Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The relationship between symbolic style and kindergarten children's emergent writing Steffler, Bonita 1991

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_1991_A8 S72.pdf [ 6.14MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0078321.json
JSON-LD: 1.0078321+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0078321.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0078321+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0078321+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0078321+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0078321 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0078321.txt
Citation
1.0078321.ris

Full Text

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SYMBOLIC STYLE AND KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN'S EMERGENT WRITING by BONITA S T E F F L E R B.Ed., The U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l g a r y , 1984 D i p . E d . , The U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l g a r y , 1989  A THESIS SUBMITTED I N P A R T I A L FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS  FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF ARTS in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f Language E d u c a t i o n )  We a c c e p t t h i s to  t h e s i s as conforming  the required  standard  THE U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA S e p t e m b e r 1991 © Bonita Steffler,  1991  In  presenting  degree  this  at the  thesis  in  University of  partial  fulfilment  British Columbia,  of  the  requirements  for  an  advanced  I agree that the Library shall make it  freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying  of  department  this or  thesis by  for scholarly  his  or  publication of this thesis  her  purposes  representatives.  Language  Education  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  DE-6 (2/88)  September  30 ,  It  be is  granted  by the head of  understood  that  for financial gain shall not be allowed without  permission.  Department of  may  1991  copying  my or  my written  ABSTRACT  A c c o r d i n g t o r e s e a r c h , d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way y o u n g c h i l d r e n l e a r n u s i n g symbols i s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f growth and  development.  suggested  Harvard's  P r o j e c t Zero r e s e a r c h e r s have  t h a t c h i l d r e n possess  characteristic styles of  s y m b o l u s e i n t h e way t h e y d r a w , c r e a t e u s i n g c l a y a n d p l a y o b j e c t s , and t e l l  stories.  In particular,  the "symbolic  s t y l e s " o f P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s have been |^This study i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  identified.  between  k i n d e r g a r t e n s t u d e n t s ' p r e f e r r e d symbolic s t y l e and t h e i r early writing attempts^ and  Six focal children  3 D r a m a t i s t s ) were s e l e c t e d  from a t o t a l  (3 P a t t e r n e r s , o f 26 c h i l d r e n .  Over a p e r i o d o f 4 months, d a t a were c o l l e c t e d a t a classroom w r i t i n g centre.  Collected data included the  c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t t e n and drawn p r o d u c t s , a u d i o t a p e d of t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k ,  observations of journal  s e s s i o n s , and taped responses  recordings  writing  to interview questions.  d a t a were a n a l y z e d t o determine  This  any s i m i l a r i t i e s o r  d i f f e r e n c e s i n each groups'  approach  t h e i r views  y^Data a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d b o t h  about w r i t i n g .  t o j o u r n a l w r i t i n g and  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 P a t t e r n e r s and Dramatists.  D i f f e r e n c e s among g r o u p members w e r e  i n some i n s t a n c e s .  