UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Teaching literacy through interaction Kotcher, Jean Maria 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1989_A8 K69.pdf [ 6.35MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054727.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054727-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054727-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054727-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054727-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054727-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054727-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054727-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054727.ris

Full Text

TEACHING LITERACY THROUGH INTERACTION By JEAN MARIA KOTCHER B.A., The U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , 1970 Diploma i n E a r l y Childhood Education, The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Educat i o n The Centre f o r the Study of C u r r i c u l u m and I n s t r u c t i o n We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d s t a n d a r d THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August 1989 0 Jean Maria Kotcher. 1989 6*7 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. 1 further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada Date (H^t 3, /9S f DE-6 (2/88) i i ABSTRACT The purpose of t h i s study i s to d e s c r i b e the s i m i l a r i t i e s between a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y language development and teacher a s s i s t a n c e t o primary c h i l d r e n ' s l i t e r a c y development. The main problem the study addresses i s how c h i l d - c e n t e r e d language i n t e r a c t i o n was used by t e a c h e r s i n an Emergent L i t e r a c y program to promote student's s k i l l s i n r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . The methodology used were f i e l d - b a s e d , q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h techniques to document i n t e r a c t i o n d u r i n g r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g conferences. The documentation was done through the use of f i e l d notes and audio t a p i n g d u r i n g the conferences. The notes and t r a n s c r i p t i o n s were analyzed f o r the presence of teacher use of framing and f o r m a t t i n g . I t was a l s o analyzed f o r the presence of v e r b a l s c a f f o l d s , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y s t r u c t u r e s and s e m a n t i c a l l y c o n t i n g e n t u t t e r a n c e s on the p a r t of the t e a c h e r s . The study concludes that those s e l e c t e d f e a t u r e s of a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e s t o c h i l d r e n ' s language development are present i n the t e a c h e r a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n i n t h i s program. T h i s may be e x p l a i n e d by the t e a c h e r s ' commitment t o c h i l d - c e n t e r e d , teacher-guided i n t e r a c t i o n s which p l a c e c h i l d r e n ' s e f f o r t s and sense of meaning at the c e n t e r of the l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g experiences. i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS A b s t r a c t i i Acknowl edgements . ^  i L i s t of T a b l e s i v L i s t of F i g u r e s v; Chapter One: I n t r o d u c t i o n to the Problem 1 Chapter Two: T h e o r e t i c a l and Research Background... 9 Chapter Three: Research Method 27 Chapter Four: The S e t t i n g 47 Chapter F i v e : Routines and Engagement 70 Chapter S i x : Making L e a r n i n g I n e v i t a b l e 96 Chapter Seven: Summary and C o n c l u s i o n 115 References 128 Appendix A Informal Observation Sample 131 Appendix B Formal Observation Sample 133 Appendix C Focussed Observation Sample 135 Appendix D P r i n c i p l e s Which Nurture L i t e r a c y 138 Appendix E L i t e r a c y f o r Everyone 140 Appendix F R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 146 LIST OF TABLES i v T able I: Comparison of F u n c t i o n by Role i n Kaye's Frame and Bruner's Format 18 Table I I : Sampling P l a n 39 V LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e 1: The L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e Centre 60 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS A work of t h i s scope would not be p o s s i b l e without the p r o f e s s i o n a l and personal support of o t h e r s . I would l i k e t o thank the f o l l o w i n g people: the two t e a c h e r s who are the he a r t of the study f o r t h e i r w i l l i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n and commitment t o p i o n e e r i n g e d u c a t i o n p r a c t i c e . Dr. Donald F i s h e r f o r h i s generous a s s i s t a n c e w i t h the methodological aspects of t h i s study,. Dr. Hi 1 l e i Goelman f o r h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n d u r i n g the o r i g i n a l Emergent L i t e r a c y seminars and subsequent p a r t i c i p a t i o n on my committee. Jay Stewart f o r e d i t i n g the f i n a l document, my husband Robert Laval f o r h i s love, p a t i e n c e and support w i t h t e c h n i c a l aspects of the document p r o d u c t i o n , and Dr. Kenneth Reeder f o r h i s f a i t h and a s t u t e guidance which were c e n t r a l t o my completion of t h i s study. 1 Chapter One: I n t r o d u c t i o n to the Problem The purpose of t h i s study i s to demonstrate the s i m i l a r i t i e s between a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y language development and t e a c h e r a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y l i t e r a c y development. The working h y p o t h e s i s of t h i s study i s t h a t the c o n s t e l l a t i o n of f e a t u r e s t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s parents' a s s i s t a n c e to t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s language development i s present i n the way two t e a c h e r s i n t e r a c t w i t h t h e i r students who are l e a r n i n g to read and w r i t e . T h i s study documents the i n t e r a c t i o n between teacher and student i n a unique s e t t i n g . The uniqueness of the s e t t i n g i s based on the t e a c h i n g methodology. The r e s e a r c h method chosen i s f i e l d - b a s e d and n a t u r a l i s t i c . A n a t u r a l i s t i c study was chosen because i t y i e l d s a f u l l d e s c r i p t i o n of the t e a c h e r s ' p r a c t i c e s . The study i n c l u d e s i n f o r m a t i o n about the t e a c h e r s ' purposes and b e l i e f s , the s e t t i n g and context of t h e i r t e a c h i n g , and the language they used i n i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h t h e i r s t u d e n t s . The a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y i s a key f a c t o r i n school success. North American school systems are b u i l t on the premise t h a t i t i s necessary f o r c h i l d r e n to be taught l i t e r a c y s k i l l s i n t h e i r school experience. Methods f o r t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g have been undergoing s i g n i f i c a n t changes i n the l a s t f i f t e e n y e a r s . These changes are i n part a r e s u l t of a g r e a t e r understanding of how c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e and develop language a b i l i t i e s b e f o r e 2 e n t e r i n g s c h o o l . That r e s e a r c h a l s o demonstrates how some of those a b i l i t i e s are l i n k e d to a c h i l d ' s success at l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g i n t y p i c a l school s e t t i n g s . Those a b i l i t i e s c e n t e r on knowing how to t r e a t language as an o b j e c t and have been r e f e r r e d to as a l i t e r a t e b i a s i n o r a l language use (Olson, 1977, 1984). The C u l t u r e of L i t e r a c y Most of the time our r e l a t i o n s h i p to language i s t r a n s p a r e n t . Language i s u n c o n s c i o u s l y embedded i n our thoughts and a c t i o n s . However, i n a l i t e r a t e c u l t u r e , the range of o r a l language p r a c t i c e s i n c l u d e s the a b i l i t y and i n c l i n a t i o n t o see language as opaque. When we do so we see i t as a d i s c r e t e e n t i t y to be h e l d a p a r t , and examined. From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e i t can a l s o be seen as something wi t h which we can c o n s c i o u s l y p l a y and work. Encouraging young c h i l d r e n t o p l a y and work wit h language c r e a t e s a foundation f o r t h e i r understanding of the l i t e r a t e b i a s i n language-use. T h i s culminates i n the a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y and p r o f i c i e n c y i n c r e a t i n g the products of l i t e r a c y . Seeing language as opaque and u s i n g i t i n d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d ways i s a l s o r e f l e c t e d i n many t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s which c h i l d r e n encounter i n t h e i r e a r l y s c h o o l i n g . Research has demonstrated t h a t a c h i l d ' s a b i l i t y to t r e a t language as an o b j e c t f a c i l i t a t e s the f o r m a l i z e d process of l i t e r a c y a c q u i s i t i o n encountered i n e a r l y s c h o o l i n g (Donaldson, 1978, M a t t i n g l y 1972. W e l l s , 3 1981,1985). The o r i g i n s of t h i s a b i l i t y t o t r e a t language as an o b j e c t and to use i t i n d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d ways has been l i n k e d t o s p e c i f i c k i n d s of i n t e r a c t i o n between a d u l t and c h i l d d u r i n g the formative experiences of language a c q u i s i t i o n (Snow, 1983, Wells, 1981, 1985). C e r t a i n f e a t u r e s of i n t e r a c t i o n present i n some a d u l t - c h i l d dyads d u r i n g the a c q u i s i t i o n of speech, some e a r l y game-playing and e a r l y book-reading episodes r e v e a l the r o l e which parents p l a y i n s u p p o r t i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n ' s language development. T h i s r o l e i s general w i t h r e s p e c t to language development. In some cases, the i n t e r a c t i o n i s more s p e c i f i c and i s d i r e c t e d t o f a m i l i a r i z e the c h i l d w i t h the use of d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language. The a d u l t , as a language master, i n t r o d u c e s the c h i l d , as an a p p r e n t i c e , to the world of book language and book t a l k . By e x p l o r i n g these worlds with a parent, a c h i l d l e a r n s to manipulate meaning gained and expressed i n d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s . The parent i s t e a c h i n g the c h i l d s t r a t e g i e s f o r manoeuvring i n the realm of language and l i t e r a c y . Such exposure lays a f o u n d a t i o n f o r the a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y which i s f o r m a l i z e d d u r i n g e a r l y s c h o o l i n g . Most c h i l d r e n come to t h e i r e a r l y s c h o o l i n g having a l r e a d y developed many language a b i l i t i e s i n c l u d i n g the a b i l i t y to comprehend language and express themselves i n i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h o t h e r s . However, they a r r i v e w i t h v a r y i n g degrees of a b i l i t y to understand and respond to d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d uses of language. 4 Teaching P r a c t i c e s Formal and c o n v e n t i o n a l t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e i s based upon acceptance of the premise that language has an opaque, o b j e c t - l i k e q u a l i t y . I t a l s o assumes t h a t c h i l d r e n have some f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d use of i t . In a d d i t i o n , methodologies f o r t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g have f l u c t u a t e d i n the extent to which the knowledge of the symbols and conventions of l i t e r a c y take precedence over the message i t s e l f . Regardless of the methodology used, t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e g e n e r a l l y b u i l d s upon the c h i l d ' s f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h those opaque q u a l i t i e s of language which have been learned i n the home environment. Included i n these q u a l i t i e s are f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the symbols of w r i t t e n language, a p t i t u d e w i t h book-hand1ing r o u t i n e s , knowledge about the nature and use of p r i n t , and most important and f o r the c h i l d most co n f u s i n g , the a b i l i t y t o r e c o g n i z e , and respond a p p r o p r i a t e l y t o the use of d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language i n an u n f a m i l i a r s e t t i n g . A l l of these approaches c a p i t a l i z e on f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the opaque q u a l i t i e s of language. Teaching p r a c t i c e may access only a s e l e c t p a r t of the f u l l spectrum of communicative competence i n the c h i l d r e n e n t e r i n g t h i s c ontext. T h i s l i m i t e d access excludes a number of c h i l d r e n from f u l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n formal l i t e r a c y a c q u i s i t i o n and f a i l s t o tap m o t i v a t i o n a l r e s o u r c e s even i n those who do p a r t i c i p a t e . Formal t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e b u i l d s upon the c h i l d ' s experience and knowledge of l i t e r a c y and i t s conventions. 5 I t a l s o uses techniques t r a d i t i o n a l l y a s s o c i a t e d with i t s own framework t o do so. T h i s may r e s u l t i n s e p a r a t i n g , to a g r e a t e r o r l e s s extent, the message from the medium. Teaching o f t e n puts the conventions i n the f o r e f r o n t , and the message behind. For example, a te a c h e r may r e q u i r e students know a l l of the l e t t e r s of the alphabet b e f o r e they are encouraged t o give simple messages i n p r i n t . T h i s d i f f e r s from the approach of the parent when exposing the c h i l d t o language i n use. In the p a r e n t - c h i l d system, the c h i l d ' s world i s the ground upon which the f i g u r e of language-use i s drawn. The message and the means to convey i t are always meaning-centered, and knowledge about the conventions of use e x p l o r e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y w i t h the meaning being conveyed. Dyadic i n t e r a c t i o n i n t h i s context procedes without p r e r e q u i s i t e knowledge as an e n t r y p o i n t f o r l e a r n i n g . Purpose of t h i s Study T h i s study d e s c r i b e s a t e a c h i n g approach which does not r e l y on p r e v i o u s experience w i t h d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language f o r success i n a c q u i r i n g l i t e r a c y . The t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e d e s c r i b e d here regards the message and the means to convey the message as interwoven and puts the c h i l d i n c o n t r o l of u n f o l d i n g the two si m u l t a n e o u s l y . T h i s p r a c t i c e encourages the c h i l d t o read and w r i t e , as the c h i l d d e f i n e s t h a t . The teachers take the r o l e of r e c e i v i n g , extending and e x p l o r i n g w i t h the c h i l d the experience of making and f i n d i n g meaning i n t e x t . L i k e a parent, the te a c h e r s are the i n t e r e s t e d and 6 s k i l l e d p a r t n e r s i n the a p p r e n t i c e s h i p In t h i s case the f o c i are the a c t s of l i t e r a c y . In t h i s t e a c h i n g environment, the teachers do not focus on l e a r n i n g the conventions of l i t e r a t e language use. Instead they have g i v e n themselves a r o l e which c e n t e r s on e x p l o r i n g the message and i n t e n t i o n s of the l i t e r a c y a p p r e n t i c e . They r e c o g n i z e and support the c h i l d ' s endeavor to communicate meaning and they r e i n f o r c e the c h i l d ' s awareness of that i n t e n t . The t e a c h e r s a s s i s t the c h i l d ' s growing awareness of meaning which i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h form i n the conventions of l i t e r a c y . T h i s model of t e a c h i n g i s premised upon a j o i n t engagement i n a language-based endeavor where meaning and form are encountered s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . T h i s study i s based on the premise t h a t the s a l i e n t f e a t u r e s of e a r l y i n t e r a c t i o n i n the a i d of language a c q u i s i t i o n are present i n episodes of dyadic i n t e r a c t i o n as p r a c t i s e d by the two teachers being s t u d i e d . S t u d i e s of language a c q u i s i t i o n from an i n t e r a c t i o n i s t p e r s p e c t i v e (Kaye 1982, Bruner 1983) document the extent to which the a d u l t p a r t n e r i n communication s t r u c t u r e s and extends o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r c h i l d r e n t o develop t h e i r system of speaking. Kaye and Bruner o f f e r conceptual background f o r v i e w i n g l e a r n i n g through i n t e r a c t i o n i n the classroom context. In p a r t i c u l a r the s t u d i e s of e a r l y dyadic i n t e r a c t i o n document the t a c i t ways i n which an a d u l t accepts the a p p r e n t i c e l e a r n e r and generates f i e l d s of i n t e r a c t i o n which become o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r extended 7 l e a r n i n g . T h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n concerns the a d u l t r o l e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the a p p r e n t i c e l i t e r a t e and. whether i t c o i n c i d e s w i t h the a d u l t r o l e i n the e a r l i e r language a c q u i s i t i o n process. Research Questions The q u e s t i o n s f o r t h i s study evolve from a b a s i c concern w i t h the s i m i l a r i t i e s i n f e a t u r e s of i n t e r a c t i o n . The i n t e r a c t i o n i s t s t u d i e s document the p a r t i c u l a r way i n which the a d u l t f a c i l i t a t e s and s t r u c t u r e s l e a r n i n g experiences f o r the c h i l d . The s e t of r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s f o r t h i s study i s : 1. How i s the t e a c h i n g s e t t i n g , i n c l u d i n g r o u t i n e s , s t r u c t u r e d ? 2 . How are engagements w i t h i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n s t r u c t u r e d ? 3. How does the teacher f a c i l i t a t e and develop i n t e r a c t i o n ? 4. What i s the evidence f o r framing and f o r m a t t i n g i n the d i a l o g u e between teacher and c h i l d ? 5. What i s the evidence f o r the use of s c a f f o l d i n g , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and semantic contingency i n the language exchanges between teacher and student? The i n t e r a c t i o n i s t s t u d i e s p o r t r a y how, under c e r t a i n circumstances, the a c t u a l dynamic of i n t e r a c t i o n can e i t h e r expand or c o n t r a c t to f a c i l i t a t e s p e c i f i c l e a r n i n g . In the case of expansion, the dynamic goes beyond the scope of the c h i l d ' s t a s k i n t o r e l e v a n t thoughts and expe r i e n c e s . In the 8 case of c o n t r a c t i o n s , the i n t e r a c t i o n can become focussed w i t h r e s p e c t t o a p a r t i c u l a r requirement from the a d u l t or the t e x t . T h i s study seeks t o look at the expansion and c o n t r a c t i o n of i n t e r a c t i o n i n an e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g . To t h i s p o i n t there have been few s t u d i e s of i n t e r a c t i o n i n the classroom which focus on s y s t e m a t i c one-to-one d i a l o g u e . T h i s program and the t e a c h e r s ' use of i n t e r a c t i o n i n the l e a r n i n g process o f f e r a unique o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the study of i n t e r a c t i o n as a formal t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g y . I t i s hoped t h a t the study w i l l r e v e a l some of the depth and scope of i n t e r a c t i o n s and be a pedagogical t o o l f o r working w i t h the a p p r e n t i c e r e a d e r and w r i t e r . I t i s a l s o hoped t h a t i t w i l l c o n t r i b u t e t o our knowledge of e f f e c t i v e classroom p r a c t i c e s which put c h i l d r e n at the ce n t e r of t h e i r l e a r n i n g e x p e r i e n c e s . 9 Chapter Two: T h e o r e t i c a l and Research Background. The purpose of t h i s chapter i s to review the l i t e r a t u r e on child.-ad.ult i n t e r a c t i o n d u r i n g l a n guage-learning to e s t a b l i s h a framework f o r understanding the a d u l t ' s r o l e i n promoting language development. The r e s e a r c h t o be reviewed p e r t a i n s t o : - s o c i a l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s i n pre-speech i n t e r a c t i o n which f a c i l i t a t e language l e a r n i n g , -language d e v i c e s c a r e - g i v e r s use to promote optimum language development i n c h i l d r e n and - p r e d i s p o s i t i o n s i n e a r l y language exchanges which may i n f l u e n c e the c h i l d ' s subsequent o r i e n t a t i o n t o l i t e r a c y t a s k s encountered i n s c h o o l . Researchers have long sought to c o n s t r u c t models of language development. Most r e c e n t l y they have looked at the environmental f a c t o r s which promote language development i n c h i l d r e n . H o l d i n g t h a t no behavior occurs i n i s o l a t i o n , t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have centered on the r o l e of the c a r e g i v e r i n c h i l d r e n ' s language development. These r e s e a r c h e r s m a i n t a i n t h a t the i n t e r a c t i o n between parent and c h i l d m otivates and f o s t e r s the c h i l d ' s language development. T h i s r e s u l t s i n the c h i l d l e a r n i n g to map meaning on to convention u s i n g language i n a way which i s p r a c t i s e d , r e i n f o r c e d and extended with c a r e g i v e r a s s i s t a n c e . The i n t e r a c t i o n i t s e l f has both p a r t i c u l a r and c u l t u r a l elements. I t serves the growth of the i n d i v i d u a l and i s p a r t of the bond and e x p r e s s i o n between two i n d i v i d u a l s . I t i s a l s o r o o t e d i n the norms and conventions of s o c i a l exchange. The r e s e a r c h reviewed here was chosen f o r i t s c o n t r i b u t i o n t o our understanding of how the behavior of the c a r e g i v e r s c r e a t e s an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c h i l d r e n t o maximize success and s k i l l i n the a c q u i s t i o n of a r e p e r t o i r e of communicative b e h a v i o r s . The work w i l l be reviewed i n the order of the age of c h i l d t o h i g h l i g h t the c a r e g i v e r ' s changing s t r a t e g i e s which accompany the c h i l d ' s development. The goal of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n i s t o e s t a b l i s h g u i d e l i n e s f o r v iewing i n t e r a c t i o n between a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n i n a d i f f e r e n t l e a r n i n g s e t t i n g s e r v i n g a d i f f e r e n t s e t of language requirements. S o c i a l i z a t i o n P a t t e r n s i n Pre-speech I n t e r a c t i o n Kaye (1982) examined the i n t e r a c t i v e mechanisms between c a r e - g i v e r s and i n f a n t s w i t h a t t e n t i o n t o the a d u l t ' s c a p a c i t y to respond t o i n f a n t behaviors i n a way th a t extends the i n f a n t ' s inherent c a p a c i t i e s . Kaye terms these a d u l t behaviors the parental frame (p. 70) . He mai n t a i n s t h a t these behaviors are motivated by and t r i g g e r e d by gestur e s and behaviors of the i n f a n t . He contends t h a t these a d u l t behaviors are u n i v e r s a l i n s t r u c t u r e and are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of a l l parents' a b i l i t y t o org a n i z e i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The p a r t i c u l a r s of the i n t e r a c t i o n are s p e c i f i c to the a d u l t - c h i l d dyad and the a c t i v i t y b e i n g pursued C e n t r a l t o Kaye's l i s t of f u n c t i o n s i s the idea of a frame. Frames are " r e c u r r i n g u n i t s of or g a n i z e d a c t i v i t y which are p r o v i d e d by the a d u l t but f i t t e d to the i n t r i n s i c f e a t u r e s of i n f a n t behavior" (p. 6 ) . While p r a c t i s e d between i n d i v i d u a l s , frames b r i n g the c h i l d i n t o the l a r g e r c u l t u r e of which he i s a member. Kaye speaks of frames as the extent t o which adjustment must occur i n parents as a p r e - c o n d i t i o n f o r the i n f a n t l e a r n i n g t o be a member of the c u l t u r a l system. Frames are microcosms i n which time and space are o r g a n i z e d by the parent f o r the c h i l d . T h i s s p a t i a l and temporal o r g a n i z a t i o n c r e a t e s b e h a v i o r a l c o n t e x t s i n which "the parent r e l i e s on the i n f a n t ' s i n t r i n s i c a b i l i t i e s t o d i f f e r e n t i a t e h i s own s k i l l s g r a d u a l l y " (p. 7 7 ) . The c a r e g i v e r ' s a b i l i t y t o c o n s t r u c t t h i s i n t e r a c t i v e framework p i v o t s on a n t i c i p a t i n g the i n f a n t ' s next step i n development and on a c t i n g as i f th a t step i s an a l r e a d y accomplished f a c t . A c t i n g as i f i t i s a f a c t , the c a r e g i v e r guides the c h i l d i n repeated s c e n a r i o s u n t i l t h a t developmental s t e p f i n a l l y appears. We c o n s i s t e n t l y h o l d out our arms f o r our c h i l d r e n ' s f i r s t s tep f u l l y b e l i e v i n g they w i l l walk i n t o them. Sooner or l a t e r they do, much to our d e l i g h t . Long before an i n f a n t can speak, the mother i s m i r r o r i n g her c h i l d ' s v o c a l i z a t i o n s and p u t t i n g them i n a frame which g i v e s them c r i t e r i a f o r d i a l o g u e . For example. the c h i l d coos, the mother coos back and says, "Oh you are happy today." In these e a r l y episodes, she i s e s t a b l i s h i n g j o i n t f o cus, t u r n - t a k i n g and shared meaning i n t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s . Kaye sees t h i s acting as if as the moving b a s e l i n e f o r a c h i l d ' s development. A n t i c i p a t i o n of the i n f a n t ' s progress p l a y s a key r o l e i n the i n f a n t moving ahead. Feedback and p r o j e c t i o n on the part of the a d u l t p r o v i d e s major impetus f o r the continued c o n s t r u c t i o n of the a n t i c i p a t e d event. T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n leads Kaye t o p o s t u l a t e the n o t i o n of the i n f a n t as a p p r e n t i c e . He a s s e r t s t h a t one of the f u n c t i o n s of the frame i s to make c e r t a i n b e h a v i o r s , or the understanding of those behaviors ( i n the case of language), i n e v i t a b l e . W i t h i n the language frame, t h i s acting as i f makes i t p o s s i b l e f o r parents to s u s t a i n a d i a l o g u e with t h e i r c h i l d r e n by p r o v i d i n g f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n and e l a b o r a t i o n of t o p i c s . In t h e i r study of mothers i n di a l o g u e w i t h two-year o l d s , Kaye and Charney (1980) found an e s s e n t i a l asymmetry i n p a r t n e r r o l e s . I t i s the mother who mai n t a i n s t o p i c c o n t i n u i t y by responding to and extending the c h i l d ' s meaning. Mothers produce the m a j o r i t y of c o n v e r s a t i o n a l turn-abouts based on t h e i r c h i l d ' s u t t e r a n c e s . A turn-about i s a language p i v o t which r e q u i r e s a c h i l d to pursue or e l a b o r a t e a t o p i c . Here i s an example of a turn-about from a book-reading episode: Mother:(point t o p i c t u r e ) What i s that? C h i l d : K i t t y c a t . Mother: W e l l , what i s i t ? C h i l d : K i t t y c a t . Mother: W e l l . I know t h e r e ' s a k i t t y i n i t , what's he in? C h i l d : huh? Mother: What's he r i d i n g in? C h i l d : A i r p l a n e . Mother: Rig h t (1980, p. 219). Everytime the mother r e t u r n s the c o n v e r s a t i o n a l b a l l t o the c h i l d w i t h a q u e s t i o n she i s r e q u i r i n g the c h i l d to add more to t h e i r d i a l o g u e . Kaye and Charney conclude t h a t the type of v e r b a l b e h a v i o r they document here i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h other types of f a c e - t o - f a c e i n t e r a c t i o n appearing e a r l i e r i n the c h i l d ' s development. Mothers t r e a t t h e i r c h i l d r e n as p a r t i c i p a n t s i n d i a l o g u e while they model how to keep a d i a l o g u e g o i n g by m a i n t a i n i n g t o p i c c o n t i n u i t y and e l a b o r a t i n g meaning. To Kaye the a b i l i t y t o frame l i e s beneath conscious human r e c o g n i t i o n and m a n i p u l a t i o n . T h i s i s not to say t h a t the b e h a v i o r cannot be made conscious, but r a t h e r that consciousness i s not a necessary c o n d i t i o n f o r i t s e x i s t e n c e . Kaye a l s o s t a t e s t h a t the behaviors d e s c r i b e d are a f e a t u r e of a more s k i l l e d person i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h a l e s s s k i l l e d p a r t n e r . The s o c i a l system, as re p r e s e n t e d by the c a r i n g a d u l t , a s s i m i l a t e s the i n f a n t ' s behavior i n t o i t s f u n c t i o n i n g . An element of c a r e g i v e r competency i s mastery 14 a c q u i r e d i n k i n d of i n t e r a c t i o n which the c a r e g i v e r i s l a t e r able t o i n i t i a t e and s u s t a i n . Language Devices C a r e g i v e r s use to Promote Language  Development A second r e s e a r c h e r who addresses l e a r n i n g through i n t e r a c t i o n i s Jerome Bruner (1983). H i s work c e n t e r s on the i n t e r a c t i v e b e h a v i o r s between mothers and young c h i l d r e n d e t a i l i n g the inh e r e n t competencies each mother b r i n g s t o t a i l o r her be h a v i o r t o the growing s k i l l of her c h i l d . The c o n f i g u r a t i o n of the mother's competencies, as r e v e a l e d i n a d j u s t e d r o u t i n e s which o r g a n i z e and s u s t a i n i n t e r a c t i o n , Bruner c a l l s formats. These p a r e n t a l behaviors form the Language Acquisition Support System (1983) by which parents c u l t u r a l l y t r a n s m i t the substance and s t r u c t u r e of language-use t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n . Bruner has d e f i n e d a format as "a s t a n d a r d i z e d i n i t i a l l y microcosmic i n t e r a c t i o n p a t t e r n between an a d u l t and an i n f a n t that c o n t a i n s demarcated r o l e s t h a t e v e n t u a l l y become r e v e r s i b l e " (p. 121). He a l s o w r i t e s t h a t " n a t u r a l contexts are c o n v e n t i o n a l i z e d i n t o c o n v e n t i o n a l forms and r e g u l a r i z e d as formats. A format i s a r o u t i n i z e d and repeated i n t e r a c t i o n i n which an a d u l t and a c h i l d do t h i n g s t o and with each ot h e r " (p. 132). Formats act t o arrange e a r l y speech i n t e r a c t i o n episodes. Bruner's n o t i o n of a format i s v e r y s t r u c t u r a l i n i t s q u a l i t i e s . I t c a r r i e s many of the f e a t u r e s of language i t s e l f . These f e a t u r e s i n c l u d e deep and s u r f a c e s t r u c t u r e , r u l e s f o r t r a n s f o r m i n g the s t r u c t u r e , ' coherence. 