns to David saying, “So David, it’s your turn.” David spells his name for Marco to
write. “Don’t write it sloppy,” David says, “And don’t write it that big.” Later, when
Marco is recording the group’s activities in the “Book Club Diary”, be accurately writes
David’s name from memory. He says, “I know how to spell David’s name ‘cause he
taught me. D-A-V-I-D”.

Few examples of literacy learning are so immediate or overt However, the
ramiﬁcations of Marco’s “spelling lesson” move far beyond spelling. Not only is Marco
learning to spell while he and David work on Book Club projects, he is learning to spell
something not included in most spelling texts: the name of his best friend. Marco’s social
construction of David’s name occurs within a literacy event created by Marco and David: it
is NOT an exercise for the purpose of evaluating their language abilities. In this example,

Marco is the subject of his own language Ieaming, seeking answers to his own linguistic

inquiry questions as young children do when they learn language at home.

194

The Book Club language event provided opportunities for Marco and David to learn
literacy through using literacy, in a context where they had a good deal of control over the
reading and writing experience. In this light, Susan’s introduction of the social structure of
“Book Clubs”, where children are problem posers (Freire, 1970) rather than passive
recipients of language instruction, becomes an example of liberatory teaching.

Meaning Making in Lauren’s Day

Lauren’s Day, Math (See Appgndix Q)

Susan announces, “When you ﬁnish your math paper you can get your writing

out right away.”

Lauren says, “Yes!”

Danielle is amused. “She was like, ‘Yes! Yes!’”

Lauren is an enthusiastic writer. When she was done with the “assignments”
during Things to Do, she pulled out her current rough draft book out of her desk to work
on it Lauren also chooses reading experiences. During “Silent Reading (and Writing),”
she and Katherine collected a stack of books and got busy. The language events of
Lauren’s Day provide many opportunities for Lauren to select reading and writing
experiences and she does.

When Lauren is reading or writing, she is not easily distracted. Like Marco she
“overhears” what’s going on around her, looking up and around and then back at her
work. In one case she stops reading to answer a question that James’ asks, and then returns
to her book without skipping a beat. Lauren is likely to ignore Susan’s announcements and
keep working, although she appears able to keep track of what’s going on. I call this
process “selective listening.” Lauren’s ability to selectively listen and selectively ignore
classroom talk and activity contributes to her meaning making process.

Lauren does not generally ask for assistance as she reads and writes, although she
does seek assistance with math. She needs no encouragement to write and writes at home
as well as at school. However, she enjoys sharing what she’s written with others. She also

is eager to assist other children in the class with their work. Lauren’s meaning making is

both a personal and a social experience.

195

Lauren as (selective) listener
Lauren and Katherine sit by the door intently reading their illustrated picture books

when Susan announces the end of Silent Reading:

Qbren’s Day, Silent Reading (See Apmndix C)

Susan says, “Okay. Stop please and look at me.”

Both girls continue to read.

Susan continues, “Who’s looking at me? Nobody. My feelings are hurt.”

Lauren glances up after Susan’s comment about feelings. Katherine leans over

and asks Lauren for a word. Lauren supplies the word and continues reading, “A
litter box will make that smelly problem go away.”

Lauren continues to read as Susan is talking, “There’s Sarina. Okay, great...

four people. I feel much better. Okay. Will you PLEASE put your books away
and then go to the carpet and sit down and face the west. We are starting with
lunch Boxes. I need everything put away.”

Katherine gets up and starts picking up materials. Lauren stops to listen to

Susan’s instructions, and then returns to her book.

Katherine, “Come on Lauren. We’ll read tomorrow. Psych". ”

Initially, both girls continue to read, ignoring Susan’s instructions completely.
When Susan continues, the girls appear to listen to her instructions but continue with their
reading for several moments. This response occurs, in part, because the girls are engrossed
in their reading and don’t want to be interrupted. In addition, their experiences with
Susan’s instructions lead them to predict that there will be a brief interlude when they can
continue their tasks. In many cases, children continue to work for several minutes before
the next activity. In this case, the next activity involves the entire class, and Susan is pushing
them to begin cleaning up more quickly.

Lauren and Katherine’s responses to Susan’s instructions might be called
“selective listening.” For Lauren, there is a conﬂict between her meaning making, and her
desire to continue to read, and Susan’s current requirements. Lauren ignores Susan’s
initial request, because she knows she will have another chance to attend. She glances up
when Susan says, “my feelings are hurt”, gauging Susan’s level of concern. She returns
to her reading as Susan continues talking for the purpose of getting attention, but looks up
when Susan actually gives instructions. After Susan completes the instructions, Lauren

returns to her book, conﬁdent that she has a few more rrrinutes to read.

196

Lauren’s gaze reveals that she is not inattentive, but selective in her attention. She
looks up to gauge Susan’s mood. When Susan is giving instructions, she stops reading to
attend. Ken Goodman (1996) describes a proﬁcient reader as being both “effective” and
“efﬁcient.” She is “effective” in focusing on making meaning, but “efﬁcient” by using
the language cueing systems selectively; taking the shortest path to meaning. Readers do
not focus on every letter, space, and punctuation mark when we read, but sample the graphic
cues selectively in the search for meaning.

Lauren’s “selective listening” involves a similar process. Lauren samples the cues
around her as she makes decisions about her activities in the classroom. Lauren makes
meaning of the classroom discourse, including the social context and social relationships as

well as the language that she hears.

Laurgn’s Day, Things to Do (See Appendix C)

Announcements begin over the PA system, and Susan puts her ﬁnger to her
mouth. The room gets quiet, but children continue to work as the assistant principal
speaks. Lauren continues working on math, occasionally looking over at
Katherine’s paper...

On the PA, the assistant principal says, “Students from Mrs. Brassel’s room
will lead us in the school pledge.” Susan says, “stand up please” as the school
pledge begins. Lauren sits as she begins chanting, then stands. She stops pasting
for a moment, then continues to work. Danielle and Alicia also continue working as
they stand and chant the pledge. When the pledge stops, Lauren and Katherine
continue to stand for a moment, engaged in working.

Lauren and her tablemates quiet down as the PA announcements begin, and even
join in with the school pledge. Yet they never take their focus off their work tasks. Susan
complains about this selective listening when several children ask about computer class.
She tells the class that the PA announcements are for the younger children too, and if they
had been listening they would have heard that the computer classes were canceled that day.
Obviously, many of the children have learned that the PA announcements are not relevant to
them. In addition, they count on their teacher to listen for them and repeat any relevant
announcements. Lauren appears adept at “reading” the classroom discourse and knowing

when to attend.

 

‘5 “Psych” is short for “I’m psyching you out.” In other words, “just kidding”.

197

Susan begins to take attendance. Today she greets each child in Spanish, with

“Hola.” Lauren plays with something in her hands.

As the children respond, Brent tallies those present and Destine tallies absences

on a chart on the chalkboard. Several students respond in Chinese. Susan answers,

“Oh, Happy New Year to you too. Thank you.” ,
Willie responds, “Hola, Senor, Madam, Miss Austin. Happy New Year.”
Lauren is talking to her friends. Susan says. “Um.” Lauren looks over.
Susan makes personal comments to some students, “Hola Jessica. I’m glad

you’re back.”
thn Kenneth is called, Lauren looks up at Susan, anticipating her name.

Patrice is next, and then Lauren.

Susan says, “Hola Lauren {last name}.”
Lauren smiles, “Hola, Miss Austin.”

 

The literacy event “taking attendance” is very familiar by the 124th day of school.

Lauren interacts with her friends, appearing indifferent to the ofﬁcial dialogue of the
Morning Meeting. However, when Kenneth is called, Lauren looks up at Susan because
she knows her turn is coming soon. In this case, Lauren’s experience allows her to predict
when her name will be called. Kenneth’s name is a cue that she needs to pay attention.
Lauren also looks up when Susan says “Um.” Susan’s “Um” cues a possible shift in the
predictable attendance discourse, and Lauren looks up to see what’s going on. Lauren uses
prediction as a strategy as she selectively listens for particular signals that cue her to pay
attention.

In a busy classroom, with many overlapping activities, Lauren has sorted out how
and when to pay attention. Much of the classroom discourse is predictable and Lauren
knows when she needs to attend and when she can safely ignore what’s going on.

Lauren’s selective listening strategy gives her more time to work on her own agenda and
more control over her Ieaming experiences. On the other hand, she uses cues in the
classroom discourse to keep tabs on what’s going on, and cooperate with the ofﬁcial
activities. Lauren’s interest in being a cooperative group member is revealed as students

continue to clean up after Silent Reading.

198

Katherine gets up and starts picking up materials. Lauren stops to listen to
Susan’s instructions, and then returns to her book.

Katherine, “Come on Lauren. We’ll read tomorrow. Psych.”

Lauren says, “I don’t think she’s coming tomorrow.. but she might.”

Lauren comes over and asks me if I’m returning the next day. I say no, but I’d
like to interview her during the movie Susan’s class and another class will be
watching at 2:00.

Lauren goes back to Katherine, who wants her to “put that book up.” Lauren

says, “I gotta talk to Miss Goodman, so I gotta have the book.”

Katherine says, “Well just ﬁnish reading... very quick.”

Lauren says, “I cant. I can’t disobey Miss Austin rules.

“I know you can’t”, Katherine agrees, “but you...” The voices become

inaudible as the girls walk away from the camera.

In the vignette above, Katherine knows I have been taping Lauren as she reads. She
and Lauren try to negotiate a way that Lauren might ﬁnish reading her book and still follow
Susan’s instructions. Although Lauren often ignores her teacher, she does not view this
selective listening as “disobeying” class requirements. Lauren’s comments during math
show her concern for listening and paying attention.

Lauren sings, “I’m on the back.” She wrestles with the scissors. “Can you

pass me some glue.” She gets the scissors.

Lauren says to Danielle, “Here’s these blanks.”

Danielle says, “You better keep them. You might need them.”

Lauren says, “No, you weren’t paying attention. If you got 0 (zero), you can

just leave it blank.”

Danielle says, “No, you weren’t paying attention.”

The girls talk about what Susan said.

Lauren is concerned with paying attention and getting her work done. However, she
has learned to pay attention selectively, listening for cues that tell her when to attend and
when to ignore what’s going on. Selective attention is an important aspect of language
learning. When babies learn to talk, they must learn which cues to attend and which cues to
ignore. They learn to attend to differences between phonemes, or sounds, in order to
distinguish between “boy” and “toy”. On the other hand, they learn to ignore differences
in pitch between their mother and their father’s voices since these features don’t relate to
meaning. They also learn to attend to the expressions on their parent’s faces in order to

gauge the seriousness or sincerity of the spoken words.

199

Learning to read and write involves the same balance between attending and ignoring
printed symbols. Readers learn to ignore differences in font, treating different looking print
(read, READ, read) as if they are the same. They must also treat print that appears to be the
same (Did you read that book. I read it yesterday.) as different. K. Goodman (1996) calls
this a “set for ambiguity”. In this way, Lauren’s selective listening process shows a
sophisticated ability to read and gauge the subtle cues and signals in the classroom
community.

Lauren as writer

mm

On the two days that I visited in March, Lauren was working on a book: My
Friend’s Little Baby Sister. Lauren brought the book over to read to me on Marco’s Day.
At that time she had written and illustrated about three pages. The following week, on
Lauren’s Day, she brought the same book out during Things to Do and read it to Amber
and me. Later in the morning, Math is ending and children are getting ready for Silent
Writing. Lauren turns in her math and wanders over to visit with Alyssa, but Susan sends
her back to her table. She takes out her rough draft book and sits down.

Lauren plays with strips of paper left from math. She omns her book to th;
figs]; blank mg; She asks if she can use my markers, and gets a colored pencil

from my supply box. Lauren draws som;thing in her Mk as she is sitting down.
Amber sits looking at her hands.

Susan says, “Its time to get quiet. All right. I’m looking to see who’s ready in
one minute.”
Alicia shows Amber her papers. They discuss whether Alicia’s book should be

wide or tall. Lauren [mks tbropgb h;r book.
She sbbws m; a pag; sh; was working on last week. “I got that one done” she

says.

Like many writers, Lauren takes a while to get down to work. She takes a break to
talk to her friends, and then to get her materials arranged. She adds to an illustration, and
looks over the previous pages. Next to Lauren, her friends are also getting ready to write.
When Lauren shows me the book, I ask if she would like to read to me from where she left
off that morning.

She reads the last page out loud to me, ”When we had got into the car, we saw

my best friend and her mother and her baby sister. We had to drop them oﬂ
because her mother had got oﬁr early. And I haven’t ﬁnished this part.”

200

I ask, “What are you going to do for that part?”

Lauren says, “I’m going to write about when they had got into the house and
they had called my mother.”

As Lauren tells me about her book, Susan explains to the class that it’s time to
put everything away and get ready for writing “when I get to zero.”

I said, “So you already know what’s coming next?”

“Mhm,” Lauren continues “And they gonna have a sleep over party.”

“So they have a sleep over party?” I repeat. “And then what’s gonna
happen?”

“Then I think,” Lauren begins to smile, “And their mother went on a trip.
Their mother. And the baby had stayed at home with them. And she was a bad
babyf’

“Uh oh. That’s what you’re planning? So this is gonna be a very long book,
huh?”

Lauren is constructing the next part of the text before she begins to write. She
volunteers the incidents about the phone call and the sleep over party. Our dialogue
prompts Lauren to think about the next events, which she composes as we talk. (“Then I
think...”) Lauren’s story is entertaining, and she smiles as she tells me about the “bad
baby.” She is enjoying the creative process and her own creation.

As we talk, Susan is counting slowly, “Ten... nine... eight...” Jonathan
continues writing, and Alicia is working with large sheets of paper, making a book.
The room is quiet, with some munnuring as children get settled.

“Go ahead,” I tell Lauren.

Ladsen spags (9 write as Susan says “six.” She holds her book with her left
hand at the top.

Lauren writes, “Wen tey ga_t in tbr heme they bet callm

mommy} ’As she writes, she says the words slowly aloud, “W
ﬂame they had called my mommy.

Susan says, “Zero. Everyone should be writing now.” She sets the timer and
the room gets very quiet. Only murrnuring and whispering can be heard. Lamp
[i r;s asrbss (b; table, with her face leaping against h;; l;f_t bapd as sh; writes. Next

to her, Amber rs picking at the stapler.
By the time Susan says, “zero,” Lauren is well into the writing process. She is
lying across the table, totally engrossed in her story.

(lauren) continues to write. She says the words to herself as she writes,
“...mommy and ask can her daughter spend the night...”

Lauren writes, "morruny and ask can her dar sem aen neyt . "

Lauren looks up at Bruce. She plays with her braid, and appears to be thinking.
She gets a tissue. Lauren returns to the table. She sits down and picks up her
pencil. She looks over her page and says, “My mother said. . .”

She begins to write, saying the words again slowly, “My:y . . . mommy: . .
sai:d . . yes.” her voice drops as she completes the sentence.

In her book, she writes: My mommy sed yes.

Lauren looks over the page and mgins to draw a pictpre under the written text

201

Susan is talking in the background. Lauren looks up and then continues to
illustrate her picture. After a several minutes, she shows me her picture. “This the
telephone cord,” she says.

Lauren works steadily throughout the writing time. However, the writing is not

always smooth. She stops and appears to think, and gets up to take a break. Lauren always
writes the words ﬁrst, on the top of the page, and then illustrates her text On Marco’s Day,

Lauren and I talked about how words and images interact in her composing process.

Marco’s Day, Writing Time: Lauren talks about her writing.

Debi: Do you remember thinking about the words, do you ever think about
what words you want to use when you write?

Lauren: Yep.

Debi: Yep. Can you tell me a little about that?

Lauren: When I went “I couldn’t believe my eyes.” I put her mouth open like
that. (Lauren opens mouth, miming surprise, while pointing at picture.)

Debi: So it went with a picture in your mind. So do you see a picture in your
mind when you’re writing?

Lauren: Mhm.

Debi: Do you draw ﬁrst or do you write ﬁrst?

Lauren: Write.

Debi: But when you’re writing, you see the picture in your mind and when
you’re drawing you try to show that picture?

Lauren: Yep.

Debi: So that’s how you write those interesting words. You see the picture.

Lauren: Mhm. '

Debi: Anything else you want to tell me about how you write such good
stories?

Lauren: When I said that, “I was getting up really early in the morning” (shows
page), this is her mother’s purse. And I didn’t have room to have... to
draw the picture and have them when they kissed their mother in the
kitchen, drawing the picture.

Debi: When they did what? What did you want to do in the picture?

Lauren: I wanted their mother to be in the kitchen cooking their lunch.

Debi: Oh. So you just showed her leaving with her purse.

Lauren: Mhm and their lunch boxes.

Debi: Oh. But you pictured her packing their lunch boxes for them and

everything. Oh, very nice.

Here Lauren gives us a glimpse of an “author’s text” that differs from her
illustrated book. In Lauren’s mental text construction, the mother is in the kitchen cooking
the girls’ lunch. The girls come in and kiss their mother in the kitchen. Lauren represents
this scene with a picture of a purse and two lunch boxes and the written text: We had to get

up really early. Mama had to pack our lunch so when we eat at school.

202

Lauren is illustrating her second page when the timer rings announcing the ofﬁcial
end of silent writing. Children continue to work as names are called to prepare for lunch.

As Lauren is working the timer rings announcing the ofﬁcial end of silent

writing. hildren r an.“Awww.” The daily helpers begin calling children’s
names to prepare for lunch. Lauren ﬁnishes her picture and shows it to me.

Lauren turns a page in her book and creases it so that lies ﬂat She looks up at

Amber and they exchange smiles.

Lauren sighs lbudly. Then she talks as she writes, “When we woke up we

fe.'lt... kitchen. was a mess. The baby messed up everything.” Lauren works at the
writing with an intent expression on her face and no hesitations.

Writing a story is hard work, as many authors discover. Lauren sighs loudly as she
begins her third page. Yet she works diligently at her writing without hesitation. It is a
labor that she enjoys. Lauren is what I used to call an “independent” worker. All she
needs is an opportunity to write. As a Whole Language classroom teacher I noticed that
about half the children simply needed the freedom and opportunity to read and write. Fifth
graders who came from traditional classrooms could never believe they would get “credit
for reading.” After three years in Whole Language classrooms, Lauren and her classmates
rarely need to be motivated to write. Many ask for writing all morning and groan when the
timer announces the end of writing time.

However, after observing children working in social literacy events, I realize that
“independent” is a misnomer. It is the social milieu of being a writer among writers that
creates a space for young writers to thrive. Children collaborate on works together, like
Amber illustrating a page of lauren’s story, or this conversation I overheard on Marco’s

Day.
Margb’s Day, Silent Writing (Appendix B)

Terrence and Darryl come over and stand by the table. Terrence says, “Next I’m
making a newspaper and you and James are going to have to help me with that”

Even when children do not collaborate directly, their writing is a “social
performance” (Dyson, 1993), as they work side by side with an audience of classmates in
mind.

Lauren turns a page in her book and creases it so that lies ﬂat. She looks up at
Amber and they exchange smiles.

203

As I discussed earlier with Marco’s experiences during the Book Club, being a
writer is multifaceted and involves much more than the ability to print letters. Lauren’s
experience during Silent Writing further illustrates the various aspects of the writing
process that children are Ieaming as they write within this community. In March of her
second grade year, Lauren is writing illustrated stories that may take several weeks to
complete. The structure of the Silent Writing time provides Lauren with the time and space
to be a writer -- writing, drawing and taking breaks on her own schedule. Lauren needs no
special motivation or assistance with writing. However, she collaborates with friends and
enjoys sharing her work, indicating that she derives support from writing in a community of
writers.

As Lauren writes in Susan’s classroom, she is learning to write and learning what it
means to be a writer. Lauren is learning the skill and style of a writer as she learns the
forms and conventions of written language. As illustrations of Lauren’s language Ieaming,
I will describe Lauren’s language Ieaming as a storyteller and a speller.

ngmr'ng a writer: Lauren’s storyt;lling

Unfortunately, I do not have a copy of Lauren’s written text However, Figure 12 is
a transcription of the story as she read it to me. Although My Best Friend’s Little Baby
Sister is not ﬁnished yet, it shows many elements of a well constructed story. Lauren’s
story has a sophisticated opening. Young writers often write “bed to bed” type stories that
start when they wake up and end when they go to sleep. In Lauren’s introduction, she
begins by developing the plot and topic: the new baby sister and the narrator’s reaction.

Lauren’s description of the narrator’s thoughts “I couldn’t believe my eyes,” and
her use of dialogue are devices that heighten audience involvement in a story, whether oral
or written (Labov, 1972; Tannen, 1989). Lauren is using internal evaluation, expressing the
narrators feelings as the story evolves. Lauren develops the several characters and
establishes the relationships between them through dialogue and action. She extends the
plot through the suspense, anticipating the moment of ﬁnally meeting the new baby. She
introduces a problem as the children are left alone with the baby, and writes with realistic

humor.

204

Figure 12 : Lauren’s Story (as read aloud)
My Friend's Little Baby Sister

Me and my mama and my sister went to the mall. I
saw my friend and I couldn't believe my eyes. I saw her
new baby sister.

But I didn't get to say ”hi" or "bye" because we
had... it was time to go home.

we waved “bye" but they didn't see us.

Finally we got home. we ate dinner. After dinner
we had to go to sleep. And my.. and Mama kissed us
goodnight.

we had to get up really early. Mama had to pack
our lunch so when we eat at school.

Our teacher, Mrs. McGillicuty, she is nice.

After school we walked to the playground. My
sister said, ”Why didn't you see your best friend?"

”I don't know." Finally we were at the playground.
My sister asked, ”When will mommy get here?"

”She will be here in a minute."

“Good."

“Mommy's here."

”Yes," said my sister.

I couldn't believe my eyes. When we had got into
the car, we saw my best friend and her mother and her
baby sister. we had to drop them off because her mother
had got off early.

(The section was completed on Lauren’s Day as I
observed.)

When they got in their home they had called my
mommy and asked can her daughter spend the night. My
mommy said, “yes.”

Then that night she drove.. came over. we had to
go to bed.

When we woke up the kitchen was a mess. The baby
:mcssed up everything.

Like many writers, Lauren builds her ﬁction on the framework of her own life. When
Lauren was in ﬁrst grade, she began to write journal entries and stories focusing on family

205

activities and events. Since she writes in ﬁrst person, I assumed that most of her stories
were memoirs. However, when I asked Lauren about the sister that appears in so many of
her stories, Lauren informed me that her story was “ﬁction.” She doesn’t have a sister.
Lauren’s “sister” is based on a close cousin. At the end of the Silent Writing time, I talk
with Lauren about what elements of the story are true:

Lauren: We do sleep in one bed, me and my cousin.

Debi: And you do have a little cousin like that.

Lauren: And we do go to school.

Debi: Does your cousin have a baby sister?
Lauren: Mhm.

Debi: What other parts are true?

Lauren: The dinner part.

Debi: Did you go to a mall and see your cousin?

Lauren: We actually wasn’t in the mall, we were at the market. And my

mother does make my lunch.

Lauren’s use of language in My Best Friend ’3 Baby Sister demonstrates her
understanding of the language of written texts, particularly stories. She uses adverbs and
adverbial phrases (ﬁnally, after dinner, that night) to add details to her story and create a
chronology of events. Out of twenty nine sentences, twelve (41 percent) involve multi-
clausal sentence structure. A few of these are the common use of “and” between
independent clauses (“I saw my friend and I couldn’t believe my eyes”). But she also
uses more complex structures involving dependent clauses (“When we had got into the car,
we saw my best friend...”). She uses dialogue with dialogue markers, except for the
exchange between the sisters on the playground when she drops the markers for the middle
comments as professional writers might. These complex sentences are familiar structures in
written narratives. They allow Lauren to include a lot of detail in her story without getting
overly wordy.

Complex sentence structures can often cause grammatical problems for beginning
writers. Lauren has few grammatical problems in twelve complex structures. The most
obvious is “Mama had to pack our lunch so when we get to school.” In this sentence
Lauren is using “so” as a preposition “for,” perhaps there is an implied missing clause
“so when we get to school (we can eat)” Lauren read this story to me several times and

appeared comfortable with the wording.

206

Two other structures involve past perfect: “When we had got in the car” and
“When they got in their home they had called.” The ﬁrst case may be a dialect variation
for “have gotten.” The second example (had called) may be the result of the complexity of
the clauses in that four-clause sentence: “When they got in their home/ they had called my
mommy/ and asked/ can her daughter spend the night.” In last phrase, “and asked can her
daughter spend the night” Lauren uses an embedded question, a common dialect variation
of African-American Vernacular English (AAVE). This sentence also demonstrates
Lauren’s ease with referents, another common problem of young writers. Within the
dialogue “1” becomes “her daughter.” Another example of this shift is “My sister said,
‘Why didn’t 1% see 193g best friend’.

From the ﬁrst day that I met Lauren in kindergarten, she has impressed me as a
story teller. In that ﬁrst interview, she produced a little book called “The Wiggle of 02.”
During her three years at the Dewey Center, Lauren has had daily opportunities to write,
share her work with other writers, and observe other writers at work. During this time
Lauren has developed into a conﬁdent writer who composes stories that demonstrate a
growing understanding of literary elements and sophisticated language.

Beggming a writer: Iauren’s smlling

Lauren writes complex, creative texts with little difﬁculty or hesitation. One reason
that Lauren is such a proliﬁc writer is that she feels free to use invented spellings in the
early drafts of her writing. At one point during Silent Writing, we hear Susan in the
background saying, “I’m not spelling, I’m sorry.” At the beginning of the year, Susan
would write words on sticky notes or add them to the “word wall” in order to support
children who were reluctant to invent their own spellings, but at this point Susan is pushing
children to work on their own. In discussions with Susan, she gives two reasons for her
refusal to help children with spelling.

First, if Susan begins to help children with spelling, she spends all of her time
helping children with spelling. And the children would spend a lot of time asking for

207

words. Getting the words spelled right interrupts meaning construction, and Susan wants
the children to spend their time writing. Later, as “sloppy copies” become ﬁnal drafts,
Susan helps the children to spell conventionally. Encouraging children to “invent
spellings” frees them to write independently from the teacher.

Secondly, Susan knows that when children are engaged in the process of invented
spellings, they are engaged in discovering the complex rule system of English orthography.
Invented spelling is a good way for children to learn “phonics” (Goodman, 1993), or the
relationship between sounds and letters in an alphabetic writing system. Lauren’s invented
spellings illustrate her phonics rule construction. I sat next to Lauren as she wrote one
section and recorded her spellings in my ﬁeld notes. Lauren tended to vocalize her words
as she wrote, and so I recorded her oral words as well.

Figure 13 - Lauren’s Spelling

Writes:* Says:

wen tey gat in thr when they got in their

heme tey het call my mommy home they had called my mommy
anD ask can her der and asked can her daughter
sen aen16 neyt. spend the night.

My mommy sed yes. My mommy said yes.

Then thert neat Then that night

she came over she came over.

we bet to go to bAd We had to go to bed

wen we weke up When we woke up

we the ken was a pes the kitchen was a mess

the baby miss up herthing the baby messed up everything.

Lauren spells 38 percent of the words conventionally. These include many high
frequency words. Lauren’s invented spellings tend to include less common words. The
more unusual words or spelling patterns are likely to produce the most variation between
Iauren’s spelling and conventional spellings.

Figure 14 - Lauren spells 19 of 50 words (38%) conventionally
A

go over up
And her she was
baby in the we
came mommy then yes

 

'6 The spelling of “aen” for “the” seems unlikely. However, Lauren’s spellings are
recorded in my ﬁeld notebook. I do not have a copy of the original story.

208

can my to

Lauren’s invented spellings show her current phonics understandings and spelling
strategies. In some cases, Lauren simply spells “phonetically,” choosing letters commonly
used for the corresponding phonemes, for example: “wen” (when) as in went, well, wish;
“gat” as in walk, fall; “sed” (said) as in bed, or red. Most of Lauren’s spellings are close
to the original word, and differ by one or two letters. This is true of the her spelling (neyt)
for the word “night” if we consider that it has four phonemes Inaitl. The three letters
“igh” are the unlikely spelling of the diphthong /ai/. Lauren tries “ey” and “ea” for this
sound, showing that she probably hears the two phonemes in the diphthong lai/ (ah-ee).

Lauren uses a /t/ in “had,” which she carefully pronounces as /ho:t/. This
demonstrates that phonics rules may vary according to a writer’s spoken language. Lauren
says lhmtI, while I say /hced/. The conventional spelling for both pronunciations is “had.”
She also omits the written past tense markers in two cases “call/called” and
“miss/messed,” as she sometimes does in her oral speech.

While Lauren’s dialect inﬂuences her spelling inventions, it is not really an
impediment to learning conventional spelling because no oral language variation is the same
as the English spelling system. The words “called” and “messed” are not spelled as I

pronounce them either: lkald/ and /mesd/. The “ed” spellings do not relate to

pronunciation but to morphology- the “ed” marks the verb as past tense. These
morphemic patterns must be learned by speakers of all English variations.

Lauren and I both have the same “impediment” when it comes to spelling words
such as “daughter.” Not only is there no “gh” sound in modern English, but American
English reduces the medial /t/ to a ﬂap. Lauren chooses not to represent this sound and
comes up with “der.” Lauren’s most “off the mark” spellings tend to involve more
unusual spelling patterns. She attempts “kitchen” and again skips the medial consonant

and writes: “ken.”

209

Lauren’s conventional spelling of double letters for single phonemes in the words
“call” and “miss” shows that she is inﬂuenced by graphic patterns and is not simply
spelling phonetically. In addition to being aware of double letters, Lauren is also aware of
silent letters and uses them conventionally in “heme” and “weke,” although she spells the
medial vowel /o/ as “e.”

Lauren’s invented spellings show her implicit understandings of graphophonic rules
and patterns. One reason Lauren is such a proliﬁc writer is that she had developed
strategies for writing unfamiliar texts without adult assistance. By the end of second grade,
Lauren takes a similar approach to reading.

Lauren as reader

In previous examples I showed that being a writer involves many complex abilities
beyond the ability to print letters on paper. Being a reader also involves many
understandings and abilities. During Silent Reading time, Susan gives the children a choice
of reading or writing and Lauren chooses to read. Lauren’s friends and classmates appear
to view her as a reader. Both Sharonda and Katherine seek out Lauren’s help during Silent
Reading time. During “Books to Go”, Lauren often sits near the front with the “kids on
the rug,” a group of children who are ready to assist the reader upon request

Lauren’s facility with book selection is another sign of being “a reader,” since
book selection involves the reader in matching understandings of titles and genres available
with understandings of her own interests and abilities. Lauren and Katherine choose nine
books for quiet reading. At the end of the day, Lauren talked to me about the books they
selected. She and Katherine choose books that they like, but also books they feel they can
read independently. She tells me that two of the books were Katherine’s selection but “she
can’t read them either.” Instead of reading these books, Katherine might look at the
pictures and make up the story. Lauren ﬁrst described these strategies, looking and the
pictures and making up the story, in kindergarten. Although she and Katherine both read

many books proﬁciently, “looking at the book and making up the story” is still a favorite

210

E”

strategy for enjoying a book when the text is too complex for other meaning making
strategies.

Lauren selects Dragon’s Fat Cat (Pilkey, I992 ) for her Silent Reading book. The
book is popular with primary age children because the author uses an understated yet direct
humor that second graders enjoy. Lauren’s miscues (See Figure 15) suggest that the book
is a good choice for independent reading, within her grasp but just a bit challenging. Lauren
and Katherine sit down on the ﬂoor at the front of the classroom on cushions from the
classroom library, and Lauren immediately begins reading. She stops reading when Susan
calls her over to pick out books for the “Books to Go” bag.

Lauren returns to her seat and begins reading again just before Susan announces the
beginning of the ﬁfteen minutes of silent reading. Dragon’s Fat Cat is a “transitional
book,” a picture book with ﬁve short chapters. Lauren has already read ten pages, and is
into the second chapter when silent reading begins. Lauren has read 24 pages in about 25
minutes when silent reading ends, and she reluctantly stops reading.

Lauren reads aloud, moving through the text with few hesitations. Since she is
reading to herself, she does not use a lot of variation in her intonation though she
emphasizes the lines “P.U!,” said the mailmouse, “Your house STINKS!” Lauren’s
miscues show her willingness to continue moving ahead in meaning construction; she does
not have many regressions (Indicated in Figure 15 by underlining). She does self correct
on three occasions. On Sentence 12, for example, she pauses after to, and then appears to

read ahead silently. She says, “to... of,” and then rereads: “to take care of a cat. ”

211

 

Figure 15 - Lauren Reads
Dragon’s Fat Cat

Dav Pilkey, Orchard Paperbacks, New
York, NY, 1992

(Captured on audio tape during silent
reading, starting with sentence 1.)