observed  D i s c u s s i o n compared t h e c h i l d r e n ' s  w r i t t e n / d r a w n p r o d u c t s and observed  w r i t i n g behaviors  both  t o each o t h e r and t o t h o s e d e s c r i b e d i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e . ii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  Abstract  i i  List  of Tables  vi  List  of Figures  v i i  A c k n o w l edgement  viii  C h a p t e r One:  I n t r o d u c t i o n To The S t u d y  Introduction Background  ;  t o t h e Problem  1 2  Statement o f t h e Problem  5  Purpose o f the Study  6  Questions  6  Definition  o f Terms  Introduction Limitations  7  t o D e s i g n and Sample o f the Study  C h a p t e r Two:  9 10  Review o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e  Introduction  12  Drawing  as a S y m b o l i z i n g A c t i v i t y  15  Writing  as a S y m b o l i z i n g Event  18  C h i l d r e n as Variation Avenues  'Symbol W e a v e r s  24  1  i n S y m b o l i c Development  to Later  Symbolization  Summary  31 38 43  iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Three:  (continued) Methodology  Research Design  48  S i t e and Program  49,  Subjects  50  Data C o l l e c t i o n  51  Data A n a l y s i s  56  Chapter Four:  Results  Introduction  69  Product Analyses  69  Composing P r o c e s s A n a l y s e s  75  Writing Interview Analysis  92  Summary o f R e s u l t s  95  Chapter F i v e :  D i s c u s s i o n and Recommendations  Summary  99  Discussion  of Results  from Product A n a l y s e s  Discussion  of Results  from  Composing P r o c e s s A n a l y s e s Discussion  o f Responses t o W r i t i n g I n t e r v i e w s  Discussion  o f D i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n groups  100  103 110 I l l  Summary D i s c u s s i o n  114  Recommendations f o r P r a c t i c e  116  Suggestions f o r Further Research  118  iv  TABLE OP  CONTENTS  (continued)  References Appendix  A:  121 Example o f d a i l y l o g e n t r y  A p p e n d i x B: P h a s e one d a t a a n a l y s e s C r i t e r i a f o r Determining Media Responses Symbolic S t y l e R a t i n g Index C h a r a c t e r i s t i c Responses t o Symbolic S t y l e  126 127 Tasks  A p p e n d i x C: P h a s e two d a t a a n a l y s e s W r i t i n g P r o c e s s Components W o r k s h e e t u s e d t o a n a l y z e and c o d e c o m p o s i n g L a n g u a g e F u n c t i o n s and S t r a t e g i e s Meaning Elements Worksheet Appendix Appendix  D:  Conventions used of t r a n s c r i p t s  i n the  132 events  presentation 137  E: D r a w i n g / W r i t i n g c o m b i n a t i o n s  v  138  L I S T OF TABLES Table  Page  1  Resources  2  Comparison o f Symbolic S t y l e a n d PPVT-R S c o r e s  3  C h i l d r e n B r i n g t o W r i t t e n D i s c o u r s e ....44 Scores 60  Number o f J o u r n a l E n t r i e s C o l l e c t e d a n d Average  Number o f Words p e r E n t r y  4  How D r a w i n g  and W r i t i n g were Combined  5  P e r s o n a l Stance i n C h i l d r e n ' s Text  6  P r e s e n c e o f N a r r a t i v e Movement i n Children's Texts  70 71 73  74  7  Segmentation  8  Topics of Dramatists' t a l k  83  9  Topics of Patterners' t a l k  84  10  Degree o f s y m b o l i c i n v o l v e m e n t of c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k Language F u n c t i o n s o f C h i l d r e n ' s t a l k R e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l and D i r e c t i v e Language S t r a t e g i e s Used  11 12  o f o r a l language  during encoding  77  86 87 89  13  H e u r i s t i c and P e r s o n a l Language S t r a t e g i e s Used...90  14  Meaning Elements c o n t a i n e d i n t a l k , drawing, & w r i t i n g  91  W r i t i n g P r o c e s s Components: Dramatists vs. Patterners  96  M e a n i n g E l e m e n t s f o c u s e d on i n t a l k , drawing & w r i t i n g  98  15 16  vi  L I S T OF  FIGURES  Figure  Page  1  Ogive  Curve  of Symbolic  Style  Scores  2  Box-and-whisker p l o t o f Symbolic  3  Sammy's b i r d s t o r y  Style  58 Scores  ....59 79  vii  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  I would l i k e t o thank a l l c h i l d r e n , p a r e n t s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who made t h i s s t u d y p o s s i b l e . would  like  t o thank Dr. Lee Gunderson  from t h e Department  In addition,  and Dr. C l a i r e  Staab  o f Language E d u c a t i o n , and Dr. M a r i o n  P o r a t h from t h e Department  of Educational Psychology, f o r  t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e a n d a d v i c e a s c o m m i t t e e members.  