15 t r a n s a c t i o n a l i t y , and a means f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n of j o i n t a t t e n t i o n . I t i s the task of the a d u l t t o pre-form the context and c o n s t a n t l y a d j u s t the p r e s e n t a t i o n of events such t h a t the c h i l d ' s engagement i s o p t i m a l . Formats appear e a r l y i n the i n t e r a c t i o n s between c a r e - g i v e r and c h i l d as games and naming r o u t i n e s . As games they occur spontaneously i n peek-a-boo. and Ride-a-Cock-Horse and oth e r s where language and gesture are repeated i n p a t t e r n e d exchange. In naming r o u t i n e s formats appear w i t h r e f e r e n c e to o b j e c t s and i n book-reading. For example: Mother: Look! C h i l d : ( t o u c h i n g a p i c t u r e ) Mother: What are those: C h i l d : (babble s t r i n g and a smile) Mother: Yes, they are r a b b i t s (p. 78). The a d u l t ' s competency l i e s i n m a i n t a i n i n g the c h i l d ' s engagement and i n i t i a l l y i n s u p p l y i n g a l l elements of the r o u t i n e . The c h i l d ' s i n i t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n i s a t t e n t i o n (as marked by gaze), babble and/or ge s t u r e . In time he w i l l "take over" more of the r o u t i n e , as i l l u s t r a t e d below. Mother: What's tha t ? C h i l d : F i s h y Mother: Yes and what i s he doing? (p. 84) At each s t e p i n the take-over the mother i s ready t o extend the r o u t i n e t o i n c l u d e new elements i n her c h i l d ' s r e p e r t o i r e of language behaviors. In the case above t h a t 16 occurs when she asks f o r e l a b o r a t i o n a f t e r the c h i l d produces the c o r r e c t l a b e l . A key f e a t u r e of the format i s the judgements the a d u l t makes w i t h r e s p e c t t o the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s . These i n c l u d e r e q u e s t i n g more of the c h i l d and r e f u s i n g l e s s : C h i l d : ( p o i n t s to b a l l i n f i r e p l a c e , r e q u e s t i n g ) ogho-wa-wa-wa-wa Mother: F i r e C h i l d : wa Mother: Don't say "wa-wa." F i r e , R i c h a r d . C h i l d : F i r e Mother: That's b e t t e r (p. 101). They a l s o i n c l u d e s u p p l y i n g more and a c c e p t i n g l e s s : Mother: What's that ? C h i l d : Ouse. Mother: Mouse, yes. That's a mouse. C h i l d : More mouse ( p o i n t i n g t o another p i c t u r e ) . Mother: No, those are s q u i r r e l s . They're l i k e mice but w i t h long t a i l s . Sort o f . C h i l d : Mouse, mouse, mouse. Mother: Yes, a l l r i g h t , they're mice. C h i l d : Mice, mice (p.86). N i n i o and Bruner (1978) p r e v i o u s l y demonstrated the r e l a t i o n s h i p between c a r e g i v e r s ' e a r l i e r supply of l a b e l s and the c h i l d ' s subsequent use of them. The c a r e g i v e r begins by modeling the a p p r o p r i a t e language. L a t e r , she may r e q u i r e the c h i l d to use the language. In t h i s way she i s c o n t i n u a l l y a d j u s t i n g the r o u t i n e i n the d i r e c t i o n of expanded language use. The presence of modeling and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y makes the r o u t i n i z e d exchanges of the format a s t r o n g language t e a c h i n g d e v i c e . Comparing frames and formats by r o l e i l l u m i n a t e s t h e i r s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s . (See Table I.) The c h i e f d i f f e r e n c e i n these two concepts seems t o r e s t w i t h Bruner's focus on the p a t t e r n e d d e v i c e s by which the c u l t u r e and s k i l l of language use i s exchanged. His focus on language-l e a r n i n g c a s t s the format i n a p a r t i c u l a r l i g h t where the feedback loop of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s an e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t . Bruner emphasizes the power of c a r e g i v e r language use i n r o u t i n e s and p a t t e r n s where t h e i r c o n s t r a i n t and p r e d i c t a b i l i t y make c e r t a i n k i n d s of language l e a r n i n g i n e v i t a b l e f o r the c h i l d . Kaye a l s o r e f e r s to the i n e v i t a b i l i t y of l e a r n i n g by c a r e g i v e r framing b e h a v i o r . He does not h i g h l i g h t r o u t i n e s per se as the avenue by which t h i s i s made p o s s i b l e . Instead he seems t o r e l y more on the a f f e c t i v e power of shared meaning and c o n s i s t e n t imputing (on the p a r t of the c a r e g i v e r ) coupled w i t h development and d i f f e r e n t i a l d i s p l a y of s k i l l s (on the par t of the c h i l d ) as the f o r c e behind l e a r n i n g . The s i m i l a r i t y i n emphasis can a l s o be seen i n the r o l e of the c h i l d . Both authors r e q u i r e a minimum commitment from the c h i l d i n terms of engagement. Beyond t h a t Kaye leaves the c h i l d ' s r o l e i n broad terms: i t i s t o p a r t i c i p a t e w i t h the a d u l t . The nature of t h a t p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s not e l a b o r a t e d any f u r t h e r . Bruner, 18 Table I Comparison of Function by Role in Kaye's Frame and Brunei's Format Frame Format Child • enter Into Intersubjectlvity • Impute meaning to child's behavior • build units of organized activity based on Infant behavior • reiy on child's develop-ment and repertoire of material produced in exchanges to make behavior inevitable • engage child • maintain child's optimum involvement • establish joint focus • create routines of patterned Interaction In naturally occurlng contexts • supply language and gesture for both partners • accept as meaningful the child's contribution • incorporate child's contribution into routines • make judgements with respect to accountability • hand over control of routine • engage in interaction with adult • maintain joint focus • participate with adult behavior within the frame becomes second nature • engage in interaction with adult • respond spontaneously and giobaily • return adult's model (Imitate) • Incorporate adjustments in expression however, has a more s p e c i f i c concern. He t a l k s about i m i t a t i o n and a l s o the a b i l i t y t o i n c o r p o r a t e adjustments l e a r n e d from p a r e n t a l modeling. Both authors are d e s c r i b i n g the u n f o l d i n g of human c a p a c i t y i n the presence of s e l e c t i v e responses which induct the i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d i n t o c u l t u r a l p r a c t i c e s . However Bruner's d e s c r i p t i o n of i n t e r a c t i o n i s more c l o s e l y tuned to the requirement f o r a standard. W i t h i n the i n d u c t i v e f o r c e of both the frame and the format can be found s p e c i f i c elements of language use which a d u l t s employ t o a s s i s t c h i l d r e n ' s language l e a r n i n g . These elements may a l s o , i n some cases, be l i n k e d forward t o l i t e r a c y development. E a r l y Language Experiences and Subsequent O r i e n t a t i o n t o  L i t e r a c y In her a r t i c l e on language and l i t e r a c y , Snow (1983) demonstrates the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of i n t e r a c t i o n between c a r e g i v e r and c h i l d which f a c i l i t a t e the development of both language and l i t e r a c y . In her case study of N a t h a n i e l she demonstrates how c a r e g i v e r use of semantic contingency, scaffolding and accountability a\\ c o n t r i b u t e t o N a t h a n i e l ' s awareness of conventions and s k i l l s i n v o l v e d i n l i t e r a c y . Semantic contingency i s a device which enables the c a r e g i v e r t o continue, expand or extend t o p i c s i n t r o d u c e d by the c h i l d . I t i s s i m i l a r to the device Kaye and Charney i s o l a t e as the turn-about, and resembles the c a r e g i v e r response of imputing and l i n k i n g meaning i n c h i l d r e n ' s u t t e r a n c e s . When the a d u l t responds to a c h i l d w i t h a s e m a n t i c a l l y c o n t i n g e n t phrase or s e n t e n c e , the a d u l t r e q u i r e s the c h i l d to e l a b o r a t e or extend h i s language . The e f f e c t i s t o make what i s i m p l i c i t i n t h e i r exchange more e x p l i c i t . As i t r e l a t e s to l i t e r a c y , semant ic c o n t i n g e n c y i n c l u d e s e l i c i t i n g and i n c o r p o r a t i n g c h i l d r e n ' s o b s e r v a t i o n s about t e x t , p i c t u r e s and w r i t i n g i n t o l i n k e d exchanges . F o r examp1e: C h i l d : ( n o t i c i n g a s i g n i n t r a f f i c ) S says S t o p . M o t h e r : Y e s , t h a t says S t o p . Grandma has an S t o o . C h i l d : Grandma? M o t h e r : Y e s , S f o r S h i r l e y . Grandma S h i r l e y has an S. C h i l d : S h i r l e y . Grandma S h i r l e y . F o l l o w i n g on the c h i l d ' s i n i t i a t i o n , the a d u l t b r i n g s i n an example t h a t has p e r s o n a l r e l e v a n c e and extends the c h i l d ' s awareness o f l i t e r a c y c o n v e n t i o n s . S c a f f o l d i n g (Bruner , 1978) r e f e r s to an a d u l t b r e a k i n g a t a s k i n t o manageable p a r t s so the c h i l d can focus s u c c e s s f u l l y on one e lement . The language frame and d i f f e r e n t formats are examples of v e r b a l s c a f f o l d s . S c a f f o l d s are presen t i n many o r d i n a r y exchanges between a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n . S c a f f o l d i n g i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important i f some p r e - s e l e c t i o n o r o r g a n i z a t i o n of a t a s k o r concept i s an e s s e n t i a l element i n a c h i l d b e g i n n i n g to u n d e r s t a n d o r do s o m e t h i n g . As s c a f f o l d s r e l a t e to l i t e r a c y t a s k s , they i n v o l v e the c a r e g i v e r s t r u c t u r i n g a l i t e r a c y event or concept to make i t more a c c e s s i b l e . F o r example when c h i l d r e n are f i r s t l e a r n i n g t o p r i n t or r e c o g n i z e t h e i r names, an a d u l t may focus on the i n i t i a l c a p i t a l t o the e x c l u s i o n of other l e t t e r s i n the name as the one t o r e c o g n i z e , name and p r i n t . F i n a l l y , Snow reviews the r o l e of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i n l e a r n i n g the conventions of l i t e r a c y . As i t p e r t a i n s t o l i t e r a c y , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i n v o l v e s modeling or demonstrating the l i t e r a c y s k i l l or convention and then r e q u i r i n g i t i n subsequent d i s p l a y s . A c c o u n t a b i l i t y a l s o i n c l u d e s an a d u l t not a c c e p t i n g behavior t h a t does not i n c o r p o r a t e what the c h i l d has p r e v i o u s l y demonstrated or seen modeled. Here N a t h a n i e l and h i s mother are s p e l l i n g h i s name w i t h magnetic l e t t e r s : Mother: Can you f i n d an H? N a t h a n i e l : F i n d de M. Mother: We don't need an M. N a t h a n i e l : That's an M. Mother: Yeah, but we don't need an M. No M i n Na t h a n i e l N a t h a n i e l : (puts i t down) (p. 173) Snow observes that l e a r n i n g l i t e r a c y i s as much a s o c i a l phenomenon as a c o g n i t i v e process. What promotes e a r l y p r e - d i s p o s i t i o n to l i t e r a c y i s c a r e g i v e r a t t e n t i o n to and focus on i t s requirements i n exchanges wi t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n . The language d e v i c e s t h a t the c a r e g i v e r employs are the same ones used i n e a r l i e r exchanges where c h i l d r e n were f i r s t l e a r n i n g to t a l k . I t i s the focus on the demands and conventions of l i t e r a c y which i s d i f f e r e n t . The author notes t h a t both middle and working c l a s s c h i l d r e n are exposed t o l i t e r a c y m a t e r i a l s and c o n t e x t u a l i z e d l i t e r a c y s k i l l s . These i n c l u d e having access t o books, knowing the names of the l e t t e r s of the alphabet and being able t o read environmental p r i n t . What may d i f f e r i n t h e i r experiences and account f o r the l i t e r a c y success r a t e s of the middle c l a s s p o p u l a t i o n over the working c l a s s p o p u l a t i o n i s exposure t o and f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language use as a l i t e r a c y convention. Donaldson (1972) looked at school f a i l u r e i n l i g h t of the same c o n s i d e r a t i o n . L i k e Snow, Donaldson s t a t e s t h a t the c o n v e n t i o n of u s i n g language as a t o o l f o r s p e c u l a t i o n beyond the context of on-going events i s an aspect of a d u l t l i t e r a t e language use u n f a m i l a r t o many c h i l d r e n . She cl a i m s t h a t t h i s o r i e n t a t i o n i s even somewhat a l i e n t o a c h i l d ' s i n t e n t i o n - c e n t e r e d , context dependent b i a s i n language use. The convention of d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d use i s one which can be le a r n e d i n p a r t i c u l a r kinds of i n t e r a c t i o n . Snow observes t h a t many middle c l a s s homes prepare c h i l d r e n f o r t h i s use by p r o v i d i n g l i t e r a t e f e a t u r e s i n o r a l use. These i n c l u d e d i s c u s s i o n s of p o i n t of view, r e l a t i n g past events or scenes from d i s t a n t s e t t i n g and encouraging c h i l d r e n t o b u i l d i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s by r e l a t i n g s t o r i e s and t e l l i n g about past events. These language based exchanges p r o v i d e experience w i t h s h i f t s i n context and form a b a s i s f o r the c h i l d ' s experience with d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d lanaguage use. Snow and N i n i o (1986) document the s e t of l i t e r a c y conventions which c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e i n shared book-reading e p i s o d e s . These episodes provide o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r extended o r i e n t a t i o n t o the s e t of r u l e s i m p l i c i t i n f i n d i n g and s h a r i n g meaning i n t e x t . The authors show how a d u l t s t r a n s m i t those r u l e s or c o n t r a c t s i n i n t e r a c t i o n . Among these r u l e s are s e v e r a l which lead the way to understanding d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d and r e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language use. One of these i s o r i e n t a t i o n t o book-time, separate from and not a f f e c t e d by the flow of d a i l y events. The time l i n e i n t e x t s t a y s constant and shared knowledge a c q u i r e d w i t h t e x t can be r e c a l l e d and e l a b o r a t e d i n s u c c e s s i v e episodes. A c o r o l l a r y t o t h i s c o n t r a c t concerning time i s one concerning autonomous f i c t i o n a l worlds c r e a t e d by language. With a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e i n the form of d i a l o g u e , the c h i l d begins t o l e a r n about the parameters of t h a t autonomy. Here i s N a t h a n i e l at th r e e years with h i s mother: Mother: Look what Dingo d i d . What'd he take i n t o the r e s t a u r a n t w i t h him? N a t h a n i e l : H i s hat. Mother: And what e l s e ? N a t h a n i e l : And what e l s e . H i s c a r . Mother: H i s c a r . Are you allowed to take your c a r i n t o a r e s t a u r a n t ? N a t h a n i e l : No! (p. 137) With t e x t , a n y t h i n g i s p o s s i b l e . N a t h a n i e l ' s mother molds t h i s i n t e r a c t i o n to expose him to th a t convention. Olson (1977, 1984) suggests that there i s a l i t e r a t e b i a s i n o r a l language use which accompanies the personal and c u l t u r a l development of l i t e r a c y s k i l l s . T h i s b i a s , as p r a c t i c e d by c a r e g i v e r s , may lead them to shape i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n i n the d i r e c t i o n of modeling and r e q u i r i n g i n c r e a s i n g e x p l i c i t n e s s of meaning i n o r a l exchange. Olson maintains t h a t t h i s s h i f t i n the locus of meaning away from the context of immediate events and i n t o the c o n t e x t of meaning c r e a t e d by and expressed by language i s a consequence of exposure to the conventions of l i t e r a c y . With l i t e r a c y meaning i s p r i m a r i l y i n t e x t i t s e l f and out of the context of the s t r u c t u r e of d a i l y events. In the p r e v i o u s example, N a t h a n i e l must contend w i t h the meaning p o s s i b i l i t y i n t r o d u c e d i n t e x t t h a t i s d i s s i m i l a r to any i n h i s own e x p e r i e n c e . He cannot r e l y on an on-going event s t r u c t u r e or shared i n t e n t i o n s between h i m s e l f and h i s mother t o a s s i s t him. He must c o n s t r u c t h i s understanding of t h a t event based on t e x t c l u e s and h i s own i n t e r n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . His mother i s a s s i s t i n g him by b r i n g i n g him face t o f a c e w i t h an apparent i n c o n g r u i t y and encouraging him to e x p l o r e the p o s s i b i l i t i e s . In these e a r l y stages she a l s o a s i s t s him i n a r e s o l u t i o n . The episode c o n t i n u e s : Mother: Dingo, get t h a t car out of t h e r e . N a t h a n i e l : You d r i v e i t out, Dingo. Mother: You d r i v e i t r i g h t out and you put i t i n the p a r k i n g l o t and you walk back i n , p l e a s e . N a t h a n i e l : Why? Mother: Cuz t h a t ' s what you do i n r e s t a u r a n t s , (p. 137) As Snow and N i n i o p o i n t out N a t h a n i e l i s j u s t beginning to be a b l e t o c o l l a b o r a t e w i t h an author. With h i s mother's a s s i s t a n c e , he i s l e a r n i n g about d i f f e r e n t meaning conventions. These conventions r e l a t e t o the use of d e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d and r e c o n t e x t u a l i z e d language where meaning i s weighted s e m a n t i c a l l y toward the world c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h words. F i n a l l y Wells (1985) has i s o l a t e d those same p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e s of o r a l language exchange that prepare c h i l d r e n f o r success w i t h l i t e r a c y t a s k s i n s c h o o l . H i s study of pr e -school l i t e r a c y - r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s and school success show t h a t the c r i t i c a l element i n i n t e r a c t i o n which may c o n t r i b u t e t o success w i t h school l i t e r a c y progress i s the c h i l d l i s t e n i n g t o a s t o r y b e i ng read or t o l d by an a d u l t and h a v i n g an o p p o r t u n i t y to t a l k w i t h the a d u l t about the meaning b e i n g d e r i v e d from the s t o r y . Wells f i n d s t hat t h e r e i s a q u a l i t a t i v e d i f f e r e n c e i n the k i n d s of exchanges between parent and c h i l d where parents enjoy r e a d i n g t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n and use the book-reading t o extend and e l a b o r a t e the c h i l d ' s experience with meaning. I t i s t h i s e x t e n s i o n which exposes c h i l d r e n t o the "conte x t -independent" p o t e n t i a l of language. As Wells p o i n t s out, these v e n t u r e s with t e x t s t r e t c h a c h i l d ' s world out to i n c l u d e new p o s s i b i l i t i e s which he must r e c o n c i l e with h i s own worl d and h i s understanding of i t . The c u l t u r e of l i t e r a t e use i s taught i n e a r l y s o c i a l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s i n which l i t e r a c y events appear. The key element i s an a d u l t p a r t n e r who can lead a c h i l d to some measure of experience and understanding of the conventions l i t e r a c y r e q u i r e s . These i n c l u d e many obvious ones concerning the nature of w r i t t e n language. They a l s o i n c l u d e some more s u b t l e s k i l l s c o n c e r n i n g the nature of meaning i n t e x t and how to access and use i t . T h i s i n c l u d e s u s i n g o r a l langauge i n de-c o n t e x t u a l i z e d and r e - c o n t e x t u a l i z e d ways. The r e s e a r c h reviewed here demonstrates how a s k i l l e d a d u l t p a r t n e r i s a c r i t i c a l r e s o u r c e f o r young c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g the s o c i a l i z a t i o n p a t t e r n s and s k i l l s of language use. The d e v i c e s which c a r e g i v e r s employ i n c l u d e e a r l y imputing of meaning t o u t t e r a n c e and gesture, establishment of t u r n - t a k i n g and j o i n t focus i n exchanges, p r o v i d i n g s y s t e m a t i c and p r e d i c t a b l e r o u t i n e s f o r exchange where modeling and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y occur, b r e a k i n g complex t a s k s down i n t o manageable but meaningful p a r t s , u s i n g c h i l d r e n ' s e f f o r t s and u t t e r a n c e s as the b a s i s f o r e l a b o r a t i o n and e x t e n s i o n of meaning and f i n a l l y engaging c h i l d r e n i n d i a l o g u e s which r e l y on words and word-constructed worlds f o r meaning. T h i s spectrum of a d u l t - a s s i s t e d language events f a c i l i t a t e a c h i l d through e a r l y gesture and u t t e r a n c e to competent language use and i n t o the realm of 1 i t e r a c y . 27 Chapter Three: Research Method The purpose of t h i s chapter i s to e s t a b l i s h a r a t i o n a l e and framework f o r the design of t h i s study. The goal of the i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s t o d e s c r i b e a p a r t i c u l a r approach t o t e a c h i n g and compare the teachers' r o l e s i n t h a t approach to the r o l e of c a r e - g i v e r s i n c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y language development. The c e n t r a l phenomenon to be d e s c r i b e d i s language based dyadic i n t e r a c t i o n c e ntered on l i t e r a c y events of elementary c h i l d r e n i n a p u b l i c school s e t t i n g . The method of i n v e s t i g a t i o n meets the need t o study i n t e r a c t i v e language i n the context i n which i t i s generated under the s u p p o s i t i o n t h a t the phenomenon being observed w i l l be present i n many l e v e l s of the environment and i n the i n t e r a c t i o n s of the people i n v o l v e d . R a t i o n a l e f o r F i e l d - b a s e d Research f o r t h i s Study The method of i n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r t h i s study i s f i e l d -based r e s e a r c h . The c h o i c e of t h i s method r e f l e c t s the d e s i r e t o study language i n context. I t a l s o r e f l e c t s my concern as the r e s e a r c h e r to develop s k i l l s as a r e f l e x i v e p r a c t i t i o n e r which i n c l u d e s the a b i l i t y t o p r a c t i c e and e v a l u a t e d i f f e r e n t methods and approaches t o t e a c h i n g . The g e n e r a l concern f o r p r e s e r v i n g the p i c t u r e of the context w h i l e s t u d y i n g c e r t a i n p a r t i c u l a r s i n the s e t t i n g i s a main f a c t o r i n the choice of f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h 28 methods. T h i s concern o r i g i n a t e s i n the assumption t h a t the e n t i r e f a b r i c of the r e s e a r c h s i t e , i n c l u d i n g the s e t t i n g , the people, and events r e v e a l d i f f e r e n t and important a s p e c t s of i n t e r a c t i o n . The t o o l s and procedures employed i n f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h take a r i g o r o u s look at a l l aspects of an environment f o r the i n f o r m a t i o n r e v e a l e d about the nature of i n t e r a c t i o n i n t h a t environment. Premise and H i s t o r y of F i e l d - B a s e d Research The f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n has r o o t s i n s e v e r a l p l a c e s . I t s t h e o r e t i c a l and p h i l o s o p h i c a l r o o t s l i e i n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t o what c o n s t i t u t e s knowledge. For f i e l d -based r e s e a r c h , what c o n s t i t u t e s knowledge can best be expressed as i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . T h i s c o n t r a s t s to the q u a n t i t a t i v e or p o s i t i v i s t p o s i t i o n t h a t f a c t c o n s t i t u t e s knowledge. One way of approaching t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n between q u a n t i t a t i v e and q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h i s to c h a r a c t e r i z e how each t r a d i t i o n views the r e l a t i o n s h i p between r e s e a r c h , theory and data. For the q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h e r , the world i n e x p l a i n e d i n terms of laws and the r e s e a r c h task i s one where s i t u a t i o n s (experiments) are set up and data (sensory, q u a n t i f i a b l e evidence) i s generated to r e v e a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . The a c t of doing t h i s proves or d i s p r o v e s a theory or conceptual framework which d e s c r i b e s and e x p l a i n s the f u n c t i o n i n g of the laws. The r e s e a r c h e r ' s goal i s p r e d i c t i o n and h i s stance w i t h r e s p e c t to h i s evidence i s n e u t r a l i t y . In the q u a l i t a t i v e t r a d i t i o n , the r e s e a r c h e r ' s task i s to understand the meaning of events, r e l a t i o n s h i p s and symbols generated by human i n t e r a c t i o n . T h i s i s acomplished by becoming s e n s i t i v e to i s s u e s and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s and then immersing o n e s e l f i n a s i t u a t i o n t o study. The r e s e a r c h e r ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a s e t t i n g allows h i s human responses to i t to draw him i n and o r i e n t h i s d e v e l o p i n g understanding. His presence i s a l s o from the p e r s p e c t i v e of an observer as he s y s t e m a t i c a l l y r e c o r d s i n f o r m a t i o n and i n s i g h t s from the context he i s s t u d y i n g . H i s e x p e r i e n c e s and responses become p a r t of how he proceeds i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n . In the process of immersion i n t o the s i t e and c o l l e c t i n g m a t e r i a l from i t , the o u t l i n e of i n t e r p r e t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n emerges. The r e s e a r c h e r c o n t i n u a l l y r e f e r s to the o r i g i n a l concepts and r e b u i l d s or m o d i f i e s them. His stance with r e g a r d to what he i s doing i s r e f l e x i v e . H i s goal i s e x p l a n a t i o n . The q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n i s l i n k e d w i t h the study of s o c i a l p r o c e s s . In q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h , the r e s e a r c h e r i s a p r i n c i p a l instrument i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n has h i s t o r i c a l r o o t s i n the development of the s o c i a l s c i e n c e s . One of the main h i s t o r i c a l r o o t s came from the study of worker and immigrant p o p u l a t i o n s i n the l a t e 1800's and e a r l y 1900's i n England. These s o c i a l surveys o r i g i n a t e d i n v a r i o u s r e s e a r c h e r s ' responses to the c o n d i t i o n s of workers l i v e s . S i m i l a r l y , i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , s o c i a l surveys were conducted i n the e a r l y 1900's by r e s e a r c h e r s b e l i e v i n g i n a connection between a d e s c r i p t i o n of c o n d i t i o n s and s o c i a l a c t i o n to change those c o n d i t i o n s . Bogdan and B i k l e n (1982) s t a t e , "The s o c i a l survey c a r r i e s p a r t i c u l a r importance f o r understanding t h i s h i s t o r y of q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h i n e d u c a t i o n because of i t s immediate r e l a t i o n t o s o c i a l problems and because of i t s p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n midway between the expose and s c i e n t i f i c study" (p. 8). T h i s suggests t h a t t h i s methodology used i n e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g s r e f l e c t s a concern f o r s o c i a l i s s u e s inherent i n those s e t t i n g s . T h i s d i f f e r s from a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s ' use of f i e l d -based methodology to preserve s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s . E a r l y a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s used i n d u c t i v e methods of i n q u i r y as p a r t of t h e i r e f f o r t s t o understand d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s i n those c u l t u r e s ' terms. In North America, the q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago School of S o c i o l o g y (1890's-1930's) where i t became known as the Chicago Method. Researchers t h e r e were not reformers and brought a c o n s i s t e n c y t o q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h t h a t was based on a t h e o r e t i c a l assumption t h a t a l l symbols and p e r s o n a l i t i e s emerge from i n t e r a c t i o n . They a l s o c r e a t e d a methodological c o n s i s t e n c y based on f i r s t - h a n d data g a t h e r i n g . The s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l i s s u e which drew me to t h i s s e t t i n g concerns the prognosis f o r school f a i l u r e amongst c h i l d r e n who have not been i n t r o d u c e d to the conventions of l i t e r a t e use of language at home and are then expected to respond i n e a r l y l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n s as i f they d i d 31 understand t h a t usage. I t has always s t r u c k me t h a t i t i s encumbent upon t e a c h e r s of young c h i l d r e n to understand and endeavor t o pro v i d e t o t h e i r p u p i l s those demonstrated e d u c a t i o n a l experiences which l a y a fou n d a t i o n f o r school s u c c e s s . T h i s cannot be done e f f e c t i v e l y without r e s p e c t f o r and i n c o r p o r a t i o n of the e f f e c t i v e l e a r n i n g behaviors which c h i l d r e n have a c q u i r e d and used s u c c e s s f u l l y before e n t e r i n g s c h o o l . S i t e S e l e c t i o n i n F i e l d - b a s e d Research The i s s u e of s i t e s e l e c t i o n i s amongst the f i r s t the r e s e a r c h e r f a c e s . My own experience suggests t h a t each r e s e a r c h e r i s drawn t o a p a r t i c u l a r s i t e o r type of s i t e , as a consequence of h i s own r e f l e c t i o n s on s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l or e d u c a t i o n a l i s s u e s . Once on the t h r e s h o l d of t h a t s i t e , p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s i n e n t r y r e f l e c t something of the s o c i a l nature of the s i t e . In choosing a s i t e , Schatzman and St r a u s s (1973) suggest three c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i o n . They are s u i t a b i l i t y , f e a s i b i l i t y and s u i t a b l e t a c t i c s (p. 19). The authors pose the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s : W i l l the s i t e meet the r e s e a r c h e r ' s needs i n terms of i s s u e s present? Does the s i t e match the r e s e a r c h e r ' s r e s o u r c e s i n terms of time, money and s k i l l s . ? F i n a l l y , can the r e s e a r c h e r gather enough i n f o r m a t i o n f o r s u c c e s s f u l e n t r y and i n v e s t i g a t i o n ? Along the same l i n e s of concern, Spradley (1980) c i t e s f i v e c r i t e r i a f o r d e c i s i o n on the nature of the s i t e . They are: (1) s i m p l i c i t y , (2) a c c e s s i b i l i t y , (3) the extent to which the r e s e a r c h e r can be u n o b t r u s i v e , (4) p e r m i s s i o n to e x p l o r e the s e t t i n g and (5) the a b i l i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n a c t i v i t i e s i n the s e t t i n g . While access i s h i g h - l i g h t e d at the b e g i n n i n g of a study, i t i s a l s o an ongoing i s s u e . With f a m i l i a r i t y and t r u s t , a r e s e a r c h e r w i l l penetrate more deeply i n t o a s e t t i n g and the thoughts of the people i n i t as time goes by. The s i t e chosen f o r t h i s study f u l f i l l s the requirements of f e a s i b i l i t y , s u i t a b i l i t y and s u i t a b l e t a c t i c s . I t a l s o met Spradley's f i v e c o n d i t i o n s . The s e t t i n g o f f e r e d me, as r e s e a r c h e r , an o p p o r t u n i t y beyond i t s g e n e r a l f e a s i b i l i t y , s u i t a b i l i i t y and a c c e s s i b i l i t y because i t was i n many ways unique i n e d u c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. In my experience as a teacher and as a Graduate A s s i s t a n t s u p e r v i s i n g student t e a c h i n g practicums, I had not known any s e t t i n g which equaled i t i n terms of the d i r e c t i o n of the e d u c a t i o n a l i n n o v a t i o n . The s e t t i n g was unique by v i r t u e of the l a c k of d i r e c t i n s t r u c t i o n p r a c t i s e d by a l l members of the t e a c h i n g team. While there has been g e n e r a l p r o f e s s i o n a l i n t e r e s t i n the Emergent L i t e r a c y approach to t e a c h i n g r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g amongst primary educators f o r a number of y e a r s p r e c e d i n g t h i s study, few t e a c h e r s were known to have adopted p r a c t i c e s such as these on such a l a r g e s c a l e f o r such an extended time as those d e s c r i b e d here. The program being i n v e s t i g a t e d here evolved from many combined years of t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e and r e s e a r c h . I t had been p i l o t e d and documented by the teachers themselves. The teachers had documented t h e i r aims, b e l i e f s and p r i n c i p l e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o the a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y and t h e i r understanding of the developmental progress c h i l d r e n make through s u c c e s s i v e stages of l i t e r a c y a c q u i s i t i o n i n a p r o c e s s - c e n t e r e d program. An aspect of t h i s program these teachers had not s t u d i e d i n d e t a i l was t h e i r own i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the stu d e n t s . Yet, i t was at the he a r t of t h e i r program. They d i d not have a complete p i c t u r e of themselves i n the process, p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e i r use of f o c u s s e d i n t e r a c t i o n as a method of t e a c h i n g . T h i s was due i n some pa r t t o the d i f f i c u l t y of s t u d y i n g themselves i n i n t e r a c t i o n . T h i s aspect of the program i s c e n t r a l t o the study. The s i t e f o r t h i s study o f f e r e d many p o s s i b i l i t e s f o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n and r e s e a r c h . The s e t t i n g i t s e l f , the d e s i g n of the program, the t e a c h i n g p h i l o s o p h y and the personnel i n the s e t t i n g , the students and t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s were a l l i n t r i n s i c and instr u m e n t a l i n c o n t r i b u t i n g to the environment. However, the key element around which a l l o t h e r a s p e c t s were t o be viewed, was t h a t of i n t e r a c t i o n between te a c h e r and student d u r i n g r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g c o nferences. In order to best view t h a t i n t e r a c t i o n , and to best p o r t r a y the r o l e of the teacher and compare t h a t r o l e to the p a r e n t a l r o l e i n e a r l y language development, the study focusses on the two teach e r s who are key to the program. 