392

WOR K SHOP
Acknowledging Children as Writers
Kelly A. King This article details how a writing workshop can be implemented in preschool classrooms. It highlights an ethnographic study that explores student and teacher interactions during the writing, sharing, and conferring components of a writing workshop.

W R I T I NG
IN

PRESC HOOL

t is March in my preschool classroom. Students have been participating in a modified writing workshop (Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001) since September. On this day, Sandra has written a story about her dad going fishing. She reads her story to the class during sharing time: My dad went fishing. He caught a big fish. Several students notice that she has not drawn the fish and suggest that perhaps she should. She responds, OK. I will do that. During the next writing workshop, I remind Sandra of her peers suggestions, and she proceeds to add this new element to her story. When I tell stories like this one to both educators and noneducators, I am frequently faced with the same question: But do preschoolers really write? To which I always respond, But of course they do! This question underscores a common conception about what preschoolers can and cannot do. Most preschoolers are not sitting down at desks scribing letters into words and sentences. But this does not

mean they are incapable of creating stories that can be put into print. Preschoolers in fact have a seemingly endless supply of stories to write; they simply require varying levels of support to put them down on paper. In my classroom, I created a structured writing time each day that was a modification of the writing workshop model (Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001). The purpose of this article is to share how this structure fostered young writers and their written efforts and to highlight how this might be implemented in other preschool classrooms. Students at an early age are capable of learning the beginning fundamentals of writing and can do so in an environment that is nurturing and naturalistic rather than one that is hyperfocused on skills and conventions.

Kelly A. King is a prekindergarten teacher in the Lowell Public Schools, Massachusetts, USA; e-mail kkelly13@comcast.net.

R T

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 65

Issue 6

pp. 392401

DOI:10.1002/TRTR.01059

2012 International Reading Association

393

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

Summary of Methods
I conducted a yearlong microethnography in my preschool classroom. The classroom was a public school, half-day classroom in an urban district. The class consisted of 12 students, one teacher, and a paraprofessional. The students were all four years old by the start of the school year. Students attended school for two hours and 45 minutes, four times a week. Students were selected to attend public preschool within the district either by lottery or because of the identified special needs. Typically, the preschool classrooms consist of 10 typically developing students and up to five special education students. In this particular classroom, one student was identified as having special needs, and the other 11 students came from families in which more than one language was spoken in the home. All names of students in this article are pseudonyms. I videotaped the following elements of classroom activity two or three times a week: journal writing time, journal sharing time, and writing conferences. Writing products created during videotaping sessions were also photographed. These data were then analyzed using qualitative methodology (see Table). Specifically, the constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) was used to develop themes from the data. Specific classroom events representative of emerging themes were then further analyzed using discourse analysis (Bazerman & Prior, 2004; Bloome, Carter, Christian, Otto, & Shuart-Faris, 2005; Gee & Green, 1998).

Table Data Collection and Analysis

Time frame September Data collection

Data analysis

Review of district, school, and classroom curriculum Videotaping of journal writing and sharing twice a week Writing samples created during videotaping collected Observational, researcher field notes created Teacher reactivity logs created Writing conferences conducted once a week Termination of data collection

Situated the classroom writing in a larger context Focused on constant comparative analysis (macro-level analysis) to develop trends and patterns in data

OctoberJanuary

JanuaryMay

Macro-level analysis continued Micro-level discourse analysis began with video data Varied data analysis continued. All video analyzed (see Figure 4 for sample analysis)

May

Setting Up the Writing Workshop Structure

Typically, writing workshops consist of four major components: teacherdirected minilessons about writing; child-centered, open-ended writing time; teacherstudent conference time;

and author share time (Fletcher & Portalupi, 2001). In my classroom, there were only a handful of minilessons built into the workshop over the course of the school year, as I took care not to be too directive in my approach to supporting student writing development. Writing time, however, followed the basic premise that students would work on writing of their choosing each day. It differed from the typical structure of writing workshop in two major ways. First, writing time in my classroom was set up as a one-shot writing event during which students created a new story on a new page of their writing journals each day. This structure was adapted to allow for students to meet with success with minimal initial effort. Early on, students sometimes only took a few minutes to complete their days writing. As students understanding of the writing process progressed, they began to spend more time on their writing projects.