Chapter 2: Life with Cat
After a few hours by the ﬁre,

the fat cat was warm, dry and very cozy.
The fat cat sat in Dragon’s lap

and purred and purred.

“It is too cold for you to go back
outside,” said Dragon.”So you will have
to stay here with me.”

The fat cat did not seem to mind.

“And if you are going to stay with
me,”Dragon said,“I will have to give you
a name.”

wid/ mile
1. Dragon tried to think of a name for
the fat cat

2. “I will call you Cat,” said Dragon.
3. Cat was a very good name for a cat.

4. “If you are going to live at my
house,” said Dragon

I said

“you will need a bed to sleep in.”

5. So Dragon took a big brown basket

W book
and ﬁlled it with soft blankets.

6. Then he wrote Cat’s name on the
side.

7. Dragon put Cat’s bed down on the
floor next to his own bed.

8. “How do you like your. bed?”

Dragon asked.
0

9. But Cat was already fastlasleep,

10. And soon, so was Dragon.

212

Part 3 — Problems

11. Dragon liked living with Cat, and Cat
liked living with Dragon.

12. But Dragon did not know ,

9 W
how tb of Cat.

A
13. He did not know how to train Cat.

14. That was a problem.

15. Dragon did not know what to feed
Cat.

Ew—T-‘fﬂ

by
16. That was a big problem.

17. And Dragon did not know what to do

(mumbles
about all the yellow

18. That was a smelly problem.

19. Dragon tried to teach mtg use the
toilet.

20. But Cat did not understand.
mouse came
21. One day the mailmouse stopped by.
meme
22. “P.U.!” said the mailmouse.

23. “Your house stinks!”

24. “I know,” said Dragon.
stinky
25. “My cat has a smelly problem.”

26. “What you need is a litter box,”
mom
said the mailmouse.

27. “A litter box will make the smelly
problem go away.”

28. “A litter box?” said Dragon.

29. “That’s a good idea.”

Lauren’s reading “to take care of a cat” instead of “to take care of Cat” shows
evidence of her meaning construction strategies, as well as an understanding of proper and
common nouns. In this case, she understands the author’s intent and uses a different, and
perhaps more predictable, wording.

Lauren’s miscues show how she uses predicting strategies when she reads. For
example, in Sentence Five, she predicts that Dragon is telling what he will do (I will...)
instead of stating a conditional fact (You will need a bed). In Sentence 2 and Sentence 20,
Lauren predicts “Dragon told” cat something, rather than “Dragon tried” to do
something. Although Lauren does not correct these rrriscues when they produce
unacceptable sentences, her initial miscue of “told” for “tried” shows evidence of
prediction.

Most of Lauren’s miscues are meaningful within the story. Her substitutions of
“came by” for “stopped by”; “mouse” for “mailmouse” ; and “stinky” for “smelly”
are examples of using meaningful synonyms. The fact that “came” and “stopped” and
“mouse” and “mailmouse” are graphically different suggest that she is making meaning
on the story and sentence level. Further evidence for Lauren’s focus on meaning
construction are the sentence level substitutions of “big long basket” for “big brown
basket,” “your bed” for “your new bed.” In all of these cases she maintains the meaning
while producing variations in wording compared to the printed text.

Out of the thirty sentences that Lauren reads, twenty-six (86%) are semantically
acceptable (meaningful). Two of those sentences (5 and 6) slightly change the meaning of
the author’s text, although the events occurring in the following sentences would certainly
clarify any confusion Lauren might have. Lauren also shows a strong use of syntactic
(grammatical) cues and strategies. All of Lauren’s word level substitutions are the same
“part of speech” of the authors text (long/brown, books/blankets, stuffed/soft, told/tried).

Twenty-six of the 30 sentences Lauren produces (after self-corrections) are also

213

syntactically acceptable. In one case (Sentence 18) Lauren does not read the entire sentence
aloud.

Lauren’s other syntactically unacceptable sentences all have to do with inﬁnitive
constructions. She also has miscues on the two other inﬁnitive structures (Sentence 5 &
Sentence 13), but these are self-corrected. In Sentences 2 and 20 she seems unfamiliar
with the “tried to ---” structure and predicts more direct language. These inﬁnitive
structures are probably less familiar to Lauren as a reader.

Lauren’s miscues also show her use of graphic cues. She particularly relies on
graphic cues when she is unable to produce meaningful sentences, for example “told to
think” for “tried to talk.” In these cases she is using both initial and ﬁnal graphemes in
text construction. In other cases, Lauren’s miscues maintain the initial grapheme,
suggesting that she scans the ﬁrst letter quickly while making predictions.

In only two cases (sentences 5 and 21), does Lauren appear to abandon graphic
cues. These examples show her active involvement in meaning construction. In Sentence
21 (One day the mailmouse stopped by.), she reads “One day the mouse came by.” She is
so engaged in predicting story meanings, she produces an alternate text wording with a
highly similar meaning.

In reading Dragon ’s Fat Cat Lauren is a proﬁcient reader, using the language
cueing systems selectively as she constructs a meaningful text. Lauren’s miscues, like her
invented spellings, demonstrate that she is learning about language systems and processes
as she reads and writes.

Comparing Lauren’s and Marco’s meaning making

Marco and Lauren are meaning makers within a community of learners. Marco
constructs meaning through listening and overbearing as teacher and classmates read, write,
and talk about reading and writing. Lauren uses selective listening to cooperate with
classroom requirements while focusing on her own agenda. Marco uses a range of

resources and strategies to support his own reading and writing. Lauren uses reading and

214

spelling strategies to create meaningful texts as a reader, writer and story-teller. While
Lauren and Marco both use listening, reading and writing for meaning construction, there
are interesting distinctions between Marco’s and Lauren’s meaning making processes and
strategies.

Listening and NOT listening:

Throughout my observations, Marco learns by overhearing as a listener and
observer of other readers and writers in action. Lauren, on the other hand, is a selective
listener and sometimes deliberately ignores her teacher as she focuses on reading and
writing experiences. When I invited Susan to view the videotape of Marco’s Day, she had
the same shocked response I as we observed Marco paying attention. We were both struck
by Marco’s attentive posture. During the Three Toed Sloth mini-lesson, he sits peering at
the board with his pencil poised. During the Small Group Math lesson, he sits next to
Susan and closely observes her interactions with other students. Marco’s attentiveness
surprised us, perhaps because he was one of the less proﬁcient readers and writers in the
class.

Lauren, on the other hand, must be paying attention. After all, she was doing so
well. But Lauren was much more likely to ignore interactions around her than Marco.
Marco was very interested in the conversations and literacy events around him, and he was
Ieaming a good deal about science concepts and language processes through listening.
Susan and I had unexamined assumptions about young learners. It just makes sense that
children who are “independent” readers and writers pay attention, while children who are
Ieaming more slowly than their classmates don’t pay attention. It makes sense, but it’s not
true.

As I thought about this issue, I looked at other examples. During a pilot study,
described in Chapter Two, I observed “The Raccoon Group,” six children who were
researching raccoons. My gut feeling as a participant observer was that three of the

children, including Danielle, were just fooling around. After careful study of the tape, I

215

 

noticed that Danielle believed she was “doing the assignment,” but had a different view of
“the assignment” than my own. When I watched Danielle closely, I noticed that she was
the ﬁrst to look up when Susan came over to talk to the group. She was paying attention.

It actually makes sense that novice readers are more attentive than proﬁcient readers.
For one thing, less proﬁcient readers are more likely to attend closely to oral language in
order to support their written language learning. The difference between how Marco attends
and how Lauren attends may be related to their written language development. Lauren’s
written language development allows her to use written language cues to support the cues in
verbal exchanges. Meaningful language transactions involve redundant cues and language
Ieaming is, in part, a process of Ieaming which cues to attend to and which cues to ignore.

’9

For example, in predicting the end of the sentence “I have one brother and one

 

the syntax cues the reader to predict a matched pair (one xxx and one xxx), the semantics
cues point to something related to “and brother.” So before readers even see the graphic
cues, they have probably already predicted “sister.” It’s not that Lauren doesn’t pay
attention, but she’s learned to pay attention selectively. Marco pays attention more closely
and generally as he learns which cues are important, and which cues can be ignored.

Another possibility is that Lauren is “reading” the discourse of the classroom
because of cultural understandings she has developed but Marco doesn’t share. The
members of the Raccoon Group had very different understandings of “the assignment”
even though we had all listened to the same instructions. Some of the differences were
based on views about classroom experiences that members brought to the group. Julia, who
read the entire time, was focused on learning about raccoons, while Danielle’s goal was to
“do the assignment.” While neither girl was actually following my interpretation of “the
assignment”, I favored Julia’s approach because it matched my own values and beliefs
about classroom experiences.

It’s important to recognize that children are making meaning through listening

experiences. Marco and Danielle are paying attention in order to make sense of classroom

216

 

literacy and social events. These understandings might not be expressed, or they may be
discounted because they differ from a teacher’s understandings. These differences mi ght
suggest direct and explicit instruction. However, direct instruction would limit the range of
reading and writing experiences and remove the opportunity to observe readers and writers
in action, and to observe interactions between the teacher and other readers and writers.

These experiences provide powerful meaning making and language learning opportunities

for both Marco and Lauren. 1"
Direct instruction generally reduces literacy events to Ieaming exercises and greatly I"
U.

limits children’s roles as subjects of their own literacy Ieaming. Rather than providing
direct instruction, we need to create opportunities for children to express and discuss their
understandings. If children’s concepts and underlying processes are made explicit through
discussion, we can explore and address differences in meaning construction.

Further research might investigate the relationship between listening styles and
language development, personal beliefs, roles and relationships, and cultural understanding.
However, I believe the implications for teaching are similar regardless of the underlying
reasons for these differences. It’s important to recognize children’s listening strategies.
Marco pays attention and nobody noticed. In my observations of Marco’s Day, listening
was his primary vehicle for meaning making and Ieaming. It would also be a mistake to
view Lauren’s “selective listening” as not paying attention. Lauren has developed
strategies about when to listen and when not to listen. Both
Marco’s and Lauren’s listening strategies are resources for Ieaming and teaching.
Reading and Writing Strategies:

Both Lauren and Marco approach reading and writing as “meaning makers,” and
use reading strategies that help them to make sense with a text. I always ﬁnd this
remarkable when I contrast it with my years a reading specialist in a school that used basal
readers and workbooks. Children in classrooms with a skills approach tend to approach

reading with a goal of “getting the words” or “sounding out” the words. Children in

217

classrooms with a word recognition approach to reading instruction became “Swiss Cheese
readers,” omitting any words they didn’t know. Children in classrooms focusing on
phonics instruction became “Perseverators,” repeatedly trying to sound out the same
words. Many of these children continued reading even if the text they were constructing did
not make sense.

One characteristic that all the children I interviewed for this study share is an

expectation that written texts make sense. If a child is not making sense out of a text using

F r...1MZZ_i

their current reading strategies, she or he reverts to earlier developmental strategies in order
to produce a meaningful text. In the debrieﬁng interview, Lauren describes how she and
Katherine, both proﬁcient readers of many texts, return to an earlier strategy when they
come to a text they “can’t even read.”

D: Okay... and you’ve got a whole lot of books right now. Why do you have so
many?

I can’t read some of them... like this one and this one. I didn’t pick up these two
books. Kristine did.

Oh, you just got all of the books that you and Kristine were looking at?

Yeah, she got these two books. She can’t even read them.

Oh. She can’t read them either?

She make up the words.

Oh. She makes the story up? But she likes to look at them?

QC??? IT

Lauren described this strategy of looking at the pictures and “making up” the text
as a kindergartner, and continued to fall back on this reading strategy as she was learning to
use other text construction strategies in ﬁrst grade. As a second grader, Lauren’s reading
and writing strategies allow her to work inter-dependently with the children around her.
Lauren’s reading strategies include selecting texts that she could read, predicting meanings,
making meaningful substitutions for unfamiliar text, and self-correcting. Lauren used
conventional and invented spellings as a resource for constructing stories and meaningful
texts. She generally did not seek outside assistance with her rough draft wriu'ng or reading.
However, Lauren also had many other resources for both reading and writing: past
experiences with texts, understandings of how stories work, previous interactions with other

readers and writers, etc.

218

Lauren’s reading and writing are an example of Vygotsky’s (1978) internalization.
Social language learning has become an internal resource that Lauren draws on as she reads
and writes independently. Lauren continues to use oral language as she reads and writes.
Meaning construction is an oral dialogue with herself. Lauren also likes to share her
writing by reading it aloud.

Marco uses more external resources than Lauren during the composing process.

He uses a wide variety of resources including written texts, illustrations, oral language,
familiar texts, classmates, and his teacher or other adults. Using these resources, Marco was
able to participate actively in reading and writing experiences. When reading a familiar text,
Marco also used predicting strategies and meaningful substitutions. However, Marco was
reluctant to use “invented spelling” as a strategy for writing, in part because he was just
beginning to discover the alphabetic relationship between written language and oral
language.

It might be tempting to focus Marco on phonics skills and try to teach him the
alphabetic principle. I’m not sure it’s really possible to rush development. But I am more
concerned that phonics instruction would focus Marco away from his view that reading and
writing are meaning construction processes. In addition, using invented spellings as a
young writer is a process of rule construction. Children discover patterns of spelling and
punctuation as they write and read. In Phonics Phacts Ken Goodman (1993) describes
how much whole language teachers and researchers have discovered about phonics through
observing children’s invented spellings and reading miscues.

Encouraging Marco to use invented spelling helps him to explore alphabetic
relationships while becoming more independent in his writing. In addition, holistic reading
and writing experiences allow Marco to make use of the linguistic resources and strategies

that he is developing.

219

Conclusion

This chapter explored the nature of meaning making within the literacy events of
Marco’s and Lauren’s Day. The literacy events described suggest that the teacher and
children in this community have a focus on meaning making. Within these meaning
making moments, Susan and the children make language processes explicit, providing
opportunities to learn language through meaning construction activities. Meaning is
constructed through a variety of social roles evolving within literacy events, and literacy
events have meaning potential for language learning. I described Marco’s meaning
construction during three literacy events related to different social roles: as a listener, as an
overhearer, and as a reader and writer. As a listener, Marco experiences meaning
construction through a wide variety of texts, genres, and literacy events. Marco attends
closely to the demonstration of other readers and writers, and the interactions between his
teacher and other children. Through these demonstrations, Marco is learning how to read
and write and how to be a reader and writer within this classroom community. While
Marco is a novice learner for much of the day, he takes on a leadership role during the
“Books to Go” language event and uses a wide range of resources in meaning making.

I describe Lauren’s meaning making strategies as reader, writer, and story teller.
Lauren uses selective listening strategies to cooperate with the classroom community while
maximizing her own literacy experiences. Lauren chooses reading and writing experiences
for herself, and selects reading materials and writing topics. Through daily reading and
writing experiences in this literate classroom community, Lauren has become a skilled
storyteller, as she is developing the conventions of written language.

Finally, I compared Lauren’s and Marco’s meaning making experiences as
listeners, and as readers and writers. Both Lauren and Marco learn through listening and
observing as well as reading and writing. Both children focus on meaning construction, and
use a wide range of strategies and resources to construct meaningful texts. Lauren’s

invented spelling strategies contribute to her independent writing, while Marco is more

220

reluctant to write without assistance. Lauren uses selective listening to negotiate social
literacy events. Marco attends closely as a participant in literacy events. Both Marco and
Lauren are supported by language events where they are subjects of their own Ieaming with
some choice in activities, materials and topics. In addition, structures such as workshops
and clubs provide opportunities for dialogue and negotiation that support reading, writing,
and literacy learning.

In the next chapter I describe the implications of these ﬁndings for literacy Ieaming

and teaching.

221

Chapter Six
Becoming Literate
Lauren and Marco’s literacy experiences in just one day of their school lives drive

home the importance of considering the social nature of reading and writing and its
implications for literacy development in and out of school. In this chapter I review and
discuss what I have learned from Marco and Lauren. I consider how factors in Lauren and
Marco’s experiences support and thwart literacy development. The implications for
classroom teaching move beyond the level of teaching strategies and learning experiences to
address the interplay between how classrooms are socially structured and how classrooms
are socially situated within the larger community. I propose a model in which classroom
communities play a powerful role in building bridges between literacy in home communities
and literacy in the wider communities outside of school. I explore the relationship between
the individual and the social literacy experience by considering how Marco and Lauren are
constructing literate identities within classroom community. I end the chapter with a
postscript revisiting Lauren and Marco as fourth graders.

Learning from Lauren and Marco:

As a researcher, this study has been a journey of renewal and discovery. As I
expected, I found that Marco and Lauren are members of a richly literate classroom
community. However, their literacy experiences involved a depth of social activity thought
and dialogue in relation to text that far exceeded my expectations. I have organized the
issues raised by this study into four topics for further discussion:

' Creating Social Spaces for Language Learning
' The Social Construction of “Instrumental Texts”
' Social Roles within Literacy Events

0 Talking About Texts: Making the Process Explicit

222

Creating Social Spaces for Language Learning

In Chapter Three, I provide an overview of Marco’s Day and Lauren’s Day. On
these days, Susan and the children use social structures such as scheduling and room
organization to create social spaces for Ieaming. Within this structure classroom time
devoted to “content work” is maximized and minimal amounts of time are spent waiting.
Transitional times tend to focus on preparing for work, rather than on management issues,
and children often work during these times. As children “get ready” for whole class
meetings, they read songbooks or talk informally.

Literacy practices in this classroom involve collaboration within a community of
learners. In Chapter Four I looked at the “social activities” within literacy events in order
to gain an understanding of the social literacy practices that comprise classroom “work
time.” On two days of school, Marco and Lauren participate in 67 literacy events, involving
56 texts. These literacy events include 27 different social activities or, to paraphrase from
Heath (1983), “ways with texts” in their classroom. When these social activities are
grouped into larger categories, the largest number involve “reading and writing literature”
and include experiences (reading, writing, listening or observing) with a wide range of texts
and genres.

Lauren and Marco were immersed in many literacy experiences that involved “real life”
reading and writing. By “real life” reading and writing, I mean literacy experiences
where children are engaged in social activities involving text that are similar to literacy
events in the social worlds outside of school. Participants read books aloud, wrote stories
and non—ﬁction texts, reported the “Daily News,” or used a list to plan math choices.
These experiences involved a wide variety of texts and genres. As Marco and Lauren
participate in “real life” events they are learning to read and write texts, but also learning
to what it means to be a reader and writer within the cultural contexts of literacy events.
These “real life” literacy experiences had great meaning potential for participants.

The smallest number of literacy activities involves “doing school exercises” for the
purpose of instruction or evaluation. These exercises are related to the upcoming
standardized text Literacy events designed to prepare children for testing, or those that had
little relevance to children’s lives, have less meaning potential for Marco and Lauren. The

“Three Toed Sloth” (Prelutsky, 1983) mini-lesson does not appear to make much of an

impression on Marco as a learner. Lauren works diligently on her math worksheet, but she

223

doesn’t turn and say to her friend, “Here, let me read this to you.” as she does with her
ﬁction story.

By March this community has established familiar and predictable social literacy events
and practices. The community of learners in the classroom has a profound inﬂuence on
Marco and Lauren’s literacy learning. The workshop approach provides a more democratic
classroom structure in which children have responsibility for completing assignments and
choices with reasonable noise and movement. The “daily helpers” have additional
responsibilities for teaching and learning, and the children take turns in these roles.
Children have “access to literacy” as supplies and materials were organized within reach.
They are also familiar with materials and texts, and are able to select reading and writing

activities and materials. Children work with friends sharing resources and expertise.

Susan also has “language policies” that respect children and encourage them to respect
each other. For example, during class meetings she always calls on children who raised
their hand. This leads to many interesting discussions as students asked questions or
commented on a wide range of issues including classroom procedures and language
processes. Susan always addresses children’s questions and comments, coming back to
them later if they were disruptive at the time. Susan calls tablemates “teams” and
encourages children to work together. She spoke of listening behaviors in terms of respect,

“Let’s listen to Destine, she practiced for us.”

Opportunities for dialogue and social interactions also have an inﬂuence on the
“meaning potential” of literacy events. Group meetings such as “Book Clubs” encourage
children to talk as they worked on literacy projects. Many of the workshops and
transitional times allow for informal conversations. Both Lauren and Marco engage in oral
reading and composing around their story writing. Marco talks to himself, to me, and to
David as he takes on a leadership role during the “Book Club” meeting.

The social nature of literacy events in this classroom raises questions about competitive

classroom structures where emulating the demonstrations of other children is considered

224

cheating. The power of social experiences in this setting also makes it difﬁcult to justify
assessment measures that demand individual performances of understandings, often
involving contrived exercises rather than “real life” literacy events. Within this social
structure, the classroom community becomes a “social zone of proximal development”
where children view classmates as resources. Victor’s description of “the kids on the rug”
as a resource when a child is reading to the class implies a social understanding that what

one child knows everyone knows by extension.

The Social Construction of “Instrumental Texts”

I was surprised by the number of literacy events involving reading and writing with
the focus on other social activities. In these events the text is instrumental, used with
another social goal in mind. Children read “efferently” (Rosenblatt, 1978), seamlessly
negotiating the transaction with text in an effort to report or record information, ﬁnd their
writing folder, choose a math activity, go to the bathroom, and so on. Children are often
highly proﬁcient readers and writers within these social events, perhaps because the events
closely resemble literacy events within their home communities.

These events have important implications for classroom language learning and
teaching. While children negotiate these events with a high level of proﬁciency, the children
are often unaware that reading and writing have occurred. Because texts within these
literacy events are “instrumental” within another social activity, the texts and the reading
and writing processes often become invisible.

Literacy events involving “instrumental” texts generally occur outside of the times
of the day devoted to “reading” and “writing.” Some of these events occur during other
content related activities. For example, children use calendars, models, charts, and tables in a
series of math activities focusing on the date, the day’s weather, and the current “day of
school”. Other literacy events occur during “procedural” times of day such as taking
attendance, when children tally the number present and absent and record the information on

the “missing person’s graph.”

225

The large number of events involving instrumental texts illustrates how literacy
events permeate the school day. Members of the classroom community use in every aspect
of classroom life. Susan is deliberate in creating literacy experiences throughout the day,
placing “teacher texts” such as attendance records, lesson plans, or evaluation forms in a
public space where these texts become integral to the school curriculum. An example
occurs when Susan shows the students the evaluation form she will use for the book club
presentations, prompting a discussion of the nature of such texts.

ren’ “ ook l Presentati n” e A n i

Susan shows the class an evaluation form, and says she is going to tell them

how they did on: reading to the class, diary pages, project one, project two, and
teamwork. Children ask about their self-evaluations, and she says that was their
chance and this is her chance to evaluate the book clubs.

Literacy events involving planning, organizing and evaluation provide an interesting
twist on David Bloome’s (1989) discussion of “procedural display”. Bloome describes
how many classroom lessons involve “doing school,” with teacher and students
cooperating to get through a lesson and little attention to meaningful language, relevant
concepts, or real world social activities. In this case the teacher and students negotiate
procedural aspects of classroom, creating additional social spaces for literacy.

Social Roles in Literacy Learning: Learning by Overhearing

In Chapter 5 I describe how Lauren and Marco participated in literacy events from a
variety of social roles and stances. Participation in literacy events has meaning potential for
whether the participant is a listener, reader, writer, or observer/ overhearer. Listening is an
important social role for Marco, who often employs a strategy of “learning by
overbearing.” Throughout the day, Marco is attentive. Marco was a peripheral participant
in demonstrations of reading and writing. The debrieﬁng interview reveals that Marco
learned about the content presented in texts and the poetic language of texts through
listening to texts read to the class. In addition, Marco explained a meaning focused reading

strategy after listening to contextual conversations about reading strategies between his

teacher and other readers.

226

Lauren, on the other hand, employed a strategy I call “selective listening.” She often
appeared to ignore her teacher, continuing with her own work agenda. However, both
Lauren and Susan viewed Lauren’s role in the classroom as cooperative. Lauren’s
responses show her awareness of when she must attend class discourse, and when it is okay
to ignore discourse around her. Meaning making involves selectively attending to cues, and

Lauren is adept at reading the classroom discourse.

The contrast between Lauren and Marco’s attention strategies was initially suprizing to
me, contradicting my “common sense” notions of which children are more attentive in the
classroom. After making these observations I now would predict that children who are less
proﬁcient readers and writers are closely attending the classroom discourse. This attention
allows them to use oral language resources and observations in order to understand

“what’s going on?” within the social literacy event

In order to support Marco’s “learning by overhearing” strategy, it absolutely crucial
that he participate in literacy events where he can observe demonstrations of reading and
writing. It is critical that he have opportunities to observe his teacher interacting with other
readers and writers. Classroom practices that separate children from one another (such as
placing desks in rows, placing children in homogeneous groups or forbidding children to

talk) would greatly diminish Marco’s opportunities for language Ieaming.

It is also important to view Lauren’s “selective listening” as a strength. Her
“inattention” could be interpreted as being uncooperative or even rude in some situations.
However, Lauren’s adept negotiation of classroom events serves to maximize her own social
learning activities and minimize interruptions and distractions. Lauren’s ability to read the
class discourse and understand the social rules might be recognized and explored further.
Helping Lauren make her “selective listening” process explicit to her classmates would

introduce “discourse analysis” into the second grade curriculum.

After observing Marco and Lauren’s listening strategies, I can’t emphasize enough the

importance of literacy events that provide children with opportunities to participated in “real

227

life” reading and writing experiences, observe, listen and talk with other readers and writers,
and/or overhear conversations between the teacher and other children. Structures that Iirnit
opportunities for participation in conversations about texts greatly disadvantage and

handicap children as literacy learners.

Talking about Texts: Making the Process Explicit

In addition to reading and writing activities, members of this classroom community
participate in a range of activities involving “talking about texts”. For example, children’s
questions prompt a discussion about how to read a model of an outdoor thermometer.
Implicit language and thought processes are made explicit through discussion as
participants talk about how texts are organized, how texts work, how texts are read and
written, and so on. This social focus on “making the process explicit” also occurs during
other literacy events, for example when Susan is prompted to provide an on-the-spot ruini-
lesson while Amber is reading to the class. During these literacy events, Marco and Lauren
experience demonstrations and discussions of how reading and writing work, and what it
means to be a reader and writer.

In the book Other People ’s Children, Lisa Delpit (1995) connects explicit
discussions in the classroom with issues of power. She proposes ﬁve “aspects of power”
play themselves out in classroom settings. I listed these in Chapter One and repeat them

here for further discussion

228

Issues of power are enacted in classrooms.

There are codes or rules for participating in power; that is, there is a “culture of
power.”

The rules of the culture of power are a reﬂection of the rules of the culture of
those who have power.

If you are not already a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly
the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier.

Those with power are frequently least aware of -- or least willing to acknowledge
-- its existence. Those with less power are often most aware of its existence.
(Delpit, 1995, p.24)

55:59.5)!"

I agree with Delpit that children, particularly children who are not members of the
dominant cultures, need explicit demonstrations and discussions of the “rules”, or the
underlying language and Ieaming processes within the classroom culture. However, telling
children “the rules” directly is difﬁcult because linguistic and cultural rules and principles
are extremely complex and variable depending on the nature of the literacy event Delpit
also points out a problem in this process, that "Those with power are frequently least aware
of -- or least willing to acknowledge -- it’s existence.” It’s difﬁcult for a teacher to teach
rules if she or he is unaware of their existence.

However, within social literacy events it is possible for teachers to recognize
underlying processes and practices, linguistic and cultural rules, and to help make these
processes explicit to children. This is particularly true if the teacher, like Susan, is
knowledgeable about language and literacy and an observant “kidwatcher” (Y. Goodman,
1985). One of Susan’s roles within classroom literacy events is to make implicit
understandings more explicit. She does this by asking, “How did you ﬁgure that out?” or
pointing out to the class that “Marco made a prediction.” These explicit conversations do
not involve direct instruction where the teacher tells the students a cultural or linguistic rule.
Instead, these powerful discussions emerge from the rich cultural context of holistic literacy
events.

Delpit connects explicit instruction with power or cultural capital. I share her strong
concern that classroom cultures reﬂect social inequities and injustices within the larger

society. As Ira Shor states, “School is one large agency among several that socializes

229

students. One way to touch the real potential of teaching is to see that education can either
conﬁrm or challenge socialization into inequality” (Shor, 1987, p.14).

With Delpit, I am committed to “challenging socialization into inequality.”
However, I question the Delpit’s assumption that acquiring the “codes of power” will
result in “acquiring power.” She suggests that literacy alone, at least in the “codes of
power”, will result in changing the power relationships in the wider community. In
addition, underlying this conviction is an assumption that inner city families are not highly
literate (otherwise they’d be more powerful). While I don’t negate the importance of
literacy Ieaming, I’m not sure there’s a direct connection between becoming literate and
gaining power.

I am also not convinced that the goal of schooling is to help children gain power. I
return to Taylor and Dorsey-Gaines (1988) reminder that, “to be literate is a uniquely
human experience, a creative process that enables us to deal with ourselves and to better
understand one another.” Literacy has a role in a wide range and variety of human
experiences, including negotiating the “culture of power.” For me, one “potential of
teaching” is to challenge the dichotomy between “powerful” and “powerless.” Direct
instruction structures recreate this power differential in the classroom.

In many of the literacy events I describe in this study, Marco and Lauren have
agency as literacy learners and are the subjects own literacy learning. Susan and the
children are working to create structures that shifted power relationships to a culture
involving “shared power.” The literacy events involving “instrumental texts”
demonstrated how Susan creates new spaces for literacy by making “teacher” texts more
public, sharing her role with the children. Children in this classroom community participate
in many thousands of literacy events over the course of the year. Within these literacy
events it is common for the children or Susan to initiate conversations about the nature of

texts and the processes of reading and writing. Within these social spaces lies the potential

230

of classroom communities in challenging inequity and constructing democratic spaces for
learning.
Factors in Marco and Lauren’s literacy development

Factors that support Lauren and Marco’s literacy development include opportunities
for “real” reading and writing, opportunities to observe and listen to other readers and
writers, opportunities to talk about literacy experiences, and access to literacy materials and
texts. Workshops and small group meetings provide many opportunities for collaborative
literacy events, although whole class discussions and listening to books read aloud were
also valuable experiences.

Opportunities to talk are inﬂuenced by how children are grouped for Ieaming. I
describe in Chapter Three how the whole class math lesson is time consuming, and did not
allow for many interactions between participants. During Marco’s small group lesson, on
the other hand, there are many opportunities for talking with the teacher and with other
children. More “ofﬁcial” opportunities for talking about reading and writing, especially in
small groups or dyads, seem appropriate.

I also wonder whether Lauren and Marco could be engaged in more literacy events
that invited reading and writing. I have shown how important whole class experiences such
as “Books to G0” are for Marco’s literacy development. On the other hand, the “Book
Club” language event really pushed Marco to read and write. This small group project
provided a good deal of time for talking, reading and writing. Although Lauren needed no
encouragement to read and write, the Silent Reading time ended before Lauren was ready to
stop reading. In future classroom scheduling, I would look closely at the nature of events
that support meaning construction, events that provide space for reading and writing, and
events that push children to read and write.

In considering what factors thwart literacy Ieaming, it’s important to recognize that
many factors outside of Susan’s control inﬂuenced classroom literacy events. Some of the

activities on these two days were organized in anticipation of an upcoming standardized test.

231

These activities were less likely to involve meaningful social learning experiences. Other
factors that thwart literacy Ieaming are the poverty in the community, and the inequities in
funding. Funding inequities result in large class sizes in inner city classrooms and little
money for supplies and materials. Most of Susan’s books and many of her supplies were
purchased with her own funds. Susan had 28 children, a “small” group within this large
district Class size makes it more complicated to organize group experiences or meet with
children in conferences or small groups.

Outside-of-the-classroom factors such as poverty and inequities in funding are a
reminder that classrooms and schools reﬂect the inequities and power structures that exist in
communities outside of schools. I observed a community focus on “making the process
explicit” I believe that “making the process explicit” represents and important shift in the
potential of language Ieaming to shift power structures in classrooms and communities. In
the next section, I address the interplay between sociopolitical factors and the literacy events
that I have already described.

Contexts for Literacy Learning

This study stretched my thinking about the contexts, texts and genres of literacy
learning. As a frequent visitor to Susan’s room, I was impressed, but not surprised, to see
that Marco’s experiences involved 12 literature texts and Lauren’s experiences involved 13
literature texts. I was not surprised that the number of instructional texts was small.
Literacy events and practices involving these texts were relatively easy to classify, although
they did involve ten different reading and writing activities, not including “talking about
texts.” What did surprise me was the large number of literacy events involving texts that
were not ﬁction, non-ﬁction and poetry.