34 Role of the Researcher Hammersly and Atk i n s o n (1983) suggest that the r o l e of the f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h e r i s best c h a r a c t e r i z e d as being an a c c e p t a b l e , marginal member of the s e t t i n g . T h i s p o s i t i o n a l l o w s f o r the maintenance of both involvement and detachment c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h i s work. I n t e r p e r s o n a l l y , i t i n v o l v e s the r e s e a r c h e r being f r i e n d l y , open and r e c e p t i v e w h i l e not o f f e r i n g o p i n i o n s or a l l e g i a n c e s . Acceptance and t r u s t are key q u a l i t i e s i n the r e s e a r c h e r ' s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o others i n the s e t t i n g . In my case t h i s was c e r t a i n l y f a c i l i t a t e d by the p r o f e s s i o n a l and personal r e g a r d which was extended t o me by the one memeber of the t e a c h i n g team who was a graduate c o l l e a g u e . She was my c l o s e s t informant through-out the study. Both p r a c t i c a l and t h e o r e t i c a l i s s u e s emerge i n the d e c i s i o n s concerning the extent to which the r e s e a r c h e r w i l l i n v o l v e h i m s e l f i n the r o u t i n e s and ta s k s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the s e t t i n g . These are expressed i n the typology of the p a r t i c i p a n t - o b s e r v e r spectrum. Junker (1960) o u t l i n e s f o u r o p t i o n s i n terms of the r e s e a r c h e r ' s involvement i n the s e t t i n g . They are: (1) complete p a r t i c i p a t i o n , (2) p a r t i c i p a n t as observer, (3) obser v e r as p a r t i c i p a n t , and (4) complete o b s e r v a t i o n . W i t h i n t h i s range of op t i o n s the r e s e a r c h e r s e l e c t s the 35 depth to which he experiences the a c t i v i t i e s and meaning generated i n i n t e r a c t i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the s e t t i n g . T h i s must be balanced a g a i n s t the amount of detachment the r e s e a r c h e r a l l o w s from the r o l e s and watching or r e f l e c t i n g on the g e n e r a t i o n of i n t e r a c t i o n and meaning i n the s i t e . The s e l e c t i o n of a r o l e may s e t boundaries on the involvement and detachment matrix . In t h i s study, as r e s e a r c h e r , I have taken the r o l e of p a r t i c i p a n t as observer. My background, t r a i n i n g and i n t e r e s t s made aspects of the s e t t i n g f a m i l i a r and comprehensible. P h y s i c a l l y I remained v i s i b l y present throughout the e n t i r e p e r i o d of i n v e s t i g a t i o n . I s a t c l o s e enough to the t e a c h e r s while t a k i n g f i e l d notes so t h a t I c o u l d hear them w h i l e they worked wi t h the c h i l d r e n y e t was not c l o s e enough to confuse the c h i l d r e n or be o b t r u s i v e . While I d i d not o f t e n seek i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h the c h i l d r e n as they worked, I never r e f u s e d to i n t e r a c t w i t h them i f they approached me. I f r e e l y i n t e r a c t e d w i t h the team of t e a c h e r s who r a n the program which was the s i t e of the study. T h i s i n c l u d e d s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n as would be normal i n a c o l l e g i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p , and a l s o a s k i n g questions and s e e k i n g c l a r i f i c a t i o n concerning the t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s I observed. I s y s t e m a t i c a l l y recorded i n f o r m a t i o n and i n s i g h t s from the context being s t u d i e d . Those experiences and responses became pa r t of how I proceeded w i t h the i n v e s t i g a t i o n . A f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h e r uses him or h e r s e l f as a t o o l i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n . The process by which t h i s occurs i s c a l l e d r e f l e x i v i t y . R e f l e x i v i t y i s an a t t i t u d e and a s t r a t e g y which allows f o r the g a t h e r i n g of i n f o r m a t i o n as a p a r t i c i p a n t observer i n a manner which i s open, allows f o r q u e s t i o n s and f e e l i n g s w h i l e at the same time proceeds w i t h a r e g u l a r , s y s t e m a t i c process of d i s c o v e r y . In order t o do t h i s the r e s e a r c h e r must share i n the a c t i v i t i e s of the people i n the s e t t i n g , become pa r t of the normal l i f e of the s e t t i n g and be able t o r e g i s t e r , i n t e r p r e t and c o n c e p t u a l i z e w h i l e r e l a t i n g t o the s e t t i n g and people i n i t (Bruyn, 1966). As a method of s t u d y i n g e d u c a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e , i t allowed me, as a p r a c t i t i o n e r , to e n j o i n i n new processes and g a i n i n s i g h t while m a i n t a i n i n g enough d i s t a n c e to c o n c e p t u a l i z e and d i s c r i m i n a t e . Methodology The f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h e r ' s methodological t o o l k i t c o n t a i n s a range of p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r g a t h e r i n g data. I t s h o u l d be s t r e s s e d t h a t while the purpose i s to sample an e n t i r e context, a l l choices f o r doing t h i s c r e a t e o n l y p a r t i a l views of the s i t e . I t i s l i t e r a l l y i m p ossible to o b t a i n a f u l l view of a s i t e . What i s p o s s i b l e i s a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s p a r t i a l view. Schatzman and S t r a u s s suggest t h a t the r e s e a r c h e r should choose methods and techniques f o r a p p l y i n g them which account f o r a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sample, p e r s p e c t i v e and framework. T h i s r e f l e c t s concern f o r sampling (time, p l a c e and people), p e r s p e c t i v e (through whose eyes to l o o k ) , and framework ( r e l a t i o n s h i p to concept or t h e o r y ) . The v a r i o u s t o o l s f o r g a t h e r i n g data o f f e r p o s s i b i l i t i e s w i t h r e s p e c t to these c r i t e r i a . The range of t o o l s employed i n f i e l d - b a s e d r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e o b s e r v a t i o n s , i n t e r v i e w s , and document and photo a n a l y s i s . The t o o l s used i n t h i s study are o b s e r v a t i o n s ( i n c l u d i n g the use of a f i e l d d i a r y ) and document a n a l y s i s . L e a r n i n g how t o take good f i e l d notes or o b s e r v a t i o n s was a c h a l l e n g i n g experience. The concept of " r i c h " f i e l d m a t e r i a l which i s i n many ways the i d e a l , r e v e a l s the purpose and t e x t u r e of f i e l d notes. In order to capture the d e t a i l and c o l o r of a s i t u a t i o n s , the r e s e a r c h e r l e t s h i s antenna work i n the g a t h e r i n g process. While the o b j e c t i s to r e c o r d the essence and d e t a i l of the s i t e , knowing what and how i s the c h a l l e n g e . Bogdan and B i k l e n (1982) w r i t e , "The goal i s to capture the s l i c e of l i f e " (p. 84). They continue, "Rich data i s f i l l e d w i t h p i e c e s of evidence...The e x p e c t a t i o n i s t h a t you l e t i t a l l hang out" (p. 86). B a s i c a l l y f i e l d notes, be they formal or i n f o r m a l , are a r e c o r d of what the r e s e a r c h e r absorbs and observes on the s i t e . Informal notes u s u a l l y begin very g e n e r a l l y and g i v e a sense of p h y s i c a l and emotional atmosphere, the t h i n g s and people, the a c t i v i t y i n which people engage. They i n c l u d e S p r a d l e y ' s topology of space, a c t o r s , a c t i v i t i e s , o b j e c t s , a c t s , events, time, g o a l s and f e e l i n g s . Beyond t h i s , however, to adequately do t h i s r e s e a r c h means v e n t u r i n g i n t o the realm of s u b j e c t i v i t y . For t h i s reason, the r e s e a r c h e r a l s o employs techniques f o r i n c o r p o r a t i n g h i s b i a s e s , m i s g i v i n g s , i n t u i t i o n s and r e a c t i o n s . T h i s may be done i n margins, b r a c k e t s , or a separate book. T h i s aspect of the work of n o t e - t a k i n g documents r e f l e x i v i t y . F i e l d notes are t o r e f l e c t the s i t u a t i o n i n which they o r i g i n a t e ; they a l s o r e f l e c t the process i n which the r e s e a r c h e r i s engaged. Formal o b s e r v a t i o n s u s u a l l y f o l l o w informal ones and focus on p a r t i c u l a r s i n i n t e r a c t i o n with d e t a i l s concerning g e s t u r e and language. A very focussed o b s e r v a t i o n would narrow the range of f a c t o r s recorded and go very deep i n t o the d e t a i l around these f a c t o r s . E l e c t r o n i c r e c o r d i n g d e v i c e s such as audio and video tape can be p a r t of f o c u s s e d o b s e r v a t i o n . They a l l o w f o r more of c e r t a i n k i n d s of d e t a i l t o be r e c o r d e d at c e r t a i n times. Sampling Frame and F i e l d Notes Two t e a c h e r s were chosen as the focus f o r t h i s study. In o r d e r t o adequately sample t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s , I d e v i s e d a sampling p l a n (see Table I I ) . T h i s p l a n accounts f o r a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e sampling of time, p l a c e and people. I used i n f o r m a l , formal and foscussed o b s e r v a t i o n s as the primary means of data g a t h e r i n g . A sample of each of these t h r e e types of p r o t o c o l s may be found i n Appendix A, B and C. Each s e t of o b s e r v a t i o n s was designed to i n c l u d e a range of i n t e r a c t i o n s which began at the most general l e v e l and g r a d u a l l y was reduced to a very s p e c i f i c s e t of f a c t o r s . 39 Table 2 SAMPLING PLAN Feb/Mar April May June Informal ABx (4 days) Axy (4 days) Bxy (4 days) Formal ABxy (5 days) ABxy (4 days) Fccussed ABx (4 days) ABx (4 days) KEY: A = Teacher (Ann) B = Teacher (Marion) x = Learning Assistance Centre y = Classroom At the informal l e v e l (Appendix A), the o b s e r v a t i o n schedule i n c l u d e d a s e r i e s of o b s e r v a t i o n s on each t e a c h e r i n a l l of her contexts f o r a f u l l week of t e a c h i n g . A week of t e a c h i n g i n t h i s s e t t i n g i n c l u d e d Monday through Thursday mornings. The focus of these general o b s e r v a t i o n s was on the p h y s i c a l context, general events and r o u t i n e s which oc c u p i e d the teacher. Each teacher taught a range of grade l e v e l s and s u b j e c t s i n t h e i r c a p a c i t y as L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e t e a c h e r s , and the e n t i r e range was i n c l u d e d i n the o b s e r v a t i o n s . The range i n c l u d e d remedial Language A r t s and Mathematics f o r primary and intermediate grades. The second l e v e l of o b s e r v a t i o n s were the formal o b s e r v a t i o n s (Appendix B). T h i s s e r i e s of o b s e r v a t i o n s f o c u s s e d on both teachers i n d i v i d u a l l y but s h i f t e d w i t h r e s p e c t t o the age group and s u b j e c t . T h i s s e r i e s i n c l u d e d o n l y primary c h i l d r e n and onl y Language A r t s i n s t r u c t i o n . I t a l s o c o n c e n t r a t e d more on the language of i n t e r a c t i o n between t e a c h e r and student. I attempted to get as much run n i n g c o n v e r s a t i o n as p o s s i b l e , and capture the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the teacher and student d u r i n g t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s around l i t e r a c y events. T h i s s e r i e s i n c l u d e d a s e t of o b s e r v a t i o n s done on each teacher w h i l e e i t h e r of them had a primary group. The schedule of groups f o r the Center allowed me to go from primary group t o primary group as each teacher worked with them through the day. In some cases both t e a c h e r s were working wi t h primary groups, and so I would r e c o r d the o b s e r v a t i o n s on the missed group another day to i n s u r e t h a t I had seen each teacher f o r a complete c y c l e of one week. The t h i r d l e v e l of o b s e r v a t i o n s was the focussed o b s e r v a t i o n s (Appendix C). I t was r e c o r d e d i n two formats which i n c l u d e d w r i t t e n notes and a u d i o - r e c o r d i n g s . The t a r g e t s e t of i n t e r a c t i o n s used i n t h i s s e r i e s was those between the two t e a c h e r s and a l l primary c h i l d r e n who attended the Center f o r a s s i s t a n c e w i t h Language A r t s . The f i e l d notes themselves focussed on the p h y s i c a l movements, g e s t u r e s and o r i e n t a t i o n which the t e a c h e r s and c h i l d r e n d i s p l a y e d d u r i n g the conferences. These notes form a r u n n i n g accompaniment to the t r a n s c r i p t s which came from the audio r e c o r d i n g s . The a d d i t i o n of audio r e c o r d i n g to the study d e s i g n p l a c e d l i m i t s on the range of the i n t e r a c t i o n s . These l i m i t s i n t u r n were more than compensated f o r by the r i c h data which r e c o r d i n g exact language d u r i n g i n t e r a c t i o n o f f e r e d . The l i m i t s were p h y s i c a l . I t was not p o s s i b l e t o r e c o r d the t e a c h e r s i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h any students o u t s i d e the Center where the equipment was s e t up. In a d d i t i o n , the p h y s i c a l placement of the microphone l i m i t e d the r e c o r d i n g of i n t e r a c t i o n s t o those i n i t s p h y s i c a l p r o x i m i t y . The microphone used was a m u l t i - d i r e c t i o n a l t a b l e microphone which was taped to one t a b l e i n the Center. Each of the two t e a c h e r s used a d i f f e r e n t area of the room they shared, and the microphone was moved to t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e areas. Once i t was i n p l a c e , the t e a c h e r s endeavored to c o n f e r with t h e i r students i n i t s p r o x i m i t y . While i t was not p o s s i b l e to capture every i n t e r a c t i o n , the r e c o r d i n g generated much more data than t h i s s i n g l e study c o u l d i n c o r p o r a t e . In o r d e r to r e c o r d those o b s e r v a t i o n s and comments which would d r i v e the r e f l e x i v e aspect of t h i s study, I used my f i e l d d i a r y and b r a c k e t s w i t h i n the f i e l d notes. T y p i c a l l y , I used b r a c k e t s while i n the s e t t i n g to j o t down thoughts, and the f i e l d d i a r y when I was away from the s e t t i n g and thought of something I wished to r e c o r d . F i n a l l y , document a n a l y s i s was done to provide i n s i g h t i n t o the p h i l o s o p h y and b e l i e f s which were c e n t r a l to t h i s program. S i n c e both t e a c h e r s under study had done r e s e a r c h themselves, and the team of t e a c h e r s were c o n s c i o u s l y d e v e l o p i n g a program, statements of p h i l o s o p h y were e a s i l y o b t a i n e d . I chose three (Appendix D, E, and F) which had been produced by the t e a c h e r s themselves to e x p l a i n and d e s c r i b e the s e t t i n g . Data A n a l y s i s The data f o r t h i s study were generated from the f i e l d notes, the f i e l d d i a r y , the audio r e c o r d i n g s and the documents mentioned above. The f i e l d notes were converted from handwritten notes recorded i n f i e l d notebooks to typed documents which contained a l l the m a t e r i a l from the f i e l d notebooks. T h i s m a t e r i a l i n c l u d e d dates, times, running commentary on the a c t i v i t i e s of students and c h i l d r e n , v e r b a t i m speech and personal o b s e r v a t i o n s . A f t e r the f i e l d note documents had been prepared, the audio tapes were t r a n s c r i b e d . There was some s e l e c t i o n i n v o l v e d i n t h i s p r o c e s s . I l i s t e n e d through a l l the tapes and t r a n s c r i b e d episodes where there was a c o n s i s t e n t l e v e l of engagement between the teacher and the student w h i l e working on r e a d i n g or w r i t i n g . I looked f o r episodes which were t y p i c a l of the k i n d s of i n t e r a c t i o n I had observed and recorded. These were t r a n s c r i b e d v e r b a t i m on a t r a n s c r i p t i o n sheet (Appendix E) . The a n a l y s i s of a l l data was done by a p p l y i n g the t h e o r e t i c a l framework from the l i t e r a t u r e on a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e t o c h i l d r e n ' s language development t o the document data. T h i s i n v o l v e d d e v e l o p i n g working d e f i n i t i o n s f o r the terms which c h a r a c t e r i z e a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e (provided below) and a p p l y i n g those d e f i n i t i o n s t o the data. The goal was t o c o n t r a s t the a d u l t ' s r o l e i n two d i f f e r e n t language-based e n t e r p r i s e s ( o r a l and l i t e r a t e ) . The working d e f i n i t i o n s f o r framing and f o r m a t t i n g come from the d e s c r i p t i o n of the r o l e s p l a y e d by each a d u l t (see Table I) as d e s c r i b e d by Kaye and Bruner. In examples of framing behavior we would expect to see the a d u l t 1) en t e r i n t o i n t e r s u b j e c t i v i t y , 2) impute meaning t o c h i l d r e n s ' e f f o r t s , 3) b u i l d u n i t s of o r g a n i z e d a c t i v i t y based on c h i l d r e n ' s behavior and. 4) r e l y on the c h i l d r e n s ' development and r e p e t o i r e of behaviors a c q u i r e d i n exchanges to produce l e a r n i n g . In the case of f o r m a t t i n g , we would expect to see the teacher working at 1) engaging c h i l d r e n i n l i t e r a c y task, 2) m a i n t a i n i n g j o i n t involvement through t u r n - t a k i n g through out episodes of i n t e r a c t i o n , 3) c r e a t i n g r o u t i n e s of pat t e r n e d i n t e r a c t i o n , 4) a c c e p t i n g the c h i l d r e n s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n s as meaningful, 5) i n c o r p o r a t i n g c h i l d r e n s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n s i n t o the r o u t i n e , 6) making judgments about c o n t r i b u t i o n s and 7) handing over c o n t r o l of the r o u t i n e . The working d e f i n i t i o n s of semantic contingency, s c a f f o l d s , and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y are taken from the review i n Chapter Two. With semantic contingency we would expect t o see the te a c h e r s r e f l e c t i n g back a c h i l d ' s sense of meaning by r e p e a t i n g or extending the c h i l d ' s o f f e r i n g , or a s k i n g f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n . With s c a f f o l d s we would expect t o see the t e a c h e r s u s i n g v e r b a l s t r a t e g i e s t o s t r u c t u r e a complicated l i t e r a c y event so t h a t a c h i l d may access a p o r t i o n of i t . T h i s might i n v o l v e s u p p l y i n g some elements of the event or p r o v i d i n g p h rasing which c l a r i f i e s some aspect of a problem i n t e x t presented t o the c h i l d . With a c c o u n t a b i l i t y we would expect to see the teachers r e q u i r i n g a d i s p l a y of a c e r t a i n a b i l i t y which they judge the c h i l d r e n are capable of i n c o r p o r a t i n g i n t o t h e i r e f f o r t s w i t h l i t e r a c y t a s k s . The f i n a l a n a l y s i s of the data o c c u r r e d through the w r i t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s . The p h i l o s p h y of the program and the d e s c r i p t i o n of the s e t t i n g came from my informal o b s e r v a t i o n s and documents I had r e c e i v e d from the te a c h e r s under study and forms the main body of data i n Chapter Four. The d i s c u s s i o n of engagement and r o u t i n e s came from my formal o b s e r v a t i o n s and forms the main body of data i n Chapter F i v e . F i n a l l y the d i s c u s s i o n of s c a f f o l d i n g , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and semantic contingency came from the focussed o b s e r v a t i o n s i n c l u d i n g the t r a n s c r i p t s of audio tapes and forms the main body of data i n Chapter S i x . The s e l e c t i o n of m a t e r i a l to be i n c l u d e d i n the body of the study came from the data s e t a l l o c a t e d t o each chapter. T h i s s e l e c t i o n process was done wi t h an eye to the t y p i c a l and r e l e v a n t , but a l s o w i t h an eye to those episodes which had i n t r i n s i c v a l u e i n terms of my i n t e r e s t i n both good t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e and c h i l d r e n ' s c l e a r and spontaneous a b i l i t y t o respond t o the tasks at hand. T h e i r i n c l u s i o n here i s t o i l l u s t r a t e the t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t s under d i s c u s s i o n and a l s o as testimony to c h i l d r e n ' s c a p a c i t i e s , both i n terms of joy i n success and ch a l l e n g e i n d i f f i c u l t y . The data i s a l s o c r o s s - t a b u l a t e d . T h i s has been done by i n c l u d i n g m a t e r i a l which i l l u s t r a t e s each t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t from d i f f e r e n t data s e t s . The goal of the a n a l y s i s which i s rep r e s e n t e d i n the w r i t i n g , i s t o b r i n g i n t o focus the p a t t e r n which i s present i n the s e t t i n g . The key to the p a t t e r n i s , i n Schatzman and St r a u s ' terms, i n the linkage of the v a r i o u s elements documented. The data v e r i f i e s and r e i t e r a t e s i t s presence. Seeing t h i s p a t t e r n i s not a r e f l e c t i o n of my personal judgements, f o r t h i s i s not my purpose. Bogden and B i k l e n summarize the pupose of a n a l y s i s i n t h i s way, "A judgement 46 i s not the g o a l ; r a t h e r , the goal i s to understand the s u b j e c t ' s world and to determine how and w i t h what c r i t e r i a they judge i t " (p. 210). 47 Chapter Four: The S e t t i n g The purpose of t h i s chapter i s t o examine how the s e t t i n g of the study i s s t r u c t u r e d . Two aspects of t h a t s t r u c t u r e , the p h i l o s p h i c a l and the p h y s i c a l , w i l l be examined. To look at p h i l o s o p h i c a l s t r u c t u r e I w i l l a n alyze the c u r r i c u l a r b e l i e f s which are the premise of the program and d e s c r i b e d i n documents c o l l e c t e d on the s i t e . In a d d i t i o n , a d e s c r i p t i o n of implementation of those b e l i e f s w i l l be p r o v i d e d u s i n g m a t e r i a l s from my f i e l d notes d e s c r i b i n g c h i l d r e n and t e a c h e r s engaged i n v a r i o u s a c t i v i t i e s . To d e s c r i b e the s e t t i n g I w i l l use m a t e r i a l from my f i e l d notes which p e r t a i n s t o the p h y s i c a l s e t t i n g , the personnel and the r o u t i n e s . E n t r y i n t o the S i t e My i n i t i a l c o n t a c t w i t h the Centre which became the s i t e f o r t h i s study occured i n October 1985. The Centre was one of t e n p o t e n t i a l p racticum placements f o r f o u r t h and f i f t h y ear Primary Education students from the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. These placements were the r e s u l t of c o l l a b o r a t i v e work between Dr. Kenneth Reeder and Dr. Hi 1 l e i Goelman of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia's Department of Language Education, and p r a c t i s i n g teachers i n the lower mainland who shared an i n t e r e s t i n r e s e a r c h i n emergent l i t e r a c y . The i n t e n t was to augment the Language A r t s C u r r i c u l u m and I n s t r u c t i o n course being taught by Dr. Goelman w i t h a seminar and praticum placements where theory and d e s c r i p t i o n were being put i n t o p r a c t i c e . My r o l e as t e a c h i n g a s s i s t a n t was to support Dr. Reeder i n s u p e r v i s i o n of the students and to support Dr. Goelman i n p r e s e n t i n g s e l e c t e d methods by l e c t u r e and demonstration. As I a c q u a i n t e d myself w i t h the teachers who were o f f e r i n g student t e a c h i n g placements, I was p l e a s e d to encounter a former graduate c o l l e a g u e who was a L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e teacher, working as a team member, i n a Centre t a k i n g a student t e a c h e r . Ann 1 had been i n a graduate seminar on Emergent L i t e r a c y I had a l s o attended the y e a r before under the d i r e c t i o n of Dr. Reeder. During seminar d i s c u s s i o n s , she and I shared a p e r s p e c t i v e on the importance of a t t e n t i o n t o c h i l d r e n ' s s e l f - e s t e e m i n the l e a r n i n g environment. We a l s o shared the c o n v i c t i o n t h a t i t was important to study the l e a r n i n g of l i t e r a c y i n the s o c i a l contexts i n which i t o c c u r s . As I spent time w i t h Ann and her c o l l e a g u e Marion p r i o r t o s u p e r v i s i n g students i n t h e i r Centre, I d i s c o v e r e d the depth of t h e i r knowledge and experience w i t h the l i t e r a t u r e on language development and the development of l i t e r a c y . The program Ann and her c o l l e a g u e s had c o n s t r u c t e d was the product of s e v e r a l y e a r s of combined i n q u i r y , r e s e a r c h and p r a c t i c e i n the realm of how c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e 1 Teachers and c h i l d r e n r e f e r r e d t o i n t h i s document are renamed u s i n g pseudonymns. 49 l i t e r a c y . In d e v e l o p i n g t h e i r program they had been i n f l u e n c e d by other w r i t e r s i n emergent l i t e r a c y (Bissex, 1980; Clay, 1975; Graves, 1983; Holdaway, 1979; Smith, 1978). Ann and Marion's r e s e a r c h work had focussed on documenting the stages of development through which c h i l d r e n advance i n a p r o c e s s - c e n t e r e d l i t e r a c y program. An important aspect of t h i s program, which had l i t t l e documentation, concerned a d e s c r i p t i o n of the r o l e of the teacher i n the s t u d e n t ' s l e a r n i n g process. I began t o t h i n k i n terms of a study i n t h i s s e t t i n g where I c o u l d i n v e s t i g a t e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e i n a program u s i n g process of r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g p r i n c i p l e s . When I approached Ann and Marion with my ideas they w i l l i n g l y o f f e r e d t h e i r consent to be part of a study. The t e a c h e r s who designed and implemented t h i s program are the s u b j e c t s of t h i s r e s e a r c h study. T h e i r b e l i e f s and endeavors are the focus of my extended o b s e r v a t i o n s to document how they teach through i n t e r a c t i o n . 2 C u r r i c u l a r B e l i e f s Three documents c o l l e c t e d from the study s i t e w i l l be examined to e x p l i c a t e the b e l i e f s which provide the f o u n d a t i o n f o r the programming i n t h i s s e t t i n g . 3 F o r m a l e n t r y i n t o t h i s s e t t i n g f o r the purposes of conducting academic r e s e a r c h i n v o l v e d the p r e s e n t a t i o n of the t o p i c and the method of i n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r review to The U n i v e r s i t y E t h i c s Committee and the Vancouver School Board. P e r m i s s i o n to conduct t h i s r e s e a r c h was granted i n the S p r i n g 1986. The t e a c h e r s i n t h i s study express the b e l i e f t h a t the f a c t o r s which c o n t r i b u t e p o s i t i v e l y t o o r a l language development a l s o c o n t r i b u t e p o s i t i v e l y t o the development of l i t e r a c y . They are expressed i n t h e i r document on P r i n c i p l e s Which Nurture the Growth of Emergent W r i t i n g (Appendix D). T h i s document o r i g i n a t e s i n Marion's e a r l i e r r e s e a r c h and has become the core s e t of g u i d e l i n e s shared by the t e a c h e r s i n t h i s program. E x p l i c a t i n g the t e x t of the P r i n c i p l e s g i v e s a p i c t u r e of the e x p e c t a t i o n s the t e a c h e r s h o l d f o r themselves and the c h i l d r e n w i t h which they work. These i n c l u d e e x p e c t a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g a t t i t u d e s , the a c t i o n s of t e a c h e r s and c h i l d r e n , and the expected course of development i n w r i t i n g s k i l l s . What f o l l o w s i s the t e x t s a n d a n e l a b o r a t i o n of the b e l i e f s . 1. P r o v i d e a warm s e t t i n g r i c h i n i n t e r a c t i o n s and  demonstrations of f u n c t i o n a l o r a l language and l i t e r a c y . The emotional environment i n which the c h i l d works i s important. I t s e t s the tone f o r l e a r n i n g and should c o n t a i n examples of the k i n d s of behaviors c h i l d r e n are expected to perform. They are not expected to act i n i s o l a t i o n , but to f o l l o w g i v e n models. 2. Emphasize the process of w r i t i n g r a t h e r than the  product. I t i s the e x p l o r a t o r y p r a c t i c e of l i t e r a c y s k i l l s which c r e a t e s l e a r n i n g of those s k i l l s . 3 T h e order of the items i n the t e x t i s changed. 51 3. Respond t o the intended, meaning of the c h i l d r e n ' s  w r i t i n g f i r s t . The important connnection between c h i l d and a d u l t i n language l e a r n i n g i s intended meaning. Intended meaning and i t s s o c i a l e x p r e s s i o n i s a l s o h e l d as the prime m o t i v a t o r f o r c o n t i n u e d engagement i n e x p r e s s i o n . 4. Expect c h i l d r e n t o come up with t h e i r own t o p i c s t o  in s u r e t h a t w r i t i n g i s meaningful and pur p o s e f u l from t h e i r  p o i n t of view. Given the importance of the c h i l d ' s message i t i s a c o r o l l a r y t o expect t o p i c s i n i t i a t e d by c h i l d r e n . 5. Encourage the c h i l d r e n to use t h e i r own i l l u s t r a t i o n s as  a source and support f o r t h e i r w r i t i n g . The c h i l d r e n are a l s o expected t o use t h e i r p i c t u r e s as pa r t of the s t r a t e g y of communicating t h e i r message. 6. Some a t t e n t i o n can be pa i d to form, but onl y when the  c h i l d r e n i n d i c a t e they are ready t o use i t i n t h e i r work. Usage i s seen as a form of l e g i t i m a t e e x p r e s s i o n , as i s . T h i s b e l i e f i s l i n k e d t o the f o l l o w i n g one concerning the developmental, r u l e - g o v e r n e d nature of the language l e a r n i n g e n t e r p r i s e . 7. Expect a developmental p r o g r e s s i o n i n the c h i l d r e n ' s  w r i t i n g e f f o r t s , over time. Have conf i d e n c e t h a t e r r o r s are  n a t u r a l r a t h e r than h a b i t - f o r m i n g and th a t c h i l d r e n w i l l  s e l f - c o r r e c t i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n t o t h e i r stage of development. An u n d e r l y i n g assumption present here i s th a t the c h i l d r e n w i l l work f i r s t at a g l o b a l l e v e l and then g r a d u a l l y r e f i n e t h e i r usage. That refinement w i l l i n c l u d e the i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f s p e c i f i c a n d c o n v e n t i o n a l s y m b o l s a s t h e y r e c o g n i z e t h e i r v a l i d i t y . 8. P r e s e n t t h e w r i t i n g t a s k a s a p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g e n t e r p r i s e  i n w h i c h t h e c h i l d r e n l e a r n t o w r i t e by w r i t i n g u s i n g t h e i r  i n i t i a t i v e a n d a l l r e s o u r c e s a t t h e i r d i s p o s a l t o d i s c o v e r  t h e m e a n i n g a n d t o s o l v e p r o b l e m s o f f o r m . The w r i t i n g e n t e r p r i s e i s s e e n as an o c c a s i o n i n w h i c h t h i n k i n g s t r a t e g i e s a r e t o be d e v e l o p e d . The f o c u s i s t h e l i t e r a c y t a s k ; t h e s k i l l s a n d s t r a t e g i e s a r e l i n k e d t o p r o c e s s e s o f h i g h e r c o g n i t i o n . 