Second, conferences were not started until midyear and were conducted only once a week during activity choice time. This structural change to the workshop was made because early writers rely heavily on teachers to assist in the act of putting text on paper. The need

Pause and Ponder

How do you get young writers to move from labeling objects to writing with a story structure? How do you promote student discussions about peer stories that go beyond I like it? What do you do about students who repeatedly write about the same thing in their journal? What does a writing conference look like in preschool?
www.reading.org di

R T

394

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

for the teacher to scribe stories made conferencing difficult to accomplish during writing time. Furthermore, by conducting conferences once a week, the teacherstudent conferences were able to focus on more than one piece of writing, which was necessary given that student stories were typically short. The final component of the writing workshop, share time, during which students share work with their peers at the end of each workshop, was structurally similar to a traditional workshop. Where this element of the workshop was modified was in the level of student discussion, which was at times constrained by the limited structured writing experiences of the students. This structured writing format was ultimately chosen over merely creating a writing center that students could visit during play time for two reasons: (1) I wanted my students to experience writing as a structured learning experience similar to what they might encounter as they move into other grades, and (2) I wanted the structured experience to be child-centered and experiential and not overly focused on skills and conventions. In my classroom, students wrote in journals (teacher-made booklets with paper that was blank on the top half and lined on the bottom half) each day. This writing time consisted of free writing time, during which students were able to write about any topic of their choosing. Student writing consisted of students drawing, writing letters, writing their names, or writing common words. Students came to the writing table with varying degrees of skills ranging from the child who drew circular scribbles to the child who was experimenting with writing words using invented spelling. Most students balanced their time between drawing pictures, practicing writing their name, or using

I wanted the structured writing experience to be child-centered and experiential and not overly focused on skills and conventions.

a combination of letters and vertical lines to represent words. These type of writing practices are well documented as typical among early writers (Calkins, 1994; Clay, 1975; Ferreiro & Teberosky, 1982; Harste, Woodward, & Burke, 1984; Rowe, 1994; Schickedanz & Casbergue, 2004). Students then came to a teacher or paraprofessional to orally tell their story and have it scribed on the bottom half of their journal. This time of day was referred to as journal time and lasted approximately 20 minutes, with students transitioning to independent reading once their journals were completed. At the end of journal time, several students shared their journal entries with the class. To do this, students sat in a circle on the rug while the author sat in a chair and did the following: read her story, walked around the circle to show her drawing to the class, and sat back down and called on two or three students to make comments about her story. Halfway through the school year, the conference element of writing workshop was added to the classroom routines. I had conferences with two or three students each Friday about the stories they wrote over the week. These three components (journal time, sharing time, and conference time) made up the structured writing time within the classroom. This concept of structured writing is well established in teaching practices for kindergarten and beyond (Calkins, 1994; Fletcher &

Portalupi, 2001; Graves, 1983), but is a departure from the typical conception of preschool writing instruction that is usually encouraged through play (Rowe, 1994; Schickedanz & Casbergue, 2004). Students in my classroom spent most of their school day playing, as play is an integral part in fostering learning for preschool-age students (Elkind, 2007; Owocki, 1999; Wasserman, 1990). The structured writing workshop was used as a time for students to experiment with writing in a way that was structurally predictable yet openended in regard to the content students chose to write about. Structured writing time in my classroom consisted of three components: journal time, sharing time, and conference time. Each element of the writing workshop revealed a new facet of the preschoolers developing understanding of writing.