I am  e s p e c i a l l y g r a t e f u l t o my a d v i s o r , D r . J o n S h a p i r o , f o r h i s g u i d a n c e a n d e n c o u r a g e m e n t t h r o u g h o u t t h i s t h e s i s a n d t o my husband  f o r h i s continual support.  viii  I  CHAPTER ONE I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e Study  Introduction The  r o l e o f c h i l d r e n ' s drawings i n d e v e l o p i n g w r i t t e n  e x p r e s s i o n has been a t o p i c o f i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r e s t i n e a r l y c h i l d h o o d e d u c a t i o n o v e r t h e p a s t few y e a r s . growing awareness (Graves, 1983).  that  There  i sa  'every c h i l d has a s t o r y t o t e l l '  P e r h a p s a s t e a c h e r s we h a v e b e e n m i s s i n g  p a r t s o f t h i s s t o r y by n o t s e e i n g t h e i n t e r r e l a t e d n e s s o f drawing, w r i t i n g , and o r a l language.  The o f t e n r e p e a t e d  p h r a s e , "A p i c t u r e i s w o r t h a t h o u s a n d w o r d s "  might continue  t o b e o v e r l o o k e d b y some t e a c h e r s who d i s r e g a r d d r a w i n g s a n d s e e them a s "added f r i l l s " .  children's  J u s t a s we a r e now  l o o k i n g a t language a r t s from a h o l i s t i c p e r s p e c t i v e , need t o l o o k a t a l l  t h e channels o f communication  we  a child  u s e s t o a c q u i r e l a n g u a g e a n d make s e n s e o f p r i n t . C h i l d r e n ' s drawings are " v i a b l e t o o l s f o r problem solving  .... T h r o u g h  them c h i l d r e n make s e n s e o f t h e w o r l d ,  and i m p a r t t h e i r v i s i o n s "  (Hubbard,  1 9 8 7 , p. 6 0 ) . I n t h i s  r e s p e c t , drawings r e p r e s e n t an e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f w r i t t e n communication  f o r young c h i l d r e n .  As Graves'  (1983)  research c l e a r l y demonstrates, t h e r e i s a developmental sequence  that characterizes the beginning writer's  p r o g r e s s i o n from drawing t o c o m p o s i t i o n .  1  W r i t i n g and tasks.  d r a w i n g c a n b o t h be v i e w e d a s  C h i l d r e n have been found t o e x h i b i t  approaches t o symbolic play.  W o l f and  symbolic  characteristic  t a s k s s u c h a s d r a w i n g and  G a r d n e r i d e n t i f i e d two  symbolic  symbolic  styles.  group o f c h i l d r e n were c a l l e d P a t t e r n e r s , t h e o t h e r Dramatists. how  No  r e s e a r c h has  been conducted t h a t  One  group  explores  a young c h i l d ' s a p p r o a c h t o w r i t i n g i s i n f l u e n c e d by  t h e i r approach t o symbolic  tasks i n general.  c o n d u c t e d by D y s o n (1986) d e s c r i b e d how children's beginning symbolic  style.  four  w r i t i n g showed s i g n s o f  H o w e v e r , t h i s was  study  kindergarten differing  not the o r i g i n a l i n t e n t  o f h e r r e s e a r c h , b u t r a t h e r an i n t e r e s t i n g Dyson's work f o c u s e d  One  discovery.  on o n l y a s m a l l s a m p l e o f  children.  T h u s , more r e s e a r c h n e e d s t o be done i n t h i s a r e a to  f u l l y understand  to  communicate t h e i r  how  young c h i l d r e n l e a r n t o use  Vygotsky  developed  (1978) who  are  symbols  'stories'.  Background t o the T h i s s t u d y was  i f we  Problem  from the t h e o r e t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e  located the roots of w r i t i n g  of  development  i n t h e young c h i l d ' s growing a b i l i t y t o use v a r i e d symbols. The  a b i l i t y t o compose w r i t t e n t e x t - t o c o n v e y m e a n i n g  through dramatic  l e t t e r g r a p h i c s - grows out o f g e s t u r e , p l a y , and  speech,  drawing.  Recent i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f young w r i t e r s p r o v i d e i n t o how  c h i l d r e n use  insight  o t h e r media, p a r t i c u l a r l y drawing, 2  as  t h e y d i s c o v e r t h e u n i q u e s t r u c t u r e s and s t r a t e g i e s o f each symbol system.  