9. E v a l u a t e i n d i v i d u a l l y b o t h i n t e r m s o f t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a l  p r o g r e s s i o n a n d i n t e r m s o f t h e i r own o r a l l a n g u a g e . The c h i l d i s w o r k i n g i n r e l a t i o n t o h i m s e l f a n d h i s own i n t r i n s i c t i m e t a b l e f o r g r o w t h . A c h i l d ' s l i t e r a c y d e v e l o p m e n t c a n n o t be a c c u r a t e l y e v a l u a t e d w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e t o h i s o r a l l a n g u a g e a b i l i t i e s . T h i s d o c u m e n t g i v e s d i r e c t i o n t o w h a t t e a c h e r a n d l e a r n e r a r e e x p e c t e d t o be d o i n g t o f o s t e r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f l i t e r a c y t h r o u g h w r i t i n g . B e i n g c o n c e r n e d w i t h m e a n i n g i s a m a i n theme w h i c h e m e r g e s . I n t h e i r f o l l o w i n g t h e P r i n c i p l e s . t h e t e a c h e r s a r e a d h e r i n g t o a c e n t r a l theme t h a t i t i s c r i t i c a l n o t t o l o s e m e a n i n g i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t h e a p p r o p r i a t e c o n v e n t i o n . T h a t commitment t o c h i l d r e n a nd t h e i r m e a n i n g c a n be s e e n i n t h e e x c h a n g e s b e t w e e n t e a c h e r a n d s t u d e n t . H e r e a g r a d e one s t u d e n t r e a d s h e r j o u r n a l e n t r y t o Ann. The a c t u a l t e x t w h i c h t h e c h i l d w r o t e was: t o d a y my F a d s y a z e p l a g r a s l g . I t was a c c o m p a n i e d b y a 53 p i c t u r e of two s m i l i n g people, one k i c k i n g out h i s foo t , next to a t r e e . Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Student (re a d i n g h i s t e x t slowly) Today my friend was playing wrestling. Oh. is this him with his foot coming out here? Yes, and he is playing. Do they trip people when they're wrestling? Yeah, and they, they fight and you know, they have to throw them down and the other one have to count and when they count the other one win. Oh, so if I get somebody down and count... No, the other one count. 1, 2, 3. Oh, there is a referee! Yeah, and he counts up to three and when he dos ( s i c ) that guy wins." (June 4) F o l l o w i n g the P r i n c i p l e s , t e a c h e r comments are based on the c h i l d ' s meaning as expressed i n h i s t e x t and i n h i s p i c t u r e s . In a s i m i l a r example, the teacher again c o n f e r s w i t h a grade one student who has j u s t w r i t t e n the f o l l o w i n g e n t r y i n h i s j o u r n a l : the boy pad Bask B a l l and the J e t - . I t i s accompanied by a p i c t u r e of a boy next t o a house w i t h a b a l l . A j e t looms larg e i n the sky above the house. Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Jason, could you read yours to me...please. The boy played basketball and the jet. ( r e f e r r i n g to the p i c t u r e ) I see his hoop, right? This is the boy that's playing basketball. What is the jet doing? He is carrying it. He's carrying it...Tell me more about that. He's gonna take it. To his place. Oh. You mean the jet is going to lift this right up. (June 3) A A 1 1 i t a l i c i z e d t e x t r e p r e s e n t s v e r b a t i m speech taken from t r a n s c r i p t s of speech recorded i n the s e t t i n g . 54 In o r d e r t o provide a simple statement which d e s c r i b e s and e x p l a i n s t h e i r program, the t e a c h i n g team c o n s t r u c t e d a b r i e f overview e n t i t l e d L i t e r a c y f o r Everyone (Appendix E ) . Intended f o r parents and t h e i r many v i s i t o r s , i t i s a co n c i s e p h i l o s o p h i c a l statement supplemented by a d e s c r i p t i o n of p r a c t i c e and examples of c h i l d r e n ' s endeavors. There i s a l s o a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of the r o l e of c o n f e r e n c i n g as the main instrument of d i r e c t t e a c h i n g . The t i t l e L i t e r a c y f o r Everyone and repeated r e f e r e n c e to h o l i s t i c approaches a c r o s s c u l t u r a l and l i n g u i s t i c d i v e r s i t y h i g h l i g h t s the team's view that the process of l i t e r a c y a c q u i s i t i o n i s developmental and s y s t e m a t i c r e g a r d l e s s of the p a r t i c u l a r s of language and background. L e a r n i n g i n a h o l i s t i c manner r e f e r s t o l e a r n i n g based on what i s whole and meaningful t o the c h i l d . In t h i s case that r e f e r s to re a d i n g t e x t which i s l i t e r a t u r e and encouraging c h i l d r e n t o f i n d p e r s o n a l l y meaningful messages i n what they read. Here a grade two student has read and then r e t o l d Jack i n the Beanstalk. He i s being asked t o t a l k about the s t o r y ' s message. Teacher: What a long story you told. You are out of breath. So. what was the real problem in the story. Kenny. Kenny: Jack and his Mom wanna be rich. Wanna be rich. Teacher: Yes, right. And did someone learn a lesson? Kenny: The Big One. Teacher: What did he learn. The Big One? Kenny: I don't know. I think he don't kill people. I don't know. Teacher: Well, think about it for a moment. What might he have learned? Kenny: Don't get mad at the little people. The little persons... the children...cause they only a little kid. Teacher: Oh, what a nice thing to learn. Do you feel that sometimes in your own life? Can you tell me of a situation like that? Kenny: Oh. I forgot. Teacher: When you are saying don't hurt the little people. Kenny: Yeah. The little kids. Teacher: Have you had a problem with that? Ke n ny: Some times. Teacher: Yes, what happens? Kenny: Well, if you kill these little children, they'll be dead and they have to learn the lesson. Don't kill the little people. Teacher: Don't kill the little people.. that 's quite a lesson. We could all take a lesson from this story. Do you ever put a lesson on your stories? Kenny. I don't know. (June 4) The r o l e of the teacher s h i f t s w i t h the c u r r i c u l u m o r i e n t a t i o n b e i n g adopted i n t h i s program. T h i s changed r o l e i s r e f l e c t e d i n the document on R e s p o n s i b i 1 i t i e s (Appendix F) prepared as a g u i d e l i n e f o r t e a c h e r s to understand t h e i r p l a c e i n the c h i l d ' s process of l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g . The c h i l d i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r engaging i n the process and g e n e r a t i n g the a c t i v i t y f o r h i m s e l f . He i s i n c o n t r o l of the s t r a t e g i e s and t h e i r deployment. The teac h e r sees h e r s e l f as a p a r t n e r i n that process, s u p p o r t i n g and f a c i l i t a t i n g the engagement. D i f f e r e n t aspects of the r o l e of the t e a c h e r and c h i l d are c o n t a i n e d i n the l i s t of R e s p o n s i b i 1 i t i e s . S e v e r a l of them va r y g r e a t l y with c o n v e n t i o n a l t e a c h i n g wisdom. Conventional wisdom o f t e n does not g i v e s e r i o u s weight t o a c h i l d ' s e x i s t e n t u nderstanding or to the a r r a y of s t r a t e g i e s he has used to ga i n t h a t understanding. In t h i s s e t t i n g the teachers r e l y on t h a t understanding and those s t r a t e g i e s . They expect a 56 c h i l d t o continue to employ them. The teacher's r o l e a d j u s t s by acknowledging and r e f l e c t i n g on the s u c c e s s f u l s t r a t e g i e s and the a p p r o p r i a t e knowledge t h a t the c h i l d demonstrates. The c h i l d ' s t a c i t knowledge then becomes more e x p l i c i t . Here the teacher i s l i s t e n i n g t o a grade three boy read The Sunflower t h a t Went F l o p (Cowley, 1982). Student: ( r e a d i n g from the t e x t ) The sunflower was hot and...No...The sun was hot and days ( s i c ) the next afternoon and suddenly the sunflower went flop... commenting on the i l l u s t r a t i o n showing the sunflower) Its, its had it...(having t r o u b l e reading) j gotta read it, read that thing before I read it out loud. Teacher: Oh. O.K. Student: What a shame said the people passing by... Teacher: Uhhmm Student: Mrs. Brown. ..(stumbles) It's...ahh. I don't know that word. I gotta try the rest of the sentence. It's it again, she said. It's done it again.' Teacher: Good. That was an excel lent strategy. (June 2) In another example, Marion works w i t h a grade two student. Her q u e s t i o n i n g s t r a t e g y again supports the rea d e r ' s c o n t r o l of h i s e f f o r t s t o d e r i v e meaning from the t e x t . Teacher: Student: Teacher: Student Teacher Student Teacher Student: Teacher: You see if it makes sense. Start again. (reading) We have to sell these logs down the river to the mill. Does that make sense? To sell these logs down the river to the mill? O.K. Where do you think the problem lies? Get your brain to think it through. Sawed? We have to what? Sawed. Sawed. We have to sawed these logs down the river to the mill. What do they have to do with these logs? Forget about the print. Just explain it to me. Use your picture clues too. What do the men have to do? They cut them down. They put them in the water. Yes. 57 Student: They cut them up. Teacher: Yes, so what happens in the water then? Student: They, umm, the logs, they push them down the water. Teacher: That's right, so you have understood. Keep reading. (May 28) The t e a c h e r s who are the focus of t h i s study have adopted a r o l e they b e l i e v e i n t r o d u c e s and strengthens the c h i l d ' s i n n e r process of d e r i v i n g b e n e f i t from c o n t a c t w i t h t e x t . From t h e i r framework on Responsibi1 i t i e s we can deduce the o u t l i n e of t h e i r p e r c e i v e d r o l e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the c h i l d making sense out of t e x t . In t h e i r r o l e they approach the c h i l d honoring meaning-making as a v a l i d p rocess i n i t s e l f and l e t r e c o g n i t i o n of the p a r t i c u l a r phonemic, graphemic and s y n t a c t i c cues that f o s t e r t h a t process be secondary t o the a c t u a l meaning. Here Marion works w i t h a grade two student who has f a l t e r e d because he cannot decode a word. Teacher: Student Teacher Student Teacher Student Teacher Student: Teacher: Student; Teacher O.K. Can you tell me about that ? What do you understand. What about the animals. What is he ( p o i n t i n g ) doing? ( i n a u d i b l e ) What does he want? Peanuts. O.K. Have you ever heard of what you say when a pet is showing that they want som e food. What do we call it? What are they doing? Hungry. They are hungry. But we say they are doing something. They are like asking for food. Only theycan't use language. They can't say, "I am hungry." So, what do they do? They. . .bark? They bark to show, yes. It 's a kind of speaking. Sometimes they might show without barking, too. What is it that they are doing in fact? Can you think of a word that describes that? Begging? Could that be? Try it with the print. 58 Student: ( r e a d i n g from book) The animals were begging for peanuts. Teacher: What have you done? Just pause for a moment. You worked that out for yourself. I did't have to tell you what the word was. How did you do that? Student: ( p o i n t i n g ) Cause this is begged. Teacher: Well, how did you know that? Student: It has to be a ( l e t t e r ) b. Teacher: It. does, but you figured it out from the picture, but also from what you know in your head, and from a situation. Do you sometimes see animals begging? Student: Oh, I haven't seen them. Teacher: Well, when you read you use what you know and what you understand. (June 2) With support fromm the teacher, the c h i l d s y n t h e s i z e s h i s own knowledge i n the act of a p p l y i n g i t . The t e a c h i n g r o l e b e i n g o u t l i n e d i n these documents i s one based on p a r t n e r s h i p , feedback and problem s o l v i n g between master and a p p r e n t i c e . The b a s i s f o r i n t e r a c t i o n between t e a c h e r and student i s the c h i l d ' s own endeavors. P h y s i c a l Set-up and Personnel During the l a s t weeks of February and beginning of March 1986 I d i d a s e r i e s of four o b s e r v a t i o n s t o e s t a b l i s h the b a s i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of the s e t t i n g and to focus my b a s i c r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . The school which houses the Centre i s s i t u a t e d i n the East End of Vancouver. The neighborhood i s m u l t i - c u l t u r a l and i s the home of many A s i a n and East Indian f a m i l i e s . Ann and Marion were both L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e t e a c h e r s who shared a t e a c h i n g assignment and t e a c h i n g space w i t h two other t e a c h e r s . One of t h e i r c o l l e a g u e s , Jan, was the E n g l i s h Second Language teacher. The f o u r t h teacher, Margaret, was a l s o a L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e teacher and the newest member of t h i s team. I d i s c o v e r e d i n my informal t a l k s w i t h Ann and Marion t h a t they had p r e v i o u s l y taught together w i t h Jan at another East Vancouver s c h o o l . The former school and i t s p u p i l s had been the s i t e of some of t h e i r e a r l i e s t r e s e a r c h work on Emergent L i t e r a c y . They had done the ground work f o r e s t a b l i s h i n g the p r i n c i p l e s and r o u t i n e s f o r working wi t h c h i l d r e n t h a t they were p r e s e n t l y u s i n g . They had moved as a u n i t to t h e i r present school the p r e v i o u s F a l l . In the present s c h o o l the four teachers were j o i n t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e and E n g l i s h Second Language i n s t r u c t i o n . The Centre was a l a r g e , spacious area c o n s i s t i n g of two a d j o i n i n g rooms, both of which had access to the h a l l s on the f i r s t f l o o r of the school b u i l d i n g . T h i s j o i n t use of space by two programs r e f l e c t e d the t e a c h e r s ' b a s i c assumptions t h a t t h e i r t e a c h i n g approach responded to b a s i c needs i n l i t e r a c y development f o r both student p o p u l a t i o n s . As the s m a l l e r of the two rooms was used almost e x c l u s i v e l y by the ESL teacher, i t was not c e n t r a l to t h i s study. The l a r g e r room was the main working area f o r Jan and Marion who became the focus of the study. T h i s room was used by four t e a c h e r s . They had s e t i t up a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r p h ilosophy and needs and were o f t e n a l l present working t o g e t h e r . (See F i g u r e 1.) C h i l d r e n , teachers and v i s i t o r s entered the room from the main h a l l . Immediately to the l e f t of the doorway was a 60 Figure 1 The Learning Assistance Centre teacher storage area low s h e l f w i t h cubbies. They were arranged by c l a s s and con t a i n e d the c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g f o l d e r s with work and r e c o r d s h e e t s . To the r i g h t of the doorway was a l a r g e f l a t t a b l e w i t h books arranged on i t . At any one time t h e r e were upwards t o f i f t y books arranged t h e r e . The t i t l e s were a l l taken from c h i l d r e n ' s l i t e r a t u r e . They contained trade books, c h i l d r e n s ' s t a r t e r s e r i e s such as the S t o r y Box ( S h o r t l a n d P u b l i c a t i o n s ) , paperbacks and some hardback primary books with f a i r y t a l e s . The books i n t h i s l i b r a r y were s e l e c t e d by the te a c h e r s because they contained good l i t e r a t u r e , c o l o r f u l i l l u s t r a t i o n s , p r e d i c t a b l e s t o r y l i n e s and i n h e r e n t meaning. The s e l e c t i o n contained few p r e s c r i b e d r e a d e r s . A l l of the books were d i s p l a y e d l a y i n g f l a t w i t h the cover exposed. The c e n t r a l f l o o r space of the room contained t h r e e l a r g e round t a b l e s , two l a r g e r e c t a n g u l a r t a b l e s , and two s m a l l e r round t a b l e s . The arrangement of t h i s f u r n i t u r e sometimes v a r i e d a c c o r d i n g t o teacher or c h i l d d e c i s i o n . Each t e a c h e r g e n e r a l l y worked i n a s p e c i f i c area of the room. The layout of the room r e f l e c t e d c l e a r l y what the t e a c h e r s wanted from the c h i l d r e n i n terms of r o u t i n e s f o r en t r y and s e t t l i n g t o work. The c h i l d r e n were very accustomed t o t h i s r o u t i n e which i s d e s c r i b e d below. Three g i r l s e n t e r , go t o cubbies and p i c k up t h e i r f o l d e r s . They ask f o r Marion, and are t o l d she i s coming and that they should c a r r y on with what they are supposed to do. They go to t a b l e C, put down t h e i r f o l d e r s and chat amongst themselves, look around the room (at ot h e r s working), and t r y to engage i n c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h s e v e r a l boys working at t a b l e B. Three boys enter, look around, p i c k up t h e i r f o l d e r s and s e t t l e at an a d j a c e n t t a b l e . Marion e n t e r s , surveys the room and comments to the c h i l d r e n how wonderful i t i s that they have organized themselves. (February 10) s Marion's comment i s i n t e r e s t i n g , because i t acknowledges both the e x p e c t a t i o n , and t h e i r s u c c e s s f u l compliance w i t h i t . Once the c h i l d r e n proceeded to a t a b l e , they would t y p i c a l l y open t h e i r f o l d e r s and begin to e i t h e r read, w r i t e or d i s c u s s the m a t e r i a l they were working on. S u r v e y i n g the room, my impression was o f t e n t h a t the a c t i v i t i e s t a k i n g p l a c e c o u l d best be d e s c r i b e d as small t u t o r i a l s . Each c h i l d or group of c h i l d r e n worked at a t a b l e they seemed to know was t h e i r s . They were j o i n e d by a teacher who a l s o was t h e i r s f o r t h a t p e r i o d , and the work proceeded from t h e r e . Here i s a s e l e c t i o n from my e a r l y notes r e c o r d i n g the t y p i c a l flow of a c t i v i t e s i n the s e t t i n g . 10:56 There are f i v e groups each with one a d u l t doing. Verbal i n t e r a c t i o n s are s p e c i f i c t o one c h i l d , and the task at hand. Marion i s at G t a l k i n g about comets. The group i s s h a r i n g s c i e n c e books about c o n s t e l l a t i o n s and outer space. The whole room i s working at a low hum. Marion moves around the t a b l e to another student and asks what she i s working on. They d i s c u s s i t t o g e t h e r . The c h i l d r e n seem ro o t e d to t h e i r t a b l e s ; there i s l i t t l e moving about. The students get up to get s u p p l i e s or change books, but r e t u r n to t h e i r work p l a c e . 11:07 Teachers at each t a b l e are e i t h e r t a l k i n g with students or w r i t i n g . Marion has moved to l a s t c h i l d at her t a b l e . Jan hasn't moved around her t a b l e . SA11 indented m a t e r i a l r e p r e s e n t s f i e l d notes gathered i n the s e t t i n g on the date i n d i c a t e d . but s t a y s s t a t i o n e r y while students are w r i t i n g . She has a c l i p b o a r d of what appear t o be r e c o r d sheets. She moves to D where a student who has been r e a d i n g t o h i m s e l f i s working. She s t a p l e s something t o h i s f o l d e r . Two more boys come i n and j o i n the group at G. (February 10) While these small groups worked, i t was a l s o not uncommon to see a c h i l d working alone. A c h i l d i s working alone at D. He i s r e a d i n g aloud t o h i m s e l f - going q u i c k l y through a book - r e c i t i n g t o h i m s e l f , t u r n i n g pages q u i c k l y . Toward the end, he focuses i n t e n t l y on the l a s t page, c l o s e s the book, makes a note i n h i s f o l d e r , chooses a second book, reads aloud t o h i m s e l f w i t h g e s t u r e s and movements. He makes another note i n h i s f o l d e r and moves to a t h i r d book. He f o l l o w s the t e x t w i t h h i s f i n g e r . He f i n i s h e s t h i s book. and get s up and c r o s s e s to the book t a b l e t o make another s e l e c t i o n . (February 10) T h i s c h i l d , who looked about seven, continued t h i s r o u t i n e of s e l e c t i n g a book, r e a d i n g i t , r e c o r d i n g i n h i s f o l d e r f o r at l e a s t f i f t e e e n minutes without any d i r e c t i o n . When the Centre was i n f u l l use, a l l of the round t a b l e s c o n t a i n e d groups of c h i l d r e n w i t h an a d u l t . At the b u s i e s t times t h e r e c o u l d be c l o s e to t w e n t y - f i v e c h i l d r e n working, w i t h the fo u r teachers, and o f t e n another a d u l t v o l u n t e e r , p r e s e n t . T h i s put the r a t i o of a d u l t t o c h i l d r e n at about 1:5 at peak times. I t was o f t e n l e s s , never more. The Centre was used most h e a v i l y i n the morning, and a l l of my o b s e r v a t i o n s were done d u r i n g t h i s time. A l l of the f o u r t e a c h e r s who worked i n the Centre worked part-time by c h o i c e . Three of these teachers were pursuing graduate degrees or p u b l i s h i n g i n t h e i r f i e l d and so had on-going 64 w r i t i n g p r o j e c t s of t h e i r own. The s e n i o r members of t h i s team, Ann, Jan and Marion were a l l i n v o l v e d i n conducting p r o f e s s i o n a l development work f o r c o l l e a g u e s i n and out of t h e i r d i s t r i c t . The Centre was a l s o v i s i t e d by other t e a c h e r s wanting more i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e i r program and how i t worked. Adult v i s i t o r s and v o l u n t e e r s were a common enough occurrence i n t h i s s e t t i n g and d i d not seem to d i s t u r b the c h i l d r e n . The a c t i v i t i e s i n the Centre worked on a scheduled b a s i s w i t h f l e x i b i l i t y . The morning was d i v i d e d up i n t o p e r i o d s , f o r each teacher. During those s p e c i f i e d times, a p a r t i c u l a r group of c h i l d r e n would be i n the Centre working w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r t e a c h e r . The p e r i o d s l a s t e d from t h i r t y t o f o r t y minutes and the groups c o n t a i n e d an average of f o u r c h i l d r e n . Ann worked almost e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h primary c h i l d r e n doing r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . Marion worked w i t h primary and intermediates r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . The c h i l d r e n ' s schedule r o t a t e d so t h a t they u s u a l l y came every o t h e r day, or three times per week depending on Marion's and Ann's assessment. Both Ann and Marion a l s o worked o u t s i d e of the Centre f o r a s e l e c t e d p e r i o d d u r i n g the morning. During t h i s time they would work i n classrooms where an extended w r i t i n g time was p a r t of the c h i l d r e n ' s day. They would conduct conferences w i t h the c h i l d r e n on an i n d i v i d u a l b a s i s d u r i n g t h a t w r i t i n g time. Having a b e t t e r understanding of the b a s i c o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Centre and how time and space were s e t up, I began to take a look at the a c t i v i t i e s . A c t i v i t i e s and Routines Whether th e r e were twenty c h i l d r e n and f i v e a d u l t s , or s i x c h i l d r e n and two a d u l t s , the b a s i c f e e l of t h i s Centre remained one of q u i e t , p u r p o s e f u l a c t i v i t y . As an observer, my f i r s t impressions were that I d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y know how the a c t i v i t i e s I observed were being generated, but to my eye they o c c u r r e d i n an e f f i c i e n t , p r e d i c t a b l e and a c c e p t i n g manner. There was very l i t t l e t e n s i o n between s t u d e n t s and t e a c h e r s , or between t e a c h e r s . Everyone seemed to have a p a r t t o p l a y , they knew t h e i r p a r t and p l a y e d i t w i t h ease. There was almost no need f o r the t e a c h e r s to a t t e n d o v e r t l y t o problems i n management or d i s c i p l i n e . Reminders as to a p p r o p r i a t e tasks were o f t e n presented as s u g g e s t i o n s . Here i s how a t y p i c a l p e r i o d would begin. 11:30 Marion comes i n t o the Centre and pushes t a b l e s together, and then goes and gets her grade two group. C h i l d r e n s t a r t t o pour i n , g e t t i n g t h e i r f o l d e r s . "Where's mine?" somebody says. " C a r e f u l f o l k s , " Marion responds. " I t would be n i c e i f each of you had a book, so when I come by you are ready." One student t e l l s Marion i t i s her b i r t h d a y . She wishes her happy b i r t h d a y . "Some of you have't f i n i s h e d your w r i t i n g . I want you to do t h a t f i r s t . I am g i v i n g you long paper," Marion says to a l l . (February 24) A f t e r the c h i l d r e n had entered the Centre, they would, on t h e i r own, begin to read, w r i t e or they would l i s t e n t o nearby d i s c u s s i o n . I f working alone r e a d i n g , i t would e i t h e r be aloud to themselves, or s i l e n t l y t o themselves. Sometimes they worked u s i n g a tape r e c o r d e r to r e c o r d and l i s t e n t o themselves r e a d i n g . Having completed a book, they would proceed to the book t a b l e and choose another one. In t h i s c ontext, " r e a d i n g " i n c l u d e d skimming, g l a n c i n g , s t u d y i n g ( p a r t i c u l a r l y p i c t u r e s ) r e c i t i n g a l oud (from apparent memory), s i n g i n g (as i n nursery rhymes or songs i n a book), r e a d i n g aloud (to s e l f or o c c a s i o n a l l y i n t o a tape r e c o r d e r ) and s u s t a i n e d s i l e n t r e a d i n g . The choosing of t e x t was i n the c h i l d ' s c o n t r o l , except where o c c a s i o n a l l y the t e a c h e r would a s s i s t i f a p a r t i c u l a r t i t l e was d e s i r e d f o r a m u t u a l l y d i s c u s s e d reason. In the e a r l i e r s e s s i o n s I observed l e s s spontaneous w r i t i n g on the p a r t of the c h i l d r e n . I t seemed they had to be cued to b e g i n t h i s . The room has been rearranged and two computers are not present a g a i n s t the window w a l l . Ann i s t a l k i n g w i t h the c h i l d r e n as they come i n , t e l l i n g them she wants t o w r i t e and read today. T h i s i s a Grade 2 group, and she p i c k s one boy i n p a r t i c u l a r and as he s i t s down w i t h h i s m a t e r i a l s , makes an agreement w i t h him about what s p e c i f i c time he w i l l do h i s w r i t i n g . He i s a small c h i l d and I cannot hear e v e r y t h i n g she says to him. Another student comes i n and Ann o r i e n t s him to one of the computers. He goes over and s t a r t s t o work, e x c i t e d . Two other c h i l d r e n are w a i t i n g at a t a b l e f o r Ann. They have t h e i r f o l d e r s and books ready She takes one of them back to the book t a b l e to s e l e c t a book. (March 5) Sometimes t h a t c u i n g would be a simple r e f e r e n c e to the w r i t i n g f o l d e r . Where are you i n here? ( i n d i c a t i n g the c h i l d ' s j o u r n a l ) (March 5th) W r i t i n g i n t h i s context i n c l u d e d the drawing of p i c t u r e s , d r a f t i n g and doing f i n a l v e r s i o n s of e d i t e d s t o r i e s . I t became apparent that w h i l e the c h i l d r e n seemed t o be engaging i n a g r e a t deal of independent a c t i v i t y , the t e a c h e r s ' presence i n shaping t h a t a c t i v i t y was c o n s i s t e n t , d i r e c t l y and i n d i r e c t l y . I turned my a t t e n t i o n to what the t e a c h e r s were doing. At f i r s t glance, t h i s seemed to be a c o n s i s t e n t mixture of s u r v e y i n g and engaging. They would glance around the room or t h e i r t a b l e to see how and what the c h i l d r e n were doing. They would then engage a c h i l d i n i n t e r a c t i o n . That i n t e r a c t i o n c o u l d be b r i e f , or extended. I t c o u l d be a cue to task, or a d i r e c t engagement w i t h the t a s k . I t s e r v e d r e p e a t e d l y to generate or extend the c h i l d ' s engagement. A c h i l d i s r e a d i n g The B i l l y Goats G r u f f aloud to Ann. He reads s l o w l y . When he has d i f f i c u l t y he s t a r t s squirming h i s body around, w h i l e keeping h i s eyes on the t e x t . I t seems a g r e a t e f f o r t f o r him. Ann reads a sentence or two f o r him w i t h g r e a t i n t o n a t i o n . A f t e r her example he uses more i n t o n a t i o n . . . H i s v o i c e gets louder and more u n n a t u r a l . He t e l l s Ann he i s t i r e d . She says "Wait a minute." She then summarizes the p l o t a c t i o n and adds "Let's see i f the problem gets s o l v e d . " He r e t u r n s to r e a d i n g . (March 5) 68 In another episode a grade three boy had been r e a d i n g to h i m s e l f f o r about ten minutes. Ann had passed him s e v e r a l times as she moved from c h i l d t o c h i l d . At one p o i n t she went over to him and he read aloud to her, s l o w l y . She asked him what was going to happen next i n the s t o r y . He stopped, g r i n n e d and gave her a r e p l y . She l e f t him f o r a few minutes to a s s i s t another c h i l d , and then r e t u r n e d to him. He reads aloud. Ann s t a r t s ( r e f e r r i n g t o the t e x t ) "Do you know what he snatched?" The student looks s t a r t l e d , and r e p l i e s "No." Ann r e p l i e s , "Well, r e a d i t a g a i n . " He looks at the book, p u z z l e d . She urges him again. He i s s t i l l p u z z l e d . "Well, use the i l l u s t r a t i o n , " she urges. He looks at the book again. "A l a n t e r n ! " he e x c l a i m s . "I thought you knew," says Ann. The student appears p l e a s e d and continues t o read, g l a n c i n g up once to s m i l e at her. (March 5) These engagements with the c h i l d were the b a s i s of the t e a c h i n g i n t h i s Centre. They occured g e n e r a l l y on a one to one b a s i s , though at times other c h i l d r e n would be drawn i n , or would simply watch and l i s t e n . R e l a t i o n s h i p of Conceptual Framework to the S i t e I n t u i t i v e l y I f e l t that what the t e a c h e r s were doing i n these engagements was s i m i l a r i n content and s t r u c t u r e to the f e a t u r e s of a d u l t speech documented i n the l i t e r a t u r e on the a d u l t ' s r o l e i n c h i l d language development. As the t e a c h e r s i n t h i s Centre had developed t h e i r model f o r l e a r n i n g l i t e r a c y based on the l i t e r a t u r e on o r a l language development, they had c a s t themselves i n an analogous r o l e t o t h a t of a parent. I had heard o t h e r teachers query them about what they were doing i n terms of a c t u a l t e a c h i n g . T h e i r answers to these q u e r i e s were not always d i r e c t or s p e c i f i c . I asked Ann i n February to d e s c r i b e the t e a c h i n g i t s e l f . She began by s a y i n g that she expected the c h i l d r e n ' s e f f o r t s to make sense, and she responded to t h a t I t was o n l y l a t e r t h a t the teachers r e a l i z e d there was a system i n a c t i o n and t h a t t h e i r responses to the c h i l d r e n were f a i r l y p r e d i c t a b l e . They then r e a l i z e d t h a t the responses were a t e a c h i n g d e v i c e . In Ann's words: In the b e g i n n i n g i t was o n l y us keeping up our end of the c o n v e r s a t i o n (with the c h i l d r e n ) . R e f u s i n g a c h i l d ' s statement of meaning w i l l stop the process. Refusing or c o r r e c t i n g the form or s t r u c t u r e i s what? How does a c h i l d take t h a t ? They see i t as r e f u s i n g t h e i r meaning, they don't separate the two. They are w i s e r than we are. (February 10) My i d e a was t h a t the " p r e d i c t a b l e " way of responding to the c h i l d might c o n t a i n some of the f e a t u r e s of parent speech a l r e a d y documented. The i n v e s t i g a t i o n became a search f o r d e s c r i p t i o n of what the teachers were doing and the s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h r e s p e c t to what parents do to a s s i s t c h i l d r e n l e a r n i n g language. Chapter F i v e : Routines and Engagement: Evidence f o r Frames and Formats i n T e a c h e i — C h i l d I n t e r a c t i o n The purpose of t h i s chapter i s to look at how engagements w i t h i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n were s t r u c t u r e d . In t h i s s e t t i n g , the r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g conferences themselves were o f t e n the o c c a s i o n of s u s t a i n e d engagement between student and teacher. Both my in f o r m a l and formal o b s e r v a t i o n s looked at what the te a c h e r s and c h i l d r e n were doing w i t h each other while working t o g e t h e r i n the Centre. I was p r i m a r i l y s e n s i t i v e to the v e r b a l exchanges which o c c u r r e d when r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g were the c e n t r a l event. My o b s e r v a t i o n s were guided by Kaye's s u p p o s i t i o n t h a t the a d u l t possesses the i n t u i t i v e a b i l i t y to guide a c h i l d ' s endeavors i n a c e r t a i n d i r e c t i o n by c r e a t i n g e n a b l i n g frameworks based on the c h i l d ' s own e f f o r t s . I expected t o see the t e a c h e r s merging the demands of the l i t e r a c y task w i t h the c h i l d r e n ' s e f f o r t s and comments and h o l d i n g them i n context u s i n g v e r b a l exchange. My o b s e r v a t i o n s were a l s o guided by Bruner's t h i n k i n g w i t h r e s p e c t to formatted i n t e r a c t i o n . In p a r t i c u l a r , I was concerned t o see evidence f o r two f e a t u r e s of f o r m a t t i n g : engagement and r o u t i n e s . He m a i n t a i n s t h a t one of the primary f e a t u r e s of a format i s engagement where the a d u l t manages to i n s u r e the c h i l d ' s optimum involvement i n m a i n t a i n i n g t h e i r j o i n t focus. How would engagement be managed i n t h i s s e t t i n g w i t h t h i s focus on l i t e r a c y t a s k s ? Would the t e a c h e r - c h i l d i n t e r a c t i o n show evidence of p r e d i c t a b i l i t y and c o n s i s t e n c y i n s t r u c t u r e 71 which f a c i l i t a t e d extended l i t e r a c y development? Reading and w r i t i n g are complex a c t i v i t i e s which i n v o l v e many s k i l l s and s t r a t e g i e s . Would r o u t i n e s between teacher and c h i l d e s t a b l i s h g u i d e l i n e s f o r a p p l y i n g those s k i l l s ? Both Kaye and Bruner speak i n terms of c h i l d - l e d and adult-managed engagement as the c e n t r a l f e a t u r e of framing and f o r m a t t i n g . I wanted t o see how these f e a t u r e s a p p l i e d to the t e a c h i n g p r a c t i s e d i n t h i s s e t t i n g . Evidence f o r Framing i n T e a c h e r - C h i l d I n t e r a c t i o n s The week I chose t o r e t u r n t o the school c o i n c i d e d w i t h the mounting of a school musical i n which a l l c l a s s e s were p a r t i c i p a t i n g . When I entered the school I went d i r e c t l y t o the p r i n c i p a l . He spoke with obvious p l e a s u r e about the p r o d u c t i o n . He a l s o mentioned t h a t while the c h i l d r e n were e x c i t e d and i n v o l v e d , the t e a c h e r s were i n v a r i o u s s t a t e s of d i s g r u n t l e m e n t concerning the d i s r u p t i o n s . When Ann met me at the L.A.C. door, one of her f i r s t comments was a concerned one about how the p r o d u c t i o n was d i s t u r b i n g r o u t i n e s i n the c e n t e r . The c h i l d r e n entered the c e n t e r i n small groups. There seemed to be fewer c h i l d r e n coming and they entered i r r e g u l a r l y t h a t f i r s t morning. My notes document two c h i l d r e n and t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s d u r i n g the f i r s t p e r i o d . 