Phase Two
Because it was determined that only when the students were proficient writers, themselves, were they able to provide quality feedback to others, Phase Two will modify the investigation and require students to, instead, ask questions of their peers. The asking of questions may be executed even by those who are not proficient writers, themselves and serve the purpose of assisting the author to write in ways that lead to more coherence and deeper meaning. In this way, there will still be peer support in the writing process as students will be helping each other develop better content instead of improving conventions.
Description of Implementation
During Phase Two, students were doing the majority of their writing assignments aligned with Charlotte’s Web, which was the novel that we were reading as a whole class. Students completed periodic writing pieces centered on the content of the story. These assignments served as a check for understanding and also allowed them to think more critically about the story. These writing pieces provided students with three separate opportunities to write which included using a specific prompt, receiving feedback from peers, and rewriting to include suggestions from peers.
Specifically, the first assignment of Phase Two asked students to write a persuasive letter asking Fern Arable’s father to allow Fern to keep Wilbur, a runt pig that she loved. Students had prior experience stating their opinion in writing during Phase One, where they wrote opinion pieces using evidence from a text. In this new assignment, they were writing more informally but still needed to use reasons from the text to support why Fern should be allowed to keep the runt pig. Students had a 30 minute writing block to complete the assignment.
The next day, students displayed their writing pieces on their desks, received feedback from peers via post-it notes, as they completed a “gallery walk” around the classroom with the intent to read and comment on each other’s papers. They did this with the mindset to learn others’ opinions and helping improve their writing. Prior to allowing the students to make comments, I modeled the process with my own persuasive writing letter, showing the students how to ask questions to reveal where gaps needed to be filled in. For example, if I wrote, “Fern should keep Wilbur because Fern is responsible,” a question that should be asked was, “How do you know that Fern is responsible?” or “What happens in the story that makes you think that Fern is responsible?” This showed students that they needed to support each other in ensuring that they were making claims that were backed up by evidence from the text.
On the following day, students had the opportunity to rewrite their persuasive letters while incorporating the answers to the questions that their peers asked. They each were required to use the book to add further details from text to support their claims and answer questions. This portion was completed in another 30 minute session.
Students repeated this process of writing, giving and receiving feedback, and rewriting. Another prompt asked students, “If you were Charlotte and had to create a web using a word describing Wilbur, what word would you use and why?”
Students wrote on this topic for one day. The next day, instead of a gallery walk, students switched papers with a peer and wrote sticky note questions on their page, asking questions that asked the author to fill in gaps similar to the first time. Afterwards, students revised their writing, taking into consideration the questions that their peers had asked.
Specifically, the first assignment of Phase Two asked students to write a persuasive letter asking Fern Arable’s father to allow Fern to keep Wilbur, a runt pig that she loved. Students had prior experience stating their opinion in writing during Phase One, where they wrote opinion pieces using evidence from a text. In this new assignment, they were writing more informally but still needed to use reasons from the text to support why Fern should be allowed to keep the runt pig. Students had a 30 minute writing block to complete the assignment.
The next day, students displayed their writing pieces on their desks, received feedback from peers via post-it notes, as they completed a “gallery walk” around the classroom with the intent to read and comment on each other’s papers. They did this with the mindset to learn others’ opinions and helping improve their writing. Prior to allowing the students to make comments, I modeled the process with my own persuasive writing letter, showing the students how to ask questions to reveal where gaps needed to be filled in. For example, if I wrote, “Fern should keep Wilbur because Fern is responsible,” a question that should be asked was, “How do you know that Fern is responsible?” or “What happens in the story that makes you think that Fern is responsible?” This showed students that they needed to support each other in ensuring that they were making claims that were backed up by evidence from the text.
On the following day, students had the opportunity to rewrite their persuasive letters while incorporating the answers to the questions that their peers asked. They each were required to use the book to add further details from text to support their claims and answer questions. This portion was completed in another 30 minute session.
Students repeated this process of writing, giving and receiving feedback, and rewriting. Another prompt asked students, “If you were Charlotte and had to create a web using a word describing Wilbur, what word would you use and why?”
Students wrote on this topic for one day. The next day, instead of a gallery walk, students switched papers with a peer and wrote sticky note questions on their page, asking questions that asked the author to fill in gaps similar to the first time. Afterwards, students revised their writing, taking into consideration the questions that their peers had asked.