Journal Time
At the beginning of the school year, my students often told me that they did not know how to write. They, like many of the adults in their lives who have asked the question, Can preschoolers really write? did not see themselves as writers. Yet I forged on, telling them that they could indeed write, modeling what it looks like when one writes at journal time and encouraging them to give writing a try. Students tentatively attempted this new literary medium. In the beginning, students spent a lot

R T

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 65

Issue 6

March 2012

395

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

of time drawing pictures and labeling the objects when dictating their writing to teachers. This type of behavior has been documented by other researchers as an early stage of writing in preschool and kindergarten classrooms (Horn & Giacobbe, 2007; Schickedanz & Casbergue, 2004). As Newkirk and Atwell (1988) contest,
Children begin to write by drawing and naming objects with one-word labels. Certain representations or themes have significance for the child and are repeated many times. With each repetition the associations that the child makes with the drawing/text become more complex and differentiated. Once the one-word label is no longer capable of bearing the weight of accumulated associations, word sequences become necessary.... By exploring favorite themes in depth, rather than trying something new every day, the young writer discovers the need to move from labeling to more complex modes of expression. (p. 21)

Figure 1 Jennifers Family Story

Figure 2 Jennifers Letters Story

As students began to understand journal time as a predictable classroom routine where all forms of and attempts at writing were accepted, they began to experiment and play at writing. And through this experimentation, student understanding of writing became increasingly sophisticated. An example of the growth that students were able to achieve during writing time is highlighted in Jennifers work. In the beginning of the school year, Jennifer relied on one writing format. All of her dictated stories (the class referred to all written formats as stories) involved the following sentence: Me and my family going to the . She would fill in the blank with different places, such as the mall, the park, the beach, and so forth (Figure 1). Yet, as the year progressed, Jennifer began to expand her purposes for writing, so that by May she dictated the following: I draw an o and a u and t. I colored in the o (Figure 2). In this

instance, she was using journal time to experiment with letters. Further underscoring the importance that she placed on this purpose is that as I scribed her work, Iin my haste to keep up with her wordswrote a sloppy letter u. As I finished writing, she pointed to the u I had written and asked what that letter was. I told her it was a u, and she informed me that it did not look

like a u, and so I wrote over it to make it more legible. Jennifer was closely in tune with what she wanted her text to say, to the point that she monitored and edited my script. Later, when she shared this story with her peers at sharing time, she told her audience that the letter o looked like an egg. Jennifers attention to letters in her writing and what they looked like and could be associated with was an important step in her writing development. Jennifer was not alone in her exploration and attention to letters and print. In 153 journal entries collected for the study, students wrote or talked about letters or words in their journals 57 times. The level of letter exploration ranged from students writing out their names or familiar words to students using letters in their drawings. Sierra provides an example of how students incorporated letters into their drawings in her story of a princess. She drew a princess, wrote a series of letters, and dictated the story: I saw a princess and a p in pumpkin (Figure3). For Jennifer, Sierra, and all of their peers, journal time became a time for experimentation. They experimented with what they saw all around them. They labeled drawings, they wrote letters, they retold events from their lives, and they experimented with frequently heard story structures such as, Once upon a time.... What was clear is that they experimented with all of these types of writing all of the time. Their writing was not linear. They did not start with labeling and end with Once upon a time. They fluttered back and forth, depending on events and interest of the dayincluding taking cues from whomever they were sitting beside. By giving students the opportunity to write every day in the context

www.reading.org

R T

396

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

Figure 3 Sierras Princess Story

Yet the students did not see sharing time in the same way that I did. The summary of video that follows describes the sharing of Sandras story on November 20th and is typical of sharing time during that stage of the school year:
Sandra excitedly gets up when her name is called and sits in the blue chair to share her story. She reads her story identically to how she dictated it to me earlier. As she walks around to show the picture nobody comments. When she gives me back her journal I comment that we had three stories about pools today. Brandon then adds, I like it too.

who raised her hand responded, I like cats. I struggled for most of the year with how to make conversation more authentic during sharing time. I commented about this frustration frequently in my field notes. For example, on March 26th, I wrote the following:
I observed yet again that once one student said something as a comment about a piece of writing, all of the proceeding commenters said the same thing. For today this included: To Sandra: I like the hug

of a writing workshop, I was able to observe the complexity of their understanding about the purposes of writing over time and not as a mere snapshot of writing in the context of a specific play task.