9:05 E n t e r s room. 9:15 Has chosen a book and gone to the t a p e - r e c o r d e r and i s p l a y i n g w i t h the buttons and humming to h i m s e l f . Ann comes to him and e x p l a i n s what he i s to do to s t a r t the tape. She s t a r t s i t f o r him. He s t a r t s t o read. She leaves him and r e t u r n s t o another c h i l d . 9:17 Bobby leaves the tape and comes to Ann's s i d e . She i s s u r p r i s e d . He i n s i s t s he has a l r e a d y read. She takes him back t o the tape and r e v e r s e s i t so he can l i s t e n t o h i m s e l f . She leaves him t o l i s t e n t o h i m s e l f . 9:23 Bobby leaves the tape and c r o s s e s the room t o t a l k t o another c h i l d who i s a l s o t a p i n g h i m s e l f . 9:25 Bobby asks i f he can leave and r e t u r n t o c l a s s . Ann r e p l i e s yes. He puts h i s t h i n g s away and le a v e s . ( A p r i l 15) The sense of t h i s episode i s of missed engagement. Yet Ann i s managing the i n t e r a c t i o n by f o l l o w i n g Bobby's lead. Using the essence of each p l a y e r ' s t u r n as the i n t r o d u c t i o n of a t o p i c or comment upon a t o p i c , and s e p a r a t i n g the r o l e of t e a c h e r and student, a p a t t e r n of t u r n - t a k i n g and engagement emerges. S c h e m a t i c a l l y , i t looks l i k e t h i s : Bobby p l a y i n g w i t h tape r e c o r d e r reads r e t u r n s t o Ann l i s t e n s t o r e c o r d i n g walks away re q u e s t s t o leave Ann suggests he use tape r e c o r d e r t o read s e t s up r e c o r d e r r e - e s t a b l i s h e s task w i t h d i f f e r e n t focus p e r m i s s i o n to leave I t i s c l e a r t h a t the c h i l d l e d the i n t e r a c t i o n and that Ann's responses l e d from h i s a c t i o n s . The d i r e c t i o n of the i n c i d e n t takes i t s shape from her management and her management f o l l o w e d h i s lead. For i n s t a n c e , he i s p l a y i n g w i t h the t a p e - r e c o r d e r . She uses t h a t to introduce u s i n g the tape f o r the task of r e a d i n g . The s t r a t e g y of u s i n g what the c h i l d i s doing t o i n t r o d u c e what i s to be done i s f e a t u r e of framing behavior. One ot h e r c h i l d was working under Ann's s u p e r v i s i o n at the same time. He r e c e i v e d more of her a t t e n t i o n . 9:05 Alex e n t e r s the room, p i c k s up h i s w r i t i n g f o l d e r . 9:09 Ann approaches Alex and goes over h i s s t o r y r e c o r d w i t h him. She qu e s t i o n s him, he r e t e l l s a s t o r y . They d i s c u s s i t . 9:15 They are s t i l l d i s c u s s i n g s t o r i e s , but the t o p i c has changed t o the general one of baby animals. 9:15 Ann asks him i f he has recorded h i s r e a d i n g r e c e n t l y . He says no. She s e t s up the tape r e c o r d e r f o r him w h i l e e x p l a i n i n g how to do i t . He reads. She leaves him. 9:35 Ann r e t u r n s t o Alex. At t h i s p o i n t he i s l i s t e n i n g t o h i m s e l f . She l i s t e n s w i t h him, then leaves. 9:40 Ann r e t u r n s to him, comments about what he has read. She then shows him where to s t o r e h i s tape. He packs up and leaves the Center. ( A p r i l 15) Ann i n i t i a t e s the engagement by j o i n i n g him. T h e i r t a l k i s about s t o r i e s , then about a general t o p i c from the s t o r i e s . From t h i s she moves him i n t o r e a d i n g i n t o the tape r e c o r d e r The i n c i d e n t d i f f e r s from the pr e v i o u s one i n the amount of t a l k which preceded the t a p i n g s e s s i o n . Here i s the schematic r e p r e s e n t i o n : Alex Ann s i t t i n g w i t h f o l d e r asks about s t o r i e s read r e t e l l s t o r y questions about s t o r y c o n t i n u e s r e t e l l i n g comment response reads i n t o tape l i s t e n s t o s e l f r e a d i n g c o n t i n u e s to r e a d and 1 i s t e n puts t h i n g s away and leaves i n t r o d u c t i o n of baby animal t o p i c query about tape s e t up tape j o i n s i n l i s t e n i n g comments on r e a d i n g shows where to s t o r e tape Ann begins the engagement by s i t t i n g w i t h Alex. T h e i r t o p i c of c o n v e r s a t i o n r e l a t e s d i r e c t l y t o h i s r e c o r d i n the f o l d e r he i s h o l d i n g . As w i t h the p r e v i o u s i n c i d e n t the te a c h e r uses elements of what the c h i l d i s doing t o i n i t i a t e f u r t h e r a c t i v i t y . T h i s s e s s i o n i s devoted to review and p r a c t i c e . Ann d i r e c t s him, agai n based on what i s e s t a b l i s h e d between them by h i s leads. In t h i s case h i s endeavors w i t h the tape are i n t r i n s i c a l l y m o t i v a t i n g enough f o r him to continue u n a s s i s t e d f o r a longer p e r i o d than Bobby. He s u c c e s s f u l l y engages h i m s e l f i n the task she s e t s . On the f o l l o w i n g day, the r o u t i n e s of engagement appear again, but the focus changes. Here three c h i l d r e n are working t o g e t h e r d u r i n g the same p e r i o d under Ann's s u p e r v i s i o n . Again, she manages each of them i n separate episodes of i n t e r a c t i o n . When the c h i l d r e n f i r s t e n t e r , she immediately approaches M i t c h e l l w i t h a request t h a t he read something he has p r e v i o u s l y w r i t t e n . 75 9:00 Ann s t a r t s M i t c h e l l on the tape r e c o r d e r . 9:03 Ann checks w i t h him to see i f he wants to tape a book. He says no. 9:10 M i t c h e l l wanders about- goes f i r s t t o book t a b l e , then back t o work area. Ann g i v e s him h i s j o u r n a l . He takes i t away, then r e t u r n s and i n t e r r u p t s her while she i s working w i t h someone e l s e . She sends him away t e l l i n g him to w r i t e . 9:15 M i t c h e l l i s s t i l l wandering. Ann, who i s s t i l l l i s t e n i n g t o someone e l s e read, s e a t s him behind her at the adjacent t a b l e . 9:15 M i t c h e l l leans over to Ann and says "I don't have a s t o r y . " Ann t e l l s him t h a t i t i s h i s job to come up w i t h one. He t u r n s around and s t a r t s t o w r i t e . 9:30 Ann t u r n s around to M i t c h e l l and reads aloud what he has w r i t t e n , "Autobot i s b i g g e r than Megatron." She asks him to draw a p i c t u r e t o show t h a t . He shows r e s i s t a n c e . 9:35 Ann r e t u r n s to M i t c h e l l , he s t i l l has not drawn a p i c t u r e ; she r e r e a d s h i s sentence. He s t a r t s t o draw. When he i s f i n i s h e d she asks him how Megatron c o u l d win i f he i s so s m a l l . M i t c h e l l v ery e x c i t e d l y launches an e x p l a n a t i o n of Megatron's s p e c i a l powers. Ann acknowledges h i s e x p l a n a t i o n t e l l i n g him i t g i v e s her " p i c t u r e s i n my mind." ( A p r i l 16) T h i s episode shows many attempts to engage the c h i l d i n the l i t e r a c y t a s k . Once engaged, her comments s h i f t toward the meaning i n what he has produced. Here i s the episode s c h e m a t i c a l l y : Mitche11 Ann s t a r t s him t a p i n g h i s w r i t i n g reads on tape requests he read a book responds no s t a r t s wandering g i v e s him h i s j o u r n a l goes to t a b l e 76 r e t u r n s t o Ann continues wandering I don't have a story w r i t e s draws e l a b o r a t i o n sends him away to w r i t e s e a t s him near her t e l l s him t o come up w i t h one reads h i s w r i t i n g r e q u e s ts a p i c t u r e r e r e a d s w r i t i n g query r e Megatron With t h i s c h i l d , p e r s i s t e n c e b r i n g s r e s u l t s . He e v e n t u a l l y engages w i t h the w r i t i n g task. A f t e r he has produced both the t e x t and the p i c t u r e she draws him i n t o a d i a l o g u e which expands the meaning he has expressed i n t e x t . T h i s d i s c u s s i o n r e q u i r e s him t o e l a b o r a t e the t h i n k i n g behind both h i s sentence and h i s p i c t u r e . Watching M i t c h e l l , i t was easy t o see h i s obvious p l e a s u r e when he d e s c r i b e d h i s c h a r a c t e r o r a l l y . The simple sentence i n t e x t o n l y t o l d p a r t of the s t o r y . A l l of Ann's endeavors, as documented, served t o draw h i s e f f o r t s , h i s t h i n k i n g and sense of meaning to the s u r f a c e where w r i t i n g occurs and i s shared w i t h o t h e r s . By r e q u i r i n g the c h i l d t o extend o r a l l y what he has w r i t t e n i n t e x t , she i s e n a b l i n g h i s r e c o g n i t i o n of a d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n between h i s e l a b o r a t e d thoughts and t e x t i n p r i n t . While g u i d i n g M i t c h e l l , Ann was a l s o working w i t h two other c h i l d r e n . Here i s the second one. 77 9:05 Saspreet e n t e r s room and gets her f o l d e r and book. 9:05 Ann comes over to l i s t e n t o her as she reads the book she has chosen. She s t a y s at her s i d e . 9:10 Saspreet continues to read. Ann asks her to s t o p . She covers the page wi t h her hands and asks Saspreet what has happened. Saspreeet d e s c r i b e s the a c t i o n . Ann asks her what i s going to happen next. Saspreet v e n t u r e s a guess. Ann asks i f t h a t i s going to be a "good t h i n g . " She then asks what the c h a r a c t e r might be t h i n k i n g . 9:22 Saspreet s t i l l r e a d i n g aloud. When she f i n i s h e s Ann asks her i f the ending was a s u r p r i s e . Saspreet responds. ( A p r i l 16) In t h i s episode, Ann comes to Saspreet as she i s r e a d i n g . Saspreet i s a l r e a d y engaged i n the l i t e r a c y task, and Ann's i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h her c e n t e r s on the t e x t i t s e l f . Ann q u e s t i o n s her on her understanding of the t e x t (what has happened). She a l s o asks her to make p r e d i c t i o n s (what i s going to happen next, w i l l i t be good) and to look at the s t o r y from a d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e (what might the c h a r a c t e r t h i n k ) . From t h i s episode we can see t h a t there are d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of engagement p o s s i b l e . C l e a r l y , the c h i l d ' s job i s to engage i n the l i t e r a c y task. I f he does not, the t e a c h e r i s working at managing the c h i l d i n t o engagement. Once engaged, the i n t e r a c t i o n between the c h i l d and teacher s h i f t s t o focus on the t e x t i t s e l f . W i t h i n t h a t focus, there are d i f f e r e n t p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r comment and exchange. I t can a l s o be observed t h a t u n t i l the c h i l d engages, any work wit h meaning i n t e x t i s l i m i t e d . Once the c h i l d and the teacher are mutually engaged and focussed on the t e x t , t h e i r t a l k i s more s p e c i f i c and d i r e c t e d toward c o n s t r u c t i n g meaning from t e x t . 78 Ann worked wi t h a t h i r d c h i l d d u r i n g that p e r i o d . In t h i s episode there i s extended engagement focussed on t e x t . 9:30 Ray en t e r s the Center and s i t s down w i t h h i s f o l d e r and the book he has chosen. Ann asks him about a s t o r y he has on the computer. She requests t h a t he c a l l i t up. He does and works on i t at the computer. 9:50 Ann checks h i s s t o r y and t e l l s him i t i s ready t o p r i n t . She asks him to read t o her. He chooses a book and reads the t i t l e . Ann asks him what i t i s going t o be about. He responds. She asks him i f he has read i t . He says no and begins t o read. Ann stops him and asks him about a c e r t a i n word he has missed. He e x p l a i n s the passage, u s i n g the missed word. She p o i n t s t h a t out. He continues r e a d i n g , g e t s stuck on a word. Ann asks him what the c h a r a c t e r c o u l d do i n the s i t u a t i o n . He responds and then f i g u r e s out the t e x t . He continues r e a d i n g w i t h g r e a t e r f l u e n c y . When he completes the s t o r y , Ann req u e s t s he r e t e l l the s t o r y . He does. They are f a c i n g each other and she l i s t e n s t o h i s r e t e l l i n g . I t i s a humorous s t o r y and the r e t e l l i n g i s humorous. When he f i n i s h e s he c l o s e s the book and opens h i s w r i t i n g f o l d e r and looks through h i s s t o r i e s . ( A p r i l 16) The l a s t p o r t i o n of t h i s episode looks l i k e t h i s s c h e m a t i c a l l y : Ray chooses a book, reads the t i t l e response responds no reads t e x t misses word Ann requests he read requests s t o r y p r e d i c t i o n q u e s t i o n r e having read i t stops him and requests 79 e x p l a i n s passage u s i n g missed word reads t e x t , then stops response leads to decoding t e x t c o n t i n u e s r e a d i n g to end r e t e l l s s t o r y r e t e l l i n g of passage p o i n t s out use of word query about what c h a r a c t e r ' s c h o i c e s requests r e t e l l i n g In t h i s s e c t i o n Ann i s u s i n g v e r b a l s t r a t e g i e s t o enhance and improve Ray's engagement wi t h the t e x t . She uses s e v e r a l s t r a t e g i e s . They i n c l u d e the same ones employed i n the p r e v i o u s i n c i d e n t ( p r e d i c t i o n , r e t e l l i n g and change i n p o i n t of view). In t h i s she i s l e a d i n g the student t o t h i n k about the s t o r y and to use t h a t t h i n k i n g as a b a s i s f o r problem s o l v i n g about the t e x t . As a framework t h i s s t r a t e g y reduces the p o s s i b l e range of v a r i a b l e s t h a t the t e x t ( p a r t i c u l a r l y the missed p o r t i o n s ) c o u l d be about. I t c o n s t r a i n s the student's focus and g i v e s him g r e a t e r p o s s i b l i t y f o r success i n determining the meaning i n the t e x t . In the cases c i t e d the teacher i s s t r u c t u r i n g the c h i l d ' s encounter w i t h the l i t e r a c y task based on what the c h i l d i s a l r e a d y doing or a l r e a d y knows. At the minimum l e v e l t h i s s t r u c t u r i n g serves to engage and m a i n t a i n involvement w i t h the demands of the task. In more c l o s e l y f o c u s s e d encounters i t serves to focus on the meaning gained i n the t e x t . In both cases we have evidence f o r framing the l i t e r a c y task so t h a t the c h i l d can s u c c e s s f u l l y work on the demands of the task i t s e l f . The teacher achieves t h i s by-u s i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s endeavors as the b a s i s f o r engagement. Once the c h i l d i s engaged, the teacher uses q u e s t i o n s and comments t o b r i n g the c h i l d ' s t h i n k i n g about meaning to the s u r f a c e and then r e q u i r i n g the c h i l d t o apply i t to the process of r e a d i n g or w r i t i n g . In t h i s way, the te a c h e r molds sequences of a c t i v i t y (or dialogue) which are c o l l a b o r a t i v e l y b u i l t by v i r t u e of a d u l t e x p e r t i s e and s e n s i t i v i t y to the demands of the task and the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s . The e a r l y data demonstrated t h a t s u s t a i n e d i n t e r a c t i o n over t e x t produced many o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r e l a b o r a t i o n between teacher and student. Kaye has suggested t h a t i t i s the a f f e c t i v e power of shared meaning w i t h i n a frame t h a t makes l e a r n i n g i n e v i t a b l e . In these i n c i d e n t s the t e a c h e r works towards u s i n g the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s and understanding t o e s t a b l i s h shared meaning as the b a s i s f o r i n t e r a c t i o n . L a t e r i n the study, d u r i n g the focussed o b s e r v a t i o n s , the same s e t of f e a t u r e s was present i n the te a c h e r ' s a s i s t a n c e t o c h i l d r e n . The data i s more s p e c i f i c i n terms of p r o v i d i n g more evidence about the language which the t e a c h e r uses to mold the i n t e r a c t i o n , thereby c r e a t i n g the frame. In the f o l l o w i n g episode, the c h i l d i s engaged i n the w r i t i n g process. Ann's comments and f a c i l i t a t i o n work to keep t h a t engagement going, and a l s o serve to a s s i s t w i t h the c l a r i f i c a t i o n of the student's intended meaning. Here i s M i t c h e l l a g a i n . He has been t a l k i n g with Ann f o r s e v e r a l 81 minutes and r e s i s t i n g the t a s k of h a v i n g to w r i t e h i s s t o r i e s down. He p r e f e r s to t e l l them o r a l l y . J u s t b e f o r e t h i s t r a n s c r i b e d p o r t i o n , he had been d e l i b e r a t i n g out l oud about h i s t i t l e and what he was g o i n g to w r i t e about . M i t c h e l 1 Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l Ann: M i t c h e l l O.K. The rabbit, and the mice and the cat. No, I want the rabbit and the mice. No, a tortoise. A tortoise, O.K. ( sounding the word out to h i m s e l f ) Tortoise.. tortoise....The rabbit and the tortoise and the dog. Uhhmm ( t a l k i n g as he w r i t e s ) One day..the rabbit...One day the rabbit asked ( c o n t i n u e s to w h i s p e r sounds to s e l f as he w r i t e s ) the tortoise... tortoise and dog for a race. ( repeat s i t a g a i n t o .ready? ( repeats a g a i n to s e l f ) I was going to put it backwards-A-D-N, that 's not a .sleep the dog s e l f ) Good stuff, in the park... Umhmm The rabbit said. Ready said. .. . Ready, set. Ready..set..go! that doesn't make sense word A-N-D Good correcting. ( s l owly ) And the dog So. . . Ready, set, go and then the dog sleep. Oh. You've got the dog sleeping (no response) No, that 's fine! I thought you meant to do that. Ready, set go and then the dog sleep..for one hour... ( s u b v o c a l i z i n g ) hour, hour, where's my hour? H-O-U-R....for one hour and then, then I think... I think he'll sleep. Uhhmm. So then, the dog sleeps for one hour and then.. And then...and then... I want to know what these other creatures are up to? The rabbit won! And . . . then ...the... rabbit . . . asked... the... tortoise ( c o n t i n u e s w r i t i n g ) (June 4) Here i s the schemat ic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the e p i s o d e . As M i t c h e l l i s t a l k i n g to h i m s e l f as he w r i t e s , I r e p r e s e n t most of h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n as composing, w i t h a p a r e n t h e t i c a l note. M i t c h e l 1 Ann composing ( t o r t o i s e ) composing (and the dog) comoposing ( f o r a race) composing ( i n the park) composing (ready, said) composing (...A- N-D) composing (and the dog sleep) composing- r e p e a t s s e l f (pause) composing (then I think he'll sleep) composing (and then...and then) The rabbit won! (resumes composing) A tortoise, O.K. Umhmm Good stuff Umhmm ready, set good correcting So. . . Oh, you've got the dog sleeping. No, that 's fine. I thought you meant to do that. So then the dog sleeps, and then... I want to know what happens to these other animals. Ann's comments q u a l i f y as an example of framing behavior. She i s m a i n t a i n i n g the c h i l d ' s engagement, based on what he i s doing and working t o develop shared meaning. The student has h i s hands f u l l . F i r s t , i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r him t o commit h i s s t o r i e s t o w r i t i n g , something which the tea c h e r knows. Second, he i s composing, s e l f - t a l k i n g and w r i t i n g s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n h i s second language. T h i r d , he i s keeping t r a c k of what Ann i s sa y i n g t o him. Her i n i t i a l f i r s t few turn s are g e n t l e encouragements i n d i c a t i n g t h a t she i s f o l l o w i n g him. She g i v e s him o u t r i g h t a s s i s t a n c e w i t h the ready-s e t idiom. He accepts i t and c a r r i e s on. However, when i t appears he may be stuck about where t o go next a f t e r the dog i s as l e e p , and she repea t s h i s l a s t phrase back to him, something changes. His h e s i t a t i o n e i t h e r connotes u n c e r t a i n t y , or a concern on h i s p a r t of c r i t i c i s m from her. She r e p a i r s the breakdown by c l a r i f y i n g the i n t e n t i o n behind her m i r r o r i n g . However, he i s s t i l l s tuck (and then...and then). T h i s time she comes at i t d i f f e r e n t l y and asks f o r a p r e d i c t i o n . I t works t o break the lo g jam by r e e s t a b l i s h i n g shared meaning (based on h i s ideas) and he contin u e s composing. Evidence f o r Formats i n T e a c h e i — C h i l d I n t e r a c t i o n In the e a r l i e r chapter on t h e o r e t i c a l frameworks, the s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s between frames and formats was d i s c u s s e d . Formats r e l y on r o u t i n e s and the establishment of r o l e s which can be exchanged. They a l s o are c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the a d u l t modeling behavior which becomes i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o c h i l d r e n ' s r e p e t o i r e of be h a v i o r s . As pa r t of the dynamic of the format, what i s modeled (by the ad u l t ) i n one episode i s r e q u i r e d (by the a d u l t ) i n another. In t h i s s e t t i n g where the teachers are s t r i v i n g t o f o s t e r c h i l d r e n ' s e l a b o r a t i o n of t h e i r own meaning and t h e i r own s t r a t e g i e s f o r comprehending and encoding meaning i t was of i n t e r e s t t o see how r o u t i n e s and modeling w i t h i n r o u t i n e s would be handled. While most of Ann and Marion's c o n t a c t w i t h c h i l d r e n o c c u r r e d i n the Center, they a l s o worked i n classrooms where they c o n f e r r e d w i t h c h i l d r e n about t h e i r w r i t i n g . The c h i l d r e n worked on d r a f t i n g or e d i t i n g . Marion or Ann and the classroom teacher would c o n f e r w i t h c h i l d r e n i n d i v i d u a l l y . Because the c h i l d r e n were c a l l e d f o r or reque s t e d conferences on p a r t i c u l a r p i e c e s , these episodes of i n t e r a c t i o n were c h a r a c t e r i z e d by h i g h l e v e l s of engagement focussed on a p i e c e of t e x t , i n t h i s case w r i t i n g . The f o l l o w i n g episodes occured between Marion and c h i l d r e n i n a grade t h r e e classroom. Since i t i s the s p r i n g of the year, the c h i l d r e n are accustomed t o the r o u t i n e and the flow of events go very smoothly. U s u a l l y the c h i l d r e n were a l r e a d y at work w r i t i n g when Marion a r r i v e d . She c o n f e r r e d w i t h then at a p a r t i c u l a r t a b l e s e t up near the door. When the c h i l d r e n came f o r conferences some e a g e r l y shared t h e i r w r i t i n g and d i s p l a y e d obvious enjoyment at the o p p o r t u n i t y f o r a conference. For others i t was a c h a l l e n g e to overcome t h e i r i n h i b i t i o n s . 10:50 The room i s n o i s i e r than usual when we en t e r today. The teacher i s c i r c u l a t i n g and a s k i n g f o r q u i e t . Several g i r l s come to Marion and want to know when i t i s t h e i r t u r n . One says she i s stuck. Marion suggests she read the s e c t i o n t o a f r i e n d . I t i s Matt's t u r n and he comes to the t a b l e . He seems shy and glances at me solemnly. He and Marion begin. Marion asks i f he i s j u s t s t a r t i n g a new s t o r y . He nods. She asks, "What k i n d of s t o r y : . "Cosmic Cow" r e p l i e s Mark. Marion comments on how i n t e r e s t i n g the t i t l e i s and how the t i t l e g i v e s her s e v e r a l p i c t u r e s i n her mind. He d e s c r i b e s Cosmic Cow. "She i s a g i r l and she's b i g and f a t and has a cape and f l i e s . " Marion asks f o r more and Mark t e l l s about the c h a r a c t e r i n h i s s t o r y who has problems i n school and how Cosmic Cow h e l p s him. Then he adds "But i t doesn't say t h a t i n the s t o r y . " Marion asks him to r e a d h i s s t o r y . He does. When he f i n i s h e s Marions laughs and says, " I t i s a b i g idea but a simple one. Even the boy wonders why he d i d n ' t t h i n k of the s o l u t i o n . " Marks says the c h a r t a c t e r has a l o t of homework. Marions asks about t h a t . They t a l k f o r a moment, then Marion comments t h a t t h e r e are o t h e r t h i n g s she wants to ask him, p a r t i c u l a r l y about the s e v e r a l l i t t l e drawings i n w i t h the t e x t . She says, "O.K. you've put some l i t t l e p i e c e s i n - you haven't r e a d them. Can you t e l l me about them? Should they be read by the reader? " He does not respond. She adds, "That's the cow s a y i n g t h a t ? Is t h e r e some way we can put t h a t i n the s t o r y ? " He seems stumped. Marion c o n t i n u e s . "I wonder how books do t h a t . . . l e t ' s pretend someone wants to t e l l something to someone." Mark says suddenly, " I t says they s a i d . " Marion agrees. They s t a r t t o i n s e r t q u o t a t i o n marks and the necessary t e x t . He works on i t . Marion asks i f there are other p l a c e s i n the s t o r y where they are t a l k i n g . He r e - r e a d s h i s ending and looks up s m i l i n g . Marion compliments him on how much he has shown the reader. She dates h i s f o l d e r and asks him to send the next c h i l d . ( A p r i l 22) S t r u c t u r a l l y t h i s conference may be seen to have t h r e e s e c t i o n s . In the f i r s t s e c t i o n Marion e s t a b l i s h e s common ground w i t h Matt. She does t h i s by a s k i n g about the s t o r y and having him r e t e l l i t . The second s e c t i o n begins w i t h h i s r e a d i n g of h i s t e x t , and i n c l u d e s her comments on the s t o r y l i n e , h i s r e f e r e n c e to homework, and her a s k i n g f o r e l a b o r a t i o n . The f i n a l s e c t i o n i s i n i t i a t e d by Marion when she asks f o r c l a r i f i c a t i o n about the drawings. Using what he has done i n t e x t she ex p l o r e s h i s understanding of the conventions around q u o t a t i o n marks. I t takes three attempts b e f o r e he sees her p o i n t . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t she never a c t u a l l y p r e s c r i b e s the convention as being necessary, but r a t h e r draws him i n to seei n g what i t c o u l d add to h i s t e x t . H i s happiness at the d i s c o v e r y g i v e s the impression he t h i n k s he d i s c o v e r e d something. The p o s s i b l y r o u t i n i z e d aspect of t h i s engagement i s i n the s t r u c t u r e of the three d i s t i n c t phases. The modeling t h a t occurs i s not anything Marion does, but i s contained i n her r e f e r e n c e s t o h i s use of l i t t l e drawings, and i n her q u e s t i o n t o him about how books handle t h a t problem. The model being r e f e r r e d t o here i s i n l i t e r a t e conventions she i s a s k i n g the student t o r e c a l 1 . The f o l l o w i n g day the same s t r u c t u r e of three phases appeared i n a w r i t i n g conference i n t h i s c l a s s . However, the student and the focus were very d i f f e r e n t . The student had approached Marion toward the end of the pr e v i o u s day a s k i n g f o r a conference. The student s a i d her problem was not knowing what was going to happen i n her s t o r y . Marion remembered t h a t t h i s same student had another u n f i n i s h e d s t o r y and they agreed to review i t the next day. 87 P r i s c i l l a 10:50 P r i s c i l l a b r i n g s her L i t t l e Witch s t o r y . Marion aks her to q u i c k l y r e - t e l l i t . I t i s about a w i t c h t e a c h e r who "teaches l i t t l e witches t o be bad." In order t o pass the l i t t l e w i t c h has to change a s i n g i n g b i r d i n t o a bat. P r i s c i l l a has s e t the s t o r y problem up. Marion asks her to s t a r t r e a d i n g from t h i s p a r t . P r i s c i l l a begins and reads f l u e n t l y and then her v o i c e f a l t e r s . Marion asks, "What have you noticed?...There i s a lesson...What i s i t ? " P r i s c i l l a o f f e r s an idea which i s v e r y convoluted and i n v o l v e s b r i n g i n g i n more c h a r a c t e r s . Marion says, "What would t h a t look l i k e ? " P r i s c i l l a v e ntures a r e s o l u t i o n . Marion says, "How i s a l l t h i s going t o h e l p the l i t t l e w i t c h ? " P r i s c i l l a responds, "I t h i n k I made i t too d i f f i c u l t . " Marion asks her how she co u l d get h e r s e l f out of the d i f f i c u l t y . P r i s c i l l a says, "I c o u l d make i t a dream. She could f a l l a s l e e p and dream about a key and when she wakes up the key c o u l d be i n her hand." "How w i l l t h a t h e l p h e r ? " Marion asks again. P r i s c i l l a says i t w i l l h e l p her remember her dream. Marion asks how w i l l i t h e l p her become a w i t c h . P r i s c i l l a ventures t h a t she doesn't know how long t h i s s t o r y i s going to be. Marion suggests she leave i t and t h i n k about i t . P r i s c i l l a agrees because "there are a l o t of ideas s w i s h i n g around i n my head." Marion then asks her i f she t h i n k s b e f o r e she w r i t e s . P r i s c i l l a says yes she i s always t h i n k i n g about her s t o r i e s . Marion says, "Well i n t h i s conference you've done some p l a n n i n g . " She then r e c o r d s the conference on her r e c o r d sheet. P r i s c i l l a i n t e r j e c t s , "Put down: Come back l a t e r . " Marion asks i f she would l i k e t o come back. P r i s c i l l a says yes. Marion asks her to send the next c h i l d . ( A p r i l 23) T h i s episode uncovers some complex i s s u e s i n w r i t i n g . These have been r a i s e d by the student h e r s e l f . S t r u c t u r a l l y , the thr e e phases are present. F i r s t , the s t o r y framework i s e s t a b l i s h e d i n r e t e l l i n g . Second, the t e x t i s read. T h i r d , a p a r t i c u l a r problem r a i s e d i n the r e a d i n g , i s e x p l o r e d . Each of these s e c t i o n s flows from the p r e v i o u s one. In t h i s episode the problem r a i s e d i s p l a n n i n g . By P r i s c i l l a ' s own admission, she has more ideas than r e s o l u t i o n s . Marion attempts t o r e f o c u s her on r e s o l u t i o n (How i s t h i s going t o h e l p the l i t t l e witch? How c o u l d you get y o u r s e l f out of t h i s d i f f i c u l t y ? How w i l l t h a t h e l p her become a l i t t l e w i t c h ? ) . As w i t h the previous episodes, she uses q u e s t i o n i n g to a s s i s t the student to f i n d a s o l u t i o n . In t h i s case P r i s c i l l a ' s responses do not b r i n g her c l o s e r t o s o l v i n g her problem. (Make i t a dream. I don't know how long t h i s i s going to be. There are l o t s of words swi s h i n g around i n my head.) Marion does not attempt t o g i v e her a s o l u t i o n , even though her use of the word p l a n n i n g does i n d i c a t e a d i r e c t i o n t h a t might l e a d to a s o l u t i o n . The model of the behavior which would a s s i s t the c h i l d i s not immediately e v i d e n t . I t i s o n l y suggested. In both of these classroom conferences Marion uses q u e s t i o n i n g i n the t h i r d phase of the conference i n an attempt to get the student to "take over" a new aspect of t h e i r w r i t i n g process. In the case of Matt her questions do lead him t o a r e c o g n i t i o n of the convention of q u o t a t i o n s and t h e i r p l a c e i n h i s w r i t i n g . Her s t r a t e g y a l l o w s him to make a l i n k between what he has read and how he has w r i t t e n . In the case of P r i s c i l l a , the take-over does not seem to work. P r i s c i l l a i s d e a l i n g w i t h a s t r a t e g y , not a 89 convention, and i s not yet able to be i n c o n t r o l of the s o l u t i o n t h a t i s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r her. As examples of f o r m a t t i n g , these episodes c o n t a i n both h i g h l e v e l s of engagement, a r o u t i n e and r e f e r e n c e to models which c o u l d be i n c o r p o r a t e d or demonstrated i n the c h i l d ' s r e p e t o i r e of l i t e r a t e b e h a v i o r s . These f e a t u r e s are a d i r e c t r e s u l t of the t e a c h e r ' s management of the episode u s i n g q u e s t i o n s t h a t b r i n g to the s u r f a c e the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t i e s and understanding. These probes are r e q u e s t s f o r d i s p l a y of l i t e r a c y a b i l i t i e s . They draw t i g h t e r and t i g h t e r c i r c l e s around p a r t i c u l a r f e a t u r e s of l i t e r a c y which can be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s . I f the a d u l t probe succeeds i n drawing out an i n s i g h t from the c h i l d , then t h a t i n s i g h t i s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the l i t e r a c y t a s k . Having found evidence f o r formats i n the conferences h e l d i n classrooms, I was c u r i o u s to see i f formatted r o u t i n e s would occur i n the L e a r n i n g A s s i s t a n c e s e t t i n g . In the Centre, both the students and the s t r u c t u r e of the s e t t i n g were d i f f e r e n t . The students had demonstrated d i f f i c u l t y w i t h l i t e r a c y t a s k s . The s t r u c t u r e of the s e t t i n g r e q u i r e d that a teacher worked w i t h s e v e r a l students at once and as a r e s u l t , the i n t e r a c t i o n s overlapped. Both of these f a c t o r s might r e s u l t i n some a d a p t a t i o n s i n how the t e a c h e r s worked wi t h t h e i r s t u d e n t s . I d i d not r e t u r n to the school u n t i l a month l a t e r . In the s e t of o b s e r v a t i o n s made then, I was concerned w i t h c a p t u r i n g more of the language between teac h e r s and 90 c h i l d r e n . I t seemed t h a t episodes between c h i l d r e n and teach e r s i n the Centre were p o t e n t i a l l y f u l l of d i s r u p t i o n s . U n l i k e the classroom conference which was designed to focus on one c h i l d and h i s w r i t i n g f o r an extended time, engagements i n the Centre overlapped and were punctuated w i t h i n t e r r u p t i o n s . The need to keep t r a c k of more than one c h i l d may have i n f l u e n c e d the q u a l i t y of the i n t e r a c t i o n . A l s o , the c h i l d r e n at one t a b l e o f t e n watched each other and chimed i n suggestions and o p i n i o n s d u r i n g any d i s c u s s i o n w i t h a t e a c h e r . Here Ann i s working w i t h Bobby and Saspreet, who have j u s t f i n i s h e d l i s t e n i n g to another student read a s t o r y . A f t e r some time, Bobby leaves the t a b l e . E v e n t u a l l y he gets a book and r e t u r n s to s i t next to Ann. She asks him, "Well, what's happening here?" Saspreet i n t e r j e c t s t h a t he has read t h a t book b e f o r e . "Well, maybe he l i k e s i t , " Ann r e p l i e s . Bobby reads aloud, and Ann leans forward and l i s t e n s . He f a l t e r s on a word. "Are you happy w i t h t h a t ? " she asks. She t u r n s t o Saspreet and comments on her j o u r n a l e n t r y . Saspreet s m i l e s and conti n u e s w r i t i n g . Bobby continues r e a d i n g , and stumbles on a word. Ann says, "Well, i t c e r t a i n l y s t a r t s w i t h an "h". What's the most important t h i n g i n the p i c t u r e ? T e l l me q u i c k l y a l l the t h i n g s you see i n the p i c t u r e . " Bobby s t a r t s l i s t i n g them. Ann i n t e r j e c t s , "And i f you have a whole l o t of people and they are going f a s t - t h a t ' s c a l l e d a _ ? " Bobby says "highway!" and continues l i s t i n g . Ann r e p l i e s , "Good f o r you - super r e a d i n g . " (May 21) In order f o r a student t o make sense of r e a d i n g , he must grasp enough of the t e x t to c o n s t r u c t meaning f o r h i m s e l f . When there i s a s t r u g g l e f o r l e x i c a l items, the process of making meaning may be impaired. Ann i s working w i t h Bobby t o r e c o v e r a missed l e x i c a l item. Her s t r a t e g y c o n t a i n s the same three phases as seen i n the p r e v i o u s w r i t i n g episodes even though the context and the student's a b i l i t y are d i f f e r e n t . F i r s t she e l i c i t s a frame of r e f e r e n c e on the item i n q u e s t i o n . She does t h i s by r e -s t a t i n g the c h i l d ' s phonetic s t r a t e g y (Well, i t c e r t a i n l y s t a r t s w i t h an "h".) and then r e q u e s t i n g t h a t he o r a l l y use the p i c t u r e cues to l i s t p o s s i b l e words that might f i t . T h i s i s s i m i l a r t o a request f o r r e t e l l i n g a s t o r y . I t i s a request t h a t g i v e s a parameter to the task. The second phase i s the c h i l d ' s response, a l i s t of words t h a t might p o s s i b l y c o n t a i n the m i s s i n g one. Here the c h i l d h i m s e l f must come up w i t h something, u s i n g h i s own knowledge. In the t h i r d phase, Ann uses a q u e s t i o n to focus what the c h i l d has d i s p l a y e d i n h i s l i s t . She attempts to t a i l o r a s l o t i n which he w i l l f i t the m i s s i n g item ( I f you have a whole l o t of people and they are going f a s t - t h a t ' s c a l l e d a _ ? ) . Bobby's success at f i l l i n g the s l o t comes from two d i r e c t i o n s , h i s own l i s t and the context i t c r e a t e d , and Ann's a b i l i t y to use language t o c r e a t e a s l o t where he c o u l d f i t a f i n a l , r e f i n e d attempt. To q u a l i f y as a format, t h i s episode must d i s p l a y the q u a l i t y of r o u t i n e i n a d d i t i o n to d e v e l o p i n g a r e c i p r o c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between modeling and d i s p l a y . The s i m i l a r i t y of t h i s episode with r e s p e c t to the p r e v i o u s ones i s the t e a c h e r ' s use of probes to o b t a i n c l a r i f i c a t i o n . They r e q u i r e the c h i l d to focus on c e r t a i n s e t s of l i n g u i s t i c requirements. However, u n l i k e the w r i t i n g conferences which had a d e f i n i t e three p a r t r o u t i n e ( r e t e l l i n g , r e a d i n g , e d i t i n g ) , the probes of the r e a d i n g conferences focus on the demands of one word or sentence at a time. In order to accomplish t h i s they proceed from the general t o the s p e c i f i c , and perhaps i n t h i s way the r e i s a r o u t i n e . I t may a l s o be that the requirements of a w r i t i n g conference are per se d i f f e r e n t than the requirements of a re a d i n g conference by v i r t u e of the d i f f e r e n c e between r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . In the f o l l o w i n g episode Ann i s working w i t h a grade th r e e student. T h i s student appeared b r i e f l y i n Chapter Four and i s r e a d i n g the same book (The Sunflower t h a t Went  Flop) as he was then, though t h i s i s a d i f f e r e n t episode. V i n c e n t : (reading) Mr Brown opened up his fix-it bag and got out some sticky tape. Ann: Uhhmm V i n c e n t : ( s t i l l reading) This should do it, you said. He said. He went sticking, sticking, sticking and stood the flower up by the well again. What a-Ann: ( i n t e r r u p t i n g ) Is there a well or am I hearing you incorrectly? V i n c e n t : well..wail Ann.- Are we talking about a well there? V i n c e n t : Yeah Ann: Is the sunflower by a well? V i n c e n t : No, by the... Ann: Well, what would you say it is by? V i n c e n t : Wood.' Ann: Yes, it seems to be made of wood. I'm not sure that I think... V i n c e n t : A fence! Ann: ( i s i n t e r r u p t e d by another student and speaking w i t h him) Vin c e n t : ( s t i l l t r y i n g t o f i g u r e out the word) WHALE! Ann: A whale? Other student: Wall! V i n c e n t : Wall! 93 Ann: Aah, that makes sense. That could be called a wall couldn't it? It could be called a wall. V i n c e n t : True Other student: Wall again Ann: Yes, but you've got to get the whole thing, (reads from t e x t ) He went stick, stick, stick and stood the sunflower up by the wall again. (May 28) F i r s t Marion c l a r i f i e s what she has heard. She then asks V i n c e n t i f h i s r e a d i n g makes sense. He t r i e s t o m a i n t a i n i t does (which c o u l d be a b l u f f on h i s p a r t ) . She asks him a s t r a i g h t q u e s t i o n which r e f e r s o n l y to p i c t u r e c l u e s , and he admits the d i s c r e p a n c y . Having e s t a b l i s h e d that they are both t a l k i n g about the same item (a p i c t u r e of a fence) she proceeds t o e l i c i t a l i s t of p o s s i b i l i t i e s from him. T h i s i s a s t r a t e g y i d e n t i c a l to the one she used with Bobby and f o l l o w s the same p a t t e r n . The o n l y d i f f e r e n c e here i s th a t V i n c e n t i s a i d e d by the second student who g i v e s him the c o r r e c t word (a model). As a f i n a l example, Marion i s c o n f e r r i n g w i t h a grade two student on a s t o r y he had w r i t t e n . When t h i s exchange o c c u r r e d they had a l r e a d y worked through a good p o r t i o n of the s t o r y and were n e a r i n g the end. The s t o r y was about some robbers s t e a l i n g money and i n the end the a r r i v a l of the good guys prevents the robbers from g e t t i n g away. Kenny i s working on a s e c t i o n about a s i r e n which f r i g h t e n e d the robbers. Marion: Tell me in your own word Kenny: He heard it flash on. Marion: How can he hear it? Kenny: It made a noise. Marion: Does it say that? See if you can figure it out. Kenny: I don't know if I can figure it out where to put it. Marion: (Covers the t e x t with her hands) 94 Kenny: Leader One saw a red light. Marion: Tell me what he heard. Kenny: A red buzzer flashed on. Marion: AAh, very good. Kenny: (Writes on h i s d r a f t w h i l e s u b - v o c a l i z i n g a red buzzer flashed on.) Marion: You got it worked out beautifully- a red buzzer flashed on. I can hear it and I can see it. (May 22) T h i s exchange c e n t e r s on Marion's probe concerning the student's i n t e n t i o n t o convey the sound of the buzzer. F i r s t , t h a t i s e s t a b l i s h e d . Second, Marion e x p l o r e s w i t h the student the d i f f e r e n c e bvetween the sound and the s i g h t . F i n a l l y , she has the student o r a l l y convey the thought and d e s c r i p t i o n which i s not p a r t of h i s t e x t . A f t e r having r e h e a r s e d i t , he i s able t o i n s e r t i t i n t o t e x t . The same p a t t e r n of probe, r e c o g n i t i o n and i n c o r p o r a t i o n occurs here as i n the pr e v i o u s episodes. As wi t h the o t h e r s i t proceeds from the general to the s p e c i f i c . I t begins w i t h a general agreement t o c l a r i f y an item and ends w i t h the student i n c o r p o r a t i n g h i s s o l u t i o n i n t o h i s t e x t . The data i n these s e r i e s of o b s e r v a t i o n s confirmed the presence of engagement and aspects of r o u t i n e s , both of which are c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of formats. R e f e r r i n g back t o Tab l e I, those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the a d u l t s r o l e which Bruner d e s c r i b e s are present i n the te a c h e r s ' p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h and guidance to t h e i r s tudents. The teachers c o n s i s t e n t l y engage the c h i l d r e n , m a i n t a i n t h e i r involvement, e s t a b l i s h j o i n t focus, c r e a t e r o u t i n e s of pa t t e r n e d i n t e r a c t i o n , supply language (or probe f o r student language), accept as meaningful the c h i l d r e n s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n s , i n c o r p o r a t e c h i l d r e n s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n s , make judgements w i t h r e s p e c t to a c c o u n t a b i l i t y , and where the c h i l d r e n are capable, hand-over aspects of the r o u t i n e . The data a l s o r e v e a l e d how modeling i n t h i s s e t t i n g v a r i e s from what i s found i n Bruner's r e s e a r c h . Here modeling was not always g i v e n d i r e c t l y by the a d u l t . Instead i t was d i s c o v e r e d or r e d i s c o v e r e d by the student by v i r t u e of f o l l o w i n g the t e a c h e r ' s probes. The data suggest t h a t episodes which are l i m i t e d i n focus show p o t e n t i a l f o r more e l a b o r a t e development of s p e c i f i c s k i l l s and conventions w i t h r e s p e c t t o l i t e r a c y . W i t h i n the formatted episodes, the t e a c h e r s ' use of qu e s t i o n s as probes f o r understanding p l a y e d a c r i t i c a l r o l e i n what the students c o u l d i n c o r p o r a t e i n t o t h e i r e f f o r t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o the requirements of r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . S u c c e s s f u l probes l e d t o student r e c o g n i t i o n and i n c o r p o r a t i o n . A s u c c e s s f u l probe c o n t a i n s both an understanding of the demands of l i t e r a c y , and a r e s p e c t f o r the v a l i d i t y of the c h i l d ' s p e r s p e c t i v e and e f f o r t s . From these data, the next step was to look at v e r y s p e c i f i c language exchanges between teacher and student. They might r e v e a l more about the nature of the probe and i t s r o l e i n l e a r n i n g through i n t e r a c t i o n . 96 Chapter S i x : Making Learning I n e v i t a b l e : The Use of  S c a f f o l d s . A c c o u n t a b i l i t y and Semantic Contingency i n the Development of L i t e r a c y Snow (1983) and Snow and N i n i o (1986) have suggested t h a t the b a s i c language d e v i c e s which are standar d f a r e i n the r e p e r t o i r e of a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e t o c h i l d r e n ' s language development are a l s o present i n p a r e n t a l a s s i s t a n c e w i t h the development of c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y o r i e n t a t i o n t o l i t e r a c y . S c a f f o l d s , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and semantic contingency are r e s i l i e n t and adaptable language d e v i c e s which a d u l t s can use t o expand a c h i l d ' s awareness of the conventions and c o n t r a c t s of l i t e r a c y . The i n v e s t i g a t i o n here c e n t e r s on d i s c o v e r i n g how those s t r a t e g i e s work i n an e d u c a t i o n a l s e t t i n g where the goal i s f o r students t o a c q u i r e competence i n e x p r e s s i n g and understanding meaning i n t e x t . P r e v i o u s chapters have demonstrated how the environment i s o r g a n i z e d and r e f l e c t s the te a c h e r s ' b e l i e f s t h a t both c h i l d r e n ' s e f f o r t s and sense of meaning are c e n t r a l t o the e d u c a t i o n a l endeavor. I t has a l s o been demonstrated how the te a c h e r s under study b u i l d frameworks of i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r s t u d e n t s which draw together the demands of the l i t e r a c y t a s k and the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s at that task i n language exchanges. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y these exchanges are b u i l t on student endeavors, m a i n t a i n engagement w i t h the demands of the l i t e r a c y task, have a r o u t i n e element and are d i r e c t e d by the teacher towards g i v i n g and r e c e i v i n g meaning i n t e x t . T h i s chapter w i l l look at the s p e c i f i c s of language exchanges to see how the te a c h e r s use the d e v i c e s of s c a f f o l d i n g , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and semantic contingency t o promote the a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y i n t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h s t u d e n t s . The Use of Ver b a l S c a f f o l d s i n Reading Conferences A language s c a f f o l d i s an e n a b l i n g framework b u i l t w i t h words. I t narrows the focus of an exchange between an a d u l t . The c h i l d can then a t t e n d to a p a r t i c u l a r s e t of language demands t o the e x c l u s i o n of o t h e r s . Here Ann i s l i s t e n i n g t o Luke read. Luke i s shy and not fond of r e a d i n g aloud. E n g l i s h i s h i s second language. He i s r e a d i n g from W i l l You Be My Mother (Melser and Cowley, 1982). Luke: Lamb cry and cry. All right said the boy, I will be your mother. Ann: Was he able to be the mother? (pause) What did he have to do to be the mother? Luke: Because - he have to make him stop crying. Ann: Yes, he talked him into it by crying. And the boy, what did he do? - to be the mother? Luke: ( s o f t l y ) Feed him. Ann: Did you see that? Feeding. Did you see the special thing heused for feeding? Luke: Yeah. Ann: Did you see what it was? Can you tell me about it? Luke: A bottle. Ann: A bottle of _? Luke: Milk. Ann: Milk! Yes. (May 26) Ann i s b u i l d i n g a language framework u s i n g q u e s t i o n s to draw out p a r t i c u l a r s of meaning and voca b u l a r y here. P o s s i b l y she i s checking to make sure Luke knows the word f o r m i l k . Together they are a l s o e x p l o r i n g the meaning s e t t h a t comes w i t h the boy becoming the mother to the lamb. Her q u e r i e s 98 c o n s t r u c t a s e t of requirements that focus the exchange (What did he have to do to be the mother? Did you see the special thing that he used? Can you tell me about it?) By-f o l l o w i n g h er language leads, Luke i s d i r e c t e d t o the se t of semantic concerns which p o i n t f i r s t to the word " b o t t l e " and then the word "milk". In the f o l l o w i n g episode, the search f o r an a p p r o p r i a t e l e x i c a l item c r e a t e s some i n t e r e s t i n g s c a f f o l d i n g which enables the c h i l d t o approach a range of meaning i s s u e s . Here M i t c h e l l i s r e a d i n g t o Ann from I f You Give a Mouse a  Cookie (Numeroff, 1985). M i t c h e l l : ( r e a d i n g the tex t ) As well, when he done, he'll probably take a nap. Ann.- Umhmm, well he will be tired after all that work. M i t c h e l l : He is, he got... Ann: You think he'll be tired? M i t c h e l l : ( r e f e r r i n g to i l l u s t r a t i o n ) He got everything in the garbage. Then... Ann: What kind of everything do we have in the garbage? M i t c h e l l : I don't know. . . . ^ c o n t i n u i n g t o read) And then he just looks at the cupboard and jump up. Ann: O.K. Well let's not... M i t c h e l l : And then he draw his family. Ann: All right, well let's get here. O.k. so what's he goingto have to do? M i t c h e l l : He'll have to...fix up the little box for him. . with ummm.. . Ann: With a ? (pause) Well, remember what he is going to have? What is he going to have? What is he going to do? M i t c h e l l : ...Bed? Ann: He needs a bed because he is going to have a nap, isn't he? So, you'll have to fix up a little box for him with a and a . M i t c h e l l : Pillow! Ann: A pillow, yes and a ? What does he need here? M i t c h e l l : This thing. I forgot what's it. Ann: You forgot what it's called? M i t c h e l l : Ummm, I don't know its... Ann: What is it like? M i t c h e l l : It's like napkin stuff. Ann: Well, with a napkin you'd wipe your face. Where would thisthing go? M i t c h e l l : The ...bed? Ann: What do you do with the pillow? You put your head on it. Do you have a pillow? M i t c h e l l : Yeah. Ann: You put your head on a pillow. O.K. What else do you do? M i t c h e l l : Sleep! Ann: You go to sleep. Don't you feel kinda cold? M i t c h e l l : Yeah. Ann: What do you have to stop you from getting cold? M i t c h e l 1 : Warm. Ann: What keeps you warm? M i t c h e l l : Ummmmm. Ann: What do you call it? What do you do? Do you pull something up over your body? M i t c h e l l : Yeah. Ann: What do you call it? M i t c h e l l : I don't know. Ann: Do you know the Chinese word for that? M i t c h e l l : Yeah. Ann: What is it? M i t c h e l l : You don't know. Ann: Of course I don't know. You are going to tell me. That 's why I am asking you. . . .What is the Chinese word for it? M i t c h e l l : Pei. Ann: Is that right? O.K. Well, in English , the word is blanket. M i t c h e l l : ( s u r p r i s e d ) Blanket? Ann: So, you see, I tell you my words and you tell me yours,right? M i t c h e l l : Oh, yeah! (May 28) Ann's v e r b a l s t r a t e g i e s here are m a s t e r f u l ; as t e a c h i n g techniques they are f a m i l a r . The mastery l i e s i n the way she uses them t o b u i l d communication wi t h her student. She begins w i t h a general q u e s t i o n to s e t the stage {What kind of everythings do we have in the garbage?). She proceeds t o the v e r b a l c l o z e procedure (So, you'll have to fix a little box for him with a and a .). When she r e c e i v e s o n l y p a r t of what i s mi s s i n g , she and M i t c h e l l go on a long journey toward the m i s s i n g l e x i c a l item. She b u i l d s a v e r b a l framework of shared experience to provide the background f o r the word. They exp l o r e a l l of the a t t r i b u t e s of b l a n k e t (What is it like? Where would this thing go?). When her qu e s t i o n s b r i n g M i t c h e l l back t o p i l l o w (the word he knows), she begins b u i l d i n g a s c a f f o l d w i t h q u e s t i o n s t h a t would d i s t i n g u i s h a p i l l o w from a bl a n k e t (What do you have to stop from getting cold? What keeps you warm?). F i n a l l y , they e s t a b l i s h t h a t h i s knowledge of h i s f i r s t language i s r e l e v a n t and can be shared. The s c a f f o l d s which Ann c o n s t r u c t s and M i t c h e l l climbs become more s p e c i f i c as she i s s a t i s f i e d t h a t he understands and can f o l l o w the d i r e c t i o n i n which she i s proceeding. T h i s e v e n t u a l l y leads them t o the s p e c i f i c semantic requirements r e p r e s e n t e d i n the word "blanket". In terms of making l e a r n i n g i n e v i t a b l e , the language exchange which the tea c h e r e s t a b l i s h e s s e t s parameters, i n c o r p o r a t e s the stu d e n t s ' s knowledge and f i n a l l y makes sense w i t h r e s p e c t to t h a t knowledge. In these two examples the te a c h e r ' s use of s c a f f o l d i n g a s s i s t s the c h i l d i n the task of o b t a i n i n g meaning from t e x t . S c a f f o l d i n g can a l s o be used t o a s s i s t i n the fo r m u l a t i o n of a task. Here Marion i s c i r c u l a t i n g among her grade two group who are r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . Marion goes t o Ian and asks about h i s s t o r y . "What i s t h i s about?" Ian: ""New sp o r t s c a r . " Marion: "And what would you do i f you had a s p o r t s c a r ? " Ian goes i n t o a long e x p l a n a t i o n of what he i s w r i t i n g . Marion crouches down next t o him so t h e i r heads are l e v e l - her l e f t arm on h i s c h a i r . She asks a few more q u e s t i o n s - he reads h i s t e x t . The q u e s t i o n i n g b r i n g s out d e t a i l s 101 which he has not w r i t t e n . Ian c o n c l u d e s , "Well the c a r , i t got b r o k e n . " M a r i o n a s k s , "Where does i t say t h a t and l eans over and looks at the paper as i f she had never seen i t b e f o r e . Ian: " W e l l , not r e a l l y but when the o t h e r c a r got b r o k e n , we s e l l e d t h a t one and got a n o t h e r . " M a r i o n : " I ' l l be i n t e r e s t e d t o r e a d t h a t , I a n . " Ian a s k s , "Should I w r i t e t h a t down?" M a r i o n r e p l i e s , " W e l l , y o u d e c i d e , you are the w r i t e r . " and l eaves him and goes to another t a b l e . A f t e r she l eaves he s t a r t s w r i t i n g , wrapping h i s arm around and a c r o s s the paper . He l eans r i g h t down next to the p a p e r , head on h i s forearm sometimes and c o n t i n u e s w r i t i n g . . . . A f t e r about two minutes M a r i o n r e t u r n s and l i s t e n s to Ian a g a i n . She i s s t a n d i n g next t o h im. He r e a d s , h i s hand g o i n g hop, hop a l o n g the words . He had added what he t o l d h e r b e f o r e , even thouogh the s p o r t s c a r never got i n t o what he wrote . (May 21) T h i s k i n d o f s t r a t e g i c c o n t a c t w i t h a s tudent keeps the s t u d e n t on the t a s k w i t h a f o c u s . What M a r i o n e s t a b l i s h e s i n t h e i r d i a l o g u e i s the v a l u e and r e l e v a n c e of the c h i l d ' s i n t e n t i o n s and t h o u g h t s . She a l s o i n d i c a t e s to him the gap between h i s i n t e n t i o n s and thoughts and what he had w r i t t e n . She then l e a v e s i t to him to b r i d g e the gap. What Ian can v e r b a l l y expres s to M a r i o n may f i n d a p l a c e i n h i s w r i t i n g , e i t h e r d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y . Her q u e s t i o n s and comments are a s c a f f o l d t h a t become touchs tones i n h i s endeavors t o compose. T e a c h i n g r e q u i r e s the a b i l i t y to s t r u c t u r e t a s k s f o r c h i l d r e n . E a r l i e r i n my o b s e r v a t i o n s I had watched Ann t e a c h a math l e s s o n to some i n t e r m e d i a t e s t u d e n t s . I was aware of h e r a b i l i t y to keep t h a t s t r u c t u r i n g l i v e l y and i n d i r e c t touch w i t h h e r s t u d e n t ' s e f f o r t s . I t i s the same a b i l i t y I l a t e r observed i n the c o n f e r e n c e s , t r a n s p o s e d to a 102 d i f f e r e n t s e t of requirements. Here i s an exerpt from my e a r l i e r notes: Ann t e l l s the group she i s going to s t a r t them on f r a c t i o n s , s t a r t i n g w i t h l i k e denominators. She g i v e s them problems o r a l l y . They w r i t e then down and s o l v e them on the board. "Take i t down," she says. "No, no, no," she c a l l s when someone s t a r t s t o e r a s e - meaning she wants them to reduce t h e i r answer. She c a l l s out, " You are on the r i g h t t r a c k . " She goes to a second problem. She watches over them, c o r r e c t i n g as they work- which i s more l i k e a l e r t i n g them when they are on the wrong t r a c k , p r a i s i n g them when they are on the r i g h t t r a c k . She taps one guy on the s h o u l d e r s a y i n g , "Subtract, s u b t r a c t . " "Oh," he exclaims and q u i c k l y e r a s e s . Her pace i s quick and focussed. She i s watching and i n v o l v e d . ( A p r i l 17) Ann c o n t i n u e d i n t h i s manner f o r about a h a l f hour. The problems became more complicated, but the c h i l d r e n worked on s t e a d i l y and w i t h enthusiasm. Her comments to them, as d i r e c t i o n s , as requirements, as p r a i s e or warnings, are the s c a f f o l d i n g t h a t s t r u c t u r e the event and t h e i r progress as they d e a l t w i t h more complicated problems. These episodes i l l u s t r a t e the range of d e n s i t y which i s p o s s i b l e with s c a f f o l d i n g . In the examples based on t r a n s c r i b e d language (focussed o b s e r v a t i o n s ) the elements of the s c a f f o l d s can be seen to be c l o s e l y t i e d , one to another, i n response to the c h i l d ' s a b i l i t i e s and understanding. In the l a s t two examples (taken from formal o b s e r v a t i o n s ) there was more space between the elements the teacher c o n t r i b u t e d . The s c a f f o l d appears expanded g i v i n g the c h i l d r e n more space i n which t o work out t h e i r s o l u t i o n s to the problems before them. The Use of A c c o u n t a b i l y i n Conferencing A c c o u n t a b i l i t y r e f e r s to an a d u l t r e q u i r i n g a c h i l d t o d i s p l a y c e r t a i n f e a t u r e s or conventions of language use. With r e s p e c t t o the a c q u i s i t i o n of l i t e r a c y , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y would r e f e r to a requirement to d i s p l a y f e a t u r e s or conventions of l i t e r a c y . A requirement f o r d i s p l a y may take s e v e r a l forms. I t may inc l u d e r e f u s i n g i n c o r r e c t usage and then g i v i n g c o r r e c t usage. I t may a l s o i n c l u d e r e q u i r i n g or encouraging a student t o f i n d the most a p p r o p r i a t e s o l u t i o n t o t h e i r own problem. The t e a c h e r s i n t h i s program do not g i v e s p e l l i n g t o c h i l d r e n as they d r a f t . T h i s i s based on the t e a c h e r s ' b e l i e f t h a t the c h i l d ' s attempts serve an ed u c a t i o n a l purpose g r e a t e r than what i s achieved by g i v i n g c o r r e c t s p e l l i n g . Here Ann responds t o Saspreet's request. Saspreet: How do you spell guess? Ann: Gas? Saspreet: Guess. Ann: What have you put down? Saspreet: G. Ann: Uh huh. Do you hear the g? What else do you hear? Saspreet: (long pause) A? Ann: Umhmm ( i n d i c a t i n g a f f i r m a t i o n ) Saspreet: ( s u b v o c a l i z i n g to s e l f ) Guess. ( s p e l l i n g aloud) G-A-S-S. ( May 27 ) The requirement from Ann i s con t a i n e d i n her q u e s t i o n {What do you hear?). The unspoken requirement i s f o r the student 104 to use what she hears and i n c o r p o r a t e i t i n t o her e f f o r t . T h i s she does. Beyond conventions f o r usage l i e s conventions f o r meaning. Making r e a d i n g make sense i s a r e c u r r i n g theme i n t h i s s e t t i n g . Here Marion works wi t h S t u a r t who i s r e a d i n g The M u f f i n Monster (out of p r i n t ) . S t u a r t reads v e r y q u i c k l y . S t u a r t Marion S t u a r t Marion S t u a r t Marion S t u a r t Mar i on: S t u a r t Marion S t u a r t Marion S t u a r t : Marion: S t u a r t : Marion: S t u a r t : Marion: (re a d i n g the t e x t ) But because the vi1 lagers were so poor they had to use all their money they had to buy more firewood and floor in order to make more muffins. Did that make sense? Floor? Try it. Floor. ...but because the vi1 lagers were so poor.... . . .they had to use all the money they had earned to buy more firewood and fl...floor in order to make muffins. Does that make sense? They had to buy firewood and floor to make muffins? What do you need to make muffins? (long pause) They needed firewood, didn't they? What for? What was the firewood used for? For the fire. Yes, and why did they need a fire? For the oven. For the oven, exactly. What else do they need? (pause) That can't be floor. (sounding out) Flou...ahh Does that give you an idea? What do you need to make muffins? (slowly) Flour. Yes. Do you know what flour is? Do you know what it 1ooks 1 ike? It's like powder. Yes, it is like powder. You need flour, of course. Now,don't leave it like that. Don't leave it at floor if floor isn't going to work. Use your good brain. O.K. You are the only one who knows when it doesn't make sense. (May 26) Marion's requirement i s th a t the t e x t make sense. As a graphophonemic element f l o o r resembles f l o u r . S e m a n t i c a l l y , however, i t does not make sense. She asks d i r e c t l y i f the s u b s t i t u t i o n makes sense. She then qu e s t i o n s him to see i f he understands what the v i l l a g e r s were doing by b u i l d i n g a f i r e . When he s u p p l i e s the c r i t i c a l word "oven", S t u a r t puts h i m s e l f i n the semantic c o n s t e l l a t i o n where f l o u r might be a good guess g i v e n the context. Marion does not 3 o l v e h i s problem f o r him. She does some l i n k i n g u s i n g s c a f f o l d s and l e t s him do the r e s t . A f t e r he i s s u c c e s s f u l she r e s t a t e s her requirement t h a t t e x t must make sense, even i f i t takes a l i t t l e e f f o r t . The requirement t h a t students produce w r i t i n g from t h e i r own i n i t i a t i v e was a l s o a par t of the a c c o u n t a b i l i t y s t r u c t u r e s present i n t h i s s e t t i n g . The teachers c o n s i s t e n t l y encouraged c h i l d r e n t o work from t h e i r own sense of meaning. They a l s o r e q u i r e d t h a t c h i l d r e n produce w r i t i n g as pa r t of t h e i r c o n t r a c t . T h i s requirement was r e i n f o r c e d by the acceptance and i n t e g r i t y with which the c h i l d r e n were t r e a t e d . In the f o l l o w i n g episode Ray i s having t r o u b l e producing some w r i t i n g . H i s discouragement i s e v i d e n t . The day prev i o u s t o t h i s exchange, when he had been asked by Ann to do some w r i t i n g , he had managed t o begi n by w r i t i n g j u s t a t i t l e . Ann: Now is this the topic you want to write on, that's the first question? Ray: What topic? Ann: The title. Is this the kind of thing you want to write about? Ray: It is. (somewhat b e l 1 i g e r a n t l y ) . This is the topic. Ann: Uhmm. Well, I am wondering because it is hard to write something if you really don't care what you are saying. 