I have described earlier the “multiple roads to literacy” that Yetta Goodman (1997)
found among young learners. In Susan’s classroom, children encounter not only the
“literature” road to reading and writing, but these other roads as well. Attempting to

describe, categorize, and understand these “non-literature” events has led me on a journey

232

of discovery about the potential of classroom literacy communities to serve as a bridge
between contextual worlds of home and family and the larger communities outside the
home. I will illustrate my thinking with two texts from Marco’s Day: the math list, and the
book club diary.

The Math List: Building Bridges Between Home and School

Marco’s Day, Transition to Math (Apmndix B)
Susan walks over the chaLk board and begins giving instructions for math.

Someone asks, “Can we do writing?”

Susan says, “We’ll do writing in a few minutes. I want the kids who were
working on math with me to stay here today. Kids who don’t have math sheets can
choose.”

Susan explains the choices as she lists them on the board. In one case, she
demonstrates how a math game is played. James and Terrence signal each other
silently, perhaps planning out their activities. Marco signals at Jonathan.

Susan says, “Okay, let me read the names of the lg'ds who are going to stay with
me. Get a clipboard and a pencil. If I don’t call your name, you know you can
make choices.”

In this vignette, Susan writes a list and reads names within a language event
focusing on organizing the class math experience. The text is very relevant to the children,
because it represents available choices. Children listen and read as Susan talks and writes,
using the literacy event to plan their own activities. The children’s meaning making is
apparent as they signal to each other. When Susan ﬁnishes the explanation, the children
make choices and begin to get settled very quickly, to Susan’s apparent surprise:

Susan ﬁnishes calling the names, and the remaining children get up and move

quickly to get materials for choices. Susan says, “You know what? Everyone stop.
I made a mistake.” She walks over to the table area, but sees the children have
selected materials and tables without a problem.

She says, “Oh you worked it out.”

The math list serves to regulate the children’s behavior; they must chose speciﬁc
math activities although at least one child would rather do writing. But it also gives children
a measure of control over their activities. During the math time, children can refer to the text
constructed within this event rather than referring to Susan. Susan proceeds to meet with a
small group of children, while the rest of the class works “on their own.” While Susan is
the “writer” of the text, the text is a co—construction of the teacher and children who

participated as writer, readers and listeners.

233

Literacy events around “instrumental texts” (such as records, lists, and charts) are
often so seamless, with the focus on a task rather than on reading or writing, that the acts of
reading and writing appear invisible to the participants. It took me quite a while, for
example, to notice that calling the names of the boys and girls to line up for lunch involved
reading from a list

My initial hypothesis was that children participate easily in classroom literacy
practices such as “writing and reading a list to organize math choices” because these
practices were more “familiar,” similar to literacy events children experienced outside of
school. For example, preschoolers often observe adults writing shopping lists to prepare
for a trip to the grocery story. Chances are the adult will include the child in thinking out
loud and the child may accompany the parent to the store. I have asked pre-schoolers and
kindergartners to write a “shopping list” as a way of understanding their current theories
and abilities as writers. I ﬁnd that they produce something that looks like a list, even if their
writing is “scribbling” or their spelling patterns are unconventional.

Children begin Ieaming to read and write as participants in “family literacy”
(Taylor, 1983) practices. While children may have limited experiences with book reading
experiences, literacy events within everyday life are a common experience across the United
States. In Growing Up Literate, a study of literacy in inner city families, Taylor and
Dorsey-Gaines (1988) compare the “memory aids types of uses and writings” from ﬁve
communities including the three communities in Heath’s (1983)Ways with Words and the
two communities Taylor studied in Family Literacy and Growing up Literate. In all cases,
writing was used to record phone numbers, make notes on calendars, and for a variety of
other purposes. In “Shay Avenue,” the inner city community that Taylor and Dorsey-
Gaines studied, they record the following examples: Shopping lists; writing of college
schedules; bathroom schedule for potty-training a young child; recipes; monthly planner,

listing appointments and information to be remembered; list of postnatal exercises; list of

234

friends to attend baby shower; menu for Thanksgiving dinner; lists of food for a party;
notes on refrigerator; etc. (1988, p. 162).

Literacy practices within homes and families represent one aspect of what James
Gee (1991) calls the child’s “primary discourse,” the language that children learn before
they come to school. The term “discourse” is used by socio-linguists to include not only
the language meanings and processes, but the social ways that language is used within a
community. Gee describes “discourse communities” where groups have common ways of
using language. The child’s home is their ﬁrst discourse community.

The child’s home literacy experiences rrright be deﬁned as the cultural ways that
participants use written language in their “primary discourse community.” The child’s
school literacy experiences are the cultural ways that participants use written language in
the “school discourse community.” The model below represents these communities. Of
course, literacy in home discourse communities, while overlapping in the nature of
experiences, will differ from family to family. By the same token, literacy events in school

communities will differ from classroom to classroom.

   

      
 
     

     
 

chool
Discourse
Community

ome
Discourse

 
 

In home discourse communities, children Ieam language while using language as
speaker and listener in a variety of “real life” cultural events. Since language events often
include literacy events, children are Ieaming to read and write before they enter school.
During the “using a list for math choices” literacy event, children appear to be proﬁcient
readers. At the same time, the structure of the event supports literacy Ieaming. The child’s
“reading” of the math list is supported by the social context and the interactions between
participants. Susan explains each item as she writes it down.

While the focus of the event is on organizing the math experiences, Susan is

demonstrating how members of this school community use literacy. She is also

235

demonstrating the writing process of making a list. Children are Ieaming written language
as they participate in this literacy event. They are not only Ieaming how to read particular
words and phrases, but they are learning how people use written language in particular
contexts. Susan orchestrates this language Ieaming experience by integrating the familiar
ways that people use written language at home with the ways that written language is used at

school. In this event, the two discourse communities intersect.

  
  
   
 
  

    
  
  

    
 
 
 

School
Discourse
Communi

Home
Discourse
Community

The “list of math choices” is easy to read because it is a familiar literacy practice,
common at home and at school. In the morning, during “Things to Do”, Susan leaves a
written list on the board. Reading the list is also a social event Some children stand and
read the list, while others consult each other about “what we’re ‘posed to do.” The
“things to do” list is easy to read because it is a familiar practice, supported by social
interactions, and by repeated experiences. Children come into the room and begin working
with no apparent prompting or instructions from Susan.

The practice of listing forms a bridge between home and school, as Susan takes a
familiar practice and extends it to a school experience. Children learn new listing strategies
supported by the literacy strategies they bring from their home community. This
intersection between “home discourse” and “school discourse” is an element of all
classroom language events for all children. Most children learn to read and write because
they make connections between written language in school and outside of school. However,
these connections are harder to make when school literacy events are very different from
home literacy events.

Classroom literacy experiences can provide explicit connections between home and
school. All of the children I interviewed at Dewey Center described family book reading

events. But the range and variety of experiences in Susan’s classroom supports the

236

“multiple roads to literacy” children are traveling when they enter school. In addition to
reading and writing literature, children in Susan’s classroom read and write charts, signs,
graphs, tallies, thermometers, calendars, lists, and so on. The math list helps in constructing
bridges between home literacy and school literacy, an important role of teachers and
schools.

The ﬁrst step in this construction is to recognize the kinds of literacy events and
practices among the families in a classroom community. Next bridges can be constructed
from home to school by creating Ieaming experiences in classrooms where children use
familiar language in familiar ways. Community studies, family history projects and ﬁeld
trips to build bridges from home literacy experiences to school literacy experiences.

It is critical to help children and families view their home literacy activities as
“reading and writing.” This is particularly true of the functional literacy events because
reading and writing often become invisible in pursuit of other social activities. Building
connections between home literacy and school literacy allows young children to learn about
the systems and processes of written language in familiar social contexts.

Familiar literacy events provide supportive contexts for literacy Ieaming in young
beginning readers and writers. Bringing the discourse circles of home and school closer
together has socio- cultural implications as well. In this model, classroom experiences
support the family, rather than placing demands on the family to push children to ﬁt a
certain mold in school. Building connections between home and school begins by
recognizing and validating the child’s home language and cultural background. Classroom
language experiences help children to maintain and expand on their home discourse. A
bridge between home and school provides a base of common understandings for the teacher
to build upon.

The “Book Club Diary” - Building Bridges to other Social Worlds
As I examined literacy events involving “talk about text,” I noticed that instrumental

texts are not usually the object of discussion. This makes sense to me since these literacy

237

events are so familiar that the texts almost become invisible. However, a conversation about

“the book club diary” provides an exception that led me to rethink this generalization.

Marco’s Day, Book Club (Appendix B)

It is near the end of a long day at school. Marco and David have been working
hard on their Book Club project. Susan stops the class and tells the children it’s
time to clean up and “record what you did today” in “your book club diary.”
Susan suggests that the book club members help each other with writing the diary.

Marco and David stop to listen, and then return to their work. Marco quickly
ﬁnishes his picture and then looks around for the “book club diary.” I help David
complete his envelope. Marco brings over his autobiography.

“That’s your autobiography,” I say. Marco says he thinks it’s his book club
diary. I ask where his autobiography is. David suggests they are the same thing.

Marco leaves to look for the diary again. I look in the book club’s loose-leaf
binder, and notice a “diary” entry on the lined paper in the binder rings.

“Marco, I found it.”

Marco returns and sits down. I put the diary in front of him.

In this vignette, Susan asks the children to write a record or report of their book club
meeting. For me, the “book club diaries” were familiar literacy activities outside of school,
comparable to literacy practices such as taking minutes or keeping records of the meetings
of a club or organization. But the diary does not seem familiar to Marco or David. Marco
and David’s reaction to Susan’s instructions about the “book club diary” indicate that
“real life” literacy events are not always the same as family literacy events. The social
literacy practice of “writing a record of what you did today” is not a familiar literacy
practice for Marco and David. Such records represent the discourse of social communities

including clubs, organizations, work groups, etc.

   
      
 

Other

  
 

Home

  
 

Discourse

  
 

Discourse

Communities

  
 

Community

    
  

School

  
 

Discourse

  

Communities

238

Although “writing in the book club diary” is similar to many out of school literacy
events, it could be perceived as a school exercise if Marco and David do not see it as making
sense within their own experiences with social literacy practices. When Susan invites the
children to join “Book Clubs,” she is involving children in the social experience of a club.
The “Book Clubs” immerse children in the discourse of clubs in a way that builds
connections from familiar language practices to new ones.

The “book club diary” encourages club members to report and deﬁne their own
progress. While the diaries may be used to evaluate the progress of each group, the diary
writing is not organized for the major purpose of evaluating how well group members read
or write. The group members are the subjects of their own evaluation. In contrast to the
nearly invisible writing of the “math list,” the writing process also becomes very visible as
Marco, David, and I collaborate on the diary entry. I decide to help Marco in a fairly direct
manner, perhaps because Marco and David have already been writing for their book club
project for the past thirty minutes.

Marco returns and sits down. I put the diary in front of him.

“Put the date.” I say.
arco looks at the dia a e. He ints to the revious en . ‘ i the
I)”
“This is the 2nd. You need to write the date here. Three.” I hint.
co looks u at the front board wher toda ’3 dat is written. “Three seven

dash ninety four,” Marco finishes.

Marco writes the date on the page. I say, “Who was here today?” Marco says,
“Marco and David.” He writes his name and logks up at me.

“How do you spell ‘and’,” he asks me.

I pronounce the word carefully, “/aezndl. How do you spell ‘and’?”

Marco mouths the word ‘and’, and thinks for a moment. “That’s an ‘N ’?” he
says. He writes n’ pn his paper,

“Is that how you spell it?” he asks me.

“That’s ﬁne,” I say.

Marco writes David’s name, remembering it from an earlier exchange where
David spelled it out for him. He says, “I know how to spell David’s name ‘cause
he taught me. D-A-V-I-D”

Marco brings writing strategies from other discourse events to his writing of the
diary. The book club diary already contains one entry, perhaps recorded by the absent
group member, Patrice. Marco’s initial strategy is to use that entry as a model to copy the

date. When I point out that “This is the 2nd,” Marco understands the implications and

239

looks up to the chalkboard where he knows the date will be printed. Marco remembers
how to spell David’s name because David “taught” him by spelling the name out for him.

Marco views me as a resource for the spelling of “and.” I insist that he invent a
spelling and he decides on “N.” As I have mentioned earlier, the “n” in and may be easier
to hear because it sounds like the letter name “EN.” When Marco asks “Is that how you
spell it?” I tell him “that’s ﬁne.” My response is intended to encourage Marco in using
his own spelling strategies for writing. As I mentioned in the last chapter, Lauren was able
to write longer texts without assistance in part because she was willing to use invented
spellings. Writing is a laborious task for Marco.

I ask, “Now what did you do today that you want to tell her? What did you get
done?”

“We got done two envelopes and we did... three envelopes?”

Marco offers me the pencil to write, but I refuse. “I’m not taking your pencil.
Ask David to help you. He’s a good speller.”

“How do you spell ‘we’,” Marco asks David who is cleaning up the table.

I say, “W:e. What do you think it starts with?”

“What did you say now?,” David asks.

I say, “We made three envelopes.”

Both boys sit and think for a few moments. David guesses ‘r’.

“Okay, ‘we’,” I say.

“Oh yeah, we.”

I spell it “W - E”

Marco remats the letters while he writes.

I say, “And you want to write ‘made’. How does ‘made’ start?”

Marco thinks for a while. He mouths the word ‘made’. He guesses ‘k’.

I say the world slowly, “/mmai:d/. Do you know any words that start like
‘made’? How about Marco- ‘Marco’, ‘made’. Do they sound the same?”

Marco shakes his head.

I say, “You don’t? All right. Well it starts with an ‘M’. Okay, what else?”

Neither boy makes a guess. Marco begins playing with the rings in the binder.
He turns his body towards the window.

“All right, I’ll write it for you this time.”

I write ‘made’ and we discuss the rest of the sentence. Marco decides to write
“three pockets” rather than “three envelopes.”

I say, “You can write the three, right?”

Mateo gkes the peneil end writes die nemegal “3.”

“Here’s how you write ‘pockets’” I say, showing Marco the word on the cover
of the book club book.

Merge says the letters ﬁend as he writes. David watches Marco.

When I pushed Marco to continue with phonetic spelling strategies, his attention
began to wander and his behavior changed. As I have said before, Marco impressed me

throughout the day by being attentive. He worked diligently and meticulously on a variety

240

of assignments and projects. I had just watched Marco and David work very hard on a
writing project for thirty minutes. Now Marco was restless and inattentive.

When I ask Marco to focus on the sounds of words, I am pushing him to do
something that is beyond his linguistic understandings at this time. The questions I’m
asking him are complex and abstract. “W” is a difﬁcult phoneme to hear, and the letter
name “Double U” doesn’t help the writer. David’s guess of “r” is not so far fetched
since he may hear the near vowel qualities of the liquid /r/ and the glide /w/. When I ask
Marco if “Marco” and “made” sound the same, he says “no.” In fact the only
similarities are the initial phonemes. Otherwise the words differ a good deal in sound and
syllable.

When I pushed Marco beyond his developmental abilities, he became incompetent
and restless. At the end of the exchange I return to familiar writing strategies that work for
Marco, using other people as a resource (“made”), writing words he “knows” (“3”), and
using another text as a model (“pocket”). Marco is once again a capable writer. I spoke
earlier of the need to place Marco in situations that push him to read and write. The “book
club diary” does just that. After reading and writing for thirty minutes, Susan asks the
children to write down what they’ve just done. But the book club diary is more than a
writing exercise. Susan has placed Marco in a community where people record their
activities.

James Gee (1991) proposes that if reading and writing are social practices, we can
only Ieam to read (or write) a text within the social world in which the text is normally
embedded:

...a way of reading a certain type of text is only acquired, when it is acquired in a
‘ﬂuent’ or ‘native-like’ way, by one’s being embedded (apprenticed) as a member
of a social practice wherein people not only read texts of this type in this way, but
also talk about such texts in certain ways, hold certain attitudes and values about
them, and socially interact over them in certain ways. (Gee, 1991, p. 41)

Susan has introduced the social world of “clubs,” and then brilliantly exploits all

the possibilities for reading and writing that are normally embedded in this social context.

241

The diary also makes Ieaming processes explicit by asking children to reﬂect upon their
activities during the Book Club meeting. The conversations around writing the “book club
diary” entry make language processes more visible and explicit as well. Susan encouraged
these conversations by suggesting that the club members help each other with the writing.

The “list of math choices” suggests building bridges between home and school
supports literacy Ieaming. The “book club diary” illustrates the role of schooling in
building bridges between children’s home literacy practices and the literacy practices in the
larger community. Since Ieaming to read a text involves understanding the social practices
surrounding the text, reading instruction that engages children with whole texts in “real
life” social contexts brings these social practices into the classroom.

Figure 16
Building bridges between home, school and other communities

Home Discourse Community Other Discourse Communities

  
 
  
 

 
 

Family
Literacy

   
 
   
   
 
    
 
  
    
  
  
 
    
 

. 'ly communitie
church, businesses,
clubs, or - anizations

 
 

Making connections

between literacy practices

at home and those in
other discourse

  
  
  
 
  

 
   
    
   

= ringing the

  
    

  
 
  
  

   

funds of communities. literacy practices
knowledge- of other communities
Building on social into the classroom.
literacy communitie (Clubs, simulations,

   
  
 

at home.
Getting to know each
other’s literacy practices.

inquiry studies, etc.)

lassroom Discourse
Community

 

242

Figure 16 is a model of classroom discourse that illustrates possible intersections

between the social worlds of home and family and the social worlds outside of the home.

The model represents the potential of schooling to build bridges and maximize intersections

between discourse and literacy communities. Each of the intersections (A-D) represents a

connection between children’s home world and the discourse and literacy of other

communities.

A.

Intersections between home discourse and other communities. Even before children
come to school, they are immersed in literacy events of communities outside of school
such as church, stores, recreation areas, relatives and friends’ homes, parents’
workplaces, etc. Family members and other adults mediate literacy events in these
communities. Children’s experiences with discourse communities outside of school
vary a great deal from family to family. Discourse communities familiar to the child are
be a good place to start building bridges between family literacy and the social literacy
in the wider world (D).

B. The intersection between home discourse and school discourse. Recognizing the

BI.

“funds of knowledge” (Moll, 1988) in children’s home literacy communities,
classroom literacy events can uncover and build upon the familiar literacy events and
practices of home and family. An example is the children’s adept responses to the
classroom practice of listing. Sharing family literacy experiences connects children’s
home literacy practices with practices of other families in the classroom.

Family studies and local community studies take children outside of the classroom and

into the home community.

C. The intersections between school literacy practices and practices in the wider world

outside of school. The Book Clubs bring the discourse community of the larger world
outside of school into the classroom. The language and literacy of social worlds outside
of school are also brought into the classroom by drama and simulation (i.e. a classroom

store) and by the literacy practices represented in literature and ﬁlms.

243

Cl. Field studies (and ﬁeld trips) take children directly into the discourse communities
outside of school.

D. In this intersection, the classroom community serves as the bridge between the home
world and other social worlds.

The intersection between home, school and the larger community is what education
is all about Too often school practices require families to serve schooling, for example
pushing children to spend long hours doing “exercises” at home, often at the expense of
recreational activities or family activities. Instead classrooms can support families by
helping children to maintain the language of home and family, while making connections to
many other language communities. The intersections between home, school, and
community can provide spaces in classroom, like “ Book Clubs,” in which children
experience how people read and write texts, talk about texts and “hold certain attitudes and
values about them” (Gee, 1991) within similar discourse communities outside of school.

After establishing these overlapping social worlds in the classroom, teachers have
key roles in making the underlying language and thought processes explicit that help
learners understand “what’s going on” socially and linguistically. This involves
introducing the discourse of wider communities (readers, writers, scientists, etc.) into the
conversation. But it also involves revealing the child’s own strengths and strategies. Once
apprenticed in the discourse of “book club diaries,” Marco is able to use many of the
strengths and strategies he used in more familiar social contexts.

Lisa Delpit argues that “If you are not already a participant in the culture of power,
being told explicitly the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier” (Delpit, 1995,
p.24). I share Delpit’s belief that school literacy events are politically charged. I also share
her concern about cultural miscommunications between teachers and African American
children. However, I’m not sure that this miscommunication has to do with indirect

language or instruction. Susan’s directions to Marco and David were quite clear. It is the

244

opportunity to participate in a discourse community where participants keep a diary that
assists the boys in understanding the rules of “book club diaries.”

The discourse of traditional direct instruction often involves meaningless and
artiﬁcial language that does not exist once a child leaves the classroom. This is not the kind
of “direct instruction that Delpit advocates in Other People’s Children. What she suggests
is explicit instruction in the “language of power.” However, the linguistic rules of the
“culture of power” Delpit wants children to attain are embedded in the discourse of
communities outside of the classroom.

Building bridges between home discourse and the language of wider communication
creates possibilities for observing how literacy works in real life social events and discourse
communities. Reﬂecting and discussing the processes behind literacy events makes the
underlying processes more explicit. One social process that children might examine is the
power relationships embedded in literacy events.

Implications for Research

The intersections between home, school, and community suggest many areas of
research. Where do classroom literacy events ﬁt in these intersections? What does it mean
to make processes explicit when talking about academic discourse or scientiﬁc discourse,
for example? The issue of listening and selective listening is one worth further study,
expanding it to observing the larger population. Who listens, and when? Does listening
vary according to gender or economic background? Is selective listening developmental? Is
it related to reading proﬁciency?

In terms of my own future research with this longitudinal data collection, I will
include more of the longitudinal data, tracing Marco and Lauren’s development and seeing
whether the issues I’ve identiﬁed are consistent with other school days. I will also expand
the case studies and include some of the other children, particularly in looking at certain

aspects of literacy events such as listening, reading and writing. Since these days were

245

inﬂuenced by a standardized test, it would be interesting to contrast them with other days
during the year.
Crafting literate Identities: the Social Experience of Literacy

Literate identities are constructed in the interplay between creative processes and
social practices within contextual worlds of home and school. Ken Goodman (1996)
describes language development as the tension between personal invention and social
convention. The creative, constructive process is like a centrifugal force shooting the learner
out on a journey of invention and discovery. The conventions embedded in literacy events,
social events involving texts, are the centripetal force that pulls the individual back into the
social circle.

However, as I bring together the ethnographic and transactional lenses to consider
language as both process and practice, the interaction between personal and social seems
much more complex and multifaceted. I have described, for example, the “sociolinguistic
understandings” that Marco brings as resources to the literacy event. However, these
understandings are not ﬁxed bits of knowledge, but are current representations of the
child’s experiences with previous social (and linguistic) events and the child’s observations
and interpretations of the events. The current representations of Marco’s understandings
are also socially consu'ucted within literacy events involving other participants. In addition,
the texts within these events also have a multifaceted social history.

The child’s “understandings” are one thread within the literacy event. Other
threads involve the “understandings” of other participants, the social roles and
relationships of participants, the social history of texts, the “ways with words” (social
strategies) that participants employ around these texts, and so on. During the literacy event,
participants engage in social action (do something with language), communicate meanings
in various ways, construct social roles and relationships, and construct new social
“understandings.” These social understandings also include many threads related to the

content or action of the event, the ways that language works socially within the event

Within this milieu language development is another thread - an ongoing process though not
the focus of the event.

In this study I unravel some of these threads in an attempt to “look beyond the
literacy event and the linguistic and the linguistic transactions that take place” (Taylor &
Dorsey-Gaines, 1988, p. 200). I feel I have created windows into the complexities of the
“uniquely human experience” that is literacy. However, as I struggle to record these
images of literacy in writing I ﬁnd that any representation of literacy events loses much in
the translation from social event to written interpretation. The term “literacy event,” while
essential for description and analysis, is a simpliﬁcation of a complex social fabric where
literacy might be seen as strands and textures in an interwoven pattern. These events are not
“literacy events,” in the sense that they ultimately focus on literacy, but social events where
literacy has an important role.

I have also had to stop and reconsider every time I refer to Marco and Lauren. As a
veteran teacher I am comfortable referring to Lauren and Marco as “students,” “young

’9 ‘6

readers and writers,” “language learners, meaning makers,” etc. However, each of
these descriptors implies that the purpose of the social event is to be literate, construct
meaning, or learn language and literacy. I have shown that Marco and Lauren are Ieaming
language while participating in these social events, and I believe strongly that participation in
“real life” social events is the ideal social setting for language Ieaming. However, as I will
explore later, literacy events are most authentic when the focus of the event is NOT on
language instruction, but when literacy use occurs within a variety of social activities
(including construction of literary works).

In an effort to avoid positioning Lauren and Marco (from my vantage point as
researcher) as language learners within these events, I tend to describe them as
“participants” in literacy events and as “members” of a classroom community. Marco

and Lauren are positioned and position themselves in a ﬂuid range of roles within events.

They are constructing literate identities in relationship to other members of their school and

247

home communities. Their ongoing perspectives and understandings of what it means to be
literate within this classroom community emerge as they negotiate social literacy events in

the classroom.

Lauren

In the following vignette, Lauren moves from one literacy event to another, involving
four different texts and genres: the math worksheet, the name book, the team behavior chart,
and Lauren’s self-authored books. I have described each of these literacy events before, but
include them again in this longer narrative to show the rich variety of literacy experiences in
Lauren’s Day.

Lauren studies her math sheet. She sa 3 “ an I se our en il?”

mneil out of Amber’s hand. She writes on her pamr, and rolls the pencil back to
Amber.

Lauren says the numbers as she ﬁnds them and pastes them down, “twenty ﬁve,
thirty.. this is it.”

“I only got /two \more,” she says. She leans back and puts her hands on her
head.

Danielle looks over at Lauren, and Lauren repeats, “I only got two more. See,
look. One, two. One, two.”

Leuren continues working. “Now I got one more.”

Danielle is looking at her answer pieces, “ﬁve, seven.”

Lauren glues the last piece down. “Got it. I got all of them right.”

Alyssa comes over to the table and leans over to look at Lauren’s paper.

Lauren says, “Here, I’m done with it. Alyssa, I’m already done with mine.”

Alyssa picks up one of Lauren’s strips.

Lauren says, “Now you put that back.” and laughs.

Alyssa mimics, “Now you put that back.” She leans close to Lauren.

Lauren says, “Do you know what Alyssa means?”

Alyssa says, “yes.” She pretends to slap Lauren, but does not touch her.

Lauren says, “My mama got e name peek. What does it mean?”

Alyssa says, “I don’t know what it means. I know what Lauren means.”

Lauren asks, “What?”

“It means soft and gentle and meddlesome and (?‘7blavely?).”

“No, it doesn’t.” Lauren tells what her name means.

Alyssa repeats Lauren’s deﬁnition and laughs.

Lauren says, “Yeah. I got a name book. So you’re a liar.” She smiles at
Alyssa.

 

‘7 Question marks within parenthesis indicate speech I was unable to discern from audio or
videotape. Where applicable, I include the speech I think I hear within the parentheses.
After repeated listening, I believe “blavely” is an Alyssa’s invention, perhaps a
malapropism.

'8 Lauren is a pseudonym so I have not included the deﬁnition she gave.

248

Alyssa leans backward. She leans forward again. “My aunt has a name book
and she told my mama what Lauren means. But then I forgot.”
Lauren plays with Amber’s pony tails, counting them as Amber works. The

gr'sls leek at the beard, where Susee is giving out team mints.

Lauren says, “I’m going to ﬁnish writing my (??) book.” She begins pulling
things out of the cubbie in her desk until she ﬁnds a “mk” made from folding
blank paper and stapling.

As I stated before, Susan’s classroom is a place where literacy events are squeezed
in between other literacy events. For example, offering “Silent Reading” as a break
between “Read Aloud” and “Book Club Presentations”; or gathering for the “Morning
Meeting” with an illustrated songbook. In this case, it is Lauren who squeezes two quick
literacy events between math and writing. But the social contexts of this literate classroom
community provide the opportunities for multiple layers of social reading and writing.

Lauren socially constructs a literate identity in relation to the children around her.
Within this literate community, Lauren is a “student” She writes to get her school work
done, and reads to see how her “team” is doing. She is a “story writer,” who pulls out her
current draft when she has a free moment. She is an authority, able to quote from texts to
prove her friend is “a liar.” And she is a friend, using language and literacy to

communicate and extend her relationships with the other girls. She is Lauren: “soft and

gentle and meddlesome and blavely.”

Marco

As illustrated earlier, Marco expressed wise and complex commentaries on
literacy during the debrieﬁng interview. Interestingly, he describes literacy as both a
language process and a social practice. Marco describes himself as a “good reader.”
When I ask how he can tell, he uses the book “What ’s in My Pocket?” (Williams,

1994b) to describe the meaning making process.

249

Are you a good reader, Marco?
Yeah

How can you tell?

fljext: Eggket, mket, What’s in My Peeket? Something that’s square.

: Because... how can I tell... because that I can tell... because I see this word
okay... and... that when... when they had draw the pictures and I had... and I
had put. I had saw it... it had to be something square. I saw this shape, cause
it’s going like that and like that.

(Picture - outline of a square inside the pocket.)
And sol thought it might be “pocket.” I might saw this one.
(Points to word “pocket”)
Cause that’s a pocket (points to pocket on man’s jacket in illustration.)
And so, “Pocket, pocket what’s... and what ’s in my pocket.
(Points to each word) Something square.
(Runs ﬁnger under sentence, points to square.)
Something that ’3 square.
(Re-reads pointing to each word.)
So that’s how I learned how to read. I look at the words ﬁrst
You look at the words ﬁrst? And then what do you do?

: Then when I get done practicing words. When I get done reading that one
time... then I just go back to it And keep on reading, and keep on reading it
over. And then I look at the next page. And keep on reading it over and stuff
How do you ﬁgure it out the ﬁrst time you see it?

: Um. The pictures.

You look at the pictures?

(Marco nods, yes.)

3 PS?

Z?

9.39

In this exchange, Marco describes a strategy of looking closely at the picture, and
then looking at the text for key concept words (square, pocket) related to the concepts
presented in pictures. He uses pictures to trigger his semantic strategies. Next, he
describes a “keep on reading it over” strategy where he employs syntactic and syntactic
strategies to construct meaningful sentences. Marco views himself as is a good reader
because he is able to use all the available cues and strategies to make meaning with text. He
is also a good reader because he is in a classroom where good readers are readers that
search for meaning, using all the resources available. Marco is a participant in many literacy

events where these views are explicitly stated by Susan and other classroom members.

The description above describes Marco’s transactions with texts, providing a view of
literacy as a language process. However, since Marco did not yet read unfamiliar texts

independently, I wondered how he initially learned to read the text “What’s in My Pocket? ”

250

How’d you Ieam to read this book? (What’s in my Pocket?)
: From my friends.
Like who... who helped you read it?
: David... uh (thinking)... David and Patrice
So you, David and Patrice read it together?
: Yeah (nods)
And now you can read it by yourself?
: Yeah (nods)
So that’s how it works, Ieaming to read in this room?
: So... and then I read the ﬁrst page, (turns book back to front cover) like this. I
read this page (shows D ﬁrst page of story text) and then:
=When you’re reading, I’m sorry... go ahead
: And then when I get done reading that page, then David goes.
Oh so you take turns?

PEP ZPZPZPZPZP

Marco’s initial meaning making of the book “What’s in my Pocket? ” is supported
by two other readers, each contributing their experiences and strategies. Here literacy is a
social practice where participants share expertise and resources as they negotiate reading a
new text together. Marco is Ieaming to read and write, and he is learning how to talk about
reading and writing. At the same time, and perhaps more critically, he is learning how

people come together to create social meanings.
Post Script
What happened to Lauren and Marco after Second Grade?

In writing this study I deliberately describe how Marco and Lauren are readers and
writers. Both children had amazing strengths and abilities as meaning makers. I had
observed Lauren and Marco starting in kindergarten, and I knew they had both progressed
enormously in their language development. The text in Lauren’s kindergarten book
included three, seemingly random, letters on each page, which she “read” as several
sentences. Marco wrote his ﬁrst name on his picture, but did not include all of the letters in
his last name. I believe that literacy learning is developmental as well as experiential. You
can’t rush development, although you can certainly pad the Ieaming experiences with richly

contextualized opportunities for meaning construction.

Still I was concerned about what would happen to the children, particularly Marco,

as they went into third grade. I didn’t follow them closely after the second grade because

251

they did not have experienced whole language teachers. In fact, in third grade Lauren and
Marco suffered the fate of too many inner city classrooms and had a string of substitute
teachers for most of the school year. When Marco and Lauren were in fourth grade, I went
back to talk with them. They were both in the same fourth grade classroom.

Lauren was doing very well in school, according to both her own report and her
teacher’s. She was able to read and retell several texts in her eloquent storytelling style.
Her teacher had “sustained silent reading” and she was reading literature books in school
as well as at home. She told me that she was still writing, and had a thick folder full of her
writings at home. Her writing folder at school had only assigned topics and some
worksheets (letter writing format, etc.) so I wasn’t able to see how her original work had
progressed. She was her usual happy and talkative self.