Sharing Time
Initially my students struggled to define what sharing time should look like. In my mind I envisioned students sitting in the authors chair, sharing their work, and eliciting insightful comments. I imagined scenarios such as: Student 1: Student 2: My story is: I went to Walmart with my mom. I went to that store, too! I went with my mom, and we bought new shoes. I wrote, It was snowing. I went outside to play. When you played in the snow, what games did you play?

I became increasingly dissatisfied with the level of discussion during sharing time. Students restricted their responses about student stories to I like statements. Often, once one student claimed to like something, several others would add that they liked the same thing. I tried eliciting more conversation via questioning and modeling of more expansive comments by the paraprofessional. For example, one day a child shared a story about a cat. I commented that I had a cat and told a story about my cat. I asked students if they had cats. The paraprofessional in the classroom commented that she had a cat named Sandra (the same name as one of our students). Students were engaged in listening to this conversation about cats and made several comments. Yet when I refocused our discussion and asked if anyone else had anything to say about the cat story, the student

To Jennifer: I like the rainbow To Salia: I like the rollercoaster

Yet, while watching videotape of sharing time, I discovered something that made me look at this structure in an entirely different way. As part of the sharing time structure, students read their stories to the class while sitting in a designated authors chair. Stories were most often personal accounts of past events, but as a convention of the classroom, all writings were referred to as stories. When students read their stories, they often relied on their memory of the dictated story rather than decoding of text so that written text that was dictated as, I went to the park and played on the swing with my cousin might be shared with the class as, I went to the park with my cousin and we played on the swings. Once a story had been shared, the author got up and walked around the

Student 1: Student 2:

I was able to observe the complexity of their understanding about the purposes of writing over time and not as a mere snapshot of writing.
March 2012

R T

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 65

Issue 6

397

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

sharing circle so that the drawing that accompanied the story could be shown up close to all students. The author then sat back in the authors chair and elicited comments, often by calling on a student who raised his hand. When sitting in the authors chair, students perceived a formal interaction format and restricted their comments, most often using an I like format. Yet once a child stepped out of the authors chair and walked around the room students perceived a shift and discussed writing in a more informal

manner. While walking around the circle, students often commented on the displayed work using comments that closely resembled the type of interactions I imagined taking place during sharing time. In fact, in 56 sharing interactions, these informal conversations were observed 25 times (or 45% of the time). An example of this can be seen when Zane shares his rollercoaster story. In analysis of interactions during sharing (Figure 4), there are two formal interactions initiated

by the teacher and seven informal interactions that take place while Zane is walking around the circle to show his picture. Students make several comments about being scared of rollercoasters. From this I discovered that my behavior during sharing time had created a perception from students about sharing time as a formal and restrictive structure. Only when students moved out of the formal authors chair could more authentic conversations commence.

Figure 4 Analysis of Student Boundary Switching: Excerpt of the Sharing of Zanes Rollercoaster Story on April 3rd
Interaction type Speaker I Zane Message unit I go on a rollercoaster and I get out in the door. You got out in the door. OK, show everyone your rollercoaster. Wow. Woo, woo. I scared roller coasters. Not so close to their face though, OK Zane? I scared roller coasters. Zane, Im your friend. R is looking at Z and pointing up to him. Z does not look at R until he gets to him with his journal. Z is putting journal very close to the faces of students as he walks up to them. T promotes formal behavior B continues elaboration R inserts social conversation into interaction R makes social link to Z in that they have both written about the same topic 2 Interaction unit 1 Nonverbal behavior Z is holding his journal out to class and looking from teacher to class and back to teacher. Teacher motions to rest of class with hands, Z gets up and walks around to show his journal to class. T promotes formal behavior Informal reaction B elaborates on story B makes a link to his own life experience Formal behavior Informal behavior Intercontexuality Z makes a link to a life experience

Teacher

3 4

Sandra Brandon

Teacher

5 5

Brandon Riley

www.reading.org

R T

398

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

Once I noticed this situational code switching, which students made when moving back and forth from the authors chair, I began to appreciate how savvy my students were as they attempted to navigate this new mediumwriting. The next step for me was to make sure that I provided this authentic talk time within the sharing structure. Essentially, it was up me to continue to encourage the relaxed conversation that students had carved out a time for.