106 Ray: Yeah. Ann: You see, you have got to want to write about a title. Ray: Can I change? Ann: Sure, sure. I mean you want to make a story that's what you want to make. You don't want to make it just because I want you to make a story. It wants to be a story that's yours, that's what you want to make. That 's what I am saying. Ray: ( a f t e r a pause) Miz D. I really don't feel like I want to do this. I have to think. Ann: You've got to think about it. Well, O.K. I think that is a good idea. Get a book, read it and tell me about it when you are done. (June 4) S e v e r a l days l a t e r Ray r e t u r n e d t o the ce n t e r . The requirement to produce some w r i t i n g , from h i s own t o p i c and m o t i v a t i o n , i s s t i l l b eing h e l d by Ann. The f o l l o w i n g episode o c c u r r e d . Ann has been encouraging Ray to w r i t e . She t e l l s him t o f i n d a n i c e q u i e t p l a c e t o work and to s t a r t . He j u s t s i t s and s t a r e s at h i s open f o l d e r . A few seconds l a t e r she t o l d him i t was important not to be too p e r f e c t and to j u s t s t a r t . He gets up and wanders around. He looks sad, disc o u r a g e d and v u l n e r a b l e . He goes over to the book t a b l e and f l i p s through some books. He c a l l s over h i s buddy, and together they s t a r t t o look at books. Ann comes over and says, "I don't know why you two are f i n d i n g i t so d i f f i c u l t to w r i t e . " She adds, "I am g e t t i n g i r r i t a t e d at w a i t i n g f o r t h i s w r i t i n g . " F i n a l l y she says, "We'll a l l w r i t e t o g e t h e r . " She gets a f o l d e r and s i t s at the t a b l e where Ray and h i s buddy are . S e v e r a l other students come i n and she r e d i r e c t s them away from the t a b l e where she and the two boys are seated... F i n a l l y she says "We are a i l going t o w r i t e . I've got something t o do too." Ray watches her c u r i o u s l y - says something t o h e r - she looks back at him and says, "You are i n t e r r u p t i n g me. I don't want t o be i n t e r r u p t e d . " Ray looks very bewildered. Meanwhile Ann i s working on some w r i t i n g . She o c c a s i o n a l l y pauses and looks up, c l e a r l y t h i n k i n g about what she i s doing. Ray t w i s t s around to look at othe r s at an adjacent t a b l e . He leans on 107 h i s arms and watches h i s buddy. Ann c o n t i n u e s . Ray gets up and goes to the s u p p l y t a b l e and comes back w i t h an e r a s e r . He looks around and watches Ann i n t e n t l y . She looks up but does not meet h i s gaze. Ray looks around, f i n a l l y w i t h p e n c i l i n hand, s t i l l watching Ann w r i t e . By now, twenty minutes have passed. More c h i l d r e n s t a r t t o f i l t e r i n . Ann i s s t i l l composing. Ray f i n a l l y s t a r t s to w r i t e . He w r i t e s a b i t more, then erases. He r e s t s h i s c h i n on h i s hand- looks around-w r i t e s some more- e r a s e s - w r i t e s . There i s no t a l k at t h i s t a b l e , though the r e s t of the room i s busy. (June 9 ) T h i s example i l l u s t r a t e s the l i m i t s to which I observed a c c o u n t a b i l i t y pressed i n t h i s s e t t i n g . The dilemma i s one faced by a l l t e a c h e r s and students at some p o i n t . In t h i s case the requirement to w r i t e i s a m p l i f i e d by the requirement t h a t i t be motivated from w i t h i n the student and mean something to him. Ann's s t r a t e g y of p r o v i d i n g a model, by w r i t i n g h e r s e l f , y i e l d s s u c c e s s . I t has the e f f e c t of moving the i s s u e of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y away from a s t r u g g l e between two i n d i v i d u a l s and i n t o an open arena of a c t i o n where the student h i m s e l f can observe the r e q u i r e d b e h a v i o r . Bruner maintains t h a t the s t r e n g t h of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y as a l e a r n i n g d e v i c e comes from i t s d i r e c t c o n n e c t i o n to the a d u l t modeling the d e s i r e d behavior. T h i s example bears out h i s a s s e r t i o n . I t a l s o demonstrates the i n t r i n s i c r e s p e c t f o r the i n d i v i d u a l which i s c e n t r a l t o the implementation of the p h i l s o p h y behind t h i s program. The Use of Semantic Contingency i n Conferencing Semantic contingency i s a dev i c e which cont i n u e s or expands a t o p i c i n t r o d u c e d by a c h i l d . C h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y the employment of t h i s d e v i c e i n v o l v e s u s i n g a c h i l d ' s own word or phrase i n a q u e s t i o n or sentence back t o him. I t allow s the a d u l t to m a i n t a i n t o p i c c o n t i n u i t y and g i v e s the c h i l d an o p p o r t u n i t y to expand the thought behind the u t t e r a n c e . In the w r i t i n g conferences, g e t t i n g at the thoughts behind the words a c h i l d w r i t e s h e l p s t o r e v e a l and make comprehensible the context, p o i n t of view and message. Here are Ann and Saspreet. She has now f i n i s h e d the w r i t i n g she was working on when she e a r l i e r asked f o r the s p e l l i n g of guess. Saspreet: ( r e a d i n g aloud t o Ann) I like dogs. Do you like dogs? I guess you like dogs. Ann: Why do you guess: Or who are you talking to there? Saspreet: A person. Ann: Are you talking to me? Saspreet: Yeah. Ann: Who is the listener? Who is the I? Are you the I? Saspreet: Yeah. Ann: Yeah. Okay. Who is this you? Saspreet: You! It's you. Ann: It's me. Okay. So, you are saying you like dogs, eh? (reading from Saspreet's t e x t ) I like dogs. Do you like dogs? At that point I say, yes I do because I have a dog of my own. And then you say I guess you like dogs. And you are right. I do. What do you like about dogs? Saspreet: They are so cuddly. Some dogs have fur that don't come off and I just like squeezing them. (May 27) In the begin n i n g of t h i s episode Ann i s e s t a b l i s h i n g who i s the rea d e r and who i s the w r i t e r . I t i s made more complex by the f a c t t h a t the c h i l d i s w r i t i n g as she would speak and assuming that she i s being answered. She i s e x p l o r i n g the conventions of w r i t t e n c o n v e r s a t i o n . Ann, by-fe e d i n g b i t s of i t back t o her, c l a r i f i e s t h i s i n t e n t i o n . I t i s t h i s f e e d i n g back which c o n s t i t u t e s semantic contingency. The f i n a l q u e s t i o n Ann poses about what Saspreet l i k e s about dogs i s a l s o an example of semantic contingency. I t keeps the t o p i c going and al l o w s f o r expansion. In the f o l l o w i n g episode Ann uses the technique of feedback i n an e f f o r t t o e s t a b l i s h the meaning i n what a c h i l d has w r i t t e n . Here i s Luke r e a d i n g t o Ann about h i s Grand f a t h e r . Luke: ( s o f t l y ) My Grandpa have two dogs. My Grandpa said the dogs stay and the dogs stay. Ann: Oh. So how did he get those dogs? (pause) You mean he wants the dogs to stay does he? Does somebody else want them to go? Luke: ( i n a u d i b l e ) Ann: Do they have names? (pause) You are not sure about these names. What do you know about the dogs? Luke: He say the dogs stay and the dogs go and stay. Ann: Oh.' I see what you mean about stay. Your Grandpa said stay and they just stay in one place and they don't move at all. Is that what you mean? They don't go. They are good obedient dogs. Luke: I tell them to move and they do. Ann: Oh, they do what you say too. (May 26) Ann's feedback t o Luke i s designed to c l a r i f y h i s meaning. At f i r s t she assumes the use of the word s t a y has something t o do w i t h the dogs having to leave. When she feeds t h i s back t o him (Oh you mean he wants the dogs to stay does he? Does somebody else want them to go?) he i s not ab l e t o respond immediately. She senses he i s having t r o u b l e c l a r i f y i n g h i s intended meaning, so she r e t r e a t s t o a more general q u e s t i o n , s t i l l c e n t e r i n g on the dogs (What do you 110 know about the dogs?). F i n a l l y Luke i s able t o c l a r i f y what he meant by st a y . Having understood, Ann i s a b l e to r e s t a t e h i s intended meaning and add f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n u s i n g the word obedient. The exchange succeeds i n making the c h i l d ' s intended meaning more c l e a r . O r a l l y , Ann and Luke are e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t the world of p r i n t comes from the world of thought. S e v e r a l weeks l a t e r , Ann worked w i t h Luke a g a i n on the same i s s u e . In t h i s episode she addresses d i r e c t l y the is s u e of i n t e n t i o n and the thoughts behind w r i t i n g . She does i t by u s i n g s e m a n t i c a l l y contingent phrases which r e q u i r e him to e l a b o r a t e the thought behind what he has w r i t t e n . Luke: ( r e a d i n g s o f t l y from h i s j o u r n a l ) My sister said let 's play hide. I said O.K. (The e n t r y c o n t a i n s an i l l u s t r a t i o n made wit h two small p i e c e s of paper pasted on the page next to a drawing of a c h i l d . ) Ann: Oh. So which is this, you here? ( p o i n t i n g t o i l l u s t r a t i o n ) And there she is hiding in there? Luke: Yeah. Ann: Do you find her? Luke: Yeah. Ann: Do you? But what room is there in behind there? Luke: It's the...we hide in the door and we hide in the closet. Ann: Oh. It's the door to the closet. It's inside the closet. Luke: And I hide there and she didn't find me. Ann: She didn't? Where were you then? Luke: Under something. Ann: That's right. Luke you've got a whole story there. You know, I'd like for you to tell me about some of that tomorrow. Do you think you can keep it in your head until tomorrow? Can you imagine in your mind? Luke: O.K. Luke went on t o add more t o h i s entry and expand from h i s i n i t i a l two sentences to four sentences. The r e s u l t was I l l more l i k e a n a r r a t i v e i n which i t was c l e a r t h a t he and h i s s i s t e r were p l a y i n g a game of hide and seek where he o u t w i t t e d her. Semantic contingency i s e a s i l y found w i t h i n t r a n s c r i p t s of conferences because i t i s a common d e v i c e which a d u l t s use to request e l a b o r a t i o n of t o p i c s or thoughts from c h i l d r e n . In my other data s e t s , semantic contingeny appears l e s s as a de v i c e necessary t o preserve t u r n - t a k i n g and e l a b o r a t e meaning and more as a request to focus on a t o p i c and e l a b o r a t e i t . Here Ann i s conducting a group d i s c u s s i o n on hamburgers. The n e c e s s i t y f o r t h i s d i s c u s s i o n d e r i v e s from the f a c t t h a t the c h i l d r e n p a r t i c i p a t i n g are from d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l backgrounds and p o s s i b i l i t y not f a m i l i a r w i t h North American foods. Ann has two (new) s t u d e n t s - Danny and J a t i n d e r . Danny has s e l e c t e d a book on hamburgers. Ann engages him i n a d i s c u s s i o n on "how t h i s i s a d i f f e r e n t book" ( i t i s n o n - f i c t i o n ) . A three-way d i s c u s s i o n ensues on how i t i s a book about hamburgers. Ann asks Danny i f he has ever eaten a hamburger. He says no. She i s s u r p r i s e d . She s t a r t s around t a b l e d i s c u s s i o n on "how would you make a hamburger?" Danny o f f e r s some ideas. Ann tu r n s t o him and says, "Oh. but you don't know anything about hamburgers." He r e p l i e s . "But I have seen one." She laughs. She has the c h i l d r e n l i s t s a l l the t h i n g s i n a hamburgers. They pour f o r t h w i t h s u g g e s t i o n s - s e v e r a l t h i n g s they do not know the names o f . Ann r e q u i r e s they d e s c r i b e the i n g r e d i e n t s , s e a r c h i n g t h e i r memories and experiences, b e f o r e she g i v e s them the name. ( A p r i l 17) 112 The t o p i c of t h i s exchange o r i g i n a t e s with the c h i l d ' s s e l e c t i o n of the book. The maintenance of t o p i c , the b u i l d i n g of v e r b a l exchange through e l i c i t i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s p r e v i o u s knowledge and c o n j e c t u r e s i s o r g a n i z e d through the p r i n c i p l e of semantic contingency. A l l f e a t u r e s of a hamburger are s e m a n t i c a l l y contingent i n t h i s exchange. In the f o l l o w i n g episode, Marion uses semantic contingency to a s s i s t a student e l a b o r a t e on her ideas b e f o r e she d r a f t s a p i e c e of w r i t i n g . Marion asks. "What are you up to these days. Donna? What would you l i k e to t a l k about?" No response from student. Marion looks at her conference r e c o r d and v e n t u r e s , "Is there something i n here you would l i k e to t a l k about?" Then p o i n t to the b e g i n n i n g of a d r a f t say, "Looks to me l i k e t h i s i s the one." Donna says, "I have gone to Expo." Marion asks, "What d i d you see?" Donna launches i n t o along e x p l a n a t i o n of what she saw. She s t i l l does not make eye c o n t a c t w i t h Marion. Marion asks, "So f o r you, what i s i t about Expo you enjoyed the most?" Donna d e s c r i b e s going to Omnimax and s e e i n g the f i l m and how i t made her f e e l s i c k . Marion asks, "What d i d you do?- I know what I would do!" "Close your eyes!" Donna says w i t h enthusiasm. "Are you going to w r i t e t h a t i n your s t o r y ? " Marion asks. Donna r e p l i e s yes. They t a l k f o r a few more minutes b e f o r e Marion checks w i t h here a g a i n s a y i n g , "So you are f e e l i n g happy about what you are going to w r i t e ? " Donna says yes and leaves a f t e r t e l l i n g Marion how much she love s c h o o l . (June 3) With the use of semantic contingency both of these t e a c h e r s e n t e r i n t o the world and thoughts of t h e i r s t u d e n t s . I t grounds t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h t h e i r students 113 i n t h e s t u d e n t s ' p e r c e p t i o n s . I t i s a g o o d e x a m p l e o f c h i l d - l e d a d u l t - m o l d e d d i a l o g u e . T h i s c h a p t e r h a s c o n s i d e r e d e x a m p l e s o f t h r e e l a n g u a g e d e v i c e s w h i c h a d u l t s u s e t o s u c c e s s f u l l y g u i d e c h i l d r e n t h r o u g h e x p a n d e d l a n g u a g e u s e . I n t h i s c o n t e x t , t h o s e d e v i c e s h a v e b e e n e m p l o y e d by t h e two t e a c h e r s u n d e r s t u d y t o g u i d e c h i l d r e n i n a c q u i r i n g s k i l l w i t h l i t e r a c y . The e x a m p l e s w e r e c h o s e n i n an a t t e m p t t o i l l u s t r a t e t h e t h r e e d e v i c e s , s c a f f o l d i n g , a c c o u n t a b i l i t y a n d s e m a n t i c c o n t i n g e n c y s e p a r a t e l y . I n t r u t h , t h e t h r e e d e v i c e s a r e u s e d t o g e t h e r a n d f o r m t h e b a s i s o f i n t e r a c t i o n i n t h e e x c h a n g e s b e t w e e n t e a c h e r and p u p i l . The d e v i c e s p e r s e do n o t g i v e d i r e c t i o n t o t h e e p i s o d e s , b u t r a t h e r f a c i l i t a t e t h e i n t e r a c t i o n . The d i r e c t i o n o f t h e e p i s o d e s i s g u i d e d by t h e t e a c h e r s ' b e l i e f i n t h e p r i m a c y o f c h i l d r e n ' s i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g a n d i t s r o l e i n t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f l a n g u a g e a n d l i t e r a c y . V e r b a l s c a f f o l d i n g i s u s e d t o h e l p c h i l d r e n t o f o c u s o n t h e s p e c i f i c n e e d s o f a p a r t i c u l a r l a n g u a g e p r o b l e m , s o t h a t t h e y c a n b r i n g what t h e y a l r e a d y know t o b e a r on t h a t p r o b l e m . A c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s u s e d t o r e q u i r e t h e c h i l d r e n t o u s e t h e i r own k n o w l e d g e i n s o l v i n g l i t e r a c y p r o b l e m s . F i n a l l y , s e m a n t i c a l l y c o n t i n g e n t t u r n s w e r e u s e d b y t h e t e a c h e r s t o a s s i s t t h e c h i l d r e n i n b r i n g i n g t h e i r i n t e n d e d m e a n i n g t o t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e i r l i t e r a c y t a s k s . A l l t h r e e d e v i c e s a p p e a r a s q u e s t i o n s o r comments. T h e i r 114 p h r a s i n g e l i c i t s d i r e c t i o n , requirements and i n f o r m a t i o n a p p r o p r i a t e t o the l i t e r a c y t a s k s . 115 Chapter Seven: Summary and Con c l u s i o n s T h i s chapter has two purposes. The f i r s t i s t o review the r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s posed i n the f i r s t chapter and summarize the evidence presented by the data f o r each of them. The second i s t o c o n s i d e r the i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s data f o r t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e i n the area of l i t e r a c y a c q u i s i t i o n . The S t r u c t u r e of the S e t t i n g The f i r s t q u e s t i o n t h i s study posed concerned how the t e a c h i n g environment was s t r u c t u r e d . In general the data suggest t h a t the s e t t i n g of t h i s study s e r v e s as an environmental s c a f f o l d which supports and f a c i l i t a t e s c e r t a i n kinds of behavior and a c t i v i t i e s to the e x c l u s i o n of o t h e r s . The a c t i v i t i e s which are supported are done so by v i r t u e of the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the space and m a t e r i a l s and by the a t t i t u d e s and a c t i v i t i e s modeled by the t e a c h e r s . The o r g a n i z a t i o n of space and m a t e r i a l s r e f l e c t s and suggests a c e r t a i n spectrum of a c t i v i t i e s . T h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n i n c l u d e s the placement of f u r n i t u r e which supports f l e x i b i l i t y i n choice of work p l a c e and working t o g e t h e r i n small groups. I t a l s o i n c l u d e s the arrangement and a v a i l a b i l i t y of the t o o l s of l i t e r a c y . Among these are p a r t i c u l a r kinds of r e a d i n g m a t e r i a l s . In a d d i t i o n , each student's work i s contained i n a format which i s a c c e s s i b l e and e a s i l y manipulated. W i t h i n t h i s p h y s i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n , the teachers s e t the tone concerning the nature of d e s i r e d a c t i v i t y . They work t o g e t h e r as a team and model a s t y l e of i n t e r a c t i o n t o the s t u d e n t s . T h i s f e a t u r e s being a v a i l a b l e t o the c h i l d r e n and each other, r e s p e c t f o r the worth of i n d i v i d u a l e x p r e s s i o n and r e s p e c t f o r the processes and products of l i t e r a c y . There i s l i t t l e d i r e c t i n s t r u c t i o n . T h e i r s t y l e of work i s based on a j o i n t commitment to c e r t a i n b e l i e f s and b e h a v i o r s . T h i s b e l i e f p l a c e s v a l u e on i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h s t u d e n t s u s i n g the student's work as a f o c a l p o i n t . The commitment to t h i s b e l i e f serves as a s t r o n g r e g u l a t o r y d e v i c e which i s both p r e s c r i p t i v e and d e s c r i p t i v e . I t keeps them a l i g n e d w i t h each other and keeps the message to the c h i l d r e n about a p p r o r i a t e a c t i v i t y congruent. The s e t t i n g and the manner i n which the t e a c h e r s conduct themselves, i n c l u d i n g t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s of the c h i l d r e n , c r e a t e s the m i l i e u i n which the l e a r n i n g a c t i v i t y takes p l a c e . T h i s m i l i e u i s a c u l t u r a l microcosm. W i t h i n t h a t microcosm, the range of a p p r o p r i a t e a c t i v i t i e s which t e a c h e r s encourage c h i l d r e n t o do i n c l u d e s , h a n d l i n g books p r o p e r l y , u s i n g p i c t u r e s and t e x t to d i s c o v e r meaning, t a k i n g r e s p o n s i b i 1 i l t y f o r c r e a t i n g and s h a r i n g meaning i n t e x t , p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n d i a l o g u e w i t h o t h e r s about the meaning found i n t e x t , and r e l a t i n g t e x t to t h e i r own l i f e and e x p e r i e n c e s . A l l of t h i s a c t i v i t y i s pursued i n a framework which suppports c o l l a b o r a t i o n . At the general 117 l e v e l the a c t i v i t i e s supported r e p r e s e n t a microcosm of c e r t a i n c u l t u r a l v a l u e s which i n c l u d e r e s p e c t f o r i n d i v i d u a l e x p r e s s i o n and the p u r s u i t of meaning g i v e n and r e c e i v e d i n t e x t . Shared meaning has value w i t h i n the community of students and t e a c h e r s . The S t r u c t u r e of Engagement- Evidence f o r Frames and Formats Three of the r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s d e a l w i t h the s t r u c t u r e of the engagement between the t e a c h e r s and the students. They were aimed at o b t a i n i n g a p i c t u r e of how the t e a c h e r s f a c i l i t a t e and develop i n t e r a c t i o n i n r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g conferences. In p a r t i c u l a r I was l o o k i n g f o r evidence to determine whether the i n t e r a c t i o n f i t the t h e o r e t i c a l c o n s t r u c t s o f f e r e d by Kaye (framing) and Bruner ( f o r m a t t i n g ) . The evidence suggests t h a t the t e a c h e r s f a c i l i t a t e a c h i l d ' s engagement i n r e a d i n g or w r i t i n g by encouraging a range of b e h a v i o r s t h a t w i l l l e a d t o r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g w i t h a t t e n t i o n t o a f u l l range of the conventions of l i t e r a c y . In the i n i t i a l stages of l i t e r a c y development, the behaviors i n which the teachers encourage the students to engage may i n c l u d e t a l k i n g about t o p i c s r e l a t e d to books, responding to t e x t , r e t e l l i n g , p r e d i c t i n g and i n f e r r i n g s t o r y l i n e s and encouraging a l l w r i t i n g - l i k e behavior, i n c l u d i n g drawing and invented s p e l l i n g . T h i s i s l a r g e l y done by responding t o c h i l d r e n as i f what they were doing was an example of the d e s i r e d b e h a v i o r s or would lead to the d e s i r e d behavior. T h i s method of engaging the c h i l d i s e x a c t l y as Kaye d e s c r i b e s i t , acting as if i n order to p r o v i d e a b a s e l i n e f o r the development of the d e s i r e d behavior. In o r d e r f o r the t e a c h e r s ' b e h a v i o r to q u a l i f y as framing, i t i s necessary t h a t i t p r o v i d e ( r e c u r r i n g ) u n i t s of o r g a n i z e d behavior based on what the student i s doing. In repeated episodes the data shows t h a t t h i s i s what the t e a c h e r s are doing. G e n e r a l l y speaking, the u n i t s of a c t i v i t y which the teachers generate m a i n t a i n engagement, support d e s i r e d behaviors and p r o v i d e f o r the e l a b o r a t i o n of s t u d e n t s ' s k i l l s through the requirement to e l a b o r a t e meaning. In many r e s p e c t s , framing s t r u c t u r e s i n t e r a c t i o n much as o r g a n i z a t i o n of space and b e l i e f s s t r u c t u r e s the p h y s i c a l and c u l t u r a l environment i n t h i s s e t t i n g . There i s a l s o a deep c o n g r u i t y with r e s p e c t to the message about the l e a r n i n g and p r a c t i c e of l i t e r a c y conveyed i n the s e t t i n g and the i n t e r a c t i v e framework. T h i s c o n g r u i t y i s d i r e c t l y the r e s u l t of the agreements among the t e a c h e r s concerning t h e i r b e l i e f s about the l e a r n i n g of l i t e r a c y and a c t i n g on those b e l i e f s w i t h t h e i r s t u d e n t s . The evidence f o r f o r m a t t i n g i s a l s o c o n c l u s i v e with r e s p e c t t o the range of behaviors both teachers and c h i l d r e n d i s p l a y which correspond to Bruner's d e s c r i p t i o n s . What has been demonstrated i s t h a t there are r o u t i n e s present i n the conferences conducted. T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e w i t h r e s p e c t to w r i t i n g conferences which c o n t a i n three 119 d i s t i n c t phases. These three phases are r e t e l l i n g , r e a d i n g and e d i t i n g f o r one f e a t u r e , convention or s t r a t e g y . The r o u t i n e s however are not "game-like". T h i s may be because the age of the student does not d i c t a t e the n e c e s s i t y f o r t h a t q u a l i t y i n order f o r the r o u t i n e to have power. I t i s c e r t a i n l y p o s s i b l e t h a t the c h i l d r e n themselves would be a b l e to take-over these r o u t i n e s , g i v e n enough f a m i l i a r i t y and p r a c t i c e w i t h them. In t h i s study the way the t e a c h e r s conduct the conferences the students g e n e r a l l y i n c o r p o r a t e m a t e r i a l i n t o t h e i r w r i t i n g where they have r e c o g n i z e d a model from p r e v i o u s c o n t a c t w i t h r e a d i n g and w r i t i n g . T h i s q u a l i f i e s as a take-over of c e r t a i n a spects of convention w i t h i n the o v e r a l l r o u t i n e . I t kept the student i n c o n t r o l of h i s w r i t i n g process even as the t e a c h e r f a c i l i t a t e d the process f o r doing i t . The data a l s o g i v e evidence f o r Bruner's d e s c r i p t i o n of the r e c i p r o c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between a d u l t modeling and c h i l d r e n ' s demonstration of elements of the r o u t i n e . In order to a s s i s t the student i n r e c a l l i n g or r e c o g n i z i n g p r e v i o u s c o n t a c t w i t h an a p p r o p r i a t e model contained i n t h e i r own experience w i t h t e x t , the teachers use q u e s t i o n s or probes designed to h i g h l i g h t the c h i l d ' s experience or understanding of the a p p r o p r i a t e model. The f a c t t h a t the t e a c h e r s are i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p r o v i s i o n of models themselves may weaken the l i t e r a c y - l e a r n i n g c a p a c i t y of the r o u t i n e s they c r e a t e . The f a c t t h a t the teachers themselves seldom provided the models may be e x p l a i n e d by t h e i r 120 commitment to have the c h i l d ' s e f f o r t s and understanding be at the c e n t e r of the i n t e r a c t i o n . T h i s commitment may have pr e c l u d e d them from p r o v i d i n g the models. S c a f f o l d s . A c c o u n t a b i l i t y and Semantic Contingency The f i n a l r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n concerns the use of language d e v i c e s which p r o v i d e a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s development of language and l i t e r a c y . The study c o n t a i n s many i n s t a n c e s of conferences where the t e a c h e r uses s c a f f o l d s , the b u i l d i n g of language-based requirements, to a s s i s t a student to s u c c e s s f u l l y employ or r e c o g n i z e a convention or s t r a t e g y of l i t e r a c y . These s c a f f o l d s were most o f t e n c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h the use of q u e s t i o n s which were i n i t i a l l y g e neral ones and became more and more s p e c i f i c as the conference progressed. The s p e c i f i c i t y of some of these s c a f f o l d s enabled some v e r y f i n e l y tuned and w e l l developed l e a r n i n g t o take p l a c e . The s c a f f o l d s were c o n s i s t e n t l y b u i l t upon what the student demonstrated i n terms of comprehension. The data a l s o shows many examples of the use of a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . In t h i s s e t t i n g , the a c c o u n t a b i l i t y s tandard i s s e t g e n e r a l l y w i t h r e s p e c t to what makes sense to the student, i s meaningful to the student or i s based on the student's e f f o r t s . I t i s seldom set with r e s p e c t to l i t e r a t e conventions f o r t h e i r own sake. Because of t h i s , the a c c o u n t a b i l i t y system which i s f o s t e r e d here i s a d i r e c t r e f l e c t i o n of the t e a c h e r s ' b e l i e f i n the n e c e s s i t y f o r students t o be r e s p o n s i b i l e f o r t h e i r own e f f o r t s and i s i n d i v i d u a l l y t a i l o r e d t o each student. While i t may be phrased as a request from the tea c h e r the u l t i m a t e goal i s f o r the c h i l d t o engage i n meaning-making w i t h i n the framework of a l i t e r a t e task. T h i s i s balanced by a generous i n d i v i d u a l i z e d support f o r each student i n p u r s u i t of h i s own s k i l l w i t h g i v i n g and d i s c o v e r i n g meaning i n t e x t . F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s ample evidence f o r the use of semantic contingency i n the data. I t would be s u r p r i s i n g i f t h i s were not so. The d e v i c e i t s e l f i s p r e v a l e n t i n o r d i n a r y language use, p a r t i c u l a r l y where a l i s t e n e r i s attempting t o get c l a r i f i c a t i o n on a speaker's meaning. I t i s a l s o w e l l documented as a primary form of a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e t o c h i l d r e n ' s language development. In t h i s s e t t i n g , t e a c h e r s use i t to e l i c i t e l a b o r a t i o n of understanding and meaning from s t u d e n t s . The e l a b o r a t i o n of meaning i s one of the key elements of t h i s s e t t i n g , both i n terms of b e l i e f s and i n p r a c t i c e . The data c e r t a i n l y demonstrates t h i s i n the e x i s t e n c e of numerous i n s t a n c e s of d i a l o g i c t u r n s based on tea c h e r ' s u s i n g key words and phrases i n i t i a l l y s u p p l i e d by stu d e n t s . For the purposes of data a n a l y s i s , the three language d e v i c e s were i s o l a t e d and t r e a t e d s e p a r a t e l y . T h i s does not mean that they e x i s t s e p a r a t e l y . In many of the episodes presented, a l l t h r e e d e v i c e s are present and the teacher i s u s i n g them t o g e t h e r i n a conference. Used t h i s way they 122 form a s t r o n g m a t r i x f o r teacher a s s i t a n c e to the development of l i t e r a c y . General C o n c l u s i o n s to the Study Questions The g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n which t h i s study addressed concerned the presence of a c o n s t e l l a t i o n of f e a t u r e s of a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s language development i n a program devoted to l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g . In g e n e r a l , the c o n s t e l l a t i o n of f e a t u r e s chosen from the l i t e r a t u r e was found to be present i n t h i s s e t t i n g i n the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e examples chosen from the data s e t . The three data s e t s themselves were o r i g i n a l l y a l l o c a t e d to the t h r e e data chapters i n the f o l l o w i n g way. The i n f o r m a l (general a c t i v i t y i n the s e t t i n g ) o b s e r v a t i o n s were a l l o c a t e d t o Chapter Four, the formal o b s e r v a t i o n s (concerned w i t h the i n t e r a c t i o n s between the t a r g e t teachers and primary aged c h i l d r e n ) t o Chapter F i v e , and f i n a l l y the focussed (concerned w i t h s p e c i f i c s of language exchanges) to Chapter S i x . Once t h i s was done, the data was c r o s s - t a b u l a t e d with episodes from the two other data s e t s added to the primary data s e t . By v i r t u e of the c r o s s - t a b u l a t i o n the study has a measure of i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y . A s i m i l a r c o n s t e l l a t i o n of f e a t u r e s based on the t h e o r e t i c a l concepts being a p p l i e d were d i s c o v e r e d i n each data s e t . The s e t t i n g , the i n t e r a c t i v e frameworks and the language exchanges a l l showed c o n s i s t e n c y w i t h r e s p e c t to theses f e a t u r e s . The f e a t u r e s i n t u r n were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the t e a c h e r s ' b e l i e f s and 123 premises o u t l i n e d i n the document a n a l y s i s . Those documents were based on the t e a c h e r s ' b e l i e f s t h a t the l e a r n i n g of l i t e r a c y can be f a c i l i t a t e d i n the same ways as the l e a r n i n g of the f i r s t language. The c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t the teach e r s were p r a c t i s i n g an approach t o l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g analagous to that documented i n some of the r e s e a r c h on a d u l t a s s i s t a n c e to c h i l d r e n ' s language l e a r n i n g . T h i s i s not to say that the te a c h e r s were c o n s c i o u s l y s e t t i n g about the r e p l i c a t e the p r a c t i c e s t h a t a d u l t s use w i t h i n f a n t s and young c h i l d r e n . Those p r a c t i c e s are i n t u i t i v e and second nature to the parent and p a r t of the a f f e c t i v e bond that e x i s t s between c a r e - g i v e r s and c h i l d r e n . Here the p r a c t i c e s appear t o be motivated by a s t r o n g commitment t o place c h i l d r e n and t h e i r messages and understanding at the c e n t e r of the l e a r n i n g endeavor. From t h i s commitment the teachers have evolved method of t e a c h i n g . A parent does t h i s out of love. In t h i s s e t t i n g , the t e a c h e r s are doing i t from a commitment to the in h e r e n t c a p a c i t i e s w i t h i n the i n d i v i d u a l student. At s e v e r a l p o i n t s i n t h i s study I heard d i s c u s s i o n s concerning the d i f f i c u l t y of demonstrating or t r a n s m i t t i n g t h i s method of t e a c h i n g t o othe r t e a c h e r s . The teachers themselves b e l i e v e d that an i n t e r e s t e d p r a c t i t i o n e r c o u l d observe them at work, but i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s would only l e a r n by a c t u a l l y working w i t h c h i l d r e n and a l l o w i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s message and i n t e n t t o be the c e n t r a l focus of the i n t e r a c t i o n . My o b s e r v a t i o n i s th a t t h i s method of t e a c h i n g has two b a s i c requirements. 