Kelly L. Thieme

Literature Review

Barnitz,J. and C. G. Barnita (1996). Celebrating with Language and Literature at Birthday Parties and other Childhood Events." The Reading Teacher 50 (October): 110-117.

Summary: This article is written by a husband and wife team (parents). It focuses on how they, as parents, incorporated whole language literacy experiences into their family's celebrations. Knowing that parental involvement was an important factor in children's literacy achievement and development these parents made literature an integral and inspiring facet of their children's early childhood and elementary years. The article gives examples of how birthday parties, sleep-overs, and holiday celebrations were turned into thematic literature celebrations. By doing these activities with and for their children, these youngsters developed a deep love, interest, and appreciation for literature and reading. At these various celebrations the various activities included dramatics, music, thematic games, creative movement, etc. This article offers parents as well as teachers suggestions on how to enhance literacy experiences and overall literacy development in children.

Carroll, J. H., J. Wong-Kam, et al. (1994). "Linking Language Arts with Creative Arts." Language Arts 71 (January): 60-66.

Summary: This article focuses on how educators can enrich their students' literacy experiences with drama, music, and the visual arts. The authors suggest a variety of ways to have children respond to literature. Included in the article are books that can serve as resources to interested teachers. Creative arts activities that are included in the article are storytelling, Reader's Theater, Improvisation, visual art projects, innovative ideas for publishing, and the use of picture books at all grade levels. The article emphasizes that incorporating creative arts with literature helps children enhance their creative expression as well as their appreciation and understanding of literature. The authors strongly contend that these activities help students bring literature to life and create meaning for themselves.

Jacobi-Karna, K. (1995). "Music and Children's Books." The Reading Teacher 49(3): 265-269.

Summary: This article discusses the integration of music with language arts. (See(-ing) a song…"(p.265) in books is a great way to expose children to the many facets of music. The authors states, referring to curriculum integration, "Such integration is indeed more interesting for students and of greater importance, more connected to their lives outside of school." (p.265). The article includes a three page list of children's books, poems, rhymes) and chants with musical possibilities.

Kersten, F. (1996). "Enhancing Stories Through the Use of Musical Sound." The Reading Teacher 49 (May): 670-671.

Summary: This article explains how musical sound can be incorporated into reading stories. The children are both listeners and participants in this musical-literary experience. Using this expressive method and technique involves each child choosing a character in a story and a special sound/instrument to represent the character. As the teacher reads a familiar story each child is to listen for the mentioning of their character. At that point the student is to make their musical sound with their instrument. Kersten states that this method of interaction and reader response yields, "... new levels of creativity, attentiveness, and interest from students. (p.670) The article continues with suggestions on how to tailor this musical reading experience to fit the age and needs of various classroom. Also included is a list of musical instrument that can be used to get you started. The article concludes by suggesting the possibility of the children creating their own stories and accompanying sounds.

Richards, J. C. and. P. Gipe (1992). Activating Background Knowledge: Strategies for Beginning and Poor Readers." The Reading Teacher 45 (6): 474-476.

Summary: This article talks about the importance of helping children activate background knowledge when reading. The authors state that by helping children activate background knowledge we are setting the stage for children to make appropriate inferences from texts. It is this deeper level of comprehension and thinking that we want all our students to achieve. The article offers two specific strategies for helping children activate their background knowledge for various texts. Both strategies are of a verbal response nature.

Siks, G. B. (1977). Drama with Children. New York, Harper & Row, Publishers.

Summary: This book is meant to be used by educators who are interested in teaching the process-concept structure approach to drama. This book offers theory and support for the use of drama with children as well as ideas for integration and specific lessons. In support of the use of drama with young children, the author states, "The ultimate purpose of drama in education is to open children's minds, stimulate their imaginations and language abilities, and spark their enthusiasm for continued personal development and discovery.' (p.9). When referring to the integration of drama and language arts the authors contend that play making motivates the children to read because it is fun, captivating, and meaningful to them.

Smith, J. L. and D. J. Herring (1996). "Literature Alive: Connecting to Story Through the Arts." Reading Horizons 37(2): 102-115.