From the beginning, other students were interested in what was going on during conference time and inserted themselves into the conversation.
field notes on the first day of conferences on January 9th,
This was the first experience with conferencing. I did not have any specific expectations for the activity. I was just intending for students to talk a little about their journal entries and perhaps talk about what they might write about in the future.

Conference Time
I began conducting writing conferences with students in January, which was approximately halfway through the school year. I chose to introduce this element of the writing workshop later in the year to assure that students had a clear understanding about what was expected during journal writing and journal sharing time before beginning one-on-one conversations about their work. Conferences were conducted once a week, on Fridays. They were conducted in a quiet corner of the classroom during activity choice timea time of day when students could choose to play and work at various classroom centers. During conferences, we reviewed the journal entries a student worked on over the past week, and I asked questions regarding their thinking when they were writing and what they might do to expand on the various topics in the future. Like sharing time, I struggled with how to meaningfully engage students during conferences. And again, the students provided me with insight into how to connect during this part of the writing workshop. Initially I envisioned conference time as a one-on-one conversation between teacher and student. As I wrote in my

I soon discovered that some students talked openly about their work, whereas others were a bit more resistant. But from the beginning, other students were interested in what was going on during conference time and often inserted themselves into the conversation. During Rileys very first conference, we sat in a back corner of the classroom discussing the basketball story he had written that day. Zane heard us talking about basketball and came over to the table. I documented this is my field notes on January 9th in the following manner:
Riley was playing by himself at activity choice, so I chose him for a conference. During the conference Zane was very interested in what was going on so I invited him into the conference. I thought this would help encourage the social nature of writing. I also knew that he had sat next to Riley at journal writing today and they had both drawn and written about basketballs. They both talked about the basketball and I suggested they could write about what they do with basketballs in the future. This led to a spontaneous story from both of them, where they acted out with gestures what they do with a basketball.

his basketball story (Figure 5). His story, I draw a purple basketball, was a typically used story structure for Rileyhe simply stated what he drew. I asked him if he had shared his story with Zane, as he had sat next to him when he wrote it. Zane overheard this conversation and came over and asked to see the story. I then invited Zane to get his journal, which contained his own story about basketball. Once he came over with his journal, we discussed what both students had written. They had both identified a basketball in their story. I then modeled and encouraged them to think about how they might expand on their stories in the future. In a summary of video on January 9th, the following exchange took place:

Figure 5 Rileys Basketball Story

During the previously mentioned conference, Riley and I were discussing

R T

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 65

Issue 6

March 2012

399

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

30Teacher: Can you think of another story about basketball? 31Zane: 32Riley: Yeah. No.

33Teacher: What else could we say? Once Riley and Zane... did what? 34Zane: Do basketball! [Zane gestures shooting a basketball.]

35Teacher: Played basketball. Yeah. What did you do when you played basketball? 36Riley: I, I just throw my moves and I just do it like this and it just went in, the throwing and I just throw in the middle. [Riley gestures throwing a basketball into a hoop.]

37Teacher: So you just throw it. [Teacher gestures throwing a basketball.] And it went in the middle. 38Riley: Yeah. 39Teacher: Yeah. In the middle. In the basket. 40Riley: Yeah. In the, in the net. 41Teacher: In the net. And did you see what Zane was doing? 42Riley: Yep. 43Teacher: Hes dribbling [Teacher gestures dribbling; Zane has been gesturing dribbling.] before he shoots. [Teacher gestures shooting.] Thats what they do. When I initially asked Zane and Riley to think about a story they could write about basketball, Riley was resistant. When I asked in line 30 if they could think of a story about basketball, Riley answered, No (line 32). Yet once