F o r example,  symbol system o f drawing r e p r e s e n t o b j e c t s ) may initial  children's understanding of the  ( o f u s i n g l i n e s and c u r v e s t o  s e r v e as a t r a n s i t i o n t o  their  u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e symbol system o f w r i t i n g  (of  u s i n g t h e l i n e s a n d c u r v e s o f l e t t e r s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e names of objects)  ( D y s o n , 1982; F e r r e i r o & T e b e r o s k y , 1 9 8 2 ) .  a d d i t i o n , young  c h i l d r e n ' s spontaneous t e x t s a r e o f t e n  composed o f m u l t i p l e media, writing.  i n c l u d i n g drawing, t a l k i n g ,  H a r s t e , Woodward, a n d B u r k e  "border skirmishes", a n d d r a w i n g , may  In  (1984)  suggest that  i n which c h i l d r e n waver between  writing  h e l p c h i l d r e n p o s e and r e s o l v e t h e  involved i n t h e i r re-invention of w r i t t e n  between  d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g  i s "a d e c e p t i v e l y s i m p l e o n e "  She d e s c r i b e s y o u n g  c h i l d r e n as  symbol systems o r media.  problems  language.  A c c o r d i n g t o Dyson ( 1 9 8 6 ) , t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p  (p.381).  'symbol w e a v e r s ' .  i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s t h e y f o r m on p a p e r may  and  r e l y on  The  varied  However, as c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p as  symbol u s e r s , t h e y soon d i s c o v e r t h e d i s t i n c t i v e n a t u r e and powers o f each form o f communication  (Wolf and  Gardner,  1981). F i n a l l y , w h i l e d r a w i n g , c h i l d r e n may approaches t o the graphic a c t i v i t y .  They have  s t y l e s o r p r e f e r r e d ways o f d o i n g t h i n g s . between  reveal  different  differing  Differences  s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d and o b j e c t - o r i e n t e d s t y l e s  been documented i n c h i l d r e n ' s use o f v a r i e d media, 3  have  including  s p e e c h and  drawing.  c h i l d r e n may  In drawing, f o r example,  f o c u s on  the  r e p r e s e n t e d ; o t h e r s may told story differences  use  aspects of a f i g u r e to  g r a p h i c symbols as  (Gardner, Wolf, & Smith, 1982). i n use  different learning and  physical  of  symbolic materials  paths.  be  props i n a  These  may  lead  D i f f e r e n t c h i l d r e n may  develop d i f f e r e n t aspects of the  to focus  on  complex symbol-  producing process at d i f f e r e n t times A m a r e l , & K l a u s n e r , 1985;  certain  (Bussis,  N e l s o n , 1981;  Chittenden,  Wolf & Gardner,  1979) . I f one out  of  "the  accepts both the  may  p.106) and be  i n the  e x p e r i e n c e as r e s e a r c h on  the  assumption that  o b s e r v e d i n how  ended composing t a s k s , differences  one  can  r e s o u r c e s and  c h i l d r e n approach open-  the  between the  (referential versus expressive);  Nelson two  there  are  children  symbolizing. (1981)  extremes of  further,  children  In  her  stresses style may  different styles in different situations.  Nonetheless, studying children with i l l u m i n a t e s both the t o be  tensions  forms of  individual differences, fall  child"  individual  assume a s w e l l t h a t  t h e y a t t e m p t new  t h a t most c h i l d r e n  display  grows  e n t i r e h i s t o r y of s i g n development i n the  ( V y g o t s k y , 1978, differences  assumption that w r i t i n g  l e a r n e d and  the  contrasting  d i s t i n c t i v e nature of the challenges that  learners.  4  styles symbol system  system poses  for  Statement o f t h e Problem The  c a p a c i t y t o use symbols has o f t e n been  the hallmark  o f human c o g n i t i o n .  established concerning human a b i l i t y .  a c q u i s i t i o n o f symbolic  Yet,very l i t t l e  t h e e a r l y course  Although  of this  crucial  competence i s a s i m p l e p r o c e s s ,  much  systems  o n l y one i n d e p t h w h i l e i g n o r i n g i t s  r e l a t i o n t o other symbolic In today's  has been  few s c h o l a r s have assumed t h a t t h e  i n v e s t i g a t i o n h a s t e n d e d t o lump a l l s y m b o l i c together o r t o study  considered,  systems.  