Summary: This article focuses on the importance of children making connections to and with the stories they read. The authors emphasize that it is not just enough for children to read and have a general understanding of what they are reading. Instead, we as teachers, should help our students "live" the literature. They say that creating this deeper connection with literature helps students create a "... multidimensional involvement with a text." (p.104). The authors suggest that helping children "live the literature" can be achieved by incorporating arts into literature study. The "arts" that they suggest include expressive writing, creative movement, visual arts, exploratory music, and informal drama. Doing these kinds of activities with students evoked comments including the following, "Doing all that stuff made me better understand the book. The book is more real." (p.114).

Strickland, D. S. and L. M. Morrow (1989). "Interactive Experiences with Storybook Reading." The Reading Teacher 42(4): 322-323.

Summary: This article focuses on the importance of reading to children. It also addresses the benefits of interactive experiences with storybook reading. The authors state, "The social interaction in storybook reading motivates interest." (p.322). The article suggests strategies for interaction which include using the Directed Listening-Thinking Activity, big books and rhyming stories, felt boards, puppets, drawing, etc.

Kelly Campbell

Literature Review

1. Eeds, M., & Wells, D. (1989). Grand Conversations: An explanation of meaning construction in literature study groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 23(1), 4-29.

The authors of this article undertook a study which involved observing literature discussion groups in 5th and 6th grade classrooms led by preservice teachers. Some of the key research issues of particular interest to myself were (1) co-construction of meaning (2) teacher participation, and (3) recognizing student growth. The researchers found that in spite of an intentional lack of traditional comprehension questioning, students consistently demonstrated the behaviors that such questioning is designed to elicit. More importantly, students went beyond an efferent reading of the text and demonstrated that they were developing what Rosenblatt terms as a "literary way" of responding to text. It was helpful to read about how the researchers, upon reviewing their tapes, categorized the students' talk into 4 different groups: (1) constructing simple meaning (2) personal involvement (3) inquiry (4) critique. This gives me further ideas for organizing my analysis.

2. Gilles, Carol (1994). Discussing Our Questions and Questioning Our Discussions: Growing into literature study. Language Arts, 71, 499-508.

Gilles uses the experiences of 3 teachers to point out how challenges that arise from the implementation of literature groups can serve as springboards to other valuable inquiries. She also writes briefly about the positive role a teacher can play if she can guide/facilitate a group without overtly directing a discussion. For me, the most interesting example focused on a teacher's need to examine her own role in group discussions. Throughout the course of my research, I've begun to consider more closely the dynamic of the group as I make adjustments in my level of participation. The teacher in this example realized that in order for students to be reflective during a discussion, they must be allowed some think time. She realized that she needed to avoid her rush to fill the "verbal voids" with her own ideas or with new topics. Perhaps, she concluded, it is during these silences that some very important thinking is taking place. The other examples in the article addressed dealing with non-participators in groups discussions, and expanding students' visions of themselves as literate community members.

3. Goldenberg, Claude (1992/1993). Instructional Conversations: Promoting comprehension through discussion. The Reading Teacher, 46, 316-326.

In this article, Goldenberg defines the elements of Instructional Conversation (IC), and outlines a framework to assist teachers in implementing IC in the classroom. He identifies instructional elements such as having a thematic focus, activating background knowledge, using direct teaching, promoting complex language, and eliciting support for responses, as well as conversational elements which include creating a challenging yet safe atmosphere, general participation, responsiveness to student ideas, and connected discourse. Although I didn't feel that this article presented any new insights, I did feel that it was supportive of my recent learning of constructivist teaching and the importance of discourse in the classroom. I noticed that the author pushed for a strong balance between planned focused instruction with what Wells would call "contingent responsiveness." Goldenberg states, "a skilled teacher weaves together the comments and contributions made by different students with ideas and concepts she or he wishes to explore. Second, a teacher weaves students' prior knowledge and experiences with new knowledge and experiences, thereby broadening the scope of their understanding while building upon understanding they already possess." (pg. 319) It was also interesting to note the connection Goldenberg made between discussion and the quality of student writing on complex themes and concepts. This is one of the side issues that I've begun to take notice of in my own research study.

4. Langer, J. A. (1990). Understanding Literature. Language Arts, 67 (8), 812-816.

This was an article I wanted to read after seeing it referenced in the Raphael and Hiebert book. I thought it could give me a way of organizing the kinds of responses my students share in their book club discussions. Langer defines 4 categories:

Being out and stepping in- where students connect text knowledge and background knowledge to get into the text.

Being in and moving through- where new information is used to go

Being in and stepping out- when text knowledge is used to reflect on ideas associated with self, others, and the human condition.