Marco’s teacher told me she had recommended that he be tested for special
education classes. She said he was not doing well in any area. This surprised me, since he
always seemed to excel in math. Marco’s teacher reported that he didn’t follow directions
and never seemed to know what was going on. He had become a behavior problem. As a
result, his desk was placed near hers and away from his classmates. He had few
opportunities to “overhear” other children read and write or talk to them about reading and
writing.

When I interviewed Marco he had made progress in his independent reading
abilities. He was able to interpret unfamiliar texts using graphophonic cues as well as
syntax and semantics. However, he was very reluctant to make predictions, and would stop
and seek my help. Marco had regressed in his view of himself as a reader. He told me he
was a poor reader. When I asked him to write, he said didn’t have anything to write about
His reading and writing were slow and painstaking, which discouraged him more.

I asked Marco what he remembered about Ieaming to read, and he said he learned to
read in third grade. I believe he was describing his development of the alphabetic

relationship between written language and oral language in English. I’m not surprised that

252

he “learned to read” in third grade, since he was beginning to explore alphabetic
relationships when I worked with him in second grade. Based on my experiences as a
reading specialist, I think third grade may be the upper end of “normal” reading
development if we only had a system that allowed children to develop literacy normally.

I went back for several visits and worked with Marco. Although he said he had
nothing to say, he found many topics for writing once we got started. I webbed out the
topics as we talked, and he used the web as a reference for concept words as he created
several personal narratives. I looked for simple stories that would interest a fourth grader,
and found that he especially liked folk tales. They were predictable since he already knew
the story. I bought him several books and left them with him, but I don’t think he read them
while I was not there. After several visits his teacher told me his behavior had improved.

What Marco needed in third grade was the rich immersion in literacy events that he
had from kindergarten through second grade. What he got was one string of substitutes
after another. By fourth grade he had acquired a label and a chair in the comer by himself.
I’m sure Marco’s teacher was doing what she felt was best for him. His teacher
recommended him for Special Education because there was no classroom support for
children like Marco who needed extra help. As school activities became more and more
challenging, Marco just stopped trying. This fed into the perception that he was slow. In
addition, his lack of reading and writing practice further slowed his development And,
because he had time on his hands with nothing to do, he began to act out in class.

Marco and I made some progress together, but my time was limited. As I was
working with Marco in fourth grade, I was watching the second grader on video-tape.
Marco, who loved listening to stories. Marco, who wiggled like a snake and made a
prediction. Marco, who applauded Jackie’s wonderful speeches. Marco, who was so
conﬁdent and attentive. Marco, who invented an outline. Marco, who was so capable when
he was working with other children.

Sitting alone by the teacher’s desk. It breaks my heart.

253

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

INTERVIEWIN G PROCEDURES

This appendix provides greater detail about the components included in “reading

and writing interviews.”

Book handling: The book handling task gets young children talking about the form,
function, and language of books. Children are asked questions that elicit
understandings about concepts such as page, cover, author, illustrator, etc. The
researcher reads the book with the child and gauges the child’s awareness of print
concepts such as text as message carrier, directionality, and reading strategies such as
prediction and retelling. The interview questions I used are printed in the appendix of a
pre—school study conducted by Goodman, Altwerger and Marek (1989). The
researchers adapted these procedures from Marie Clay’s Sand Test (1972). I used the
book handling interview procedures until children were reading independently (in some
cases this occurred in kindergartners) and then moved to miscue analysis procedures.
Print Awareness: This interview gauges a child’s awareness of “environmental print”
such as signs, logos, advertisements, etc. I conducted these interviews in ﬁrst-grade
following a unit where children were asked to make posters or books of things they
“could read.” The procedures for this interview were also based on the study Print
Awareness in Preschool Children (Goodman, Altwerger, & Marek, 1989) and research
procedures are detailed in the appendix of their book.

Miscue Analysis: In this interview, the child reads a text without any assistance from
an adult, and then retells the “story” they have just read. The procedure is described in
detail in the book Reading Miscue Inventory: Alternative Procedures by Goodman,
Watson, and Burke. (1987) In debrieﬁng interviews, I generally used texts that the

children had read or written that day, a variation from miscue procedures. However, I

254

asked each child in the study to read and retell unfamiliar texts. I also used miscue
analysis procedures to analyze the reading process of texts read and written during
classroom literacy events.

Writing analysis interview: These interviews focused on a sample of a child’s
writing. I asked the child to read her or his writing and to talk about the writing and art
work. Initially, I was interested in the child’s awareness of forms and functions of
writing and distinctions between drawing and writing. In addition, I was interested in
the composition process and later interviews focused extensively on how children got
ideas, how they assessed their own writing, etc.

Reading and Writing interview: These interviews are designed to understand how
readers (and writers) perspectives on literacy. Questions probe children’s attitudes
towards literacy and towards themselves as readers and writers. Questions included:
Are you a good reader? What makes someone a good writer? Other questions ask
children to describe their own reading and writing processes, such as: When you’re
reading and you come to something you don’t know, what do you do then? These
interviews were based initially on Carolyn Burke’s “Reader’s Interview of the Reading
Process” (Goodman, Watson, & Burke, 1987) which has been adapted and used widely
by many teachers and researchers. I often used these values and process questions in
my own classroom teaching, and found it natural to ask such questions during
debrieﬁng interviews and during class time.

Debriefing Interviews: The debrieﬁng interviews occurred at the end of a day of
observation. During the interview, I asked the child to talk about the events of the day. I
was particularly interested in how the child perceived events, and what they thought were
the functions and reasons for various activities. I also asked the child to re-read texts
they had read and/or written during the day, and talked with them about the meaning
construction process. I also used the interviews, as time allowed, to ask the child general

questions about literacy and schooling.

255

APPENDIX B

MARCO’S DAY

This observation takes place on March 7, and begins at 9:30 am after “Things to
do”, an informal opening to the day where children select from a list of assignments and
choices on the chalkboard. One of today’s assignments, labeled “handwriting”, was to
copy a short poem from the chalkboard.

Transcription notes follow Appendix C, Lauren’s Day
Language Event 1 - Three Toed Sloth

Susan Austin, Marco’s teacher, stands at the front of the room. Jack Prelutsky’s
poem The Three Toed Sloth is printed on the chalkboard. A picture of a sloth hangs next to
the poem.

The Three Toed Sloth
The three-toed sloth is in a deep
and curious wakeless sleep.
The boughs and branches bend and break
but seldom does the sloth awake.
The noisy jungle far below
is not for three-toed sloths to know.
Jack Prelutsky

The children are sitting at table groupings with their “handwriting” copies of the
poem in front of them. Susan refers to the ﬁrst two lines of the poem, explaining that sloths
sleep about 18 hours every day. Alyssa does some rapid ﬁguring, and says that the sloth is
only awake for six hours out of the day. Susan asks, “How did you ﬁgure that out?”

Alyssa says, “I counted from 18 to 24.”

Susan repeats, “She counted from 18 to 24. So a sloth is awake six hours out of
the day.”

Susan reads, “The noisy jungle far below is not for three toed sloths to know.”

She explains the sloth “hardly ever goes down on the ground” because it has long
claws, good for climbing but not walking. Susan points out a greenish tinge on the sloth’s
fur in the picture. She asks if the children have seen algae in ﬁsh tanks. She wonders if the
green-brown fur makes it hard or easy to see sloths in the rain forest. Jonathan responds
with, “hard.” Susan suggests that algae is good camouﬂage.

Susan says. “Julia and Brent were trying to ﬁgure out, today, which vowels we’re
going to look for in the poem.” After reviewing vowels discussed previously, Susan says,
“We’re looking for the long “0”, or when we hear it say. . .”

Children call out, “0”, or “Its name.”
Susan continues, “Its name. We talked about this yesterday, your mouth makes
that oozoo shape.” Susan asks what words in the poem have the “long 0 sound.” Alicia

256

suggests, “toed”, and Susan circles it on the board. She circles other “long 0” words as
children call them out The children circle the words on their papers. Susan walks around
assisting.

The camera shifts to focus on Marco who sits at the “square team” table, between
David and James. He is wearing a red plaid shirt and has a fade style haircut, shaved short
on top and even more closely on the sides. He holds his pencil poised to write; peels
losel a the ard and then down at his a r. On Marco’s right, James is circling words
on his paper. Marco looks at the ard moves his m uth andl ks down thi r
again. He peints at the paper with his mncil, and says something to David. He glances
over at the camera.

Susan says, “Okay let’s see if you can do this one.” After praising the class for
choral reading abilities, Susan leads a choral reading of Three Toed Sloth. Marco recites
the title and ﬁrst line, which also begins “The three toed sloth...” After the ﬁrst line, Marco
holds his pencil poised and listens to his classmates. Next to Marco, James reads from his
paper while Terrence reads from the board. Destine, who also sits at Marco’s table, is
drawing a picture on her paper.

Susan says, “Would the daily helpers please come up?” She tells the children to
put their work in their “things to do folders.” Students begin to move and talk. Alyssa
comes over and picks up James’ pencil and then puts it down. Marco says, “She took your
pencil.” James says, “no”, but Marco insists disagrees. James explains, and Marco nods.
Marco puts his pencil on his paper as if ready to write. When David gets up, Marco gets up
and begins walking towards his “assigned seat” at the “triangle” table to put his work
away.

As he walks, he shows his paper to David, saying,“I did all those.”
Language Event 2- Morning Meeting

The students gather on and around the 6 x 9 mg deﬁning the classroom meeting
area. The “daily helpers”, Alyssa and James stand in front of a bulletin board waiting for
classmates to get settled. The bulletin board holds a teacher-made calendar, and a number
line, written in children’s handwriting, indicating the “days of school.” Above the number
line is a computer banner with the message “peace” and pictures of civil rights leaders.

Amber, Lauren, Alicia, Darryl, Jonathan, and Terrence sit in the front row facing the
daily helpers. Marco sits on the ﬂoor near the rug, next to Terrence. Other children are
scattered around the area rug, with a few sitting along the North wall. Darryl makes a
comment just before the meeting starts:

Darryl: Miss Austin, they put twelve zero zero. {On the “days of school” number
ﬁne}

Susan: You know what, James got confused. He thought nineteen and thought 20,
and got excited and put two “O”s=

Terrence: =Twelve=
Susan: =and made two hundred:
Terrence: =twelve hundred

Susan: So I just Xed out one of the zeros. It’s one hundred and twenty.
(Jackie stands up, raising her hand, then sits back down.)
You can see. There’s the one, the two, and the zero.
Susan: Jackie?
Jackie: That’s how you Ieam cause you know
How (? the line is?)
I did that before but I thought about it
And I crossed it out.
But before I crossed it out, I looked at it a couple of times.

257

Susan: That’s right. Jackie says, “That’s how you learn.”

Susan says, “James hold on a second. Let’s wait until everybody’s ready.”

James begins the morning meeting. "Today’s one hundred and twenty. It’s a four,
two, and a ten.” The factors of 120 are indicated on the number line with symbols below
the numbers: a square for multiples of four, two dots for multiples of two, etc. Children call
out, “ﬁve” and James puts his hand on his head, miming “I knew that.” Someone calls out
“ten”, and James says, “I said ten.”

James walks over to the easel, but Alyssa pulls him away. He mouths, “Oh yeah.”
Marco looks at his feet. He has on new shoes.

The easel has magnetic blocks under the headings of hundreds, tens, and ones.
There is a one hundred-square and two ten-strips. Alyssa says, “I took all the ones off and
put a ten, and it’s a hundred and twenty.” Marco talks to Terrence and Jonathan.

Alyssa holds up a large cardboard model of a thermometer, with the temperature
marked by a moving elastic. Alyssa says, “Today was 16 degrees.”

Susan tells Alyssa and James to ﬁx the line, “It looks like it’s on the ten.” Several
children ask questions about how to interpret the temperature. Susan points out that each
line is two degrees. She takes the thermometer model and shows it to group at the back of
the rug, explaining that only the tens are written down, and then you have to count by twos.

James walks over to Susan’s chair, to the south of the area rug. Susan says,
“Marco, James is not feeling good about you talking.”

Marco sits up quietly. Susan says, “Marco, what are you going to say to James?”
Marco says, “Sorry.”

Latrice selects “me0”, a Swahili greeting, for the attendance. Susan turns pages
in a black loose-leaf binder with a record sheet for each child.

“Jambo, Alicia.”
“Jambo, Miss Austin.”

As Susan greets each child, Alyssa tallies students present and James tallies those
absent on a tally chart on the chalkboard. Most children, including Marco, respond with,
“Jambo, Miss Austin.” However, some children are more creative.

Jonathan says, “Jambo Madam Miss Austin. Happy Good Morning.”

Susan sometimes makes comments as she calls children’s names. Sharonda
“might come, but we have to mark her absent for now.” Susan compliments Danielle on
coming to school four days in a row, and says Danielle will be in school an entire week if
she comes on Friday.

Students often chime in with responses to Susan’s comments:

Susan: Sarina hardly ever absent

Voice: I know.

Susan: She hasn’t been feeling well. She told me she has a cold.
Voice: Every day she said it

Susan: Rudy? Nozo Rudy.
Chorus: Nozo Rudy.

258

Marco watches the daily helpers as they tally the attendance ﬁgures. Jonathan
shows Marco some candy in his pocket. Then Jonathan takes something out of Marco’s
hair, and strokes Marco’s head a few times, like a brush. Marco strokes his own head.
Danielle raises her hand and reports that Jonathan has food. Susan tells Jonathan to put the
candy away.

Susan and the helpers begin to count the tally marks on the chalkboard. “Five,
ten.” Susan says, “I’m not going alone.” She begins counting again, and the class chants
with her, “Five, ten, ﬁfteen, twenty, twenty one, twenty two, twenty three, twenty four.”

There are 24 children present and four absent. The daily helpers take the “missing
person’s graph” down from the chalkboard, and shade in four boxes for this day.

Susan says, “Stand up.” The children stand up and begin singing:

I’m gonna shake, shake, shake my sillies out.
Shake, shake, shake my sillies out.

Shake, shake, shake my sillies out.

Wiggle my waggles away.

The children shake their bodies and walk around the room. Marco shakes his hands
and sings with the group. The class sings “I’m gonna clap my crazies out.” Marco struts
around in a kind of dance: clap, step right, bend the knee and clap, step left, bend the knee
and clap. Many children pair up and slap hands together as they clap. After two more
verses, someone starts chanting. “Head and shoulders.” Susan says “okay” and they
continue chanting:

Head and shoulders baby, one, two, three.
Head and shoulders baby, one, two, three.
Head and shoulders, head and shoulders,
Head and shoulders baby, one, two, three.

As they chant, they touch their heads, shoulders and then clap three times. Many
children clap hands together in pairs or small groups. Marco leans against a table. He joins
in sporadically through three more verses: knees and ankles, touch the ﬂoor, and stand up -
sit down. Children move around the circle area freely and everyone participates.

After this chant is over, Susan leads:

Teddy bear, teddy bear turn around.
Teddy bear, teddy bear, sit right down.
This is a signal for all of the children to sit down on the area rug. Susan says,
“Face the East and look at Amber.” Morning Meeting time is over and it’s time for
“Books to Go.”

Language Event 3 - Books to Go
“Let’s see who’s ready ﬁrst.”
Amber is sitting in a chair near the door, waiting to read.

Marco gets up and walks to the back of the room to throw something away. As the
children get settled, James quietly talks to Susan. Susan says, “Amber, you were going to
read ﬁrst, but James has a good idea. Your book is long. We might have to divide it up in
parts. James’ book is shorter. Is it all right if he goes before you?”

Amber agrees.
“Okay, James will go ﬁrst. GOOD IDEA, James.”

259

James goes off to get his book. As the children wait Susan says, “You are going to
like these books today. Amber has an information book about my WORST thing.”

Children call out, “Snakes.”

Susan talks about the paper Anaconda that a group of children made the day before.
It is a full length model, 25 feet long, and hangs from a wire going across the length of the
room.

There is informal talk between Susan and various students as they wait for James to
begin. It is still a class meeting. Susan reminds the children, “While we’re waiting for
James, this is not a time to get up and walk around.” But children do not raise their hands
to talk, and quiet side conversations develop.

When James is seated in the reader’s chair by the door, Susan says, “James you
can wait till everybody’s done [talking].” James looks around at the class and then begins
to read If a Tree Could Talk. The book is an ecology poem, with one line of verse on each
illustrated page. James reads the text slowly and clearly, and then shows the pictures to the
class.

The class is very quiet. The girls in the ﬁrst “row” stare up at the book. Terrence
and Darryl move towards James, kneeling and leaning in to the book. Marco sits behind
Alicia with his legs folded. He faces James and looks up when each illustration is shown.

The children sitting closest to James assist him when they feel he needs help. At
one point, they call out predictions:

James: Help us to live. We w. .. w. ..
Voices: wish
James: wish to stay

At another point when James appears “stuck”, someone says, “James, show me.”
James holds the book out to the girls in the front. Amber holds the page so they can see.
Lauren says, “every.” James continues, “Every day’s Earth Day... ”

Marco plays with his shoes. He looks up each time James shows the picture. After
about three minutes, James ﬁnishes reading. The children applaud. Marco holds his hands
above his head and claps vigorously.

Amber leaves to get her book. Terrence and Darryl move onto the carpet,
negotiating good spots with the girls in the ﬁrst row. They talk as they wait. Marco is
sitting on his knees. He ﬂips onto his back, then sits down with his legs curled to one side.
James sits down against the wall between Audrey and Terry.

Marco pulls up his sock and studies his shoe.

Susan and Amber look at the book. It’s long and Susan wants her to read it “in
parts.” Since it doesn’t have chapters, they plan how many pages Amber will read.

Amber begins reading, “There are over 2,400 diﬂerent kinds of snakes in the
world.”

The children gasp and look around at each other. Terrence and Darryl open their
mouths wide, miming amazement. Marco looks down at his shoes as Amber reads, but up
at the picture when she shows it to the class.

Amber continues, “Snakes slither and slide on their belly.”

Marco places his hands together in front of his chest like a snake’s head. He makes
a slithering motion with his upper body as Amber continues to read. He continues for a
time, appearing to enjoy the movement Amber shows the picture to the group. Darryl

260

holds the page to look closer. Alicia leans over to see. Marco looks at the picture. He
makes a comment to Jackie. Marco is sitting with one knee up, one foot ﬂat on the ﬂoor.

Amber reads, “The giant of all snakes is the Anaconda.”

Darryl leans back onto his knees, miming being impressed. Terrence points to the
class model hanging across the room. Marco pulls up his knee sock.

Amber reads, “It can be as long as a school bus. And weigh as much as two
grown men.”

Darryl says, “Jeesh.”

Marco says, “Let me see the picture.”

Other kids call out, “000. Show the picture.”

Amber shows the picture to the class. Children cry out in amazement, “Whoa!”

Amber reads the names of snakes from a page about snake sizes. She self corrects
several miscues, such as “rat snake” to “rattle snake”, but then holds the book out to
Darryl and Terrence.

Darryl reads “gator snake and Susan calls from the back, “garter.”

Amber holds the book out and around slowly so that kids can look closely at the
picture of many snakes. Children look at the illustration intently, and then turn to each other
to share and gauge reactions. Marco studies the picture, pointing with his ﬁnger.

Amber continues to read. Some children (Darryl, Terrence, Jackie, Alicia) appear to
be totally engrossed in the book. Others appear intrigued, looking at Amber intently
although they do not react audibly. Marco squats on his shoes, biting his nails. He watches
Amber closely.

Amber continues reading, seeking help from Alicia, Darryl and Terrence on two
occasions. Children do not generally assist until Amber requests help by turning the book
so they can look. At one point, she stops to work out the word “sense.” Jackie walks over
to stand behind Amber. Darryl and Terrence lean over to look. Marco carefully ties and
reties each of his shoes.

Darryl says, “That word?”

Amber says, “yes”, and Darryl supplies the word.
Later Amber reads, “In a ﬂash the rattle snake...”
She stops and the boys stand up to look.

“Give her some time.” Susan says.

The listeners wait, while Amber studies the text Amber turns towards the ﬁrst row
and says, “Alicia.” Alicia, Darryl and Terrence all study the page with Amber.

Someone says, “stricks”, and Amber repeats it, but then stops and says, “Miss
Austin, what’s this word?”

Susan begins to walk around the children towards Amber.

Susan: Can you go on with the sentence. Let’s listen to the rest of the sentence.
Amber: ...the mouse.
Susan: Okay, start at the beginning.
Amber In a ﬂash the rattlesnake something the mouse.
Susan: And I heard someone over here say “stricks”,
I think that’s cause it starts with s-t-r.”

261

Terrence: (quietly) ssss sstrike.
Susan: So what do you think would make sense?
What’s the rattlesnake going to do to the mouse?
Terrence: Strike.
Voices: STRIKE! (Loud staccato, like a snake striking a mouse)

Amber continues reading, “It grabs it with its needle sharp teeth, then it...”
“Swallows it,” Marco whispers loudly as Amber pauses.

Susan says, “Marco has a prediction. Say it out loud Marco.”

“Swallows it,” Marco says.

“... sinks it’s fangs into the mouse, ” Amber continues.

James says, “000. Dang!”

When Amber ﬁnishes reading the page and is showing the picture, Susan says, “I
want to ask Amber something. Marco thought it was ‘swallowed’. How did you know it
was ‘sinks’ and not ‘swallowed’?” Amber responds that she just knew the word. Susan
goes on to explain that Marco’s prediction made sense with what came before it, but not
with what came after.

“Okay, did we get to 24?” Susan asks Amber.

“Miss Austin,” someone says, “You said we would stop at page 23.”
Susan says, “Okay, we’ll stop at 23.”

“I’m past 23,” Amber shows Susan the book.

“Okay,” Susan says, “you want to read those two pages? Okay, cause this is a
pretty exciting snake. Then we’ll stop.”

“Snakes that kill their prey by squeezing are called constrictors.” Amber reads
about the Anaconda.

Marco sits with his legs crossed looking at Amber as she reads. Brent says, “Miss
Austin, that’s like that other snake that we made.” Kids clamor to hold the book as Amber
shows them the picture. There is general discussion of the Anaconda, with many voices
talking at the same time. Susan says, “Yeah! It’s supposed to be the biggest snake in the
world.

Susan tells Amber to put the book away. “Put a marker in it Go get a piece of
paper.”

Susan asks Brent to explain how they made the paper model of an Anaconda
hanging on a wire across the classroom. She tells how they estimated 25 feet by using ﬁve
lengths of paper the height of Susan, because “I’m a little bit taller than ﬁve feet” She
involves the class in the computation, ﬁve feet times ﬁve strips of paper equals twenty ﬁve
feet

Books-to-go ends when Susan walks to the chalkboard on the south wall and begins
to give instructions for math.

Language Event 4- Small Group Math Lesson

Susan walks over the chalkboard and begins giving instructions for math. Someone
asks, “Can we do writing?”

Susan says, “We’ll do writing in a few minutes. I want the kids who were working
on math with me to stay here today. Kids who don’t have math sheets can choose.”

262

Susan explains the choices as she lists them on the board. In one case, she
demonstrates how a math game is played. James and Terrence signal each other silently,
perhaps planning out their activities. Marco signals at Jonathan.

Susan says, “Okay, let me read the names of the kids who are going to stay with
me. Get a clipboard and a pencil. If I don’t call your name, you know you can make
choices.”

Children move around on the carpet as they listen. Marco gets up when he bears his
name, and walks over to the math shelves to get his clipboard. Susan ﬁnishes calling the
names, and the remaining children get up and move quickly to get materials for choices.
Susan says, “You know what? Everyone stop. I made a mistake.” She walks over to the
table area, but sees the children have selected materials and tables without a problem. She
says, “Oh you worked it out.”

The teaching group is milling around on the gathering rug. Susan sits down on the
ﬂoor holding a large bag ﬁlled with “unit blocks.” Marco sits down on Susan’s right and
James sits down on her left. Jonathan sits down next to Marco. The other children form a
loose circle on the ﬂoor except for Julia who lies on her belly behind Susan.

Danielle shows me her math sheet, “I wrote my name in cursive.”

Susan gives Marco his math sheet with a comment, “Whoa! You got so excited,
((perhaps responding to how name is written on page)) MAzrco.” She sings out his name.

Marco puts his math sheet on his clipboard. He goes to get a pencil from his desk.
Susan tells the kids to get a set of “tens and ones” from the large bag. Each child gets a

Susan leaves the group and turns out the lights. Susan addresses the independent
work groups. She clariﬁes makes sure each child is settled in one of the choices listed on
the board.

Mamo writes something en his pamr. He carefully puts his plastic baggie under the
clip on his clipboard and listens to Susan. He glances over at the camera. Terrence,
Audrey, and James take out their ten sticks. James spreads his sticks out like a fan. Julia
looks at her clipboard and begins working. Marco sits with one knee up. He taps his pencil
on the clipboard and waits for Susan to ﬁnish talking.

Susan turns the lights on and returns to her spot next to Marco. Destine sits down
next to Danielle. Danielle says, “I know how to do this.” Audrey and Destine look at
Danielle.

Danielle says, “Do you know how to use them? I’ll help you.”

Terrence studies his math paper. He says to James, “These ones down here going
to be even.”

When all of the children have clipboards and materials, Susan begins. She points
out the ﬁrst problem (35+18) and asks, “Can you make thirty ﬁve with your base ten
sticks?”

Marco takes out his ten sticks. He lays out three tens.
Susan asks, “How many tens in thirty ﬁve?”

Marco looks around at the other children and what they are doing. He places three
ten sticks on his clipboard. He puts ﬁve unit blocks near the sticks. He looks over to see
what James is doing.

Susan asks, “What are we adding?”, and kids call out, “eighteen.”

263

Susan looks around at each child’s work as she gives instructions. “Marco, put
these over here so you can see them.” Susan moves Marco’s sticks off the clipboard and
arranges them on the carpet where they are more visible.

Children repeat instructions and talk over their work. “Eighteen. She said
eighteen.” Marco silently takes out a ten stick, and then lines up eight one cubes on the
right side as Susan did with the thirty-ﬁve sticks. Marco counts the unit cubes. He puts the
extra cubes back in the baggie. He watches as Susan works with the other students,
stopping to count his own blocks several times. The children in the circle are informally
working in pairs or trios, but Marco watches and works without talking. Julia continues to
work on her own behind Susan.

Susan instructs the children to count their ones, “What do we add ﬁrst?”,
Marco counts all his unit cubes (ﬁve and eight). He says, “I count thirteen.”

Susan works with other children, making sure they are following the procedures.
Marco watches Susan’s interactions with other students.

Susan talks to the group. “Okay, thirteen. Now what do we have to do?”

“Trade for a ten,” Marco says, looking down at his blocks. Then he picks up ten
cubes and exchanges them for a stick. He has ﬁve tens and three ones laid out

Marco says, “I traded.”
Susan says, “Okay. Good, Marco.”

Susan then explains to the group how to record the information on their paper,
indicating the trade above the tens column. Marco l ks over at other a rs. He '
write. He is sitting with his legs folded. Susan shows Marco how to record his answer.

The group proceeds to the next problem: 46 + 17.

Marco counts out forty-six. He puts away his excess sticks. He says, “Miss
Austin. Now I have forty six.”

Susan says, “Okay, now we’re making seventeen.”

Marco puts away the forty-six and gets out seventeen. He says, “Now I got
seventeen.”

Susan is talking to Audrey, “No Audrey. This is forty-six. Now we got to make
seventeen.”

Marco listens and looks over at Audrey. He gets out more blocks. He makes forty-
six and then seventeen. He picks up ten ones and trades them for a ten stick. He has six
sticks and three cubes. Marco watches as Susan instructs Audrey. Susan looks over at his
“work” and im recor his n w r.

Susan says, “Clear your tens and make twenty two.” Marco puts all of his blocks
away and then takes out two tens and two ones. He waits for further instructions.” Susan
says, “Make ﬁfty one now.” Marco puts out ﬁve sticks and one cube. Susan looks over

and assists Marco. Marco looks around at the group. He writes semething ee his sheet.

Susan says, “Do you want to go on and do the next one yourself?” Julia is
counting on her ﬁngers behind Susan. When Susan turns to talk to her, Marco turns to
observe the interaction.

James is working with Terrence, who has been asking Susan for help. “Terrence,
you need help?”

“Yeah,” says Terrence.

264

“Cause I can help you.” James begins giving Terrence step-by-step instructions
for working the problem.

After a few minutes, Susan says, “Okay, you know what I want you to do. Put your
sticks away. We’re going to clean up.”

Susan goes over and turns out the lights. She says, “Three, two, one, zero, thank
you.” She gives instructions for cleanup. “Will everybody please clean up and go get set
in your own seats so we can get out our writing folders.”

Marco puts his sticks away and sits holding the baggie. He looks at the ﬂoor as
Susan gives instructions for cleanup. She sets a timer for two minutes. Susan says,
“Okay, Marco. Put all the ten sticks away for us.” Marco picks up the baggies. He lines
them up carefully with the tops together as he gathers them. Jonathan helps Marco put all
the baggies in a large plastic bag.

Language Event 5- Silent Writing

Susan signals the end of math and beginning of writing simultaneously, “Would
everyone please clean up and go get set in your own seats so we can get out our writing
folders.”

Marco puts away the math materials and goes to the bathroom. When the timer
rings at the end of cleanup, Susan begins calling the names of children who are “ready.”
Susan tells the class that “we’re going to keep working on autobiographies.” While some
children have ﬁnished, “a lot are still working.” She says that everyone has to have an
autobiography, but if they are done, students can write something else. Susan asks the daily
helpers to pass out writing folders.

At the “square” table, Destine and Terrence are already working on the “sloppy
copies” of their autobiographies. They are using books made of unlined paper folded in
half and stapled along the fold. Destine writes continually for the full twenty minutes of
writing time.

James brings the writing folders (legal sized pocket ﬁles) to the square table.
Terrence says, “Cool, cool.” He takes his folder from the ﬁle. David looks through the
folders. James comes back and stands by his chair. He looks through the folders, reading
the names out loud. David watches and then ﬁnds his folder.

Lauren wants to read an original story to me (the researcher). We sit down across
from David and Lauren reads to the camera.

Marco returns from the bathroom. Susan calls him to her desk, “Are you working
on your autobiography, Marco? The one in that little book I gave everybody?”

Destine and Terrence sit writing and/or drawing. In the background Ariel, Bruce,
and Latrice sit working at the hexagon table. As Lauren begins to read her story, Susan
says, “On your mark... Get ready, get set, write.” She sets a timer for 20 minutes. The
room is very quiet as the children continue working. Hearing Lauren reading out loud,
Susan asks about the noise, then notices she is reading to me and says, “okay.”

Destine turns to the page of her autobiography. She looks up at Lauren. She looks
down and continues to work. Terrence puts down his pencil and leaves the table. David
and James return to the table with supplies. Marco comes over and sits next to David. He
sits down with a blank book and begins to draw on the cover. He does not look at Lauren
as she ﬁnishes reading her story and then talks about the writing and illustrations.

James and Terrence return to the table and begin working. Marco looks over to
David. He says something, holding his pencil poised above his paper. Marco goes back to
drawing. Marco says something to David, pointing to his paper. He draws as David

265

watches, shaking his head as if amused. James talks to himself and spells out loud as he
writes. Marco talks to David and reaches for David’s eraser. He stands up and looks
around, then sits back down. Marco and David work with their bodies slightly slanted
towards each other, attending to each other’s work. Next to them, James and Terrence sit in
a similar alignment.

Destine looks up at me. “If I was in kindergarten when my brother was born and
my brother is two now, what that mean?”

I ask, “What are you asking me honey? What do you want to know?”
Destine says, “When was he born?”

I talk through this problem with Destine. She knows his birthday, her birthday, and

her birth year. I subtract from 1996 to determine the birth year. James leans over to hear
what Destine and I are talking about

James leaves the table. Marco continues to draw and interact quietly with David.
David’s lunch box sits on the table in front of Marco, who is using it as a model for his
drawing. He looks up once at Destine, but does not closely attend the exchange. He leans
over and says something to Terrence. He talks to David and draws. Marco laughs. He
looks at David’s work, and then goes back to his drawing.

Destine goes back to her autobiography. She writes, “My brother was born in
1992.”

Marco laughs out loud.
“Excuse me,” I say.
“Sorry,” Marco says.

Marco tries not to giggle. He erases something from his picture. He draws or
writes something on David’s book. David sits facing forward, working on the cover of his
autobiography. Marco’s body and head are turned towards David. The boys glance at each
other, and at each other’s works in progress throughout the writing session.

I sit down across from Marco and David to get a closer look at what they’re doing.
I ask Marco, “Are you working on your autobiography, or did you ﬁnish?” Marco looks
at David and smiles.