s c h o o l s i t i s n o t uncommon t o f i n d  writing  i n s t r u c t i o n o c c u r i n g from t h e f i r s t day o f grade one. e v e n o c c u r i n g i n many k i n d e r g a r t e n p r o g r a m s .  It i s  As w r i t i n g  a c t i v i t i e s a n d i n s t r u c t i o n move t o l o w e r g r a d e s ,  educators  s h o u l d be i n c r e a s i n g t h e i r knowledge o f what i n f l u e n c e s w r i t i n g development a t e a r l y ages. differ  i n s t y l e i n t h e areas  o r a l language development. symbolizing beings  We know t h a t c h i l d r e n  o f drawing,  symbolic  I f c h i l d r e n ' s development as  i s i n f l u e n c e d by t h e i r p r e f e r r e d  s t y l e , we n e e d t o know w h a t i n f l u e n c e t h i s w i l l t h e i r e a r l y w r i t i n g attempts.  r e q u i r e d t o f u l l y understand aspects  this  have  Further research i s  the universal properties of  o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n t h a t may  a c r o s s media and t h e n a t u r e  symbolic  have on  What i n f l u e n c e w i l l  on t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f w r i t i n g ?  symbol u s e , those  p l a y and  differ  o f p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s among  i n d i v i d u a l s i n p a t t e r n s o f symbol u s e . 5  Purpose o f t h e Study The p u r p o s e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between k i n d e r g a r t e n s t u d e n t s • p r e f e r r e d s y m b o l i c s t y l e and t h e i r e a r l y w r i t i n g a t t e m p t s .  Their  p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e nature o f w r i t i n g , as w e l l as t h e processes  i n v o l v e d i n w r i t i n g were a l s o examined.  Questions The s t u d y a t t e m p t e d  t o answer t h e f o l l o w i n g  research  questions: 1.  Do c h i l d r e n who d i f f e r  using Sullivan's  i n symbolic s t y l e  [1986] c r i t e r i a )  w r i t i n g attempts?  (as i d e n t i f i e d  also differ  i n their  early  I f s o , what i s t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s e  differences? la)  What r o l e do d r a w i n g  graphic product?  and w r i t i n g s e r v e i n one  A r e t h e r e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e way  P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s combine drawing in their lb)  and w r i t i n g  work?  What p e r s o n a l s t a n c e i s e v i d e n t i n t h e c h i l d r e n ' s  texts?  Does t h i s d i f f e r b e t w e e n P a t t e r n e r s a n d  Dramatists? Ic)  I s t h e r e e v i d e n c e o f n a r r a t i v e movement i n t h e  children's w r i t t e n products?  Do P a t t e r n e r s o r  D r a m a t i s t s i n c l u d e more movement i n t h e i r t e x t s ?  6  Id)  A r e t h e r e d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e message q u a l i t y o f  P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s c o m p o s i t i o n s ? the  nature of these d i f f e r e n c e s ?  le)  What r o l e d o e s l a n g u a g e p l a y i n e a c h  I f s o , what i s  groups'  approach t o w r i t i n g ? If)  What m e a n i n g e l e m e n t s a r e c o n t a i n e d  c h i l d r e n ' s drawing, lg)  i n the  t a l k i n g and w r i t i n g ?  What t o p i c s a r e e v i d e n t i n t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k a s  t h e y draw and w r i t e ? t h e i r ongoing  How r e l e v a n t i s t h i s t a l k t o  journal activity?  What d i f f e r e n c e s a r e  t h e r e between t h e t o p i c s o f P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s talk? 2.  Do P a t t e r n e r s a n d D r a m a t i s t s d i f f e r i n t h e i r  o f t h e n a t u r e o f w r i t i n g and t h e p r o c e s s e s writing?  I f s o , how do t h e s e p e r c e p t i o n s  perceptions  involved i n vary?  D e f i n i t i o n o f Terms 1.  Symbol - something t h a t s t a n d s  f o r something  something concrete t h a t represents o r suggests  else;  another  thing  t h a t c a n n o t i n i t s e l f be r e p r e s e n t e d o r v i s u a l i z e d 2.  