Stepping out and objectifying the experience- when the student begins to evaluate the crafting of the text or experiences in the text.

Langer stresses that these types of response are not linear and can occur throughout reading. She also points out that, "because they represent the strategies readers use as they make sense, the stances can help us understand where to provide instructional support in response to students' sense-making." (pg. 813-814) Connected to this idea was Langer's assertion that less able readers are more "superficial" and tend to "resort to the first stance." (pg. 814) I believe this provides me with some interesting ways to catalog responses and evaluate the depth of contributions by students of varying abilities.

5. Roller, C.M., & Beed, P.L (1994). Sometimes the Conversations Were Grand, and Sometimes... Language Arts, 71(7), 509-515.

This article addresses the frustration teachers may encounter when they measure the quality of their students' literary discussions against the exemplary models provided in research articles. In this particular study, the authors evaluated the discussions of at risk readers who were participating in book sharing sessions. They categorized their concerns about the students' discussions in 3 ways: (1) Content free Enthusiasm (2) Substantive but lifeless, and (3) Content free and lifeless. Most notable to me about this article was the authors' ability to find value in what might initially appear to be disappointing or lackluster discourse. The lesson for me in reading this is that I should be careful not to immediately dismiss portions of students discussions that don't seem especially dynamic. As the authors point out, "more ordinary exchanges frequently served definite and significant purposes." (pg. 514).

6. Short, K.G., & Klassen, C (1993). Literature Circles: Hearing Children's Voices. Children's Voices: Talk in the Classroom. Newark: International Reading Association.

This article is a good general overview of some key components of literature circles. The authors give some brief rationale for the value of students coming together over a piece of text and outline varying purposes and structures. In the second portion of the article, the authors highlight two varied uses of literature circles. In the first example, a teacher connects literature discussion with science themes. A key question that arises relates to how we can best provide students with alternative ways to talk about science that go beyond basic retellings and listing of facts. The teacher in this example found that by leading model discussions with science related texts and providing students with various response options she was able to develop not only their content knowledge but also help students to develop an aesthetic perspective in their science reading. The second example involved a teacher who used real life issues relating to prejudice and violence that were affecting the lives of her students, to develop a literature theme centering on Peace and Conflict. Due to the multicultural setting of this classroom and the large number of ESL students, the teacher often had students reflect with a partner before coming to their literature circle. I thought this could be an interesting approach to try in my own classroom, especially next year when I'm introducing book clubs to my new fourth graders.

7. Wiencek, J., & O'Flahavan, J.F. (1994). From Teacher-led to Peer Discussions about Literature: Suggestions for making the shift. Language Arts, 71(7), 488-498.

This article provides tips on how teachers can move away from teacher-centered leadership in text interpretation to a more student-centered model. The authors propose the formation of Conversational Discussion Groups (CDG). Although I question some aspects of the CDG format, such as groups meeting only once a week, the article does offer worthwhile insights on questions related to literature selection, group formation, developing students' written responses, and structuring the classroom (schedules, physical set-up, etc...) for CDG. I most liked the section related to students with reading difficulties. The authors state that, "students who have difficulty decoding text need to participate in literary experiences more than other students because they need to discover how literature can enrich their lives..." (pg. 492). Another part of the article that intrigued me addressed the need for teachers to understand the experience of co-constructing meaning with others by reflecting on their own participation in a book club.

Joni Baker

LITERATURE REVIEWS

Sociolinguistics for Educational Researchers by Susan Florio-Ruane

This article describes the type of research done by sociolinguists in the classroom. It was helpful to me for a couple reasons. The first section of the article gives an overview of sociolinguistics and tells why research from this perspective is important to understanding classrooms. I hadn't realized, prior to reading this article, that I am actually engaging in a sociolinguistic study. I was not even familiar with the term. Sociolinguists study language in the context of its use. They look for patterns of communication among group members and strive to understand more about culture, language, and learning. The focus is on individual cognitive learning, but it's looked at within the communication of the group. Reading about this has been helpful because it has given me a broader perspective of the research I'm doing in my classroom. I feel that my study has a 'history" behind it.