Jackie comes over to with an illustrated page she is writing about dinosaurs. Marco
looks at her picture. He gasps and rolls his eyes back, miming fear. I say to Jackie,
“You’re into dinosaurs now, Huh?” I remember that Jackie has “BEEN working on
dinosaurs, haven’t you?”

Marco says, “Yep. They got... they go’n make a big book.”

Jackie leaves to get the rest of her “book.” I ask Marco, “A big book? How do
you know all about it?”

Marco says, “I know because...” He thinks for a moment before continuing, “I just
seen them write it.” Jackie returns with a folder ﬁlled with many pages of writing and
drawing. Marco says, ”They... see there go the book.”

Jackie begins to sift through the papers, showing them to me. Marco stands up to
look at Jackie’s book. Marco says, “This an information book.”

I ask, “An information book? What kind of book is yours?”

“Biography.” Marco sits back down and starts to draw again. He is still working
on the same picture.

266

Jackie shows me the book Digging up Dinosaurs by Aliki. She stands ﬂipping
through the pages and talks about how she has used this book as a reference. “I’m
copying all this information.” Marco continues drawing. David looks over at Jackie and
back at his paper. Marco looks at David’s paper. He rolls his eyes, rrrinring amusement.
Marco takes David’s book and looks closely at the picture. David watches Marco.

Marco says to me, “Hey, you want to see this pretty picture?” He laughs.

David grabs at his book, but Marco holds it away. Marco starts to write or draw in
David’s book. David takes the book saying, “Don’t draw on my...” Marco laughs.

Jackie sits down next to me, in the chair across from Marco, and talks about
dinosaurs. “And then once dinosaurs was extinct they found these big heavy rocks and
that’s how... the book tells you about how they found them.”

Marco and David look at Jackie. Marco applauds Jackie’s talk. Jackie tells about
her plans for the book she is writing. Marco draws. He looks up at Jackie. He tells David,
“They been working on that book about twenty days.”

Jackie talks about the people who found dinosaur bones. She wants to be a
paleontologist. She talks about her great grandmother who told her that “if you look and
see your dream... don’t say you can’t be anything you want.”

Marco draws. He looks up and listens as Jackie continues talking about how fossils
are found. Marco looks at David. He hides his picture in his lap, and continues drawing.

Jackie shows a picture of dinosaur teeth. Marco gasps. She talks about the biggest
dinosaur teeth, “They have sharp teeth.”

“Rats have sharp teeth,” Marco comments.

Jackie shows me pictures and talks about the information in the book. Marco and
David listen. Marco leans across the table to study the book illustrations. Jackie tells how
scientists reconstruct dinosaur skeletons. Marco goes back to his drawing. David laughs.

Marco leaves the table. When he returns he says, “I didn’t start nothing on my...”

David shows Marco his work, and Marco listens while David reads the page. I ask
David, “With this page you’re going to be one?”

Marco says, “I’m bout to write my page GOOD.”

He looks at Debi, “You want to know my title?”

I ask why Marco hasn’t started yet. He says, “I’ve just been thinking.
“What have you been thinking about?”

“I’ve been thinking I’m gonna write, I was four years old... When I was four I had
went... I mean six. ”

“I know where you went”, Jackie says “It starts with an ‘M’... Oh, Major Magic.”
Jackie reminds Marco about Major Magic, a pizza fun house. I ask Marco if he and Jackie
know each other outside of school. He agrees, saying they know each other in school too.

The timer rings signaling the end of “silent” writing. The class gets noisy as
children start to prepare for lunch. Marco gets up, but Susan asks the children to return to
their seats and begins giving instructions for cleanup and lunch preparation.

Marco comes back and stands by the table. He turns to the ﬁrst page of his book
and writes, “I. ” He says, “How do you spell ‘was’?”

Iask him, “What letter does it start with?”

267

"3

Marco says the word to himself, “Wa:z Wa:z . Wa: s s s ‘S”. I sound it out

“You hear an “S”? Yes there is an “S”, that’s right. Start with a “w”, then put
the “s.”

David looks over as Marco writes. “Aint it ‘W’, ‘A’, ‘S’?” he asks.
I agree, but suggest that “ws” is close enough for the sloppy copy.

Marco writes “4 ” next to the ws. He reads, “1 was four ”, pointing to each word,
and then completes the sentence orally, “when I went to Major Magic.”

He and David talk about how to spell “Major Magic.”

James, the daily helper, calls Marco’s name. He gets up and leaves for the
bathroom. Terrence and Darryl come over and stand by the table. Terrence says, “Next
I’m making a newspaper and you and James are going to have to help me with that.”
Terrence and Darryl sit down and write. Destine shows her book to the camera.

Marco returns. He walks over and studies the easel (word wall??), perhaps looking
for a word spelling. Children continue to write throughout lunch preparations.

Susan calls, “If you can hear me and you want to buy lunch, please get in line.”
Marco gets up and goes to get in the line of buyers.
Language Event 5 - Books to Go, part two

After lunch Amber takes the reader’s chair with her Snakes book open, and children
gather on the area mg to ﬁnish Read Aloud. Susan gives an overview of the afternoon.
“Okay, we’re going to listen to Amber. Then we’re going to hear Destine. Then we’re
going to do book clubs. And they we’re getting BACK on the magic carpet and we’re
going back to the rain forest.”

There is a chorus of groans, “Ohhhh.”
“Oh, you don’t want to go?” Susan is surprised.
A few voices shout, “NO.”, but many more vigorously call out, “YES.”

“Books to go” continues. Susan is sitting near the front this time, and Amber is
more likely to appeal to her for assistance. Children continue to be involved in the book.
When Amber reads, “A python can swallow a whole pig in one bite, ” children call out,
“Whoa!”

Marco is sitting in the front, between Jackie and Kenneth. He has to crane his neck
to look up at Amber. He listens attentively, and studies the pictures when Amber slowly
shows them to the group. Sometimes he points to the book, or asks to see the picture.

When Amber reads that a snake’s meal might last a month, there are many loud
reactions. Amber smiles. Susan comments, “I wish that would work for me.”

Later, Amber reads, “Snakes shed their skin two or three times a year... ”
Marco looks over at Susan. He looks at the picture and says, “He changing.”
He looks at Susan, “Miss Austin, why he changing?”

Susan says, “Cause he’s growing. He doesn’t ﬁt his skin anymore.”
“Cause he’s... he’s getting bigger.” Jackie says.

 

‘ Quotation marks indicate the letter name is being pronounced. For example “S” is
pronounced /Es/. Italics indicate the speaker is reading or writing.

268

Susan says, “Just think if every time you got... your mom says, “Oh you’ve
grown, I have to get you new pants or shoes. Just think if your skin had to peal off and you
had another skin underneath.”

Kids laugh.

Alyssa has been counting on her ﬁngers. She says, “If a snake were seven years
old, it would shed its skin twenty times.”

“How did you ﬁgure that out?” Susan asks.
“I just counted by threes.”
Amber reads, “The green snake is the same color as the grass... ”

Susan says, “This is important.” She asks questions, prompting a brief discussion
of ‘camouﬂage’ and ways that animals ‘protect themselves’.

Marco interacts with Jackie and Teny, but turns around to look at the picture. He
points, “What kind of sna... what’s...”

Amber says, “It’s a rattle snake.”

Amber ﬁnishes reading and the kids all applaud. Marco holds his hands up to the
side of the head and claps hard three times. Destine goes to get her book. Several children
tell snake stories movies and TV shows. Other children talk to each other.

Susan says, “Class, I want to tell you before I forget. There is a great book around
here somewhere called A Snake Mistake.” She gives a synopsis of the book, a “true
story” about a snake who ate a light bulb thinking it was an egg. Jackie and Terry
immediately rush off to the book comer to look for the book. Susan tells them to come
back, but there is discussion of where the book might be and what it looks like.

When Destine is ready, Susan says, “Let’s give Destine respect. She practiced for

US.

Destine reads D. W. All Wet, a book that the children have all heard several times.
As she reads, several children mouth the words. At one point Darryl corrects Destine
without Destine’s request. I point out that Destine’s miscue made sense, and ask Darryl to
give her a little time.

Later Terry starts talking, and Danyl says, “Shh. Don’t tell the story.”
Destine shows a page to Susan, who tells her the word.

Susan says, “This is my favorite page.” When Destine is ﬁnished reading, Susan
talks about how much “we like this book” even though we’ve heard it over and over.
“That’s why it’s a good book, cause you want to hear it again.” Susan complements the
children on listening, and asks how many learned something from Amber’s book. Marco is
playing with Jackie.

“What kind of book was that?” Susan asks.

One child shouts, “biography”, but the rest call out “information. Susan says,
“Okay, I see somebody who wants me to start on book clubs.”

Language Event 6 - Book Clubs

Susan calls off the names of the book clubs, beginning with What’s in my Pocket?
Marco gets up when he hears the title. Marco has taken off his ﬂannel shirt during lunch,
and tied it around his waist. He is wearing a plain white T-shirt

A child calls out, “Patrice is not here.”

269

Marco says, “I here.”
Susan says, “Marco, were you in this group? Okay.”

Marco walks over to David, who is sitting on the ﬂoor by the door. Marco says
something to David. David shakes his head, “No.” Marco waves to David, “come on.”

Susan calls the Lunch Boxes group. The group members get up and begin moving
toward their group area. David gets up when he sees the other students standing.

After David leaves the gathering area, Marco plays around with Danny. Marco and
Danny start hopping around the area rug with their legs bowed like cowboys.

Susan says, “Marco, time-out. Danny, stay here.”
Marco goes and stands in the comer of the room by Susan’s desk.

The room gets noisy as children move around, preparing for book clubs. Susan
reminds the class that, “We’re working on Project Two.”

The Lunch Boxes group members get out construction paper and other supplies to
make props for a dramatic presentation. Another group sits in the book comer. Alicia
rocks in the rocking chair as the group talks about project plans. One group reads together
in a circle on the gathering rug. Jonathan, Brent, and Kenneth read a book together on the
ﬂoor next to the carpet. Amber sits alone at the “triangle” table reading the book Follow
the Drinking Gourd.

David sits at the “square” table in his usual seat by the window. The book club
folder, a loose-leaf binder, is open on the table in front of him. One pocket holds several
copies of the book What ’s in my pocket? by Rozanne Williams. Marco comes over and
picks up a book. David takes the book and puts it away. David talks to Marco about “what
we’re ‘pose to be doing.”

Marco leaves the table to confer with Susan. The camera picks him up at the supply
table in back of the room. He returns to the table with a stack of white envelopes. He waves
at David, who is getting something from another table. Marco calls David’s name. Susan
tells them not to shout across the room. David returns and sits down by the window, facing
Marco.

Marco sits with the pile of white card size envelopes in front of him. He picks up
and envelope and opens all the glued seams. Then he closes up the sides and neatly stacks
the “ﬁnished” envelopes on a separate pile.

David leans over towards Marco. He has a large black marker in his mouth. David
says, “What’s that (??) Your mama something... She... something in 1998.”

Marco says, “your mama got to skate. She (?hit the ﬂo’?). Her (?bootie roll?) In
nineteen ninety eight.”

Marco continues to pull apart envelopes. David laughs at the rhyme. He looks at
Marco and raises his eyebrows. Marco glances at the camera. He smiles.

Marco says, “You aint go’n help me?”

David looks over at Susan, “Oh Miss Austin got some paper.”

David gets up and starts towards Susan’s desk.

Marco calls, “But we already got the envelopes.”

David says, “I know but she giving out paper.

David returns with a used, blue legal sized ﬁle folder. He looks at Marco and asks,
“Why you doing that?”

270

“CAUSE. That’s what Miss Austin says we GOT to DO:O.” He shakes his
shoulders to emphasize his words. “Then we put it in there and then we be... draw

something in there and then we be done.” He indicates that the envelopes will go in the
blue folder.

David says, “Then we go’n to make a triarama. I’m...”
6‘ N o . 99

“I’m going to make a triarama.” David leaves and goes over to the supply table.
He returns with green “handwriting” paper and begins to fold it for a triarama.

Marco folds down the metal prongs on the ﬁle folder so they lie ﬂat He says to me,
“Look what we making. I’m going to draw a picture.”

“What are you going to do?”

“We making “What ’s in my Pocket?” books like this.” He pulls a copy of the
book out of the group binder. “And we got to draw in something. We can draw. We can
get some of the ideas out of here [the book], but then when we don’t want to get the ideas
out of here, we can just think of some.”

David has folded his paper down at an angle. He cuts the excess strip so that he has
a square.

Marco explains, “We’re going to use these [envelopes] for the pockets.”
“Those are the pockets?”

“And this what we go’n put them in,” Marco says, pointing to the blue folder.
I ask how the group decided on the project.

Marco says, “The reason... because that... cause when we heard when we said,
“What ’3 in my Pocket? I had thought of it. And then I decided to make this one up and
so then I got it and then when we open it there’s going to be a little picture in there.”

I ask, “What’s David doing?”

Marco explains, “He making a triarama.” He looks over at David. “You got the
wrong paper.” Marco takes David’s paper and tries to form a pyramid shape by
overlapping two of the four sides. It works, but the paper is ﬂimsy.

David says, “This will work.” He goes to get a stapler.
I ask, “What’s the triangle for?”

Marco says, “Another project. This project number two. We already did number
one. And then [lunch box group] did the other one. They made (?bags?) And I don’t
know what they’re [group in book comer] going to do.

Marco decides, “We go’n make a triarama too. I’ll go get a piece of paper.”

He goes to the supply table and returns with a sheet of stiff manila paper. He folds
the paper and cuts off the side so it’s square.

David explains, “First you got to fold it, then you got to cut it.”

Marco folds the square cross wise so there is a cross creased across the middle. He
cuts from one comer to the center.

I ask, “How did you learn?”
Marco says, “Miss Austin.”
Then he says, “Aint that one hard to make?”

271

David starts to write on his triarama with a marker. I suggest a pencil, but he is
resistant.

Marco folds one side over the other, forming a pyramid shape. He staples the sides
and sits it on one side so he can write or draw inside.

“Is that David’s?,” I ask.
“It’s all of ours,” Marco says.

Lle we'tes his heme on the triarama. “So David, it’s your turn.”

David spells his name for Maree te write. “Don’t write it sloppy,” he says, “And
don’t write it that big.”

As Marco writes, David begins to chant, “In eighteen eighty eight...”

Marco says, “Your mama tried to skate. She skate so well you couldn’t even catch
her.

He looks at David. “The other one that I got off that movie, it’s a nasty one.”
David says, “I aint saying that.”

Marco and David talk and plan. Marco takes another piece of paper and dr_aws a
li_ne. He draws a triangle, square, circle, and diamond on the line. As he draws, he looks up

on the wall, where the square hangs marking their table, as a reference.
Marco says, “Okay, them the ones we going to put in.”

David goes over to the supply table. He returns with some glue. Meanwhile, Marco
draws a second line and adds two more shapes.

Marco says, “These the ones we’re going to draw in there.” He points to the
envelopes.

David sits trying to open the glue. “Why we need glue?” Marco asks.

Marco studies the paper with the lines and shapes. “Okay,” he says. He counts
off six envelopes, moving them from one pile to another, while looking at the shapes. Then
he counts the shapes, pointing to each one with his ﬁnger. He counts the shapes three
times, and counts the envelopes once more.

“We don’t need these,” he says. He moves the extra envelopes to a comer of the
table. David is still working on the glue. He looks over to see what Marco’s doing.

Marco opens one envelope and places it on the table. He epens the mk sed reeds,
“P k t . hat ’s in m ocket? It’ somet in r and. ” He looks over the next

few pages, and then turns back to the ﬁrst page.

Merge sgtts te eepy frem the Mk te the inside of the envelem. He is using the
thick, black marker.

I say, “Honey, don’t you want to write that with a pencil?”
Marco shakes his head, no. “I’m writing this- pocket, pocket...”

I am sitting in the chair on Marco’s right side. “Wait a minute.” I take the
envelope and close it up. “Do you want it closed like this, and then you open it and the
surprise is inside.”

David takes an envelope and glues it to the blue folder.

I say, “Let’s see if we can plan that a little bit. What I’m thinking is maybe...
what’s going to be inside this one.”

272

Marco says, “Marble.”

“Okay. Draw what’s going to be inside.”
Marco draws a marble inside the envelope.

“Okay. So you want to write, “a marble.”

Merco writes a marble , eopying the words frem the book.

“So on the outside.” I write on the outside of the envelope. “Pocket. See I think a
marker’s going to be too fat to write all these words.”

Marco reads the envelope as I write, “Pocket, pocket, what ’s in my pocket.”

I say the words slowly as I write, “Somethimg... tha:t’s. .. rou:nd. Then you
open it up.”

Margo mints to the text inside the envelope. We both read. “a merble. ”

Marco takes the folder from David, “What did you do?” he asks. He laughs.
“You posed to wait.” David, Marco, and I talk about how the folder should be oriented.
Marco wants it horizontal, “That way, cause that way we got more.”

 

Marco suggests we might need tape. I say we can use glue, but should line the
envelopes up. We take David’s envelope off and wipe off the glue. “Glue this one down
here so you can put more on.”

Marco does the gluing, even though I suggest that David do it. He places his
envelope on the left side, beneath the fold.

David says, “This time Ima do it. Let’s trade seats.”

Marco pastes David’s envelope below the ﬁrst one.

David says, “I don’t get a chance to do nothing. Why you have to do everything?”
Marco says, “Now what we go’n write up here.”

We decide on something square.

David says, “Write it, just like that.” He points to the envelope that I wrote.

Marco says, “You know I can’t write that neat.”

,- 001'4 1 H to ‘ 0 0 u 'rvl'ur I '0' t'm°-.-r
David leans over to watch.

“That’s neat enough, huh?” Marco says, looking over at David.
David reaches for the pencil. “Let me see.”

nto n il an con ' wri 'n .
“I don’t get a chance to do nothing. All I have to do is...”
“You ‘bout to do something.”
“Why you get to do everything?”
Marco shakes his head.
I say, “Hey, David, where’s your pencil. You can do this one.”
I show him another envelope. David looks around for a pencil.

Marco says, “Hold on. I think I got a pencil.” He ﬁnds a pencil for David, “This
needs sharpening.”

273

I sharpen the pencil as Marco gms haek te writing. I bring the pencil back to
David.

David sits for a few seconds. He says, “Pocket, pocket, what’s in my pocket.” He
takes the envelope and starts to write.

Marco waves his hands in annoyance. He is concerned that David is copying from
the same page that he is copying. He says, “You... you STOP. You got to do the next

page?’
David starts to turn the page in the book. Marco stops him. “I know. But I got to
do this page.”

Wm each word in the book as he reads, “All you do is write Pocket.
pocket, thI’s it; my pocket. That’s all you got to write.”

For the next few minutes, the boys write quietly. Marco eopies frem my envelepe.
David copies from the book.

As the mys continue writing, David notices I am drinking out of a McDonald’s
cup. “Y’all went to McDonalds?”

“Mhm.”
“I wish I went.”

 

 

The boys continue working as we talk. David asks for some of my drink. Marco
laughs. I explain that I have a sore throat and apologize for drinking in front of them.
Marco shakes his head. He complains about an ear infection.

After a time, Marco looks over at me. “I wrote... It say, ‘Pocket, pocket, What’s in
my pocket.” He teps each word on the envelem with his ﬁne]! eraser.

Marco looks over at David’s work. He moves David’s pencil so he can see what
he’s doing.

I ask Marco, “Are you doing something square? Something that’s square?”
Marco puts his pencil down. “You can write that,” he suggests.

I refuse. “No. You go ahead. You’re doing a really good job. You’re almost
donef’

Marco continues to write, “Something that ’s sg. . .. ”
“I don’t got enough room.”

“Write ‘square’ down there,” I suggest, “Erase the ‘s’ and ‘q’. See how I wrote
‘round’ underneath it.”

Marco uses the book to copy the word ‘square’. “How’s that ‘p’ look?” he asks.
“That’s a ‘Q’. It’s like a ‘P’ backwards.”
“I mean...” Marco starts to erase the Q.

“No, you got it. It’s s’posed to be a ‘Q’. S-q-uare.” I emphasize the phoneme
/k/.

As MQLCO writes I ask David. “You’re going to do something different? What?”

“Something furry.”

“I’m tired,” Marco says. He leans back in his chair. 'lfhen he leans ferwerd end
erases semething.

274

“I’m tired too,” David agrees. He starts writing again.
“It’s gonna take DAYS for this,” says Marco.
Mgco ﬁnishes the envelope. “See,” he shows me. He opens the envelope.

“All right. What are you going to put that’s square? You going to think of
something different than the book?”
Marco draws inside the envelope. “That ‘pose to be square.”

“What’s that?” I ask.
“A square.” Marco says.

I suggest that he draw an object shaped like a square. Marco decides on a lunch
box. I write “lunch box” inside the envelope. Marco starts to draw, using David’s lunch
box for a model.

Susan says, “Stop.” She explains to the children that they are to “record what you
did today” in their book club diaries. She looks around and decides to set the timer for
eight minutes because of the mess.

Marco and David stop to listen, and then return to their work. Marco ﬁnishes his
picture. I help David complete his envelope. Marco looks for the “book club diary.” He
gets out his autobiography.

“That’s your autobiography,” I say. Marco insists that his autobiography is his
book club diary. David suggests they are the same thing. As Marco goes to look for the
diary, I look in the group binder. I notice lined paper in the binder rings for a group log.

“Marco, I found it.”
Marco returns and sits down. I put the diary in front of him.
“Put the date.” I say.
1 ok at a c. He ints t the rev' 3 n . “Thi ?”
“This is the 2nd. You need to write the date here. Three...” I hint.

Marco looks up at the front board where the date is written. “Three seven dash
ninety four,” Marco ﬁnishes.

Meme writes the date on the page. I say, “Who was here today?” Marco begins to
write Marco and David. He writes his name and looks up at me,

“How do you spell ‘and’,” he asks me.
I pronounce the word carefully, “/ae:nd/. How do you spell ‘and’?”
Marco mouths the word ‘and’, and thinks for a moment. “That’s an ‘N’?” he

says. He writes h’ on his pamr,
“Is that how you spell it?” he asks me.
“That’s ﬁne,” I say.

Marco writes David’s name, remembering it from their earlier exchange. He says,
“I know how to spell David’s name ‘cause he taught me. D-A-V-I-D”

I ask, “Now what did you do today that you want to tell her? What did you get
done?”

“We got done two envelopes and we did... three envelopes?”
“You going to do that?” David asks, indicating the diary.

275

Marco points to David’s envelope. “He’s a good artist, see.”

Marco offers me the pencil to write, but I refuse. “I’m not taking your pencil. Ask
David to help you. He’s a good speller.”

“How do you spell ‘we’,” Marco asks David who is cleaning up the table.
I say, “W:e. What do you think it starts with?”

“What did you say now?” David asks.

I say, “We made three envelopes.”

Both boys sit and think for a few moments. David guesses ‘r’.

“Okay, ‘we’,” I say.

“Oh yeah, we.”

I spell it “W - E”

Marco repeats the letters while he writes.

“And you want to write ‘made’. How does ‘made’ start?”

Marco thinks for a while. He mouths the word ‘made’. He guesses ‘k’.

I say the world slowly, “/mmai:d/. Do you know any words that start like ‘made’?
How about Marco- ‘Marco’, ‘made’. Do they sound the same?”

Marco shakes his head.
I say, “You don’t. All right. Well it starts with an ‘M’. Okay, what else.”

Neither boy makes a guess. Marco begins to look distracted. He turns his body
towards the window.

“All right, I’ll write it for you this time.”

I write ‘made’ and return the pencil to Marco, who writes the numeral ‘3’. I point
out to him that ‘pockets’ is in the book.

Marco says the letters aloud as he writes. David watches Marco.

Marco and David ﬁnish cleaning up and sit at the table, waiting for the next activity.
Marco sings into the microphone, “Don’t ask my neighbor.”

276

APPENDIX C

LAUREN’S DAY

This observation takes place on March 13 and begins as children are walking in the
door in the morning. Kelly, the sixth grade future teacher, is ﬁlming so I can take ﬁeld
notes. Although I asked Kelly to just ﬁlm the students working, she provides a running
commentary for the time she is ﬁlming. I stop her after about twenty minutes.

Transcription notes are listed at the beginning of Appendix B.

Language Event 1 - Things to Do (8:35 am.)

The room is a noisy buzz as many children talk and walk around. Kelly’s presence
behind the camera is distracting. She says, “Okay you guys, say ‘hi.”’ and then she tries
to get the children to “Do your work.” Susan is in the hallway helping children put their
outdoor things in their lockers and supervising the entry process.

On the chalkboard is a list of “Things to do”, and some children come in and look
at the board to see the tasks for the day. Required items are marked with stars, and they are
followed with choices. In the background, there is a voice calling, “What do we ‘posed to
do?”

Lauren comes in from the hallway at 8:39. Her face appears in front of the camera
and she asks, “And why you’re behind the camera?” She laughs.

Kelly says, “Because I am responsible, Christian.”
Lauren gives her name.
Kelly says, “Lauren, you silly thing. Go. Go. Go. Everybody go do your work.”

Lauren asks Kelly to sharpen her pencil with the electric sharpener. She walks
toward the board, mssibly reading the “to do” list.2 A few minutes later, Lauren stands
next to the hexagon group table. She is tapping her pencil on her back and lmking at the
mate. She may be reading the “to do” list or studying the map sample on the board.

Lauren sits down in her chair and talks to Katherine. Lauren is wearing a black
corduroy skirt, a white shirt with black collar and cuffs, and white tights. Her hair is in two
small pony tails high on the sides of her head. Alicia comes over to the table. Lauren
begins to work on her map of North Amerim. Katherine sits next to her cutting out
answers for her math work sheet. Lauren looks towards the board. She says to Kelly,
“Move out of the way. I can’t see.”

Lauren leaves the table and goes to the front of the room. “I can’t hardly spell
Mexico.”

Kelly says, “Mexico. There.” Lauren returns to the table with the sample map of
North America from the board. She is out of camera range for several minutes.

Kelly is talking to the camera and showing various things in the room. Upon
Kelly’s request, Lauren brings over the class trip book and helds i while Kell i t

theeemela. Lauren has a crayon in her mouth. Lauren mints to text as Kelly reeds, but

 

 

2 Underlining indicates instances where Lauren is reading, writing, or transacting with
printed texts directly.

277

Kelly says, “Hey, get your ﬁnger out the way.” Kelly has Lauren get another class book
and Lauren and holds it up as Kelly reads it to the camera.

At 8:54, I take over the camera and direct it to Lauren’s table. Lauren and Katherine
are both working on math sheets. Katherine watches as Lauren uses the glue. The girls talk
as they work. Katherine puts the glue down and Lauren brushes it away. Katherine
appears irritated, but Lauren laughs. Then Katherine smiles. The girls exchange remarks in
a mock argument.

Lauren says, “I don’t care.”
Katherine rolls her eyes. Both girls are smiling.

Lauren has colored Mexico yellow and c i s e name “M xic ” fr m
map. She looks over at Katherine’s work as Katherine sits gluing her math answers down.

Jonathan and Alicia are also working at the table. (See MAP). Danielle comes in
and clears a space for herself kiddy—comer from Lauren, pushing materials to the middle of
table and placing her notebook on the table. I sit down next to Jonathan. Lauren cuts the
strip of answers from the math sheet. She looks over at Katherine’s paper, wrinkles her
nose and then looks back at her own work. Katherine looks at her own paper and counts
with her eraser.

Things to Do - map of “hexagon team” table
Lauren Katherine

 

 

 

Danielle

 

 

 

 

Alicia Jonathan

Announcements begin over the PA system, and Susan puts her ﬁnger to her mouth.
The room gets quiet, but children continue to work as the assistant principal speaks. Lauren
eehtinaes working on math, occasionally looking over at Katherine’s paper. She pushes the
purple crayon box towards Danielle. Danielle sits down to work on her map, and pushes
the supply box out of her way. Lauren pushes it back. Danielle shakes her shoulders,
miming “an attitude.” She smiles. This mock argument has jostled my microphone.
Lauren adjusts it so it faces her. Lauren looks at Danielle out of the comer of her eyes and

smiles. She contihees working throughout the exehange, now cutting the strip into smaller

pieces.

On the PA, the assistant principal says, “Students from Mrs. Brassel’s room will
lead us in the school pledge.” Susan says, “stand up please” as the school pledge begins.
Lauren sits as she begins chanting, then stands. She stops pasting for a moment, then
eeah'nees te werk. Danielle and Alicia also continue working as they stand and chant the
pledge. When the pledge stops, Lauren and Katherine continue to stand for a moment,

engaged in working.

Lauren looks over at Katherine’s work. She ick the t ieces fr mh r

sheet ar_rd talks about them with Katherine. Alyssa comes over and picks up the glue.
Lauren takes the glue from Alyssa. Alyssa pats at Lauren’s pony tails. Lauren begins

gluing pieces on her math sheet. Alyssa talks for a while and then wanders away. Lauren

278

picks up Katherine’s paper, and reads Katherine’s answers. She and Katherine laugh as
they continue to work.

Susan says, “Um, class. Where is the map that was up here that I did?”

Lauren and Katherine continue working. Willie comes over to the table looking for
the map. He starts to take it and Katherine reaches for it. Lauren grabs the map and helds
it up, smiling as Susan says, “Somebody must know where it is.”

Willie says, “Right there.”
Lauren says, “Miss Austin, I got it.”
Susan says, “Okay, thank you” and comes over to get the map.

Katherine picks up two answer squares from the table, looks at them and starts to
take her paper back from Lauren. Lauren waves her hand around as Katherine tries to get
her paper. Lauren holds Katherine back with her left hand as she reads Katherine’s pamr.
She laughs. Alicia watches and laughs. Lauren gives the paper to Katherine and Katherine
sits down to work. She says, “All right, where’d the glue go?” Lauren makes a raspberry
sound and laughs. Alicia laughs. Susan asks how may kids have math papers done.

Katherine gets up and looks around for the glue. Lauren also looks for the glue and
notices Danielle’s personal supplies. “Can I see your glue?”

Danielle refuses. Lauren sits with her elbows on the table and stares at Danielle for
a moment, miming disappointment

Susan asks who has completed their maps. “All right, I’m going to set the timer for
ten minutes, then we’re stopping so you need to get right to work.”

Although Lauren is done with her map, she doesn’t raise her hand. Katherine
returns with the glue and Lauren takes it.

Bruce, who is sitting at the round table behind the girls, calls out, “Miss Austin, I
don’t know how to do this problem.”

Lauren turns around to face Bruce. “I know how to do it.”

Susan asks the kids to put the completed North America maps in her basket Alicia,
Danielle, Lauren, and Katherine continae working and do not look up at Susan.

Susan asks about South America maps. Lauren says, “I took mine home.” and
then repeats more loudly, “I took mine HO:ME.”

Susan comes by the table and Alicia hands her a South America map. “Can I hang
it up?” Susan asks. “I wanted a couple to hang up.”

Lauren repeats, “I took mine home.” She smiles, rocking back and forth with the
rhythm of her speech.

Katherine walks over to Susan’s desk with her math sheet. Lauren reaches out to
Katherine. She turns around and looks at Susan, who is hanging maps on the bulletin
board next to her desk. Sharonda comes over from the round table and asks for the glue.
Lauren hands it to her. Lauren gets up and pulls Katherine back to the table, semaLsheem
l h ' ’s m h a r.

Susan says, “On zero, put everything down and look at me. Let’s see who heard
that Three, two, one, zero.”

Lauren and Katherine stand at their desks looking down at their mm papem.

279

Susan explains that she is going over the math papers because some children need
help. Those who are ﬁnished can work quietly on their maps. Lauren goes to the circle
table and gets the glue. She returns to her table with a big smile on her face.

Bruce shouts, “Give us that glue back.”
Lauren says, “I need to SEE it.”

Susan says, “Lauren, put the glue back for them. We are not gluing. I am asking
the class to stop and listen.”

Susan then asks Brandon what he said to Lauren, concerned about his tone of voice.
Bruce says Lauren took their glue, and Lauren explains, “But I let him see it.”

Susan says the problem will be worked out “when we’re done.”

Susan asks the children to focus on the ﬁrst problem on the math sheet Katherine
reads her paper and recites the answer with Susan. Lauren looks at her paper strip ef
answers, and looks up at Susan. Susan tells the kids to write answers in the box and then
cut and glue the answers later. Lauren puts her arm on Katherine’s shoulder and Lmlts
o t rine’ a r.

 

Susan says, “Okay, let’s look at ‘B’. What are we counting by?”
Katherine responds, “tens.” Laur nlo ks tK t rine’s a r n h n er
own paper.

As Susan continues, Lauren reaches in front of Katherine and pieks up an answer
sgaa e.

Katherine whispers, “STOP. Stop.”
Lauren whispers, “That’s MINE, cause I got my name on the back of it.”