Symbolic  S t y l e - a d i s t i n c t i v e o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c manner  i n which a person  uses symbols.  S u c h a s t y l e h a s many  c o m p o n e n t s , i n c l u d i n g t h e means w h e r e b y c h i l d r e n information, capture coherent  i ti n symbolic  forms,  select  organize i t into  messages, and t r a n s m i t i t d e l i b e r t l y t o o t h e r s . 7  3.  P a t t e r n e r s - ( a s d e s c r i b e d b y W o l f a n d G a r d n e r , 1979)  c h i l d r e n who d i s p l a y a s t r o n g i n t e r e s t c o n f i g u r a t i o n a l uses o f m a t e r i a l s — s t r u c t u r e s , and o r d e r s .  (and s k i l l )  i nthe  t h e making o f p a t t e r n s ,  They e x h i b i t a p e r s i s t e n t c u r i o s i t y  a b o u t t h e o b j e c t w o r l d a r o u n d them.  T h e y w a n t t o know how  s o m e t h i n g w o r k s , how i t m i g h t b e named, how t o e x p l o r e a n d vary i t .  G i v e n m a t e r i a l s , s u c h c h i l d r e n a r e more  i n mechanical  and d e s i g n p o s s i b i l i t i e s t h a n  or r e c r e a t i o n of personal experiences. p e r i p h e r a l p a r t o f t h e drawing  process.  interested  i n communication  Language i s o n l y a Patterners are  a t t r a c t e d t o r e p e t i t i v e p a t t e r n s and o f t e n t h e y t e n d t o plunge d i r e c t l y  i n t o drawing  sometimes been c a l l e d 4.  or building tasks.  They have  visualizers.  D r a m a t i s t s - ( a s d e s c r i b e d b y W o l f a n d G a r d n e r , 1979)  c h i l d r e n who a r e s o c i a l l y o r i e n t e d a n d d i s p l a y a n a b i d i n g i n t e r e s t i n t h e human s u r r o u n d i n g : w h a t o t h e r s d o , how  they  t h i n k a n d f e e l , how o t h e r s c a n b e c o n t a c t e d a n d a f f e c t e d . F o r them, d r a w i n g  processes  are interwoven  with talk.  make e x t e n s i v e u s e o f n a r r a t i v e d u r i n g d r a w i n g . o f t e n a p p e a r more r e f l e c t i v e o f t a s k a t h a n d . energy i s devoted  toward  dramatic  Dramatists A l l their  e f f e c t i v e communication w i t h  sharing of their  They  others  and  toward  5.  P e r s o n a l stance - t h e r o l e o r s t a n c e w h i c h t h e c h i l d  a u t h o r a p p e a r e d t o be t a k i n g a s t h e y  8  experiences.  worked.  6.  N a r r a t i v e Movement - ( a s d e f i n e d b y D y s o n , 1989,  used f o r d e s c r i b i n g time.  p.296)  N a r r a t i v e movement e x i s t e d i n a  t e x t i f t h e r e w e r e two t e m p o r a l l y o r d e r e d ,  independent  clauses presenting action or a character's  reaction.  7.  message q u a l i t y - (a t e r m borrowed  f r o m C l a y , 1975)  c h i l d ' s c o n t r o l o v e r t h e f o r m u l a t i o n o f meaning and  the  the  system f o r t r a n s c r i b i n g t h a t meaning. 8.  Meaning  E l e m e n t s - t h o s e components t h r o u g h w h i c h  meanings a r e e x p r e s s e d ( i n c l u d e s o b j e c t s , a c t o r s , placement  i n s p a c e and t i m e , a n d s e n s o r i m o t o r q u a l i t i e s ) .  I n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e D e s i g n and The  actions,  s t u d y examined  o f t h e symbol  Sample  kindergarten children's  s y s t e m s o f d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g .  exploration The s t u d e n t s  a t t e n d e d t h e same K i n d e r g a r t e n c l a s s f o r e i t h e r t h e  morning  or afternoon session. D a t a c o l l e c t i o n was ( l a s t i n g 6 weeks) was  divided  i n t o two p h a s e s .  an i d e n t i f i c a t i o n p h a s e  26 s t u d e n t s p a r t i c i p a t e d .  Twelve  Phase  one  i n which a l l  s y m b o l i c s t y l e t a s k s were  a d m i n i s t e r e d t o e a c h c h i l d t o d e t e r m i n e any p a t t e r n s i n t h e i r approach t o these t a s k s . (1986)  f r o m W o l f and G a r d n e r ' s  a s s e s s media responses. who  C r i t e r i a a d a p t e d by (1979)  r e s e a r c h was  Case s t u d y c h i l d r e n were  d e m o n s t r a t e d an i d e n t i f i a b l e s y m b o l i c s t y l e .  P e a b o d y P i c t u r e V o c a b u l a r y T e s t - R e v i s e d (PPVT-R) administered to these selected 9  children.  