124 They are t h a t the teacher not c o n t r o l the i n t e r a c t i o n , but r a t h e r f o l l o w the c h i l d ' s lead w h ile at the same time p r o v i d e ample g u i d e l i n e s which shape the i n t e r a c t i o n i n the d i r e c t i o n of the d e s i r e d s k i l l s . The second i s t h a t c h i l d r e n take r i s k s and engage i n l i t e r a t e b e h a v i o r s t o the best of t h e i r a b i l i t i e s . As simple as t h i s sounds, i t c h a l l e n g e s some b a s i c b e l i e f s about t e a c h i n g . I t puts l e s s emphasis on i n s t r u c t i o n and more emphasis on the developmental c a p a c i t i e s of c h i l d r e n . L i m i t s of t h i s Study and I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r Future Research The l i m i t of t h i s study i s inherent i n the l i m i t of the methodology used. The data presented here r e f l e c t s the s i n g l e s e t t i n g i n which i t was gathered. The p i c t u r e generated i s one of two teachers and t h e i r s t y l e of c o n f e r e n c i n g students toward g r e a t e r s k i l l w i t h l i t e r a c y . In another s e t t i n g , examining other t e a c h e r s c o n f e r e n c i n g stu d e n t s , a d i f f e r e n t p i c t u r e might emerge u s i n g the same t h e o r e t i c a l framework. W i t h i n the l i m i t s of the method used there are s t i l l unanswered q u e s t i o n s about the use of formats i n l i t e r a c y r o u t i n e s . P a r t i c u l a r l y with the w r i t i n g conferences which g i v e evidence of a s t r u c t u r e which can be l i f t e d from the substances of the a c t u a l exchanges, a comparative study which examines the r o l e of a d u l t modeling and i t s e f f e c t on c h i l d r e n ' s a c q u i s i t i o n of s k i l l s may be u s e f u l . 125 With the curre n c y of a paradigm s h i f t i n t e a c h i n g methodologies, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n language a r t s , t h e r e i s need f o r f u r t h e r s e a r c h on how to provide s u c c e s s f u l l i t e r a c y l e a r n i n g s i t u a t i o n s . With young c h i l d r e n , keeping methodologies c h i l d - c e n t e r e d i s necessary to pr o v i d e the most r e l e v a n t a c t i v i t i e s and exchanges to the i n d i v i d u a l s t udent. The t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e s which are e v o l v i n g out of the l i t e r a t u r e on Emergent L i t e r a c y have spawned new s e t s of classroom p r a c t i c e s . I n i t i a l l y they were p i l o t e d by experienced t e a c h e r s who were w i l l i n g t o t r y something new. We do not have a complete p i c t u r e of t h a t t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e . We l a c k a d e s c r i p t i o n of many of the a c t u a l t e a c h i n g d e v i c e s which can be presented t o other p r a c t i t i o n e r s . F u r t h e r r e s e a r c h which d e s c r i b e s i n depth what teach e r s are a c t u a l l y doing i n the implementing of these new methodologies i s r e q u i r e d . A d d i t i o n a l l y , we r e q u i r e data which c o r r e l a t e t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e w i t h student progress to determine which aspects of p r a c t i c e are y i e l d i n g best r e s u l t s . I m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s Research on Teaching P r a c t i c e T h i s study has both c u l t u r a l and p r a c t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s . I began t h i s paper w i t h a r e f e r e n c e to Olson's comment on the o p a c i t y of language f o r the l i t e r a t e user. I f o l l o w e d t h i s w i t h a d e s c r i p t i o n of how e a r l y f a c i l i t y w i t h language as an o b j e c t i s l i n k e d t o c e r t a i n kinds of i n t e r a c t i o n s between parents and c h i l d r e n and one of the 126 determinants of school s u c c e s s s . In e f f e c t these are c u l t u r a l p r a c t i c e s which are handed down i n l i t e r a t e f a m i l i e s from parents to c h i l d r e n . The same s e t of p r a c t i c e s may then become the b a s e l i n e of e a r l y school e x p e r i e n c e s . Where these experiences are not inherent i n a c h i l d ' s u p b r i n g i n g , s c h o o l i n g p r a c t i c e s may be c o n f u s i n g and u n f a m i l i a r . The r e s u l t , f o r the c h i l d who has not had the e a r l y t r a i n i n g at home, and f o r whom the e a r l y s c h o o l i n g experience r e l i e s too much on the presence of these a b i l i t i e s w i t h language, i s too o f t e n a poor s t a r t on l e a r n i n g what l i t e r a c y i s a l l about. T h i s perpetuates i t s e l f as a d i s a f f e c t i o n from the c u l t u r e of l i t e r a c y . I t has personal consequences i n terms of the student's success w i t h s c h o o l and a l s o g e n e r a t i o n a l consequences when the p a t t e r n i s repeated. T h i s r e s e a r c h o f f e r s a p a r t i a l s o l u t i o n , or the d i r e c t i o n of a s o l u t i o n , t o the dilemma p o r t r a y e d above. The c h i l d r e n who appear i n t h i s study were not g e n e r a l l y from homes where e a r l y experiences with the l i t e r a t e b i a s i n languge use c o u l d have been expected. Yet i n t h i s s e t t i n g , they are l e a r n i n g l i t e r a c y based on what they themselves c o u l d demonstrate they knew about i t . By engaging i n the process of g i v i n g and r e c e i v i n g meaning i n t e x t , and being asked to c l a r i f y and e x p l o r e the meaning, they engaged i n both the process of producing l i t e r a c y and i n the process of u s i n g o r a l language i n a l i t e r a t e manner. In t h i s way, they become l i t e r a t e users of o r a l language and more capable 127 members of the c u l t u r e of l i t e r a c y . T h i s i s done i n the same simple way that o r a l language i s lea r n e d and the l i t e r a t e b i a s i n language use i s learned: by paying a t t e n t i o n t o the message (not the form) and r e l a t i n g the message to personal experience and r e f l e c t i o n ( u s i n g language t o r e f l e c t on meaning). How the teachers achieve t h i s seems l a r g e l y based on d i s c o v e r i n g the student i n t e n t i o n and working w i t h them as they c l a r i f y and express i t . As t e a c h e r s we are not warranted i n assuming a l e v e l of t a c i t knowledge about l i t e r a c y or the l i t e r a t e use of o r a l language i n our young stu d e n t s . Recent r e s e a r c h s e r v e s us w e l l i n p o i n t i n g out e x a c t l y what c h i l d r e n need i n order t o experience success w i t h l i t e r a c y and be come f u l l y p a r t i c p a t i n g members of l i t e r a t e c u l t u r e . We can b u i l d i n t o t e a c h i n g p r a c t i c e ways of a c h i e v i n g i t f o r a l l c h i l d r e n . S u c c i n c t l y put, we must r e l y on our students to take the r i s k and w r i t e and read i n whatever way they can and we must be w i l l i n g t o not attempt to c o n t r o l t h a t and i n s t e a d r e l y on our a b i l i t y t o understand them and respond t o them i n such a way t h a t they l e a r n more about what they themselves are a l r e a d y doing. REFERENCES B i s s e x , G. (1980). Gyns at wrk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press. Bogdan, R.D. & B i k l e n , S.K. (1982). Q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h i n e d ucation. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon. Bruner, J . (1978). L e a r n i n g how to do t h i n g s w i t h words. In J . Bruner and R. Garton (Eds.). Human growth and development. Oxford: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. Bruner, J . (1983). C h i l d ' s T a l k . New York: Norton. Bruyn, S.T. (1966). The human p e r s p e c t i v e i n s o c i o l o g y : The methodology of p a r t i c i p a n t o b s e r v a t i o n . New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . Clay, M. (1975). What d i d I w r i t e ? Auckland, New Zealand Heinemann. Donaldson, M. (1978). C h i l d r e n ' s minds. Glasgow: Col 1 i n s . Graves, D. (1983). W r i t i n g : Teachers and c h i l d r e n at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann. Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: P r i n c i p l e s i n p r a c t i c e . London: T a v i s t o c k . Holdaway, D. (1979). The foundations of l i t e r a c y . Sydney A u s t r a l i a : Ashton S c h o l a s t i c . Junker, B. (1960). F i e l d work. Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press. 129 Kaye, K. (1982). The mental and s o c i a l l i f e of ba b i e s . Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press. Kaye, K. & Charney, R. (1980). How mothers m a i n t a i n " d i a l o g u e " w i t h two-year-olds. In D.R. Olson. The s o c i a l foundations of language and thought. New York: Norton. M a t t i n g l y , I. (1972). Reading, the l i n g u i s t i c process and l i n g u i s t i c awareness. In J . F. Kavanagh & I. M a t t i n g l y (Eds). Language by ear and by eye: The r e l a t i o n s h i p between speech and r e a d i n g . Cambridge. MA: M.I.T. P r e s s . N i n i o , A. and Bruner, J . (1978). The achievement and antecedents of l a b e l l i n g . J o u r n a l of C h i l d Language. 5, 1-15. Olson, D. (1977). From ut t e r a n c e t o t e x t : The b i a s of language i n speech and w r i t i n g . Harvard E d u c a t i o n a l Review. 47, 257-81. Olson, D. (1984). "See! Jumping!" Some o r a l antecedents of l i t e r a c y . In H. Goelman, A. Oberg & F. Smith (Eds). Awakening to l i t e r a c y . E x e t e r NH: Heinemann. Schatzman, L. & S t r a u s s , A.L. (1973). F i e l d r e s e a r c h : S t r a t e g i e s f o r a n a t u r a l s o c i o l o g y . New J e r s e y : P r e n t i c e - H a l l . Snow, C.E. (1983). L i t e r a c y and language: R e l a t i o n s h i p s d u r i n g the preschool y e a r s . Harvard E d u c a t i o n a l Review. 53 (2), 165-89. 130 Snow, C.E. & N i n i o , A. (1986). The c o n t r a c t s of l i t e r a c y : What c h i l d r e n l e a r n from l e a r n i n g to read books. In T e a l e , W. & Sulzby, E. (Eds). Emergent l i t e r a c y : W r i t i n g and r e a d i n g . Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Smith, F. (1978). Understanding r e a d i n g 2nd ed. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t & Winston. Spradley, J.P. (1980). P a r t i c i p a n t O b s e r v a t i o n . New York: H o l t , Rinehart & Winston. W e l l s , G. (1981). L e a r n i n g through i n t e r a c t i o n : The study of language development. New York: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . W e l l s , G. (1985). Preschool l i t e r a c y - r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s and success i n s c h o o l . In D.R. Olson, N. Torrance & A. H i l d y a r d (Eds). L i t e r a c y , language and l e a r n i n g . Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press. APPENDIX A Informal Observation Sample Page 1 - March 5, 1985 - Jean Kotcher - Informal: L.A.C. 132 8:57 1. I met Lee and Marietta in the staffroom u p s t a i r s . I had 2. negotiated this observation several days ago. I am always 3. made to feel welcome. We came down together with the two 4. teachers discussing minor changes in the day's routine. 5. The room has been re-arranged again, I notice. Two compu-6. ters are now present against the window wa l l . Lee i s 9:00 7. t a l k i n g with children as they come i n , T e l l i n g them she 8. wants them to write and read today. This i s a Grade 2 9. group. She zeroes in on one boy i n p a r t i c u l a r as he s i t s 10. down with his materials and makes an agreement with him 11. about what specific time he w i l l do his writing. He is a 12. small Asian child. I cannot hear everything she says and 13. nothing of what he says. V i c t o r comesin and Lee orients 14. him to one of the computers. He goes over to s t a r t work. 15. He i s excited. The adult volunteer i s working with one 16. c h i l d reading. Two others are in the room waiting at 17. table f or Lee. They have t h e i r f o l d e r s and books ready. 18. Lee i s using tables G and F for t h i s period. She takes 19. one of the boys from her group back to the book selection 20. table to s e l e c t a book. The older (Gr. 7) c h i l d r e n come 21. in and gather at other tables with Marietta. Lee returns 22. to G and settles with one boy, Blake. She makes a note in 23. her record folder. He s t a r t s to read aloud slowly. The 24. adult volunteer is also seated at this table with the boy 25. she i s working with. There are two g i r l s at F also wor-26. king. They too are part of Lee's group. Lee asks 27. Blake how this version of the story of the Gingerbread Man 28. is different from another version he has read. He replies 29. that the animals are wearing clothes. Lee asks him how 30. the ending i s different... She queries him further. He . 31. appears not to clue in to what her questions intend to 32. lead him to notice. They go back to the book table toge-33. ther and return with the e a r l i e r - r e a d version of the 34. story. He comments how the Gingerbread Boy himself i s 35. different. Lee says, "Yes, the ill u s t r a t i o n s are d i f -36. ferent." Lee works with him on looking at how there 37. are different animals in the two versions. He talks about 38. that, l i s t i n g the animals verbally. By now there are 12 39. children and 3 adults working in the Centre. It i s quiet 40. and calm. Everyone is either reading, writing, discussing 41. or l i s t e n i n g . Lee and Blake continue to compare the two 42. s t o r i e s . Lee d i r e c t s him to read a portion of the pre-43. vious story (version). This pupil is a very slow reader, 44. i t appears to be hard work for him. At one point, he 45. sticks his thumb in his mouth. Lee asks him how he would 46. write the story i f he were going to do i t himself. He " 47. mentions he would have a lion sucking thumb in his story. 48. Lee asks him to choose another story from within his book. 49. He says, " B i l l y Goats Gruff!" with no h e s i t a t i o n . She " 50. asks him to f i n d the story in the table of contents. He 9:13 51. does, and starts to read. Marietta's group of Gr. 7's are 52. a l l working. She conferences them i n d i v i d u a l l y , moving 53. around. It appears they are continuing to do research-54. type activity. The adult volunteer has moved to F to work 55. with one of the g i r l s . The c h i l d she has just f i n i s h e d 56. working with is not writing. Blake continues to read the 57. B i l l y Goats. He reads slowly. Whe he has d i f f i c u l t y he 58 s t a r t s squirming his body around, a l l the while keeping APPENDIX B Formal O b s e r v a t i o n Sample 134 Page 2 - May 22, 1986 - Jean Kotcher - Formal: L.A.C. 1. She leans in his d i r e c t i o n , but her body i s at r i g h t 2. angles to his. L.: "How does he f e e l about her?" A. -3. L.: "Let's do t h i s part again." (they do) L.: "What 4. happened there?" A.: "Argument." L.: "The whole way?" 5. A.: "No, they be friends i n the end." L... L.: "Do you . 6. have a friend you argue with?" A.: "Dorainick." L.: "So 7. sometimes you argue and sometimes you are friends." L. 8. leans back and looks over to adjacent table to check on B. 9. and Boy X. S. has joined Jaspreet and they are working 10. side by side at the same table. A. finishes his recording 11. and Lee says, "How about a d i f f e r e n t kind of story? You 12. and I have a l i t t l e more time together. A. goes to book 9:25 13. table. L. has gone to xerox something for puppeteers. B. 14. and Boy X and now S. and J. are a l l working making puppets 15. and props. L. brings back xeroxing. B. grabs up for 16. them. L.: "What are you going to do? You t e l l me. B.: v 17. "I'm going to do i t . L.: "You can put them i n order for 18. people." B. takes paper to another table. L. follows and 19. shows him where something needs c u t t i n g to be put in 20. order. She s i t s next to Andy. He has chosen a book. 21. Across the table, B. and S. are ordering xerox pages. L. 22. watches them. They are t r y i n g to f i g u r e out the order. 23. L. watches, makes a few suggestions. She is s i t t i n g some 24. distance from Andy - but turns to him. L.: "Is that what 25. you are reading? Well, carry on." He reads aloud to 26. himself, b a s i c a l l y - Lee i s by him, but not t o t a l l y en-27. gaged w/ him. A. stops reading. L.: "Don't get d i s t r a c -28. ted, Andy, carry on. M. comes over w/ journal. L. looks 29. at i t , laughs. L.: "Was he going to share h i s dinner w/ 30. the rabbit? What does share mean?" M. r e t e l l s his [story 31. thoughts]. L., looking d i r e c t l y at him. He i s standing 32. in front of her. She looks r i g h t into h i s face. L.: 33. "Are dogs and rabbits f r i e n d l y ? " M. puts hands behind 34. back, chats away. - then turns back to book, on table. 35. L.: "Well, you can do that tomorrow...How are you going 36. to remember? You could put the t i t l e down to remind you." 37. M. takes book away, writes. M. doing a re-write of a 38. story (book) "My Home i s Here" - has changed the end — 39. not comprehending the story the way the author intended. 40. M.: "The cats and the mice [sub v o c a l i z i n g ] - (then) "I 41. wrote i t , Miz Dobson." Brings book back to Lee. - t e l l s 42. her another t i t l e . L.: "Oh, I l i k e that." M. takes book 43. to Beth. L. returns to Andy, "What do you think about 44. that Gingerbread Man?" A. r e t e l l s story. L.: "What do 45. you think about the G.B. Man, not smart enough?" They 46. continue. Lee i s now s i t t i n g p a r a l l e l to him, S. & M. at 47. some distance - leaning forward, arms across body mid-48, s e c t i o n - then arm up, hand to chin - asks Michael i f he 49. has ever written a G.B. Man story - then t e l l s him to go 50. f i n d another G.B. Man to compare them. B. gets some help 51. w/ h i s ordering from S. - She i s s t i l l s i t t i n g - then 52. turns around and checks on S. and Boy X. Shes goes to 53. t h e i r table and asks i f everyone has a copy. S. s t a r t s 54. looking for xerox paper. M. t e l l s her he has added ano-55. ther character. "Cat and Mouse and Dog". He reads i t 56. again, then s i t s and writes some more ^"JTe talks to him-57. s e l f as he writes. [Children who are intensely engaged 58. get basically same treatment as those marginally engaged 59. — ? ? — the standard for conduct is internalized by L. and APPENDIX C Focussed O b s e r v a t i o n Sample 136 Page 2 - May 28a, 1986 - Jean Kotcher - Focused: Lee 1. l e f t hand extends around to book space - [Again, the 3. e n c i r c l i n g ] - while they are working on "blanket" - Mi. 4. lays head down on book, but keeps l e f t hand finger on 9:30 5. place in text. Bl. chimes in w/ his memory of text while 6. continuing his folding. Mi. trucks on, holding page w/ 7. right hand, pointing w/ left. L.: "What w i l l he need?" -8. Lee picks up a r o l l of tape which i s on the table. Mi. 9. looks a l l around, in the book, on the table. Lee goes to j£ 10. get some from her desk drawer - "Here is i t " - pulling out ' 11. a piece. Bl. s t i l l working on pop-out's, putting them in 12. his journal. (to make a pop-out book]. L.: "So then, 13. he'll want to — " She points to the text. When Mi. 14. wanted "remind" he looked up at Lee. Mi.: "He's 15. choking.." turns too many picures. Lee stops him - she's 16. looking over at Roy and Victor. Mi. stands up when he 17. finishes - "Go back over here, indicating the front of the 18. book - a l l the r e - t e l l i n g is accompanied by gestures 19. (flip, trim hair, wipe face, etc), even Victor chimes in. 9:40 20. [L. R. & V. in t h e i r negotiations re: task] [ d i r e c t i v e 21. to task] Lee moves over to Ma. 22. L.: "Oh, I remember you had a dragon story." Ma. reading 23. from text he had selected several days ago. [h.b. kids 24. keep their current reading selections in t h e i r folders.] 25. Ma. s i t s back in his chair as he reads. He i s turned 26. s l i g h t l y away from Lee. He follows lines in text w/ piece 9:45 27. of construction paper (bookmark). Lee directs B. to extra 28. reading or writing. L i t t l e g i r l comes in for message re: 29. gym. Lee touches her journal several times. Mi. wiggling 30. around in his chair when Lee asks about "odd picture". He 31. puts hands in lap, passive/quiet while Lee talks. He puts 32. hands down by side while L. reads. (Bl. leaving during 33. "good-bye...") Ma. several times shakes/nods his head, 9:45 34. "yes". Tape over - I'm l e t t i n g i t go as period i s over 35. and new group coming in - f i r s t David, Raymond come in. 9:50 36. Lee getting everyone to pack up. Lee calls Jaspreet back 37. to hear her story. J.: "This part w/ the fancy designs" 38. - indicates on her picture - looking at picture's on wall 39. for alphabet. If You Give a Mouse a Cookie by Laura Joffe 10:00 40. Numeroff. [I've been doing some xeroxing - purposely have 41. shut off machine and l e f t - Victor and Roy are pushing. 42. Lee and I f e e l that the presence of the mike i s a c o n t r i -43. buting factor to their resistance, particularly w/Victor.] 10:05 44. Tape on - Roy i s working on a re-write of his Frog and 45. Princess story. I told Victor and Darryl I wouldn't keep 46. recording i f they were working - Victor gets i t and goes 47. back to his reading -48. Victor is reading - Ray, writing, Darryl thumbing through 49. a book. Lee i s watching Victor more than working with 50. him. D. & R. getting a kick out of V.'s intonation and 51. characterization. - Talk about the flapping flower accom-52. panied by gestures by both Lee and Victor. As L. reads, 137 138 APPENDIX D P r i n c i p l e s Which Nurture the Growth of Emergent L i t e r a c y 139 P r i n c i p l e s which Nurture the Growth of Emergent L i t e r a c y 1. P r o v i d e a warm s u p p o r t i v e s e t t i n g r i c h i n i n t e r a c t i o n s and demonstrations of f u n c t i o n a l o r a l language and l i t e r a c y . 2. Emphasize the process of w r i t i n g r a t h e r than the product, a l l o w i n g generous p e r i o d s of time to e x p l o r e and experience the process. 3. Respond t o the intended meaning of the c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g f i r s t . Some a t t e n t i o n can be p a i d t o form, but only when the c h i l d r e n i n d i c a t e they are ready to use i t i n t h e i r work. 4. Present the w r i t i n g task as a pr o b l e m - s o l v i n g e n t e r p r i s e i n which the c h i l d r e n l e a r n to w r i t e by w r i t i n g u s i n g t h e i r i n i t i a v e and a l l the r e s o u r c e s at t h e i r d i s p o s a l t o d i s c o v e r the meaning and to s o l v e problems of form. 5. Expect c h i l d r e n t o come up wit h t h e i r own t o p i c s t o ensure t h a t the w r i t i n g i s meaningful and p u r p o s e f u l from t h e i r p o i n t of view. 6. Encourage the c h i l d r e n t o use t h e i r own i l l u s t r a t i o n s as a source and support f o r t h e i r w r i t i n g . 7. Accept the c h i l d r e n ' s own r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of w r i t t e n communication as a l e g i t i m a t e i n d i c a t i o n of t h e i r c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of the w r i t i n g task. 8. Expect a developomental p r o g r e s s i o n i n the c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g e f f o r t s , over time. Have confidence t h a t e r r o r s are n a t u r a l r a t h e r than h a b i t - f o r m i n g and t h a t the c h i l d r e n w i l l s e l f - c o r r e c t i n d i r e c t r e l a t i o n to t h e i r stage of development. 9. E v a l u a t e i n d i v i d u a l l y both i n terms of the developmental p r o g r e s s i o n and i n terms of t h e i r own o r a l language. APPENDIX E L i t e r a c y f o r Everyone 141 L i t e r a c y r " c r E v e r v o n e Rationale Parents are enorrnousiy successful in teaching their children to speak and to understand, in oral language learning, children move througn stages e.g. from babbling to teiegraohic sentences to elaborated language. We, as teacners, have researched the principles at work in the environments conducive to early language learning, and have come to share them as sound principles of learning and teaching writing and reading. We see children as learning written langauge in parallel to their learning of oral language, e.g., they move from scribble to telegraphic to conventional writing. We have found considerable current research which supports the development of integrated, holistic, whole language programs. Literacy Program At ' • School, we have an integrated English Language Centre (ELC) and Learning; Assistance Centre (LAC) resource room program. We not only share teaching quarters, we also share an integrative, holistic perspective oflanguage learning. - - - Z (ELC), and and' —. Z ..son (LAC) originally developed the program and they have since been joined by : - •/ ' - ' ..: a classroom teacher, also shares this philosophy. The extension of this program into the classroom was jointly worked out with her. Special features of the writing/reading program - integrative, holistic approach (whole language) to eariy literacy - resource teacners joining teacners in the classroom to conference cnildren's writing-- daily writing andreaaing on seif-seiected tonics - individual conferencing on writing and. reading with meaning as the focus - humanistic, yet notalaissezrfaire approach - all children making progress- including those of varying language and cultural backgrounds -achoice from a wide variety of reading material which is"well written, highly predictable and. inherently meaningful - children wanting*to read and to write - arly literacy - we set UD an eaual expectation and opportunity for chilaren to write as well as to read from the very beginning of Kinaergarten - we focus on the meaning as the absolute priority - we accept errors rather tnan exDect correctness - with sucn exDectations, cniiaren can and do engage in these activitites from the very beginning of scnool (ERIBC, March 1986) - contrary to traditional expectations, young children find writing easier than reading and see themselves as writers more easily than as readers. An early writing sample illustrates the presence of systematic errors of form in the.transcription of a meaningful message. TR WZ A There was a 5T A FL H5 beautiful nous_e At this stage children find it easier to read their own writing than to read conventional text. In fact regular writing and their reading of it appears tc facilitate learning to read text in their efforts to put their thoughts into print, children gradually discover and understand the conventions of form. We continally observe that the errors are systematic across children as they progress. Early readers of conventional text invent their own story to suit their exoectations and/or memory of the story. They use their understanding of tne context for their message just as they do when they read signs in the environment. They gradually come to incorporate the conventions of written language into their reading strategies which then enables them to snift from invention to the recreation of the author's messaae. Conferencing at all levels At 2I1 levels, chilcren learn gradually in 2 holistic manner, with meaning as the focus. This perspective of learning applies eaually to all chilaren including those who attend our Learning Assistance Centre (LAC), and our English Language Centre (ELC), for extra help with English, reading and writing. These two resource programs share a common perspective and set of principles of the integrated learning of writing and reading. We focus on the learner and the whole tasks with individualized conferences on both. 143 These conferences aiso tar.e piace in classroom wr:t:ng orcgrams. Classroom teacners invited centres CLAC/ELC) teachers to worK aesiae them in their classrooms in the develoDment of writing programs. This came about througn the joint study ana aiscussion, ana snaring of ideas and pupil accomplishments, which ied to the development of mutual respect, and to a drawing together of teacning colleagues. The joint development of such programs by centres and classroom teachers has . resulted in consistent approaches reinforcing one another in both settings. The shared philosophy involves: - a humanistic yet not laissez-faire view - a particular perspective of children and their learning - recognition that children have already developed considerable knowledge and sound language learning stategies by the time they enter school - respect of the children, their knowledge, abilities and strategies - faith that children will make sense of literacy tasks for themselves - encouragement of children to be risk-takers Enclosures: -two pieces of children's writing If you wish to photograph the original pieces of work they are available. 144 145 - I \ ' 0 )• ';c I" p;. APPENDIX F Responsibi1 i t i e s 147 3ZZ7QSZZ2IZ.ZZZZS Teacher's R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s Children's X e s n o a s i b i i i c : -ca understand and s e s s i c i v e i y observe how c h i l d r e n ' s writing develops; co expect children's writing co follow a developmental progression of successive approxiaacions in vnich Chey induce che ruies and conventions of written language :o oecsse aware that wriciag develops :roa cheir own e f f o r t s •to project: confidence onto the c h i l d r e n chac chey can learn co write by writing -co produce writing -ro act as a genuine audience Co che intended aeaoiags of c h i l d r e n 1 s r . writing -Co share che aeaniag of cheir writing -co give c h i l d r e n control and ownership of c h e i r writing; i t s l e v e l , pace and concent (coning up with c h e i r own copies) -co cake control and ownership of chei wricing; ics Level, pace and content 4 . -ca eaphasise the concent racher than f a r : ; to value and accept a l l children's personal, expressions as presented -to provide anple and regular tiae f o r c h i l d r e n to explore a. variety of topic choices, s t y l e s , foras and mechanics or w r i t i n g 4 . -to r i t r sk, error as chey experisent with solving prabiess of topic choice, st y l e , f o r a and the conventions and aechanics of written Language t -to eaphasire the learning process rather 5. than the product; to expect chi l d r e n to use c h e i r p r i o r knowLedge and o r a l language competence co Induce che rules or conventions of written through experiaentation Language -to bring cheir p r i o r knowledge and cneir o r a l language cospetence to aake sense of print -to e s t a b l i s h where i n d i v i d u a l children are on che written language learning continuua to aake decisions on aporooriate i n t e r a c t i o n s with thea -to sake connections betveen what they know and what chey encounter including the print in che environment and teacher deaonstrations -to i n d i v i d u a l i s e and r e s t r i c t : reaching -to aspects thar c h i l d r e n are ready to Incorporate into t h e i r writing -to give- children, feedback, on their-progress and. accomplishments which wlLL f a s t e r che development of a. conscious awareness or c h e i r tacit, understandings —to aake sense of print: f o r cheaseives 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054727/manifest

Comment

Related Items