Katherine peels the square off her paper and looks at the back. She smiles and
W. Lauren reaches for the cut piece. Katherine holds it Lauren holds her arm
crocked in a circle around her head. She pulls at her hair band on one pony tail.

Susan is saying, “What comes after?”

Voices respond, “ten, twelve, fourteen.” Katherine reads softly from her paper.
She writes down the answer. Lauren leans over and watches. Katherine continues to
respond to Susan’s questions as they work through the problems. Lauren watches
Katherine and writes answers on her own math sheet. She occasionally joins in as kids

recite the answers. As the answers are provided, she Ima at Katherine’s sheet and her ewn
511%

Susan goes through several problems and then tells the kids to ﬁnish quietly.

Lauren looks over at Katherine. “What’s the last one?” She lmks at Kathetihe’s
Lager.

Susan reminds the children to put their names on their papers, and then tells Lauren
that she can get the glue.

“Miss Austin,” Lauren calls out, “Do I have to glue it?”
Susan says, “yes.”

Amber comes in late to school and sits down where Katherine has been sitting. This
is Amber’s assigned seat. Katherine picks up her own stuff and moves.

Amber says, “Miss Goodman, I got my new glasses.”

280

Lauren returns with the glue and says to Katherine, “Where are you taking my
Stu/\ff?3 I told you all this stuff over here is mi/\ne.”

Katherine tells Lauren, “Look you already had this one.”
They go back and forth with “No I don’t”; “Yes you do.”

Jonathan is working on math and Alicia is coloring her map. Amber asks Lauren
and Katherine, “What are we supposed to do on this?”, referring to the map.

Lauren says, “Amber, you have to do your math ﬁrst.”

Lauren studies her math sheet. She says, “Can I see your pencil?” and takes a
pencil out of Amber’s hand. She writes on her pamr, and rolls the pencil back to Amber.

Lauren says the numbers as she ﬁnds them and pastes them down, “twenty ﬁve,
thirty.. this is it.”

“I only got /two \more,” she says. She leans back and puts her hands on her head.

Danielle looks over at Lauren, and Lauren repeats, “I only got two more. See, look.
One, two. One, two.”

LAUGH continues worjkihg. “Now I got one more.”

Danielle is looking at her answer pieces, “ﬁve, seven.”

Lauren glues the last piece down. “Got it. I got all of them right.”

Alyssa comes over to the table and leans over to look at Lauren’s paper.
Lauren says, “Here, I’m done with it. Alyssa, I’m already done with mine.”
Alyssa picks up one of Lauren’s strips.

Lauren says, “Now you put that back.” and laughs.

Alyssa mirrrics, “Now you put that back.” She leans close to Lauren.
Lauren says, “Do you know what Alyssa means?”

Alyssa says, “yes.” She pretends to slap Lauren, but does not touch her.
Lauren says, “My mama got a name book. What does it mean?”

Alyssa says, “I don’t know what it means. I know what Lauren means.”
Lauren asks, “What?”

“It means soft and gentle and meddlesome and (?‘blavely?).”

“No, it doesn’t.” Lauren tells what her name means.’

Alyssa repeats Lauren’s deﬁnition and laughs.

Lauren says, “Yeah. I got a name book. So you’re a liar.” She smiles at Alyssa.

Alyssa leans backward. She leans forward again. “My aunt has a name book and
she told my mama what Lauren means. But then I forgot”

Lauren plays with Amber’s pony tails, counting them as Amber works. It is 9: 18.
fifhe girls look at the board. where Susan is giving out team mints.

 

 

3 /\ indicates a rising and then falling tone.

" Question marks within parenthesis indicate speech I was unable to discern from audio or
video tape. Where applicable, I include the speech I think I hear within the parethenses.

5 Lauren is a pseudonym so I have not included the deﬁnition she gave.

281

Lauren says, “I’m going to ﬁnish writing my (??) book.” She begins pulling
things out of the cubby in her desk until she trhds a “hmk” made from folding blank
paper and stapling.

Amber picks up the book. Lauren puts her other stuff back in her desk and looks
up., “Where is.. EH!” Amber laughs and Lauren takes the book back. She looks at the
heard. “Qh. Cheek minuses.”

Danielle says, “Everybody got a check minus.” Alicia, Danielle and Amber are
working on their maps. Lauren sits with her book on her desk and her pencil in her mouth.
She looks at the board and then towards Susan. Danielle, Alicia and I start talking about
where Detroit is on their maps. Lauren turns in her chair and is talking to the group at the
round table. She also talks to Katherine, who is standing nearby. Katherine leaves and
Lauren turns back to face the table.

Lauren Opens her book and shows it to me. It is the same book she was working on
during my last visit, one week earlier. She says, “Look, Miss Goodman. I’m on this page

and I’m almost ﬁnished.” Lauren writes something in her book.

She says to Amber, “Let me read this book to you. My Friend ’s Liale Behy
Sister. ”
Lauren holds the book in front of Amber’s face. Amber smiles.

r nread in loud lear voice “Me nd m mamaa m sist rw ntt
mall.I wm iend hrMama ndIcould’ el'vem e. aw r w

sister. ”

Amber leans over to listen as Lauren reads. I ask, “Your friend’s new baby
sister?”

Lauren nods and continues reading, “But we dida ’t get to say ‘hi ’ er ‘hye’ hewe

w .‘tw ti to oh me.”

Lauren looks at the picture in her book and looks at Amber with a big smile.
“Amber drew this picture.”

Amber says, ”No, I drew the car and she drew the people.”
Lauren says, “Why you say that, Amber?”
Amber shrugs and looks away.

Lauren continues, “Anyway. We waved ‘bye’. but he i n’t see us. ” Lauren
looks over at Amber and the girls smile at each other.

H

“ i ll w thome. W atedinner A r i rw ot 1
Lauren shows the book to Amber and me as she reads.

Susan talks to the class about behavior, “Excuse me. I’m keeping record. Not
very good. No winning team yet.”

Lauren continues to read but more softl “And m .. and Mama kis s
' to t u reall rl .”

The timer goes off and Susan says, “Okay, clean up. Daily helpers, you can read if
you want.”

Amber stands up, but Laure ntin es re i o m “M to k r
luneh so when we eat at schoe
“ her Mrs. Mc e ' ice.”

Amber says, “You said, ‘McGillicutty’.”
282

“Oh, I forgot. Aﬁer school we walked to the playground. ” She holds the Mk
teacher style, reading from the side and showing us the picmte.

“My sister said. ‘Why didn ’t yoa see yoar hest may. ’ “

Susan announces a two-minute cleanup. Danielle and Alicia are working on their
maps. Lauren looks up but continues to read. “I don ’t know. Finally we were at him
round. M ister asked ‘ hen will momm et here? ’ ‘ he will h r '
minate.’ ‘Good.’ ‘Mommy’s here.’ ‘Yes.’ said my sister. I eoulda ’t believe my eyes.

 

Susan hears Lauren reading and asks if she is doing something with me. I say she
can stop, and Susan tells her to stop reading. Lauren stops reading and leaves the table to
join the class on the rug.

Language Event 2 - Morning Meeting (9:25 am)

As the children clean up from Things to Do, they gather on and around an area rug
for Morning Meeting. Brent and Destine, the daily helpers, stand in front of the calendar
board. Brent holds the book Ten in the Bed by Mary Rees. Danny comes up and talks to
Brent. He gets This Old Man by Pam Adams from the basket of songbooks under the
calendar table. He stands between Destine and Brent Darryl comes over and stands next
to Destine. The four children stand facing the gathering class, holding the book in front of
them.

Brandon starts singing, “This old man...”
Darryl says, “Not now.”
Brent says, “She said we could start reading as soon as we come up here.”

Brent, Charles, Destine, and Darryl start singing This Old Man. The book is large
and they hold it facing the class. This requires them to read from above and to the side of
the book, looking at the print sideways or upside down. In the background, Susan is
assisting with clean up. Kids gather on the carpet and join in singing.

Alicia, Sarina, Latrice, and Ariel sit in the front Sarina, a ﬁrst grader, points at the
text with her ﬁnger as the group sings, “This old man, he played four. . . ”

As the children sing, they make eye contact with each other. Danny grins at Brent,
and Brent responds with a big smile. After the ﬁrst verses, several verses are displayed on
one page. “Here’s six,” Brent says, and they start singing.

Lauren comes over and sits down between Amber and Alicia.
A voice calls, “Miss Austin, they ain’t doing nothing.”

Susan stops the singers and asks the square team to come back to their table.
Danny and Destine leave to ﬁnish clean up. Jonathan comes over to help Brent hold the
book. He sits down on the chair. “This old man, he played seven, he played nick nack on
my heaven. ”

A voice asks, “On my heaven?” Jonathan stops for a second and looks puzzled.

There is talking and movement as the children sing the remaining three verses.
Lauren sits close to Jonathan’s chair, interacting with Amber.

When the song is ﬁnished, Jonathan puts the book into the basket of songbooks,
under the small table of calendar supplies. Kids move around getting settled. Danny goes
over and puts both arms up and around Susan. He stands just a little taller than her waist,
and looks up at her.

 

“Can I please go ﬁrst? Please!” He wants to be the ﬁrst reader during Books to Go.

283

Susan nods, blows her nose. She appears to have a cold today. Brent and Destine
stand at the front, ready to start calendar activities. But Susan says, “No, don’t start
Brandon. They are not ready.” She tells the class she is not happy with their behavior that
morning. There was too much talking, and children were not listening to directions. Some
kids took too many math pages and two kids couldn’t do the assignment. Children are not
putting names on the papers.

Lauren is talking to Ariel. She turns to look at Susan. She looks at her lap and then
up at Susan. Susan ﬁnishes saying, “I’m not in the mood to hear any more talking. I’m
feeling way crabby about what I’ve seen. I hope the rest of the morning will be calm.”
Susan tells the class they should listen to announcements, so they would know that
computer class was canceled. Lauren looks at Susan. She holds Alicia’s braid. She
interacts silently with Katherine. Susan calls Willie over to join the class. He explains he is
cleaning. She says, “Thank you, but you have to join us now.”

After Susan’s talk, four children have hands up. Susan calls on each of them, and
answers their question. “Darryl, what is it?” Darryl asks a question about morning
meeting. Susan says, “I don’t know, but I guess they’ll explain that in a minute.

Brent and Destine hold the thermometer mode. Brent says, “It’s forty degrees.”

Brent points to the number line, indicating the days the children have been in school
(124). “Today was a two.” He taps Destine and points to the easel. Destine describes the
hundreds chart for the class, which shows a model of 124 with unit blocks.

Next, Brent stand by the calendar, “I put thirteen on the calendar.”

Destine points to two cups, labeled tens and ones, next to the calendar. She puts one
straw in the ones cup.

Susan says, “Daily helpers, what are you doing? We need to hear.”
Brent says, “Destine needs to put one more thing.”

Susan says, “In the what?”

Brent says, “In the cup.”

Susan says, “In the ones cup.”

Destine removes the numeral “2” from under the “ones” cup, writes “3” on a
piece of tag board and posts it under the cup. Now there are two cups, one with a bundle of
ten sticks and one with three sticks. Under the cups it says “1” and “3” for March 13.

Lauren leans in towards Katherine, talking to her friend.

Susan asks, “What’s the number of the Days of School. Lauren, look. I want you
to see this. Do you see the two sets of ten and four ones? I’m not sure everyone’s
looking.” Susan says the model is a good example of what they’ve been talking about
during math time. Lauren, Katherine ahd Ariel look over at the easel, where Susan shows
the hundred squares for the days of school.

Children make comments on the calendar pattern of four kites and two Shamrocks,
for the days of the month. Susan asks the daily helpers about the pattern.

Susan begins to take attendance. Today she greets each child in Spanish, with
“Hola.” Lauren plays with something in her hands.

As the children respond, Brent tallies those present and Destine tallies absences on a
chart on the chalkboard. Several students respond in Chinese. Susan answers, “Oh,
Happy New Year to you too. Thank you.”

Willie responds, “Hola, senor, madam, Miss Austin. Happy New Year.”

284

Lauren is talking to her friends. Susan says, “um.” Lauren looks over.

Susan makes personal comments to some students, “Hola Jessica. I’m glad you’re
backf’

When Keith is called, Lauren looks up at Susan, anticipating her name. Patrice is
next, and then Lauren.

Susan says, “Hola Lauren {last name}"
Lauren smiles, “Hola, Miss Austin.”

When Amber is called, she says, “Hola, Senora Austin” and Charles says, “Surf’s
up dude.” Susan tells me that Charles is into Ninja turtles.

Alicia and Katherine lean in towards Lauren. Alyssa crawls over towards the others.

Danny says he wasn’t called. Susan says he didn’t raise his hand to speak. She
says the attendance tally will indicate if he was forgotten.

Susan says, “Lauren {last name}, this is not your talking time.” Lauren Mm
meattmdahmtaliy and back at Katherine. Katherine mimes concern.

The elass ehants the tally by ﬁves as Brent points: “ﬁve, ten, ﬁfteen, twenty, twenty
ﬁve, twenty six, twenty seven”

Some children continue to chant, “twenty eight”, and Susan says, “and twenty
eight with the one person absent.”

Alicia raises her hand to say, “Brent had made a mistake and put one more. It was
29 and he erased it.”

Susan says, “Okay. He FIXED7 it. All right”

Lauren and the girls cluster together, leaning towards Alicia and Alyssa.
Susan says, “Danny, if I forgot you, they marked you present.”
Danny suggests she called him, but he didn’t answer.

Susan says, “I’m sorry. I guess I just went on.” She continues, “I promised
Danny he could start the Books to G0”, which signals the end of Morning meaning.
Someone asks about the Daily News. Susan says she forgot and they’ll have it after Danny
reads.

Language Event 3 - Books to Go
“Let’s see who’s ready.” Susan says. She explains what she means by “ready.”

Danny begins making his way to the reader’s chair. Lauren sits in a loosely
grouped circle of six girls: Jackie, Amber, and Alicia in front with Alyssa, Katherine and
Lauren sitting behind them.

Susan says, “Danny, read nice and loud so everyone can hear the story.” She tells
the class, “You haven’t heard this one yet.”

Danny sits down in the chair near the door and begins to read Who Sank the Boat?
There are comments and reactions after he reads the title. Alicia says, “Oh, I have this
one.” Danny reads a page and then shows the picture.

 

" Lauren is a pseudonym selected by Lauren herself. Her given name is a popular name of
girls her age, and another girl in the class has the same name. Therefore, Susan addresses
Lauren by her ﬁrst and last name.

7 Capital letters indicate stress or emphasize.

285

Voices say, “He can’t READ this.”

Susan asks Danny if he want more time to practice at home. He says he just needs
help with one part. He spells out a word for Susan, but she needs to see the word. Susan
goes to stand by Danny.

Lauren is interacting with Katherine. She looks up at Danny and back at Katherine.
Katherine shakes her head, indicating they should not be talking. Danny reads, and kids
laugh in response. Danny reads very quietly. The children are quiet and look up at the
picture. Lauren leans on her left arm with her right knee up. She plays with her bracelet

Danny reads word “din.” Susan says, “I want to stop for a minute there.” She
asks what din means. Katherine suggests commotion. Susan says there was a din in the
room that morning. Voices call out noise. Lauren looks at Katherine during the discussion.

Danny shows the picture. He calls Marco’s name to look at the picture. Lauren
looks up at the picture and then at Alicia. She looks at her hands, then up at Danny.
Katherine smiles at Lauren. The two girls interact silently as Danny reads, looking up at
the pictures.

 

Jackie sits right under Danny, rnirrring the story. Marco moves along the wall closer
to the door. Danny continues to read very quietly. Some attention seems to wander, but the
room is very quiet and many children appear to listen closely. Most children look up
whenever Danny shows the picture. Danny calls the names of children who don’t look up.

Danny reads, “Was it the pig as fat as butter? and Lauren looks up and smiles.
Willie says, “Miss Austin, I know who sank the boat.”

Susan says, “Don’t tell.” She complements Tiffany and Ariel for listening.
Lauren looks at the two ﬁrst grade girls. She looks at her lap, moves her legs from side to
side, plays with Amber’s braids.

Someone says, “Miss Austin, on one page is a page with color. On the other page
is a page without.”

Susan says, “Oh, I’m sorry, we can’t hear.” She asks Danny to speak up.

Lauren leaves her seat to get a tissue. Danny ﬁnishes reading and the kids clap.
Lauren returns as they are applauding.

Willie says, “I didn’t see the part where they sank the boat.”

Susan talks about why kids might not see the picture and puts the book out on the
chalk ledge where they can look at it later. Susan tells Sharonda to get her book.

When Danny ﬁnishes, children begin to turn to face the chalkboard for the Daily
News. Susan tells them to sit back down, and Victor reminds her about the Daily News.

Susan says, “Oh, that’s right. We’re going to hear the news and then we’re going
to hear Sharonda.”

The “Daily News” is a large sheet of butcher paper, where children have written
personal news during “Things to Do.” The news is written in boxes on both sides of the
paper. Destine and Brent hold the sheet up against the board and call on readers. Since the
news is written on a ﬂat surface, they turn the sheet in many directions to ﬁnd the messages.

Ariel, a ﬁrst grader, reads, “In two more months it is my birthday.” Alicia
applauds. Susan says, “Alicia is clapping,” and other children applaud.

Audrey reads very quietly. Children say, “I can’t hear”, and several children repeat
Audrey’s message. There are comments about Audrey’s use of yellow marker. Susan
says, “It’s hard to read but Audrey knows what it says.”

286

Sharonda reads Teddy Bear for Sale. She sits in the reader’s chair. She is wearing
com-rows ending in many thin braids with beads along the bottom that click as she turns
her head. She has a big smile on her face. Lauren looks at Sharonda intently as she reads
and shows the pictures. Susan stands behind Sharonda, who reads haltingly. Sharonda
shows Susan the book and makes a guess. Susan nods. Sharonda reads in a loud voice
and then shows the picture. Lauren looks closely at the picture.

Susan kneels next to Sharonda and helps on request Mostly Sharonda looks for
reassurance and Susan nods. The room is very quiet. Lauren and all her friends watch
Sharonda as she reads. Most of the boys are sitting in the back of the room.

Sharonda reads, “He jumps in a car. 017 he goes.” Someone makes the
“EEERRR” of a screeching car. Lauren says something to Katherine, who raises her
eyebrows. As Sharonda continues reading, Lauren plays with Alicia’s hair. She moves
closer to Alicia and begins to re-twist one braid.

Sharonda reads haltingly. Attention seems to wander but the group is very quiet
Lauren folds her arms. She looks up when Sharonda shows the picture. She and Katherine
play with Amber’s twists, tugging them down and watching them spring up.

Sharonda smiles at Susan as she reads. Lauren looks at her bracelet in her lap, and
up at the pictures. She mouths words at Katherine. Sharonda asks for a word. Susan has
her read to the end of the sentence and then reread.

Susan says, “Now what would make sense?”
Sharonda ﬁlls in a meaningful word.

When Sharonda ﬁnishes reading, children applaud. Susan complements Sharonda
saying this was a difﬁcult book for her. “Sharonda is growing,” Susan says. Lauren
smiles.

“Remember what Goofy says?” Susan asks.
The children chant, “Keep on growing, keep on Ieaming.”

Susan says, “When you get to your seats, I’m sorry, but we have to do some work
in math books again.” There are some groans and a few cheers, and Books to Go is over.

Language Event 4 - Math
Lauren and Amber are lmkihg in the desk eahbies fer meir math hmks. They talk

and whisper. Katherine comes over to talk with them. Katherine and Lauren clap hands,
hold hands, and laugh. Katherine leaves as everyone prepares for math.

Marco comes over and talks to Danielle. He gets his math book and leaves. Amber
ﬁnds her book and sits waiting. Jonathan is also waiting.

Susan says, “Willie, you need to come sit over here. We want team work.”

The girls hold their pencils in their hands. Lauren stansimkihgthmighhetm.

Alicia comes to sit by Amber on the edge of the table.

Susan says, “Three, two, one, zero. Thank you. Let’s see. First graders go sit next
to a second grader.”

A voice at the table says, “I hope she don’t call me.”

Susan gets the ﬁrst graders settled. Lauren looks in her desk while Alicia and
Amber look at Susan. Lauren holds up a necklace and waves it at Katherine.

I sit down next to Alicia and begin taking notes. The girls imkaLtheiLheelg and
interact quietly. Laaten and Amher wtite sememing in their heeks.

287

Susan asks the children to ﬁnd page 354 and “do not tear it out.” The girls leok in
th ir ks.

ren ﬁnds the e. “I got it.”
Amber looks at Lauren, “I almost had it.”
Lauren chants, “I have it I have it.” She snaps her ﬁngers.

After several minutes, Amber and Danielle are still looking for the math page.
Lauren asks, “Want me to ﬁnd it for you?”

Susan asks for quiet and starts to give instructions, then asks if there is anyone who
has not found the page. Danielle raises her hand.

Amher and Lauren write in their mks. Lauren looks up when Susan says, “look

up here.” but then continues to write when Susan continues to give preparation instructions.

Danielle says something to Lauren, and Lauren shows her book. Amber and Alicia
converse with hand signals.

Math, Hexagon team, table map
Lauren Amber

 

Alicia

 

 

Danielle

 

 

 

 

Jonathan

About three minutes after Susan’s instructions, everyone has found the page. Susan
says, “Okay I’m going to put a number on the board, and you don’t have to do anything.”

The girls all look up at Susan, who is standing at the front of the room (North wall)
by the chalkboard. Lauren plays with her pencil. Susan asks students who can “read my
number” to signal by placing their hands on their head.” She places magnetic unit blocks
on the board. Two ﬂat lOXlO squares representing hundreds, three 10X1 sticks
representing tens, and three 1x1 cubes representing ones.

Lauren is holding her book up on the table. Danielle taps the book. Lauren smiles
at Danielle and puts the book down. Danielle md meren write in their meks.

Susan says, “Someone’s humming and that’s bothering me.” She ﬁnishes writing
on the board and looks around. “Oh, I see a lot of good signals.” Alicia has her hand on
her head. The other girls are writing in meir wig and not looking at Susan.

Susan calls on James to say the number. She asks how many hundreds, tens and
ones are in the number. Alicia puts up her ﬁngers as Susan asks each question. Late-en

lmksatheﬂkkik, up at Susan and over at Amber. She writes semething in het mek and
macaw.

Bruce calls out, “Where to put it?”

Susan says it’s not time to write. “Right now we’re just looking at the board.”

Lauren e es w 'tes methi in er

It is very quiet as Susan places another number on the board. Bruce says, “00.
0000. Lauren.” Lauren continues to write in her boek. Amber looks at the board and

288

raises her hand. Alicia looks at the board and puts her hands on her head. Lauren has one
arm around her head, playing with her pony tails. Susan calls on her. Lauren says, “I
didn’t raise my hand.”

Susan says, “Oh I’m sorry. I thought you had the signal.”

Lauren laughs. Susan calls on Katherine. Katherine gives the answer. Susan
explains to the children how to write the answers in their books.

Danielle is concerned that Lauren is copying. She puts her notebook up between
Lauren and herself. I tell her to put it down and we talk about copying. I suggest she is not
paying attention since she is so worried about copying. Danielle puts her thumb in her
mouth and looks down at her paper. Susan walks around checking children’s answers.
The group at the table sit and wait. Lauren tries to get Danielle’s attention and show her
mek te Danielle.

As Susan writes another problem on the board, Sharonda goes up to complain about
Bruce. Susan says, “Bruce, you know what I said about teammates getting along.” Danny
raises his hand. Susan says, “Danny is this important?” She tells Kenneth to “sit down
and boss Kenneth.”

Lauren sits with her pencil in her mouth. Amber and Alicia have their hands on their
heads. Alicia is called to answer the question. She says, “Two hundred and eighteen.”
mitten leeks at her heok. Susan asks how many hundreds? tens? ones? Amber chants
the answer. Lauren looks ovmt whfat Alicia is writing. Susan tells the children to “Please

write that in number two.” Lauren looks at the mok and up at me mare. She mm
in at th rd f r each number. She WW.

Susan says, “When you’re done, signal with your hands on your head or your
arms folded.” Lauren sits with her arms folded.

Susan says, “Okay, I’d like you to look at number three.” Lauren lmks at her
mek. Susan reads the instructions to the class and asks them to “Do that quietly by
yourself and then give me a signal and we’ll see what everyone has.”

Ladsen writes in her book and mises he; haad.

Susan says, “Lauren, what number is that? Excuse me Marco, I couldn’t hear
Lauren because you were talking out of turn.”

Lauren says, “Two hundred thirty four.”

Susan repeats the answer and asks how many hundreds, tens, ones. The children
chant responses. Lauren taps her pencil on her ear. She doesn’t chant answers.

Susan continues with number four. Lamerﬂtes, and raises her hand. Alicia
raises her hand. Amber and Danielle write answers. Susan calls on Marco to give the
answer. Lauren puts her pencil in her mouth, then on her nose. Susan asks how many
hundreds, tens, ones. Amber, Lauren and Alicia join in chanting.

Susan says, “Now stop and listen.” Lauren looks up from her book. Susan tells
the children to tear out the page and work on it themselves. She tells them to raise their
hands if they need help, and asks me to help with the tearing. The room gets noisy as the
children follow the instructions. Lauren has her page torn out of the book before the
instructions are over. She puts her book way. Alicia is tearing out Amber’s page for her.
Lauren looks over at them.

Susan says she’s looking for a team where everyone has papers on top of their
tables and math books put away. She complements Marco. Amber says, “OW”, possibly
from a paper cut. Susan asks, “Are you all right, Amber? Did you hurt yourself?” Lauren
leans over to look as Amber studies the palm of her hand.

289

Susan asks the children to turn the paper over and gives instructions for doing the
problems on the back. Lauren looks at Amber and then up at Susan. Amber responds to
Susan’s questions. Lauren sits with her pencil in her mouth. Danielle writes on her paper.
Susan works through the ﬁrst problem with the class. Alicia raises her hand. Amber
writes. Lauren plays with her pencil.

As Susan gives instructions, Lauren begins eircling answers on her pamr. She says
something to Amber. Amber looks over at Lauren.

Susan gives instructions for completing both sides of the paper and then tells the
second graders to continue on their own. There are several interruptions for comments
about behavior. Lauren taps her pencil on the table. She holds up her paper. Danielle
show’s Lauren her paper. Lauren circles answers on her pamr. She looks over at Amber.
She does not respond to Susan’s questions, but looks up at Susan, leaning on her elbow.

Susan asks the ﬁrst graders to meet her on the area rug. Lauren begins working.
Susan tells the second graders to do the back ﬁrst because the front involves gluing. She
reminds them to share the glue. Lauren looks up as Susan talks. Alicia and Danielle
continue working.

Danielle says, “I don’t have to share.” Danielle has her own glue.

(At this point the video stops and I rely on the audio tape and ﬁeld notes.)
Danielle says to Lauren, “Why you looking at my paper, Lauren?”
Lauren says, “I’m not.”

Danielle says, “Are too.”

Lauren sings, “I’m on the back.” She wrestles with the scissors. “Can you pass
me some glue.” She gets the scissors.

Lauren says to Danielle, “Here’s these blanks.”
Danielle says, “You better keep them , you might need them.”

Lauren says, “No, you weren’t paying attention. If you got Oh (zero), you can just
leave it blank.”

Danielle says, “No, you weren’t paying attention.”
The girls talk to about what Susan said. Amber is quietly working.

Jonathan says, “I do math at home. I’m a math boy cause I love to do math. I got a
hard math book at home.

Susan announces, “When you ﬁnish your math paper you can get your writing out
right away.”

Lauren says, “Yes!”
Danielle is amused. “She was like, ‘Yes! Yes!’”

Susan asks Danielle to switch seats with Bruce, who is having a difﬁcult time getting
along with his teammates. Sharonda says, “Yes!” in the background.

Danielle says, “Why they like that?”

Lauren responds, “They don’t like Bruce.” She lowers her voice and adds, “So
why we have Bruce here?” The children quietly talk about Bruce.

Danielle gathers her things together. “I’ll see you next year, Lauren.”
In the background, Bruce is arguing with Susan.

290

Rudy and Terrence stand behind Lauren. Rudy says, “Terrence, I ﬁnished my
autobiography. It was funny, you can ask Miss Austin. It was funny, wasn’t it Lauren?”
Rudy recites segments of his autobiography for Terrence.

{At this point, the second Video Tape begins}

The children are up turning in their math and preparing for writing. The girls are all
standing or walking around the room. Jonathan continues to work at the table. Susan asks
who’s ﬁnished with math, and says there will be ﬁve more minutes. Kids who are done
have a head start on writing. Bruce is making a fuss about moving. I take him out of the
room for a talk.

Lauren comes over to the table and talks with Amber. She is holding the glue.
Victor stands by Alicia’s seat. Alicia takes him by the shoulders and moves him out of her
way. I bring Bruce to the table. He sits next to Jonathan with his head on his ﬁst, elbow on
the table.

Lauren sits watching Amber work. Katherine stands next to Amber. Alyssa comes
over and stands by Lauren. Lauren speaks harshly to Alyssa and the girls laugh. Jonathan
leans over to talk with Bruce and encourage him to do his math. Bruce sits with his head
resting on both hands.

Lauren takes the glue from Amber and glues something down on her paper. She takes her
paper and walks off.

Susan announces that there are three minutes left for math. Lauren ambles back to
the table and sits facing Amber and Alicia. She goes over to talk to Alyssa. Alicia goes to
the writing table to get paper. Susan tells Lauren to go back to her table. Lauren returns to
the table and gets out her book: My Best Friend’s New Bab ister. She puts her book on
the table and sits down. She adjusts the microphone so it is facing her. Jonathan, Amber,
and Alicia also prepare for writing. Brent sits with his head in his hands.

Lauren plays with strips of paper left from math. She opens her hmk te die ﬁtst
lLlan_k_page. She asks if she can use my markers, and gets a colored pencil from my supply

box.

Lauren dtaws something in her bmk as she is sitting down. Amber sits looking at
her hands. Susan says, “Its time to get quiet. All right. I’m looking to see who’s ready in
one minute.”

Language Event 4 - Silent writing

Alicia shows Amber her papers. They discuss whether Alicia’s book should be

wide or tall. Lauren looks through her book. She shews me a page she wm working ea
lasuveek. “I got that one done,” she says. I ask if she wants to read to me “from where

she left off" that morning. She reads the last page out loud to me,. ” ..when we had get late

.' ar w Iwm est i'ndandhermoth rI I her IIb si tr . II I IrII gm
eﬂ because her mether had got oft early. And I haven’t ﬁnished this part.”

I ask, “What are you going to do for that part?”

Lauren says, “I’m going to write about when they had got into the house and they
had called my mother.” As Lauren tells me about her book, Susan explains to the class that
it’s time to put everything away and get ready for writing “when I get to zero.”

I said, “So you already know what’s coming next?”
“Mhm,” Lauren continues “And they gonna have a sleep over party”
“So they have a sleep over party?” I repeat. “And then what’s gonna happen?”

291

“Then I think,” Lauren begins to smile, “And their mother went on a trip. Their
mother. And the baby had stayed at home with them. And she was a bad baby.”

“Uh oh. That’s what you’re planning? So this is gonna be a very long book,
huh?”

As we talk, Susan is counting slowly, “Ten... nine... eight...” Jonathan continues
writing, and Alicia is working with large sheets of paper, making a book. The room is quiet,
with some murmuring as children get settled.

“Go ahead,” I tell Lauren.

muren starts to write as Susan says “six.” She holds her book with her left hand
at the top. She is writing on the left hand side, because she has started the book from the

“back.” Amber and Alicia are working on stapling their books together.

Lauren writes, ”Wen tey eat in thr heme they het call my

mommy . " As she writes, she says the words slowly, “When they got in their home they
had called my mommys ”

11:00 Silent Writing starts

Susan says, “Zero. Everyone should be writing now.” She sets the timer and the
room gets very quiet. Only murmuring and whispering can be heard. Lauren lies across
the table, with her face leaning against her left hand as she writes. Next to her, Amber is
picking at the stapler.

 

I am sitting at the table across from Bruce, who still holds his head in his hands. I
talk to Bruce about making a decision to stop being unhappy. Lauren looks over for a
moment and back at her work. She looks over her page and then continues te wh'te. She

says the words to herself as she writes, “mommy and mk ean her daughter speed me

eight.” Lauren writes, “momm an k can her r s m n n .’
Silent Writing, hexagon team, table map
Lauren Amber

 

Alicia

 

Me Bruce

 

 

 

Jonathan

 

Susan stops by and asks Bruce to ﬁnish his math. He begins going through the
squares for gluing. Jonathan talks to Bruce, offering some encouragement Lauren looks
up at Bruce. She plays with her braid, and appears to be thinking. She gets a tissue.
Amber is working at the top of a page in her book. Alicia sits with a blank page in front of
her. Lauren returns to the table. She sits down and picks up her pencil. She asks me softly
ifI have seen a picture she drew.