his peer, Zane, started the story (line 34), Riley then added to the story by stating and gesturing how one goes about playing basketball. During Rileys storytelling, Zane continued to participate in the story by making dribbling and shooting gestures. This conference led to both students experimenting with what is contained in a story. A few days later on January 16th, when Riley revisited the topic of basketball in his journal, Riley created the following story: I draw a basketball. A crazy one. I just throw it in the basketball (Figure 6). Initially Rileys basketball story on January 9th consisted of a labeling of what he drew. In his next basketball story on January 16th, Riley continued to label what he drew, but then expanded on the drawing to describe the act of playing basketball in greater detail. The conference served as a stepping stone to expanding Rileys understanding of what a story can contain. In this sense, the conference functioned much like writing workshop conferences conducted in elementary classrooms. This type of collaborative storytelling occurred frequently during the early stages of conferencing. In the case of Riley and Zanes basketball story, Zane becoming a member of the conference was a spontaneous act. What I soon realized was that having a partner during conference time might benefit some of my other students as well. In my field notes on January 23rd, I wrote, It might be helpful to try Salia in a conference with another student she feels comfortable with, as she might be more comfortable with a peer. As a result of this reflection, I began asking students to invite a peer to come with them during conference time. The student would then tell his or her stories to both me and the peer.

Figure 6 Zanes Basketball Story

This change in structure led to students having natural conversations about their stories like the one between Riley and Zane. Conferences led to students discussing future writing plans, and at times students would make amendments to their work during the conference (e.g., when Brandon informed Tommy that his snake needed eyes). In this sense, writing conferences met the overarching purpose of improving student writing practice and understanding. Yet it also developed into a classroom structure that was both collaborative as well as social. By taking cues from the students, conference time became more than I anticipated it could be.

Discussion
Highlighted in the preceding sections are three examples of how preschool students met with success in the context of a writing workshop. Jennifer demonstrates how an open-ended writing format fostered her developing

www.reading.org

R T

400

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

understanding of letters and concepts of print. Although the focus of writing in the classroom was not specifically geared toward developing mastery of writing conventions, letters, or written words, students were able to begin to explore these concepts. Jennifers attention to how her teacher scribed her words, and the ultimate correction of the letter u, provides insight into Jennifers growing understanding of letters and words. Zanes sharing of his rollercoaster story underscores the adaptability of students as they claimed ownership of their work and ideas through informal sharing time. They came to define formal sharing time, when they were seated in the authors chair, as

a teacher-directed task with limited accepted comments. They then stretched those boundaries and identified an informal, student-centered sharing time during which multiple topics could be discussed. Finally, students influenced the structure of writing conferences by inviting peers into the conversation. This led to a structure that was less formal than the typical one-on-one teacherstudent conference, yet for the age was an appropriate and effective way to explore how to improve on or add to student stories. All three of these examples, which highlight a major component of a writing workshop, demonstrate how students began to develop an

understanding about what it means to be a writer. They are certainly not masters of the craft, but if asked Can preschoolers write? these examples provide credence to the argument that they do indeed write with increasing intent and sophisticationand for a variety of purposes. Preschool teachers can experiment in their own classrooms with a modified writing workshop. Start with daily, open-ended journals that students can write and draw in. Then set aside a share time each day. During the share time, use student work as a model for peers. For example, if a student shares a journal with a strong sense of story, use this as an example to teach a minilesson on how to write or tell a story. Of course,

TA K E AC T I O N !
1. Set up a time in your preschool
classroom when students can all write together each day. I recommend transitioning to journal time after a circle or story time. Provide students with individual journals filled with blank paper and attractive writing materials. Finally, encourage students to write or draw about whatever they want.

3. Once students get used to the routine

of journal time, introduce sharing time. Initially I ask students if we can share their journal that day. I asked students to tell us about their story and show it to their peers in a whole-group setting. Be careful not to make my mistake and make the structure too rigid. Encourage any feedback. I have since found that jokes, laughter, and asking students about how stories relate to their own lives are helpful in sparking authentic conversation and comments. Eventually, how students are chosen to share each day will be up to your preference. Some years I have had sign-up sheets. Other years it has been at my discretion.

in, I will invite the peer to comment about the stories. I often conclude the conference with a suggestion for the next time they write. Just like a typical writing workshop, this suggestion is highly individualized. It might be driven by content, conventions, or something that the peer suggests.