The latter part of the article helped me more directly with my research project. It gives a set of maxims to guide my study. They include:

• having extended contact with the study group through observation and limited participation
• documenting the talk with field notes, observation, and/or taping--being careful not to place value judgments
• focusing where to look and segmenting when to start and stop the looking
• proceeding inductively--I think this means to begin with the particular happenings of the group, and then move to more general statements
• deciding on units of analysis--again, I think this means as I sift through my data, to narrow my focus of what to analyze and look for the meaningful talk
• looking for disconfirming evidence as a way of testing my research claims

These maxims will be useful to me each step of the way. It is especially helpful considering I have never engaged in research before.

Discourse Analysis A Sociocultural Perspective by Elise A. Forinan and Dawn E. McCormick

This article presents discourse analysis as a methodology of sociocultural research in education. It first outlines the main ideas of sociocultural theory and then explains some of the tools of discourse analysis used by researchers.

Reading and learning about sociocultural theory helps me understand how my research fits into this perspective. It makes me feel that I am part of a larger community seeking to understand the social nature of learning. For my study I am looking at the conversations of students while working in a cooperative group setting. I want to know how conversation enables the individuals and the group to reach their academic goal. In sociocultural theory, learning is not simply a cognitive activity, it includes values, beliefs, motives, and goals. And this takes place through the exchange of ideas.

Discourse analysis, as a methodology, focuses on the description of language within a conte4 with cultural influences. It includes examining the social interaction patterns. This is just what I want to do in my study. As I listen to my students while they're working in their small groups, I'm looking to see what roles develop. How do these roles affect the group as a whole, and how do they affect individual learning?

The article then goes on to describe the steps that are involved in discourse analysis. This was particularly helpful to me in organizing what I need to do. I've already begun some of it--

PHASE 1

• identify research question
• select participants and task focus

PHASE 2--data collection

• use combination of sources
• be systematic
• include information about school environment

PHASE 3--data analysis

• data reduction
  selecting, simplifying, abstracting, and transforming

• data indexing
  identify and describe patterns

PHASE 4--data interpretation

• recognize emergent themes that can be verified

What is interesting is that the methodology for discourse analysis and sociolinguistics research is basically the same, but they're presented slightly differently. From both of these articles I have a clearer picture of what I need to do and how to organize myself Of course the difficult part remains--finding the patterns in my data that will aide my analysis and interpretation.

Oral Language and Learning by Douglas Banies

This article is different from the previous two in that it does not include methodology on how to do research. However, it helped me think more deeply about my general practices in the classroom and how oral language is used.

Barnes first describes the use of language that is most typical in classroom settings. He calls it "lesson-talk." This is when the teacher defines the topic and task' and the students must figure out what the teacher wants. Kids' responses are geared toward showing that they are 'taking part" in the lesson. There isn't time for students to develop or explore their ideas, and this leads to a very restricted exchange of ideas. Many misunderstanding go unnoticed by the teacher. Unfortunately "taking part" becomes equated with "intelligence."

I realize that this occurs in my classroom--not all the time, but more than I wish. When we have whole class discussions I try to ask critical thinking types of questions, yet I don't give the students enough time to explore their thoughts. I want to keep things moving along so other students don't lose interest. I worry about off-task behavior and students not listening to one another's responses. If I can help students learn to listen to one another more closely, perhaps this won't be an issue.

Barnes believes we need to help children become prepared for when they're out in the world and must think and take responsibility for themselves. They need to be able to set goals for themselves and construct their own knowledge, not simply 'take part" in the lesson.

He goes on to write about the purposeful talk that must be a part of classrooms, where students are working together on understanding. He calls this "exploratory talk." This occurs as peers collaborate, considering and reshaping their ideas. Hesitation, uncompleted thoughts and utterances, backing up and starting over, and even frustration are all part of exploratory talk. But with this type of interaction students are constructing their own knowledge.

I was so excited when I read this article because I first came across the concept of exploratory talk while reading Taffy Raphael's book. She referred to it briefly, and I wanted to find out more about it. This is the type of oral language experience I want happening in my classroom And in relation to my research project, this is just what I'm looking for in the small group activity my students are engaged in.

References

Florio-Ruane, S. (1987). Sociolinguistics for educational researchers. American Educational Research Journal 24(2), 185-197.

Forman, E. A., & McCormick, D. E. (1995). Social discourse a sociocultural perspective. Remedial and Special Education 16(3), 150-158.

Barnes, D. (1990). Oral language and learning. In S.Hynds & D. L. Rubin (Eds.), Perspectives on talk and learning (;,p.41-54). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Back to Student Work on the web