Lauren looks over her page and says, “My mother said...” She begins to write,
saying the words again slowly, “My:y. .. mo:mmy. .. sai:d. .. yes...” her voice drops as

 

8 The colon (mozmmyz) indicates that the vowel sound is elongated.
9 The spellings of this text are from my ﬁeldnotes. I don’t have the original text, so can’t
verify the “aen” for “the”.

292

she completes the sentence. Lauren lies across the table with her head resting on her arm as
she writes. In her book, the she writes: My mommy sed yes.

Amber and Alicia are still working with the stapler, trying to prepare their books.
Amber leaves the table and returns with a staple remover. Lauren looks over the page md
mgins to draw a picture under the written text. I ask Amber if she needs help. She says,
“It won’t work,” and hands me the stapler. Bruce begins to work on his math. Lauren
looks up at me as I work on the stapler and then goes back to drawing.

In the background Susan says, “I’m not spelling, I’m sorry.” Then Susan asks,
“Does anybody have an extra pencil for Danielle?” There is some discussion as several
children go to assist. Lauren looks up and then continues to illustrate her picture. After a
several minutes, she shows me her picture. “This the telephone cord”, she says. Amber
and Alicia tear sheets of paper apart and continue to work on preparing books for writing.

The noise in the room starts to rise as children’s murmuring increases in volume.
Susan says, “Excuse me”, and the children quiet down. Alicia begins counting the papers
she has stacked in a pile.

Lauren turns the page in her book, and creases it so it lies ﬂat She mgins te write

 

as she says. “Then that night. .. she drove. .. ca:me. .. over. .. we:e. .. hat (M. , , te,,,
ge, ., te. ,. bed.” Lauren’s distinct “t” sound at the end of “had” is reﬂected in he;
writin: n natshecm vrweh ”

Lauren illustrates her text, ﬁrst drawing the bed. Nearby, Amber and Alicia are
arguing playfully, “You wasting paper.” As Lauren is working the timer rings announcing
the ofﬁcial end of silent writing. Children groan, “Awww.” The daily helpers begin
calling children’s names to prepare for lunch. Lauren ﬁnishes her picture and shows it to
me.

I ask, “Are you sleeping in the same bed?”
She says, “Mhm”
I say, “One on one side, one on the other side.”

Lauren agrees. We talk about the picture and I ask about some circles. She says
those are “what holds the bed up.”

“Oh, like the bedposts?” I ask.

Jonathan continues to write, and Alicia continues to tear pages from a pad of paper
and then stack them in a pile. Lauren turns a page in her book and creases it so that lies ﬂat
She looks up at Amber and they exchange smiles.

Lauren sighs loudly. Then she talks as she writes, “When we woke up we [e:lt ,,
kitchen. was a mess. The baby messed up evetything.” Lauren works at the writing with

an intent expression on her face and no hesitations. Lauren writes, “Wen we wekehpthe
ke w s a s. The ba miss her thin .”

Lauren begins illustrating the page. She looks over to the front of the room, perhaps
gauging when the daily helpers will call her name. Alicia stacks papers into a pile. She
takes a marker from Jonathan and smells it She shows it to Amber and they begin smelling
markers. Amber asks me if she has an orange dot on her nose. Lauren looks over and
laughs.

Lauren goes back to illustrating her text. A voice calls out Lauren’s name and she
leaves the table for the bathroom. Alicia stakes the papers and staples to one side. Jonathan
looks through the crayons. He has been drawing a picture of two block ﬁgures with a
yellow sun in the comer.

293

Susan says, “Would you PLEASE clean up your tables. It’s almost lunch time.”
Amber sits writing as Susan talks. Alicia appears to be drinking. Lauren returns to the
table. We talk about her book I ask, “How many pages do you have in your story.
(Lauren shows me three ﬁngers.) Oh, you’ve only got three left? Is that going to be the
end of the story then.

We talk about what elements of the story are “true.”

Lauren: We do sleep in one bed, me and my cousin.
Debi: And you do have a little cousin like that.
Lauren: And we do go to school.

Debi: Does your cousin have a baby sister?
Lauren: Mhm.

Debi: What other parts are true?

Lauren: The dinner part.

Debi: Did you go to a mall and see your cousin?

Lauren: We actually wasn’t in the mall, we were at the market And my mother
does make my lunch.

Susan asks if the children would line up silently. They quietly line up and leave for
lunch.

Note: On this day, Susan has a planning time following lunch. The children come
in around 1:10 instead of 12:20.

Language Event 6.1 - Read Aloud (About 1:10)

Terrence sits at the front of the room reading from Two Dog Biscuits, a large picture
book by Beverly Cleary. Alicia stands at the front facing the class as Terrence reads.
Lauren is sitting on the carpet behind Amber, patting at Amber’s hair. She is in the second
row of children nearest Terrence.

Terrence reads, “Be on the look out for a dog, ” said mother. “What does be on the
lookout mean?” says Jimmy. Terrence’s voice conveys a humorous inﬂection and the
children laugh. Lauren laughs too, and continues to smile as Terrence continues.

Alicia leans over towards Terrence. Terrence says, “Oh.”

Susan says, “Is it Alicia’s tum now?” Susan is sitting behind the group on the
ﬂoor.

Alicia sits down and continues to read where Terrence left off. Marco is on his
knees listening to the story. Lauren scoots back and is out of sight of the camera. A group
of children sit in the front row: Rudy, Amber, Ariel, Sarina, Katherine, Danny, Danielle, and
Kenneth.

Alicia reads, “I don’t like dogs that bark. ” “Oh dear, ” said mother, “I guess
we ’11 have to ﬁnd a dog that doesn ’t bark.”

Victor says, “All dogs bark.”

Alicia shows the picture to the class. The children look intently and make
comments. Alicia, like Terrence, reads with little hesitation. She does not ask for help. She
adjusts her voice for dialogue, conveying the emotions and emphasis of the different
speakers. Alicia shows the picture again, and calls Willie’s name to look up. He complies.
Marco puts his T-shirt over his head. Terrence is standing near the front and pulls Marco’s
shirt down. Alicia and Terrence appear to feel some sense of authority over the class.

294

The class is quiet but somewhat ﬁdgety, moving around as the reading continues.
As the book draws towards a climax, they appear more interested and attentive. Alicia
ﬁnishes the book and the children applaud.

Susan says, “Good job Terrence and Alicia. Thank you for sharing that book with
us.” Then she asks the class to “look over here and I’ll explain what I want you to do.”
The children look towards here, though there is a feeling of restlessness. “You have book
clubs that want to read to you today.”

A voice whispers, “Yes.”

Susan continues, “But I drink you have given us a lot of listening energy. So what
I’m going to do is, I’m going to send tables at a time to get something for silent reading.
We haven’t done it in a while. I’m going to give you a chance to sit where you like.”

As Susan is talking, Jackie gets up and approaches her with a comment

“Okay,” Susan says, “Let’s do this. Jackie just said something about silent
writing. If you would prefer to write rather than read I will give you a choice. Only for the
next ﬁfteen minutes. And then we’re going to listen to a book club.

“Square team, please go get your writing or reading.” The room gets noisy as
children go off to get materials. Children go to the library comer and collect books, pillows
and stuffed toys. Other children go to their desks and get writing materials. Lauren sits at
the back of the carpet waiting. Susan calls the hexagon team, Lauren’s table group, and she
heads to the library comer.

Near the front door, Sharonda sits down in the reader’s chair. She has a stack of
four song books from the large plastic basket under the calendar table.

Jackie comes over to show me a wrestling book she is working on with Terrence.
She says, “Miss Goodman, I made a chapter book. I even know this word.”

Jackie shows me that she and Terrence are writing about children in the class but
using “book names” instead of real names. I ask, “Why did you think of having a book
name?”

Jackie says, “It was kinda simple. We didn’t want our real names to be in the
book. In biography books we want our names to be in them.”

Marco comes over and looks at Jackie’s book. He realizes I’m ﬁlming and moves
out of the way. I encourage him to come back. He returns and stands next to Jackie so he
can see the book as she is talking. Jackie talks about how they represented wrestling
announcers in the book text. “Don’t you know how they says ‘and... AND... AA:ND’?”
she asks me, imitating an announcer with growing excitement. She shows me the text:
Johnny Cage vres Lukane and and and Lukane won.

By the door, Sharonda is reading The Hole in the Bucket, singing out the words
with great enthusiasm. Susan asks the children to settle down and is counting backwards,
“Five . . . four . . three.”

At Lauren’s table (the hexagon team) Amber stands working on the picture of
ﬂowers that she started right before lunch. The picture is for the front of Alicia’s book, and
Alicia leans across the table watching. Jonathan sits in his seat and reads.

Marco shows me a book that says “Pictionary” on the cover. “I’m making a
dictionary,” he says. Jackie calls from her seat where she is starting to write, “Miss
Goodman, every two pages are a chapter in my book.”

295

Susan has counted to “zero”, and tells a group in the back, “No, you can’t do this.
This is Silent Reading. Not Read Aloud. Not Book Club time. This is not a talking time at
all. Marco, Get something to read now. Or something to write.”

Lauren and Katherine have settled near the door with their backs against the
northern wall of the classroom. They each have two pillows, one for their seat and one for
their back. They are each holding a book, and seven more books lie on the ﬂoor between
them. They also have a D.W. doll (a book character) propped on the ﬂoor between them.

Lauren is reading eat load te herself, but Katherine is listening to Susan’s instructions.

Susan says, “Hurry and get what you (need). Everybody has to ﬁnd a spot
quickly.”

I place a microphone by the girls, attached to the tape recorder. Katherine, who is
not accustomed to being taped, watches me. La ren 'n st re ut u . Katherine

looks over at Lauren. She puts her book down and leans over to listen to LatireLIeadiag. It
may be she feels two of them reading will ruin my tape.

Susan says to them, “Girls if you’re whispering to yourself...” Katherine points to
the taping equipment. Susan says, “That’s okay. But it’s not time to be talking.”

The girls confer and Katherine gets up and goes over to talk to Susan.
Sharonda asks Lauren, “Does this say (??)”

Lauren gms over te look. She says something to Sharonda. She is sitting down
when Sharonda calls again. “When... is this ‘when’?” Katherine returns and both girls go
over to look at Sharonda’s book.

Susan calls from the front, “Katherine, Lauren, and Rudy. Would you choose a
book you want to be read to you.” Katherine and Lauren leave to see Susan.

In the background, children are complaining about pillows. Susan says, “Lauren
and Katherine, just one, Okay? Give someone else a pillow.”

Marco and Keith come over and snatch the unguarded pillows. They are each
holding white cradle mattresses. The girls come to stop them. Terrence also comes to take
a pillow. There is discussion about the pillows and Susan says, “All you need is one
cushion or one pillow.”

Lauren begins to sit down, but Katherine comes over to get her. Susan says,
“Lauren, where’s the book you want to take home.” Katherine and Lauren go back to piek
o for the “Books to Go” ba 3. The bags will include one book to practice at
home for reading aloud to the class. The other book is for their parents to read to the girls.
There is also a form for their parents to ﬁll out. Lauren, Katherine and Rudy stand by
Susan’s desk as she prepares the bags.

In the comer near the door, Sharonda is reading her second book, “If a Tree Could
Talk. She say uses great emphasis, “We WISH you would...” She looks up at me
behind the camera and smiles. “What you see?” she asks. “Nothing.” I say.

Language Event 6 - Silent reading “starts”:
Susan says, “On your mark. Get ready. Get set. Read or write.”

It has taken ten minutes to get settled, but many of the children have been reading or
writing for a while already. The class gets very quiet Sharonda ﬁnishes reading If a Tree
Could talk and picks up This Old Man from her stack of song books. Jessica sits on the
carpet near Sharonda, leaning against the small calendar table. Audrey reaches past her and
pulls a book from the box. I put the mike by Sharonda since Lauren is still at Susan’s
desk. Sharonda hams it up for a minute: “This old man came roooliiiing

296

hoooommmeee. ” Then she returns to singing the words to the song as she goes from one
page to another.

Sharonda appears very familiar with the song, and sometimes looks around the
room (rather than at the book) as she sings. Sharonda swings her legs and sings to herself.
After the verse “he plays six” ,she turns the page and talks to herself about the picture.
The verses from seven to ten are on one page. She points to the pictures and counts the
object

Sharonda sings another verse. When she gets to “This old man/ he played eight”,
she stops singing and begins an enthusiastic chant, similar to a rap rhythm.

Jessica says, “Sharonda, would you quiet down.”

Sharonda ﬁnishes This Old Man and picks up the song book Peanut Butter and
Jelly. This song has more complex language with less repetition, and Sharonda focuses

closely on reading- rather than remembering- the text. She reads, You pop it in the oven
and you... bake it.. ”

She stops and says, “Jessica, what’s this word?”

Jessica continues reading, mouthing the words as she goes along.

Sharonda gets down from her chair with a little huff. “What word,” Jessica says.
“Never mind.” Sharonda says.

She comes over and asks me for help with the word “bake.” I help her with it, not
realizing she has already read it. As she continues to read, she asks for my help with several
words and I help her by looking at this pictures or talking about what the actions are in the
song.

Sharonda ﬁnishes her fourth book and goes to the basket under the table. She pulls out
She’ll be ComingRound the Mountain.

Lauren and Katherine have put their “Books to Go” bags in their lockers and are
now back on their cushions reading. Lauren rs sitting against the wall with her feet straight
out in front of her, crossed at the ankles. Katherine ﬁnishes a book and looks through their

stack for another book. Lauren continues te Lead alo u.d She appears n r i r
hmk Dragon’ s Fat Cat by Dav Pilkey.

As Lauren reads Marco and Destine are working on big sheets of paper, drawing
basket ball courts. Marco goes over to talk with David, who is writing on the ﬂoor near the
front wall.

Susan says, “Excuse me. I did not say we were done.”

Lauren stops and looks up as Susan talks. Then she goes back to reading, “A
dragon did not know what to do about all the (??) That is a stinky problem.”

Dragon told to teach cat (pause) cat to use the toilet but cat did not understand.

James comes over to look through the books Lauren and Katherine have on the
ﬂoor. He asks for a book by title. Lauren says, “You have to ask Sharonda.” Charles
goes over and gets the book from Sharonda.

Lauren continues to read. “One day the mouse came along. ‘P. U. ’, said the
mouse, ‘ Your house STINKS! ’ Lauren uses great emphasis on “P.U.” and “STINKS.”

“I know, ’ said dragon, “my cat has a stinky problem.”
“That you need is a lit-ter box,” said the mouse.
Susan says, “Okay. Stop please and look at me.”

297

Both girls continue to read.
Susan continues, “Who’s looking at me? Nobody. My feelings are hurt.”

Lauren glances up after Susan’s comment about feelings. Katherine leans over and
asks Lauren for a word. Katherine is reading One Fine Moming. Lauren supplies the
word and continues reading, “A litter box will make that smelly problem go away.”

1:45 Transition to Book Clubs

Lauren continues to read as Susan continues to ask for attention, “There’s Sarina.
Okay, great. four people. I feel much better. Okay. Will you PLEASE put your books
away and then go to the carpet and sit down and face the west. We are starting with Lunch
Boxes. 1 need everything put away.”

Katherine gets up and starts picking up materials. Lauren stops to listen to Susan’s
instructions, and then returns to her book.

Katherine, “Come on Lauren. We’ll read tomorrow. Psych.”
Lauren says, “I don’t think she’s coming tomorrow.. but she might.”

The lunch boxes group is not sure about their presentation. Someone asks, “Miss
Austin, we gonna read the book?”

Susan says, “What ever you guys decide.”

The children talk about the presentation, “We just got to memberize the book,” one
person says.”

“Well you better decide,” Susan tells them.

Lauren comes over and asks me if I’m returning the next day. I say no, but I’d like
to interview her during the movie Susan’s class and another class will be watching at 2:00.

Lauren goes back to Katherine, who want her to “put that book up.” Lauren says,
“I gotta talk to Miss Goodman, so I gotta have the book.”

Katherine says, “Well just ﬁnish reading... very quick.”
Lauren says, “I caint. I can’t disobey Miss Austin rules.

“I know you can’t”, Katherine agrees, “but you...” The voices become inaudible
as the girls walk away from the camera.

The room is noisy as children clean up and prepare for the book club presentation.
Susan says, “I’m going to read this and see who’s up here reading with me.” She begins
singing, reading from Ten in the Bed. Children join in signing with her.

The Lunch Boxes group begins to gather in a row of chairs along the western edge
of the carpet. They are talking and working out their plans for the presentation. Each girl
wears a plastic bag on her back like a backpack.

 

298

Book Club Presentation, room map
Door Calendar Wall

 

Front of classroom (Area Rug)

Children gather facing group.

 

 

 

Girls are sitting
in small chairs: Tiffany Katherine Lauren Alyssa Ariel Audrey

Darryl has been passing out books to the children in True Francine. Susan tells
him to put the books away, that she doesn’t know if True Francine will present today.
Susan says, “Okay, you know what? I’m gonna stop this book now. I hear a lot of
talking. It’s (the book) not helping people to come up. It’s just getting noisier.” Susan
begins giving instructions for speciﬁc groups and children to put materials away and join
the group. She says, “Excuse me. If you are on the carpet, ZIP. This group (the book
club) needs to do some talking because they need to get ready.”

Darryl stands on the carpet talking to the girls in the Lunch Boxes group. Susan
says, “You know what, you’re not bossing their group.” Darryl sits down.

When most of the children are gathered on the rug and settled down, Susan says,
“This is our first book club... I’ll wait. This is our ﬁrst Book Club presentation.”

Darryl says, “Ain’t this the second?”
Susan says, “No we haven’t heard a Book Club yet. This is our ﬁrst time.”

Darryl asks about a similar activity that the class had in the fall. Susan says that was
Guided Reading and not Book Clubs because she chose the books for the children. She
reminds the group that she said she would start with Lunch Boxes. “We can’t hear all of
them today and we wouldn’t want to.” Susan says she is not sure if True Francine will go
next, but everyone should be ready because she had told them that yesterday was the last
day to prepare for presentations.

Susan shows the class an evaluation form, and says she is going to tell them how
they did on: reading to the class, diary pages, project one, project two, and teamwork.
Children ask about their self-evaluations, and she says that was their chance and this is her
chance to evaluate the book clubs.

Since “this is the ﬁrst” presentation, Susan asks the kids to stand up so “we can
decide where the stage starts.” She asks everyone to sit behind the carpet, or to the side of
the carpet. There is discussion and negotiation as everyone settles down again. The group
of children sitting in the ﬁrst two rows includes: Jackie, Alicia, Rudy, Terrence, Marco,
Amber, Salina, and Danielle. The lunch Boxes group has rearranged themselves and are
sitting in a row of chairs, from left to right: Audrey, Ariel, Lauren, Alyssa, Katherine, and
Tiffany. Ariel and Katherine hold books, while Lauren and Alyssa hold one book between
them.

Susan says, “I forgot to say what Latrice was worried about.” Susan tells the class
that Latrice was nervous about reading her book to the class. The children could select their

299

own books and some selected challenging books. But Susan explains that the groups will
read together, “that’s why you’re in the club together, because you’re helping each other.
So you don’t have to be worried about that.”

Audrey stands up. Susan says, “We’re not quiet ready.” Audrey sits down.
Susan says, “Destine, can you show Audrey you’re ready?”
Audrey stands up. “We’re going to do a play and read.” She sits down.

Lauren looks around and makes eye contact with the girls in the group. The girls in
the outer four chairs look towards Lauren and Alyssa. Then Lauren starts reading, and the
other girls follow, “Lunch Boxes, by Fred Erlich. ”

The class is quiet as the girls read in unison, “At old (??) school when it’s time to
eat, the teacher likes it when we’re neat. ” Lauren and Alyssa hold their book between

them. Tiffany looks on Katherine’s book. Audrey appears to recite verses from memory,
not looking at the book that Ariel holds.

After the girls read a verse, they show all three books to the audience so the other
children can see the pictures.

“Miss Vanilla and Mr. Blare tell each child to take a chair. Everyone is in a happy
mood as they sit down to eat their food. ”

On the following page, the girls come to a name and stop to confer. Alyssa
pronounces the name, and the group goes back to reciting together. This page is hard to
follow and voices say, “What?” Katherine repeats the line as they show the picture. Her
group members say, “Shh.”

“What’s the use of dipping hot dogs in your juice. ”

Voices call out “EWWW”, and children make comments as the book club group
shows the picture. Susan says they can laugh, but should sit quietly. “You will have a
chance to comment.”

It takes a while to read each page and then show the picture. Amber suggests,
“Miss Austin. Can’t one group show the picture while the other reads.”

Susan does not respond, and the group continues, “When Rosa ’s mile spills on the
ﬂoor, she tries to drink it with a straw. Maria takes her hard boiled egg and throws it to
her best friend Craig. ”

There is loud laughing and children call out “ewww” and “yeech.” The book club
group smile at each other over the reactions to the text, and continue with even greater
enthusiasm.

“Peanut butter in your hair. Stop that now says Mr. Blare. ”

As the group continues to read, children react with laughing and responses. The
laughing gets bigger, sometimes sounding faked, but the audience seems to be enjoying the
book. Also, the book lines appeal to the seven year olds.

“And I think that Miss Vanilla is sounding like a big gorilla. ”

One page shows Mr. Blare pointing as he says “Put your garbage over there.”
Jackie points her arm in the stance of the picture and Marco follows.

See how quietly we pass out the door and back to class.

“The end,” the group announces in unison, and the audience applauds. Audrey gets
up and bows.

300

Susan says, “I don’t understand. how is this play supposed to be?” She tells the
group they “needed” to either do a play or read the book. The girls look around. Alyssa
says, “We read the book.” Susan is puzzled because the girls have “costumes” and had
planned to do a play.

Susan suggests that they show the lunch boxes they made, and explains to the class
that this was one of their projects. “Start with Audrey.”

Each of the girls takes a construction paper “lunch box” out of their plastic bag.
Inside of the lunch boxes are “foods” that the children made out of paper and scraps. It is
a slow process as each girl shows the foods in her lunch boxes.

Alyssa shows “hot-dogs” and candy, and the audience respond with “000.”
Then she shows a “steak” and the kids laugh. I say, “That’s my kind of lunch.”

Lauren stands to show her “food”, “This my lunch box. This my apple. This my
Swiss cheese.” Children laugh at some of the more unusual items.

The audience is interested in the girls’ project but it becomes a bit tedious and they
get restless. Members of the Lunch Boxes group start talking as other members present
Susan says, “The group is talking and that is not very polite. And the audience is not as
quiet as they could be.”

Tiffany is showing the items in her lunch box as Kathy’s class arrives to watch a
movie with Susan’s class. Tiffany ﬁnishes and the Book Club time ends.

Transcription notes:

0 When representing the language of speakers in direct quotations, I include the syntax
and wording used by the speaker. I have tried to do this consistently for both children
and adults. I also represent some phonological shifts, particularly if they involve a
noticeable variation as in “posed” for “supposed”. I use eye dialect, or spelling
patterns, to suggest these features, rather than linguistic markings. These decisions are
discussed in more detail in Chapter Two, methodology.

' Italics indicate reading texts aloud.

° Underlined sentences indicate the case study child is reading or writing.

° “/” indicates a rising and “\” indicates a falling tone.

° Question marks within parenthesis (??) indicate speech I was unable to discern from
audio or video tape. Where applicable, I include the speech I think I hear within the
parentheses.

° : a colon indicates an elongated vowel sound.

° Capital letters indicate stress or emphasize.

- < > Indicates a very quiet tone of voice.

301

APPENDIX D

LITERACY EVENTS AND PRACTICES OF MARCO’S DAY

 

 

.Eoco

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mica: Rhone 52m poo... REE. 2:. 2: we mice»: :22? a E cote—Eu 88. 858,—. 3
l .38“ 05 E 853 ..c weer.
05 20:0 8 3898 32:55 was 888883
4x8 a £5? mEoumo owe—5:; 52m poo... 8.5. 858a. ...a mac? 2: =0 88.. was
buﬁi 8:258 98 8:08... on... me 8E8 EoeBm EB 283.20 .2953 ..w—5... 2: 8:86 86:8 ecu 8:08p. A:
.508 a com: dog—.86 05 E 0390an B050 cc“ «8»?
882 coca—ESE 2.2228 3830.5 82 .0585 a 8 =2: 8 Econ 05 Eat 8:: mi?
..o 5683.6 8a“: 858,—. Soon 3 52m cook 85,—. RE. 385 Bone =oumccem5 8358:. 888,—. 2
c=o>o 25305 05 Mini.
Aecaoﬁﬁau Ewen 85 Eek. Econ 2: 8:80 08; 8.6—EU
.Eocm 2: 9 :8: women :8 $85.85 xoﬂ. .3 . ..ﬁoﬁ coo... BE... 2:... Even a so ....88... 52m cock.
2 £0? a ..o ﬂames—E a 882 Seemn 53M tech. 85:. 2:. 820 22? a 8255 8:08“ 2:. ”32230 85E.
3522a .3885 35% 88,—. 8.8.5 .3885 “nevi
man 98.32 omasmcj

><Q POUME ZO any—SEA QZ< mFZm>m Sea—mt..—

Q X_QZm—AE<

302

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0:03:50: 388.9.
:30 $.33: 0 a: :5:an :33: 2850.82: «auto: :08» .830: E02832 2:30 8:330 Auto” :gehﬁﬁm
..::::w 8080: mEmEEz : 0: E03: :0::::0
:0::E.:0E_ 3050 wEiEw. ::::w ::: ::::m 20:8: MEmEE, :0 8:E:: 0:: 88:8: E030: :::: 0: H MN
98: 8:0 8::
.:0::E..0:E ::000: 0: 8:8 E .:E0:V 8:00:00, :::0:0=::0 ::: 82.: .3 8:_:: :::00 :30: :85 .8:_::
:08: 8:0:E0: : m: :::: :0 0.5 :::: -.h—::: :0 :::: 00::::0::< :0 E085 ::: E03: ::000: £030: .280 an
80:08: :0 8:0EEco .8803“
.w::00:0m 0: 88.0: E000: _:_0EO .8:E: h80—080: ::::E .:::0 :0:0 :::: 3:88» 8:888,
::000: _:w0_ -00::::0::: m::0_:._. - ::0E:00: ::w0_ E VHF—0: 00::::0::< £00: 00::::0::: E 8m:: 8.5: 8:08.: 0N
8:298
::::m .303: ::: :0:::0:&0:E 30:: :8
.0::::8:E0: 33:0: 8:02: 88:3: 0E0m .8:0EOE8:: :0 :0:0E 09:.
0: _0:0E 8:0E0E8:: :0 0:3 8:02 8:0E0E8:: : :0 8:02 : :0 0::::8:E0: ::::0: 30:: E030: :::Q :N
06.22: _:0::E0:::E :0: 800.: _0:0E :80: :::: 0::_ 8:E:: m .8: 0::
: m: 30:0: 2.: .3: 00: 3835 83:00:00 0::0:w:E :0 ::::0 ::D :30: 3:05 :::: 8:9: 21:98 820: :::Q 0N
.2922: ::0::E0:::E :0: 0:00: .8:E:: 98:0: 0:: :0 208::
: m: 300:0». E .9: 0:: 0:: 0::8:E::, m:0_._:> ::0:: :8 B:0:::m ..00:0w h:0 :::: :::
8:: :0 80%: :: 0m: 3:0:3m ::::U 30:00 :0 :80 ::::0_:0 0:: :0 8680:: ::0. E030: DEG :N
:28
.8838 .3 80:3 0:: 8:02: 38:3: ::: 8:0:0... .0::8:E::
C98 _:0_::E:::EV REE? 80.: 30:0: 0:: :0 0:: :0 ..0:E:: .._00:0m :0 .39. 023:0: wEES,
.00_::EE 80:; : :0 58:85 ::0::::: ::::U :::: 0:: :0 0::8:EE 0::E 8E3 0:::EE : 50:: 8:8 SEQ :N
.00::::0::< ::: C0583 :::
808000.: :::E ...00:0: :0 :::? .::::0_:0 0: 8:20: 8:38:
0m::w::_ ::w::w_: 0: :::0: E08 :80: ::0::: E 8::Emm:_0 ::0_ ..m8E0: 38:... 0:: ”5:00:
0:: :0 23:: ::::t 0: ._. ::::E :::000: .820 ::::0_:0 E00885 ::::0_:0 mE::_0E 0E::0: :::: < .30_>8>O 9:505
0050:...— h0:8:§ 0:80 38,—. 3:08 8:82.— .8:0>m
_ .39 9008:: 0w::m::.:

2:08.?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.3038: :3: 8:50: __ :00: 83000:: 8:003 :::: 68030:: 030: 0: 3003 :::: 0:: 8:339 38:50: :0
.::000:: ::08::_: : -..:03::: .::03::: ::000: :::
0:: mE::000:.. ::: 8.00:: :E0_:0:: ::0: 0: 80:: :::E 0:3 .2839:
::3 ..:8_:0:: 0:: wE>_0:.. 03098:. ::00\::Imr:::2 :0 0:03 0: :w:: :0 ::0:::w ::0:w ::::w 5.
00:08:08
mEE:0_ :0::0:: 0N_::w:0 b::0:E0: .:0:0: ::: :0::: ::U: .::0:: wEE:_:x0 :::
0: 8:88 :8: b::0:E0.:. -.S:0::::::E :00_0:U :::E :0 :5 :::0: :0 ::0:: wE::: .:00:0:0 :0:_>0:: ::::m :3
.w:_::0:m0: ::3 :0::::
:0 wE::00: 80:08:08 wE:0:0: ::0:w ::E: :: ::: :00_0:0 wE>:: ::0:w : 0:E :0:::/:0: :::E :0: :0:::: :::_0 0: .r :::—2
.::0::0_ 38:5: .3085: mE::0: : :w:0::: :0:E< :::—:3 ::::m_
:0:: 0:: :0 8:39: 8:08,: .:_0: :0: ::::m 0: :::0::: :0:E< :m
:80: E0:: .:0::0::0:,
:_0: :02000: ::: ::00: :0::0E 8:3 ::0::0: 0:: :_0: ..w:: 0:: :0 :::... 0: :. 0m
:0::::::_: £289
:::—0 0:: 0: :::0: :::U ::0:0_:-:0Z :_0_:::: a: 80:05. :::—0 0:: 0: :::0: :0:::< :m
8352:. @552:
:::—0 0:: 0: :8: :::U 300: .080: 0:0,: 3:09 00:: 0b :::—0 0:: 0: :::0: :0:::. :m
.:::_0 0: mE::0: 08:0: 00:08:
::: 080: ::00: 0::: :0::::0 0G
08:3 EEME: wE0m:0 :< .::_::: ::: :0::: ::::m ::: :0::E:::_U :::—0 0:: 0: ::0: :0::::0 03 H 0: ::00m
00.50:.5 3:82: 0:80 38.: 88.8 580:5 ”88>”:
.39 900.85: 0w::w:5

 

 

 

 

304

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.53....83‘ d.» ...325: 52.85.
.6 .35, .553K $5.53 £08 “£2.22, ~33.“ «V5.3: 8.55% 3.253%?” 38.55. h
.538
m. 25.. 2; 5:? 52.2 852 €8.53 8 ow o. 2.5. 9:. when 80 5.5: :8 22:2. DEG gm
9.5.3 I
mE w=8w€ £5.09 35 5855., ws....» 2&3 .022...
8.32 .28....» 35.3585, 8 d 5.3 z 5352—. .35. w... 5505. 33.0
80 $555.00 a 55.3 8...“. 558-5: 35.3585 £5.32 0: .owa 58 mi .8 23¢ Soon 8:8 8.32 wm
5...:
£050 23:. 5 5:5 85.35, E=< B 1.03 .585“.
mo 25. Soon 8:8 55.2 xoon 558-5: 5.58:5 m3 «.535 5: .8 min: i can soon a 5>o mwctn 022:. um
2:5 5 5.3 3.9: 6.58:5 .l
5: 53m 3:8 855 EEO 8.3. 558-5: wwEEB $0203. :0 x83 5: 2.. Beam 8 .95 588 038—. am
.235 5 5.3 5. goon
53:86 ES 35. .055 EEO 88c -55: 8a.“. \ boa M553 m2 FEB be... 5: 535mm. 25 2.5. 5.54 um
2:55.03 ...Emmzomﬁ a 9m: 03 .5an BF: _ 5505
a witﬁn .8 558.8... 5.095. .15an ﬁg... .0: .8 593:5 2: Soon m2 x5 8 38m
28 o. 58:05. wEmD -1355ng b: \ b.5555 Mocumoa 2% .25. 2:5 .8 365% 52.3 @550 um
.5292on85 .363 .55.an0 b5 m..o£=< 5 .8 5:233
9552: 98 ”2.88“. 80 8%.“. 03.85 092.. .525 3 EB 82E. .mo_:5.wo_no.=a 9.2.3 :0 :53
5mm... 32:3 5 x53 ﬂcoozﬁ $.38on -5_:%.wo_ao.=< 55a 28 85.5% .2...on .225 .852 am
2255..., 6528 95:3 .55 E8 225
55:55 232 wcﬁmom 55:...me 5582 p.028 want? E... 582 .038 2: o. @528 music 5E3. «m
555:. .053.
.8 ...a—526.. 8...: 359.5 52550585 8F: 8 55095 =~ 2m 5:... $535
...MEEB 85:9. E85220 .5205 9.6:. 2: £8.85 wiowco 3m: 55‘ ...bEuE: 8...: U5 8.5“. 5 :m 5.220 gnu—bl
832w...— muESS 259 85.1 35.6 .3283 ”855
ﬁ mun 98.32 owuswﬁl