5. Above all, be observant of your

students. Their behavior will tell you what they need next. Every class will be different. I keep a journal of my thoughts during journal timewhat surprised me, what frustrated me, and what went well. From these notes I decided on occasional minilessons and perhaps what to discuss during a conference. It is important to review these notes on occasion. It is not surprising for something from October that you may have forgotten about to pop up again in March. Remember, writing is not always a linear process.

2. Students will soon provide you with a lot of information about what they understand about writing by how they initially approach writing time. Take cues from them about what kind of guidance they need to acclimate to the structure. By setting up journal time right after circle or story time, you will have a time before journal time when all students are gathered together and you can address any procedural issues and present minilessons before starting journal time.

4. I generally start conferences midyear.

Doing them once a week will assure you have enough writing material to talk about with a student and a chosen peer. I often ask students to retell their stories and ask clarifying questions. If they havent jumped

R T

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 65

Issue 6

March 2012

401

W R I T I NG WOR K S HOP I N P R E SC HO OL: AC K NOW LE D G I NG C H I LDR E N A S W R I T E R S

it is important to also value the varied writing attempts of students. Labeling, writing letters, and repeating topics are all examples of how young writers experiment with what it means to be a writer. Finally, try adding conferences to the writing routine. Inviting peer participants and reviewing several journal entries at a time will help to facilitate conversation. And above all, just as students experiment with writing, teachers should experiment with how to make writing workshop work for their class or students. It is the hope of this researcher that this study helps practitioners and researchers begin to look at how structured writing can be used in preschool classrooms as a means for exploring what it means to be a writer and what writers do. Writing workshop in the preschool classroom can provide a bridge between writing as play and writing as a formal, conventionalized task.
R E F E R E NC E S Bazerman, C., & Prior, P. (2004). What writing does and how it does it: An introduction to analyzing texts and textual practices. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Bloome, D., Carter, S.P., Christian, B.M., Otto, S., & Shuart-Faris, N. (2005). Discourse

analysis and the study of classroom language and literacy events: A microethnographic perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Calkins, L.M. (1994). The art of teaching writing (new ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Clay, M. (1975). What did I write? Beginning writing behaviour. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Elkind, D. (2007). The power of play: Learning what comes naturally. Philadelphia: Da Capo. Ferreiro, E., & Teberosky, A. (1982). Literacy before schooling. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Fletcher, R., & Portalupi, J. (2001). Writing workshop: The essential guide. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Gee, J.P., & Green, J.L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: a methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23(1), 119169. doi:10.3102/0091732X023001119 Graves, D.H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Harste, J.C., Woodward, V.A., & Burke, C.L. (1984). Language stories and literacy lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Horn, M., & Giacobbe, M.E. (2007). Talking, drawing, writing: Lessons for our youngest writers. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Newkirk, T., & Atwell, N. (Eds.). (1988). Understanding writing: Ways of observing, learning, and teaching K8 (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Owocki, G. (1999). Literacy through play. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Rowe, D.W. (1994). Preschoolers as authors: Literacy learning in the social world of classroom. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton. Schickedanz, J.A., & Casbergue, R.M. (2004). Writing in preschool: Learning to orchestrate meaning and marks. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Wasserman, S. (1990). Serious players in the primary classroom: Empowering children through active learning experiences. New York: Teachers College Press.

MORE TO EX PLORE
IRA Books Assessing Preschool Literacy Development: Informal and Formal Measures to Guide Instruction by Billie J. Enz and Lesley Mandel Morrow Building a Foundation for Preschool Literacy: Effective Instruction for Childrens Reading and Writing Development (2nd ed.) by Carol Vukelich and James Christie IRA Journal Articles An Effective Framework for Primary-Grade Guided Writing Instruction by Sharon A. Gibson, The Reading Teacher, December 2008 Supporting Informational Writing in the Elementary Grades by Carol A. Donovan and Laura B. Smolkin, The Reading Teacher, March 2011 Even More! Literacy Development in the Preschool Years (position statement): www.reading.org/General/ AboutIRA/PositionStatements/Preschool LiteracyPosition.aspx

www.reading.org

R T