 

 

305

 

  

 

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DES“ waive. .mmohwoa 39w 955%: E28

3.30 a :0 ..tone.. a E5» 982 \ME ESQ 920 zoom $6 220 x08 2.:3 8 :53 0982 v5 Eun— oh
3853: cosmEcS. 520x03 §Bom b: E 33$: 2: HQ @222

.oﬁowou an: a with: icon 2qu -SOHOE want? 9.th :95. 80.85.. :0 x53 832 can 225 E.
wcutk @2552: 858 29:35, 8035 95% 5m :83? 8::

5m 12.2: a. mm 2on a wEmD 208 0:25— cue—och b: E m .ZESEEEB he :62: ms xoon cm: 925 98 852 on

.550on

:22 52:3 a wcuosbmcoo Ena— moEaZ -..«Eﬁmtb. aEEaE E moEa: 8E3 832 A:
bSuoa wcaza a o5§m5 E22882 .8033 wan—b:

2 :2 Exam—:2 a wExaE -Ecouﬁimwho ..oE—SP @852 m... 5% 53 a 8.2: 8 28:53 wow: 83: E.
.320
goon ..woxoom b2 5 $25»: 2: E 2a 225

23 8.52 .xooa $12220 E2056 a .5 BED

EcouﬁanS 22:8 520 xoom mam—68 :23 230% :25 SE moEzu $20 xocm

8:232: 628$ 83 4‘2 BO 330 9 mum». 2580 ca

@2862:

$20 8 £22: 2.5 douocéoc moxmcm mmso 9 mum“: 52:5. .3

N ow

.wEEoE 2: Eoﬁ 3:528 E ow 8 309ml. 3 8.25

8322a mow—3: 350 85,—. 8:96 how..—35— n$=o>m

man 9832— owaswcﬁ

 

 

 

306

APPENDIX E

LITERACY EVENTS AND PRACTICES OF LAUREN’S DAY

 

.28:

w
n

:03 0:: :o 2:00 :::—:2: c: 0503 0:0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

50:3 :0 253 0:22:20 gram—:05 55:03:02 ES: 0:2: 8:0E< 55%: 0020 0:2: 8:2:< :::om 5: 00.00 :85 Mu
::o:w 0 :: 8:00:00 35:09:02 50:0 ::2: 5,: .50.: ::::
::: 85:08:: 80:00:53 w:_30:>0~h 20:2: 20:2: :50: :::—:0 50:0 ::2: :05 00cm ::: 0020 0:90 :00:m .=
22:22: .002: E :200: ::: :::0
0530:: 80:50 5:00: 25:03:02 30:06:50 :5: 0 ::o: ::0 0:0 0:030:< 0522:: :0:::::
::: wE::U .:00:00:o:s 0 06:5 80:00:53 02:00 .8025 :::—2 :::5 ”002:8: 80:0 52: 0 :o 0:53 8:220 0:
.2058
::0>0 :::: ::: 0020 boa 8 E2: :8: :8 0:0 00 00.03 0020 :05
w:_::: 0:8: 050: 0020 w:::0w~h E08: 28: :05: 0050: 0020 5:: c: 853 00.00 C088: 23:: :::—0M 3
:59: :5 :28:
._0:oE 0 00 =:::: 2:500: 55:03:02 0:2: 0.85:5 :2: 2:65 .8::0::< :::oz :0 :2:
0 :20: :2: 0 9:550 ::: 5:095 :::—022 is: 50:00: :2: 2:88 0 :o =00:83:: :0::2 ::: 5.00 :0::::0 0:
55:52: So: 2 055.. :::. S .58:
5000:: 0:0 :0» 30:0 0: :: w:::w_m ::::000. :500: 52:0 :::»:th 0:: :25 >2: :0::: ::: :w_0.. :0::::0 A:
:0: :8: 0:6: 2:: 02080020
02005 :o :::5 2:050 02: :22
.00:_>:00 :0: 0: 5:0: ::: :0::0 8:220 :28 0:2
0:2:w0: ::0 02:85 8 :0: 0 w:::8~: 2:25:02 \ :0E :0: o: 0: 0w:::.r 00 C058: 3: :25: :o :0: o: a: 0m:_::. a:
253 0:
:2: 00 300:: 0:2 ::: :::o:0 05:: :0::: :25: 2: :5 00.02 :0 :0: 0 :o 2:253 28: 5:: :28 :0::::0 0< “B0:>:0>O 8 0222:.
00:00:: 880:5 0.509 0:20.: 02:03: 580:: 02:03:
:00 0:05:02

 

 

 

 

 

 

><Q 9me35 20 Qua—:05: QZ< wFZm—>m BID—MP:

m XHQZmnEAx

307

 

02:8 053
2::0D "0: ::0 60.20:: 0.:0::0:m “0: 2:0:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

..0.:00:0: w:_00_5.. 3:053:02 :0 500305 :0::0w0: 2:0: ..0:00:.. 0020
:0 ::000: 0020 :0: 0000:0020 w:_2=0: $5.52. ::000: 2:0: 00:0::0::< 500:0 5000:: 000:: 2:0: 0:0:_0: 2=0Q :N
.03.: 0803005 :02 5:50 .00:500 5
m::00:w 0 :50: 00:0::2:0 w:_::000: \w:_:000_ ::000: 0.00: 00:0::0::< :::0 :000 5:02: .00:0::2:0 000:0: :00:m 0N
52:0:
:0 5:00:85 0:00 :0::: 0::—0 :0 ..w:
.20: :0::200 0: ::0 .. r. 353 0::00Q .2 ”0:0: 0.20:0:
0.20: 0:: 5:00:02: ::0 :::—00:. :0::200 :0:0 ::0: 0::0 :0::0—00 ::0 005200 0:: 50:0 ::0: 0530: 2:09 :N
50:00 5 :00: 0>0: :0::::0 0:: 5:50: ...—00:0w :0 20m:= 0.20:0:
020: 2: 5:00:02: ::0 95.00; 0:: 5:55 50:0 _00:0m :0 0200 :0 ..0:0:00:.. 2: 50:0 ::0: 0:020: 2:0D 0N
20:0:000030: .md 0:520:50: :0:0505:0:: :0:0505:0:: 50:50 .:0:050:::2: 2: :0 200050: 90:
0.20: 30:0 0: :0:05 0 :503 20:05 20:02 :0:0505:0:H 0:505:50: 0.20: 0:: 30:0 5020: 2:09 am
.w::002 95:02 :0: :0::0w ::0 :0 :020
55006: 050:< :0::::0 00 w:_0\:00: 0020 0 :02 ::0 :00:
:00: ::00 0 ::::00: ::0 ”0.55200 :00: ::00 E50 50: 503: :_O 05:. ::00 0 :0200 20::0_:: ::0: 5030: 2:00 am
.00:0::0::0 ::0 .030: “0.0500:
:0:::: 2:0: .:0::003 .:0::0_00 :0 0:50:00: w::005 2:0: :0: w:: 00:0 :0 :0::0w :0::::0 wEEo—Z
50:0
0%:03 30:00 5:05:00: :0:::: 55:0 52020 <0: :0 2%.:0
$33: 0 :0::::00: 2: ::0: =0 M250: 0:82: 2:00 0. 030: $03 :0 0:503 5:330 3:3 0:301:0950 02:00: 20:33.: N00023:
.:_0025 ::0 :0:5<
2:0:000: ::0 050:: 200: 255:: 0: 0.00: 0:00: :0:0—:58 2:03 :0:0
00:05.0 0: 25:0 :0:::3 :30 ::::00:m ::0:: :0:0: 200: 2:0:0 :0 :20 ::0 0:00: :0:0::00-:_00 :0: 000—0: :0::02 ::
...0::_5 200:0 0 :0»
530:8, _0:0::::0:_ 2:0:2:0>0.. 0200 0:050Q ::0 :0:0 ..:00:..
..:00w.. :0: :0::0:500 w:_m0::00:0, 20505505 :0::::0 530:0: 500: ::000: 0502
,0500: :0 530:0: 550:0 \w:_:000_ ::000: ::00:0__0:0 :0 :0:0 0:» 0: ::00: 0:: :0 ::0:0 0 000: :85 a:
20: ...:00: 050:: 0 5 055005 050:
:0:00:0>:00 0 5 :0:0000 0:00: :0:0:" :0:0:0: ::: 5000:: :: ::::00: 0: :0:0: 0002?. ::0 :0::01: ::0m
:0: 225500 00 :00: 0: w:_::0:0:m :0: 00:20:02 :0:: 00.00: 0502 :005 20:: :0:3 ::0 0050: :0 500305 2
. .050: :0: :0:0 0: 30: :00 : 50:: 50:0 00:00 20=< 00020: :_0_: 2:2 5

 

 

308

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EmanEoEmm .: 80¢ D000 0 0:8
@5003 :30 8: 50:: £0: 0::0 Eaﬂw0505§ 0300mm 0:: $923503: 8: 30:: 8:8 m0; 0v
.: :0 0:03 0:: A30: 000:
8030:: wEuma: 0:0 2:08 0%“: 0:0 :02 :0:0—EU .03: mo :0::
wit—.0 8030:: m:_0:000: £50305 080002005 30:: 0:200:me 0030 00:08:05 0003
:22: 30050005 :0 @0003 000:8003 0M0: 0.00: :0:: 0:: 0mm: 05 ::0 .000 0: :0:0::0 0:0. ::0—gm 00
.:08:: E 8030:: :0:0 :0:0::0
.005 .0008: E 8030:: 0E3 08:0
80:08:: E 8320 0:0 w:_0:000:, 3:000:55 0:008:20 8:: 8030:: 02w 0: :0:0—E0 :0 0:00
..0005 0000080508 : w:_000:m 000:8003 8.00: ::0—2 8.00.: ::: 05 :0:0:: :0:0::0 0.0: 585 :0
...nuwk=
8 $3330 0:: :05. 0x00: 0:: :0 50:53:
32000503.: \309: £02: 3003 ES 0 3R. 8 $003 0:02.000: 0.00.: 200%. .5»
005002005 300: 50E
0M0: 0:: w:_0:cm 860: 0:0: 8:00: :32 E 00.00 050 8000:» 0:008 ms: ::86 av
:30 :0 0:03 :05
:0::0m0: 030 0:0 $005005 8:03 $20 .8303 ::: 000:9“:— wEm: .03? 0020 :0 5:00:05 08:0 20:3 000305 ::mzm 502
:00: 00000: a 82mm: 0:: 3:00: 8: 585
wESE: 0:20 .9000 0 005000: 0030:: E000: 03m, :0ké0m @003 Sam :0: ::0m 3003‘ 0000: 00:00::m 0m
8:00am a: 30.53: 55
.memEmwﬁo 5:03 :0:0: 5:05: .E0=< awn—0 00 030: :05 000: 00 80:03
00 m30: 3:080: m:_000: 0:0 w:_:._3 0000630: - 0302 DEC 0: ._. :0 ::0 8030: £00 0: H ”0302 3:00 0m
._:_0_. “0:03 “.0 w:_:00E :0
:00: ::0; 0:03 30% 0:: «50% 05: :068580 :0:m :00 w:_000: @0000: 5086 :m
0:08:50 0::
0:20 000: 508 a 00 w:_:0a=m :00: :20: :0:0::0 .0820 05 0: 50003:. :00:
0:: .0820 0:: 00 0:20 E03 0 005000: 0:305 E000: 0.30% 0:: 030% 3B 250:: 0 ,000m 0:: ::0m 0:3 €00. 3:55 «m
@5002 wEEoE w:_.=_0 500300 003 2 00:6 000305 8 030: 0G
€00 $00 8:. :O 0030:: w:_000. :0: 0:5: 8 0000005 02:: A05 8.00: 00320:. E0: 000. 0000:5020 00 :0:0: :0:0::0 8 8.00m
00:00.5 3.000005 0.58 8:09 8:05: >038: 8:03:

 

 

 

 

 

amn— 0:053

 

 

 

309

 

.088 00.0: :00 080800800.

00$ :0 00.. 80:0 m:.000m :08: :00
008080808 00... 00% h.0 00.1.. 2000:: 00 080: 0:08:01. 0:00 :0:..0: €00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:0:: 00 00.. 0 80:“. 0080: 8.000% " 0m
.03:
0.: 00 0m:.::.w0: 0:: w:.:_:3 0:0 30080:... :0 8.:03 80:20:00 0.00: 0.:050:0.. 0m
.I 0:033: ::3 :0>00
80:00:... 0: 0:.w0: :0:8< 0:0 .0000 000.0
00 0.00: 080.: 080.0800 0.00: 0w:0. :00
80000 w:0.0000 0:0 8:00.08. 08.: w:0.:3
3.00:0:0: 0.:0._:3 .0... 0.00: 080.: 0.00: 0.0.0..< 2.80 0:0 00:0:0 0.0..< 0.00: 0.0.0.10. 0m
08:00:00 .0:0>00 002:3
000.0 00 0:0 00:030: w:_:.:3 0:.w0m
00000 0 00:3 0: w:.::.w0: .w:.:.:3 :0:0: 000.00 00 0.00: 00000:. 30: 0
:0: =0.00: 38800.. 0 m:.:0=::0:00 0:00 :0: 0.00: 0.:0:8< w:.0.08 08.: 00:0:0 :0:8< 0.00: 0.:0:8< :m
.00M0n. I.
:0:0»: 30: 00:5 0000:00.0 0:0 0000500... 0803
E00 :0:0: 0 0.00: .30: 0.0202500: .00000800 5.05 :0:... .08 0: 0.00: :0:
...0 :0:0 :95: 0 w:.:0::0=... 0:0 w:0.:3 0:30.: 880$ .02 0.00: 0:080: w:.000:-0: A: 8:000 5:00.: 0.00: 0:080: 0m
0:00.008. :0 52:0.» 0 :0 0.80:0 00.:3 :0:0::0 0:0 :08: 0:00 :00:m :0:.H. .w:.:.:3 $5.03
Emo: 0:0 ::08 :08: :0:0::0 .88 0. 80:0 :0". .508 ::3 0:00 0:0 00:: :0:3 w:.::3 :0:0 :00 30:: :0:0::0 0:0: :35 ::0 _
00500:.— »000003 0809 808,—. 800%. A0008: 8:0.»m

 

 

A00 0:050:

 

 

 

 

 

 

310

 

0.00: 0008:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

000.0 ::.3 000:0:00: 0.00: :0..:m. :0:0. 0:: 0: 8:38: :. 0:00 0>0: :0::
m:.:0:0 E0 ::.3 :0:0: 0 0: w:.0:0:00: 0:80.: 8000:: 00:". a: 00.08% :0:3 80.00:: ::0 :0 30:0 83808 :20 :00»: w:
b.>.:00 m:.:0:.8.00 0.00: :0..:m 0.00: 000580: :.0:: :0 w:.000:
00:08:80: 00 w:.000: .0:0:0 0:80.: 8000:: 00:“. ::: 036% :0:3 .0:0:0 0000 :20 0.00m 000:0: :0:0: :0
0:20 0.00: 0:020>0 0: 8:0: .:. 0:.0.:x0 0:0 000.0
000 ...3 :0:000: :0.:3 8:0: w:.:.0.:x0 .0::080::0:. 8:0: :0.:00.0>0 :20 0.00m. 0:: 0: :::o: :0.:020>0 :0 030:0 :000m 0:
.:0.:0::000:: :20 0.00: 0:30
:0::: 0:: 0. 0.: P 0.00: 0:: 0: 0883: :. 0.0 :0:: 60.38 ::0 :0 030:0 0:0 .000 0 0:: :0: m:.000: .0:0:0 0 0000 0008: :0:0: :08:
:00: 00...: .:.00:0:
00.0:0 :00» :0 0.00: 0 0.8000: 0:80.: 8000:: a: :00 :0:: 0.00:0:Q 0: 000.0 0.00: 0:80.: 0 0000: :0:03 0:
.30: :0: 5:00.:
.:.00 00.00: 0:80.: ::0: 0.00: 00.00 .::.0: 0:0 :< 00.00: w:00 03:.
0: 00.00: 0800 w:.000: 0:0 w:.:00.0m. 00.00: m:00 w:00 00.00: w:00 80:: w:.000: :0:00: :00: 0:.0 00:0:0:w 0:
.000: 0: 0::0:0mf .w0: 00:0:0:: :000w 0:0 0.000 0: 00.00: 3M:
:0: 0:0 000.0 0: w:.000: :0: 0:0 0:05.: :0:... ...w0: 00 0: 00.009. :.0:: :0: 00.00:
@8000: 080: :0: 00.00: w:.:00.0m 0:00: 0:80.: 800:000.0 00.00: 0000:0 0: 0:.:0::0v. 0:0 5:00.: 00.00 :000m 00
8.3 :0:0 0: 0.00:
0:0 00000:0 :00m. 80:: 00030: 00.00:
E05... ::.3 0002000 :0 :300 :.0 0:0 00.00:
000: 0: 00.00: 08:00.00 00.00: 0:80.: 800:000.0 00.00:: 0:.: 080 :00.00 0:.:0::0v. 0:0 :0:03 :0
0008800 0.0..< 0:0 08.:
0900 :00: 800.0 b:0>0m. 000:: 0 :0 0:00 00. 500.0 >.:0>0m. A:
0 0: ”8:00.. 000.0 0:: 0: w:.000~I..: 0:80.: 8000.”. 5.50.5 won: 03.: 0.00: 0:80.: :0.w:0. 0 80:: 0000: 00:080.: 00
w:.000~:
.08.: 08:03 0:0 m:.000~. ::0..|m a: 0032.0: 000.0 0:: 0: 000: 0.0..< 0:0 00:080.: 0
00:00:: 50:85 09:00 0:00,: 0:005. 00000:: 0:003:

 

 

 

 

 

A00 0:080:

 

 

 

311

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBILIOGRAPHY

Adams, P. (1974). This Old Man... Singapore: Child's Play (International) Ltd.

Allen, P. (1996). Who my, the Boat?: Paper Star.
Allington, R. (1997). Overselling Phonics. Reading Today, 15(1), 15-16.

Archibold, R. C. (1999, July 18). In Season of Play, Daunting Struggle to Learn.
New Yor_k Times, pp. 1, 38.

Atwell, N. (1998). In me Middle (Seem Edition). (Second ed.). Portsmouth,

NH: Heinemann.

Avery, C. (1993). ...Agg with g ﬁght jlfguch. (Second ed.). Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

Barrs, M. (1993). Readin the 'ffe nee: Gen r
Classrooms. York, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.

Barton, D. (1994). Q'temy: An Inﬂmﬁm to me Egogy 91 Written Language.
Oxford, Cambridge: Blackwell.

Berliner, B. (1996). Man tu C 'sis: M
ﬂblig Schools: Addison Wesley.

Bloome, D. (Ed.). (1987). [Jew and Sewing. Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Publishing Corp.

Bloome, D., Puro, P. and Theodorou, E. (1989). Procedural display and
classroom lessons. Cgm'culum Inguig, 19, 265-291.

Brown, J., Goodman, K., and Marek, A. (1996). Studies in Miscg Analysis: An
AW. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Brown, M. (1991). D.W. All Wet. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.

Bruner, J. (1986). ACM Minds, Possible Woles. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.

Camboume, B. (1988). The Whole Story; Natugg] Lagging m £129 Agguisig'on o!
W New York, NY: Scholastic.

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom Q'scourse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.

Clay, M. (1972). Sand Test. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cleary, B. (1996). Two Dog Biscuits: Mulberry Books.

Delpit, L (1995). Other P_e_oge's QQ'ldren: Cultural Conﬂict in the Classroom.
New York: The New Press.

312

Demuth, P. (1993). Shag: Grosset and Dunlap.

Dewey, J. (1961). Democracy and Education. New York: McMillan.

Dewey, J. (1963). Exmn'enee and Education. New York: Collier Books.
Diaz, 8., Moll, LC and Mehan H (Ed.). (1986). Beyond Language: Social ahd

Cultural Eactors ih Schooling Language Minority Children. California State University:
Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 304241.

Dyson, A. H. (1993). Social Worlds of Children Learning to Write in an Urban
Primary School. New York: Teachers College Press.

Dyson, A. H. (1994). 1th Need for Stogy. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.

Dyson, A. H. (1997). What Difference D006 Q'Iferenee Make?: Teacher

e ec ions on Diversi Lite and e Urban ' School. Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.
Edelsky, C. (1991). With 'terac Jus 'ce f A l- e ' ' the Social '
W. London, New York: The Falmer Press.
Edelsky, C. (1993). Who's got the ﬂoor? InD. Tannen (Ed.), G_<;____nderand
Cohversatimgl Ihte Egon ,(pp. 189-227). New York, Oxford: Oxford—_— University Press.

Ehrlich, F. (1991). ngh Boxes. New York, NY: Puffin Books.

Erickson, F., and Shultz, J. (1981). When rs acontext? Some issues of theory and
method in the analysis of social competence. In J. Green, and Wallat, C. (Ed)
-_ ' 8, (pp 147-160). Norwood: Ablex.

 

Erickson, F. (1982). Audiovisual records as aprimary data source. InA.
Gnmshaw (Ed) W (V01 11(2) 919-213-231)

Ferreiro, E., and Teberosky, A. (1982). Lg'teracy Belg: Sghﬂing. (English ed.).
Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Fisher, B. (1998). W. (Second ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Florio-Ruane, S. Denyer, J. (1997 ). h' C 00 n

W
Contexts: thrvatig} and Ahal ysis Hahgmglg. Doctoral Seminar rn Classroom Discourse,
Michigan State University.

Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy o] the Mssgd. New York: Continuum.

Gee, J. P. (1996). Social Lihgt_u'§_ti§ m Ligmies: [geology in Qiseomeg. (2nd
ed.). London, New York: The Falmer Press.

Gilyard, K. (1991). Voicw of the Self- A study of Langu_ag§ Comgtenee. Detroit:
Wayne State University Press.

Goffman. I. (1981). Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.

313

Goodman, D. (1989). So why don't I feel good about myself? In K. Goodman, Y.
Goodman, and W. Hood (Ed), The Whole Langgage Evaluation Book, . Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.

Goodman, D. and Curry, T. (1991). TeachingintheReal World. InY. Goodman,
W. Hood, and K. Goodman (Ed.,) W- Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann.

Goodman, K. (1986). What's Whole in Whole Language? Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann.
Goodman, K. (1993). Phonics Ehacts. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Goodman, K. (1996). My. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Goodman. K (Ed). (1998). W- York. Maine:

Stenhouse.

uaGoodman, K., E Brooks Smith, Robert Meredith, Yetta Goodman (Ed). (1987).
._ . . (ThirdEditioned.).

 

Katonah, NY. RichardC. Owen Publishers. '—

Goodman, Y. (1985). Kidwatching Observing Children in the Classroom. In

Jaggar. A and Smith-Burke. T. (Ed). W. (m 9-18).
Newark Deleware: IRA/NCT E

Goodman, Y, Watson, D. and Burke, C. (1987). Rmn ng Miscue Invggtgy:
W. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.

Goodman, Y., Altwerger, B., and Marek, A. (1989). ﬂint Awgnexs 1h
W11 (Oeeassional Paper 4). Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona -
Program in Language and Literacy.

Goodman. Y. (Ed). (1990). W
W. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Goodman, Y., and Wilde. S. (Ed). (1992). W

W. New Yorlc Teachers College Press.

Goodman, Y. (1997). Multiple Roads to Literacy. InD. Taylor (Ed.,) My
W“ Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Goodman, Y., Watson, D. and Burke, C. (1996). W
W. Katonah, New Yorlc Richard C. Owen Publishers, Inc.

Goodwin, M. H. (1990). e- 'd-S e- 'd: as Social
W. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Graves, D. H. (1994). A Fresh Look at Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Gutierrez, K D. (1994). How Talk, Context, and Script Shape Contexts for

Learning: A Cross-Case Comparison of Journal Sharing. Lingg'sties and Education 5, 5,
334-365.

314

Hall, N. (1987). The Emergence ofgfteracy. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
Halliday, M. (1975). Learning How to M;ea_n_. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1979-1980). Three Asgts of Chilgren's Languagg

Develogncnt: Learning Langu_age, Learning through Language, Learning about Langgge.
Paper presented at the Oral and Written Language Development Research: Impact on the

Schools, International Reading Association, National Council of Teachers of English.

Harste, J., V.A. Woodward, and C. Burke. (1984). Language stories and literacy
lessnns. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Heath, S. B. (1983). Wa s with words: ua e life wor in co
W.

Henkin, R. (1998). Who's Invited to Share? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Herman, G. (1996). Tedny Bear for Sale: Cartwheel Books.

Hillel, G., Oberg, A., Smith, F. (Ed.). (1984). Awakening to Litegcy.
Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Hindley, J. (1996). In the ngngny of CQ'Idren. York, Maine: Stenhouse.

Jaggar, A., and Smith-Burke, M. T. (Ed.). (1985). Observing the ngnagg
Learner. Urbana, IL: National Council of Twchers of English.

John-Steiner,V.(1990).N boo the ' ‘ x ti of ' ' .New
York: Harper Collins.

Kaestle, C. F. (1991). Qteracy in the Umﬂ States. New Haven: Yale University
Press.

Kozol, J. (1991). W. New York: Harper Collins.
Kozol, J. (1995). AM. New York, NY: HarperCollins.

Labov, W. (1972). The Transformation of Experience in Narrative Syntax. In W.
Labov (Ed) W; University of Pennsylvania Press.

Ladson- -Billings G (1994) )W
W. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Larson, J. (1995). Talk Matters: The Role of Pivot in the Distribution of Literacy
Knowledge Among Novice Writers. Lingnistics nnd Equtign, 7, 277-302.

Larson, J. (1997). Indexing instruction: the social construction of the participation
framework in kindergarten joumal-writing activities. W4), 501-
521.

Larson, J. (1999). Analyzing Patricipation Frameworks in Kindergarten Writing

Activity: The role of Overhwer in Learning to Write. Discourse and Socieg, 9(4), 501-
521.

315

Lee, C. (1999, ). Roundtable Qiscgsion. Paper presented at the National Council
of Teachers of English Resmrch Assembly, Chicago, IL.

Leech, G. (1983). Princinles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman.

Martens, P. (1996). I alrﬂy know how to read: A child's view of literacy.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Miller, P. J., and Mehler, Robert A. (1994). The Power of Personal Storytelling in
Families and Kindergartens. In A. H. Dyson, and Genishi, Celia (Ed), W
Story, . Urbana, IL: National Council of Twchers of English.

Milz, V. (1983). A c I' 'sti 1i tio of Develo ent of Wri 'n in
Selected First Grade Students. Unpublished Dissertations Abstracts International, Vol. 44
3279A, University of Arizona, Tucson.

Mitchell-Pierce, K., and Gilles, Carol J (Ed). (1993). _C_ycles of Meaning:
Exmoring the Potential of Talk in Learning Cgmunities. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Moll, L. C. (1994). Lessons from Research with Language-Minority Children.
Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(4), 439—455.

Nieto, S. (1996, 1992). Aﬂrnning ingmity; :1th Enigmh'hcal Context of
Multicultural Education. (Second Edition ed). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Paley, V. (1979). White Tm. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Paley, V. (1981). Wall '8 Sto ' ° v ' ' ' . Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

Paley. V. (1995)- W- Cambridge. London:
Harvard University Press.

Pearson, P. D. (1994). Learning about Literacy A30 year Journey InR. B.

Ruddell, & Singer, Harry (Ed) TMetical Models and Ramses of Min n,g (4th ed, ).
Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.

Peterson. R. (1992). W.

Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Pilkey, D. ( 1992). W. New York, NY: Orchard Paperbacks.

Polanyi, L. (1985). Telling Q Americnn Stony: A structural and gultural analysis Si
convgrsatinnal smlling.

Prelutsky, J. (1983). Three Toed Sloth, Zoo Doings, . New York, NY: Trumpet
Club.

Pugh, S. L., Hicks, Jean W., and Davis, Marcia. (1997). Metnﬂorical Ways of
Knowing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Rees, M. (1988). Ten In A Bed. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.

316

Reyes, M. de la Luz. (1992). Changing Venerable Assumption: Literacy Instruction
for Linguistieally Different Students. Harvard Educational Review 62(4 Winter), 427-446.

 

Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative Analysis. (Vol. 30). Newbury Park: Sage
Publications.

Rosenblatt, L. (1978). flfhe Reader the Text the Poem The Transactional Themy of
the m'te_ra_ry Wonk. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Shannon, P. (1989). Broke o 'ses: in Instruction in Twentie Centu
America. New Yorlc Bergin & Garvey.

Shaw. (1947). It Looked Like Sm’lt Milk. New York: Scholastic.

Shor, 1. (Ed). (1987). Ereire for mg Classroom: a Soureem for Liberatmy
Teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton Cook.

Short, K., Harste, Jerry, and Burke, Carolyn. (1996). Creating Classroog for
Authors and Inguirers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Smith, F. (1971). Understanding M'ng. New Yorlc Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
Smith, F. (1988). Jm'm'ng m Litemny Club: Ennhe; Esgys inm Egucation.

Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Smith, M. (1994). A Snalge Mistake: Troll Associates.

Smitherman, G. (1977). Talkin' and testifm'ng': flfhe lggtmge of Blmk America.
Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Stock, P. (1995). ﬁlm Diologic anjgulnm: Teaching nng Lgmng in a
Mnlticultural Egg. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Street, B. (1998, ). Stmnt Wn'n'ng in the University: a_n Awdemic Literacies
Pgrswtive. Paper presented at the Weekend Course: Extending our Knowledge of

theracy Pmcesses, University of Arizona, LRC.

Street B (1995) W
W London and New Yorlc Longman

Tannen. D. (1989). W
gnvgrsatinnal discourse. (Vol. 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Taylor. D. (1983). WWW-

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Taylor, D. (1993). W. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Taylor, D. (1996). Toxic Literacies: Expming the Injustice of Bureaucratic Texts.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Taylor, D. (Ed). (1997a). Many Families, Many Literaeies. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

317

Taylor, D., Coughlin, Debbie, and Marasco, Joanna (Ed). (1997b). Teaching and
Ade. York, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Taylor, D. (1998). Beginning to Read and the Spin Doctors of Science. Urbana,
IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Taylor, D. (1999). Personal Conversation, Tucson, Az.

Taylor, D. and Dorsey-Gaines, C. (1988). Growing Up Literam: Leaming [mm
inmr-Cini Fmilies. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Teale, W. ,and Sulzby, E. (Ed) (1986). Emergentlitemgy: Wn tingamgmn g.
Norwood, NJ.: Ablex.

Torrence, N., and Olson, David R. (1985). Oral and literate competencies in the
early school years. In Torrence, N. ,and Olson, David R (Ed), Literacy, Ianng and

Learning: The Nature and Consequences of Reading gm Writing, (pp. 256-284).
Cambridge, MA. Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Weaver, C. (1988). Reading mess mm Emgiice: me Socio-mycholingnisncs to
Whole Language. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Weaver, C. (Ed). (1998). Reconsidering n balm nnp_roach to Leading. Urbana,
IL: NCTE

Wells, G. (1985). Preschool literacy related activities and success in school. In
Torrence, N. ,and Olson, David R. (Ed) in'terac racy, ﬁguage and Mug: The Namze

and Comuences of Mng nnd wnting, (pp. 229-255). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge

University Press.

Wells, G. (1986). jijhe Meaning Makers. Childrenlmenimn negl._.a_nmg eUar_1d an g
W. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.

Westcott, N. jijhe Hole in the Bucket.

Whitmore, K F., and Crowell, Caryl G. (1994). Inventin a ass fe 1na
WWW York ME: Stenhouse Publishers

Williams, R. L. ( l994a). Ii a jifree Could iiInlk. Cypress, CA: Creative Teacher
Press.

Williams, R. L. (1994b). Whast' sin my Pocketz Cypress, CA: Creative Teacher
Press Inc.

Wilson, J. (1989). Qn jijhe BouM’es of Conversation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

318

111011an STATE UNIV. LIBRRRI'
IIHIMHIIHIIIWNWWWIIIIHIIHIUIWI”WI
31293021067818