Sullivan used t o  selected The was  P h a s e two  l a s t e d f o u r months.  D a t a was  gathered  on s i x  c a s e s t u d y c h i l d r e n as t h e y worked a t t h e J o u r n a l W r i t i n g Centre.  C o m p a r i s o n s o f a p p r o a c h t o w r i t i n g w e r e made  b e t w e e n P a t t e r n e r s and  Dramatists.  Each c h i l d  was  i n t e r v i e w e d i n d i v i d u a l l y about w r i t i n g .  L i m i t a t i o n s of the 1.  The  use  of i n t a c t groups l i m i t s the making  g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s beyond t h i s 2.  Study  S a m p l e s i z e was  relatively  6 f o r phase two).  study. small  P h a s e one  (26 f o r p h a s e one  f o r phase  demonstration the symbolic 3.  The  two  afternoon  sessions.  w e r e s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s  of strong patterns of symbolic tasks  G r o u p one  kindergarten at different attended  mornings a l l year  g r o u p two  attended  may  a f f e c t e d t h e r e s u l t s o f p h a s e one.  have  childrens  1  may  i n the afternoons.  a b i l i t i e s t o a t t e n d t o and  t a s k s g i v e n may  style  of on  administered.  groups attended  o f t h e day.  have been a f f e c t e d .  This time  times and factor  The  respond t o Also, the  the  teacher  have responded d i f f e r e n t l y t o t h e c h i l d r e n a t  d i f f e r e n t times 4.  two  and  included a l l kindergarten  c h i l d r e n i n b o t h t h e m o r n i n g and Subjects  of  of the  day.  Varying  l e v e l s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e among t h e s u b j e c t s  another  l i m i t a t i o n of t h i s study.  Quotients  Intelligence  o f t h e s u b j e c t s were not a v a i l a b l e . 10  was  With  no  random s a m p l i n g , for  t h i s f a c t o r c o u l d n o t be  i n t h i s study.  However,  an e s t i m a t e o f r e c e p t i v e  language v o c a b u l a r y , measured w i t h use P i c t u r e Vocabulary Robertson,  Test - Revised  & Eisenberg,  Peabody  used t o  groups.  determine  Although  PPVT-R  i n t e r p r e t e d as i n t e l l i g e n c e  test  s c o r e s , s t u d i e s h a v e i n d i c a t e d c o m p a r a b l e mean  standard  s c o r e s between the  of  PPVT-R and M c C a r t h y S c a l e s  Children's A b i l i t i e s 5.  of the  (Dunn, Dunn,  1 9 8 1 ) , was  t h e s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e two s c o r e s s h o u l d n o t be  controlled  Only those through  (Mitchell,  1985,  p.1127).  a s p e c t s o f l e a r n i n g w h i c h w e r e made p u b l i c  c h i l d r e n ' s written/drawn  t a l k were tapped.  Although  e x a m p l e s , much more may  products,  actions  the data base i s r i c h  h a v e gone u n d i s p l a y e d  and with  and  therefore unavailable for analysis. 6.  S u b j e c t s f o r p h a s e two  w e r e s e l e c t e d on t h e b a s i s o f  t h e i r p a t t e r n s on b e h a v i o r on t w e l v e t a s k s to  determine  t h e i r p r e f e r r e d symbolic  administered  style.  Although  t h e s e t a s k s were adapted from t h o s e used i n Wolf & Gardner's  (1979) and  Sullivan's  (1986) r e s e a r c h ,  v a l i d i t y as a c c u r a t e measures o f s y m b o l i c still 7.  style  their is  somewhat q u e s t i o n a b l e .  Many o f t h e c o d i n g p r o c e d u r e s ( 1 9 8 2 , 1989)  research.  The  were adapted from Dyson's  findings reported i n this  s t u d y a r e o n l y a s v a l i d a s t h i s a n a l y s i s was exposing  the c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g 11  behaviors.  accurately  CHAPTER  TWO  Review o f t h e L i t e r a t u r e  Introduction The  c a p a c i t y t o use symbols has o f t e n been  the hallmark  o f human c o g n i t i o n .  Adults i n a l l cultures  utilize  (and even devise)  ranging  from language and g e s t u r e ,  music, and dance. symbolizing form), to),  intention —  (e.g., a g r a p h i c  t h e symbol, and an  a c t i s guided  being referred intended  by t h e producer's Smith  s y m b o l i z a t i o n a s a means t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e  communicate p e r s o n a l  i n s i g h t about experiences.  (1979) saw s y m b o l i z a t i o n a s a s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s i n d i v i d u a l c h o s e one a s p e c t serve  model  what t h e p e r s o n wants t o a c c o m p l i s h .  (1981) d e s c r i b e d and  (19 63)  referent (theexperience  A symbolic  systems,  t o drawing, s c u l p t u r e ,  i n v o l v e s t h e symbol i t s e l f  t h e person producing  recipient.  a wide range o f symbol  I n Werner and K a p l a n ' s  the symbolic  considered  Bates  whereby t h e  from a complex a r r a y t h a t  as a " l i g h t - w e i g h t mental token  could  t h a t c a n be  s u b s t i t u t e d f o r t h e e n t i r e k n o w l e d g e - p a c k a g e " ( p . 6 5 ) . The c a p a c i t y t o c r e a t e a n d d e c o d e was b a s e d o n t h e i m p l i c i t r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t an element, o r s e t o f e l e m e n t s , c o u l d for  stand  some o b j e c t o r e x p e r i e n c e . The  development o f symbolic  competence i n v o l v e s t h e  a b i l i t y t o a t t r i b u t e meaning t o a b s t r a c t forms and i s a p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f human 12  intelligence.  Acknowledging  t h e c e n t r a l i t y o f such symbol u s e , s t u d e n t s o f  human d e v e l o p m e n t h a v e p o r t r a y e d t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f proficiency  i n s y m b o l i z a t i o n as a primary achievement o f t h e  f i r s t year of l i f e Piaget,  (see Bruner,  1962; Werner and K a p l a n ,  O l v e r , and G r e e n f i e l d , 1966; 1963).  Indeed,  by t h e time  c h i l d r e n a r e 5, 6, o r 7, t h e y a r e g e n e r a l l y q u i t e s k i l l e d i n t h e use o f s e v e r a l symbol systems,  exhibiting the capacities  b o t h t o p r o d u c e " l e g i b l e " messages i n t h e s e systems and t o " r e a d " t h o s e c o m m u n i c a t i o n s f a s h i o n e d b y o t h e r members o f the  culture. Even t h o u g h an i n s i s t e n c e on t h e i m p o r t a n c e  use  i s not i n i t s e l f  controversial, very l i t t l e  e s t a b l i s h e d concerning t h e e a r l y course of t h i s human a b i l i t y .  Although  o f symbol has been crucial  few s c h o l a r s have assumed t h a t t h e  a c q u i s i t i o n o f s y m b o l i c c o m p e t e n c e i s a s i m p l e p r o c e s s , much i n v e s t i g a t i o n has tended  e i t h e r t o lump a l l s y m b o l i c  systems  t o g e t h e r o r t o s t u d y o n l y one i n d e p t h w h i l e i g n o r i n g i t s r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r symbolic systems.  As a r e s u l t , t h e  u n i v e r s a l p r o p e r t i e s o f symbol u s e , t h o s e a s p e c t s o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n t h a t may d i f f e r a c r o s s m e d i a o r a c r o s s cultures,  a n d t h e n a t u r e o f p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s among  i n d i v i d u a l s i n p a t t e r n s o f symbol use have n o t y e t been f u l l y ascertained. To u n d e r s t a n d  t h e range o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n  t h e way y o u n g c h i l d r e n make m e a n i n g o u t o f o b j e c t s , i m a g e s , and u t t e r a n c e s , r e c e n t r e s e a r c h h a s a t t e m t e d 13  to identify  p a t t e r n s of development  i n t h e way  i n d i v i d u a l s use  symbols.  Numerous s t u d i e s o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n w e r e c o n d u c t e d a s a p a r t o f H a r v a r d ' s P r o j e c t Zero w h i c h sought t o c o n s t r u c t a model o f i n d i v i d u a l s y m b o l i c competence and t r a c e i t s development from i n f a n c y t o a r t i s t r y S m i t h , 1975;  ( G a r d n e r , 1976; G a r d n e r , W o l f , &  Ives, Silverman, Kelly,  & Gardner,  P e r k i n s & G a r d n e r , 1978; W i n n e r , R o s e n s t e i l , 1976; W o l f & G a r d n e r , W o l f and G a r d n e r d e v e l o p m e n t a l sequence meaning  1981;  & Gardner,  1979). (1981) t h e o r i z e t h a t t h e r e i s a to children's understandings of  c a n be r e p r e s e n t e d t h r o u g h s y m b o l i c f o r m s .  d i s c o v e r y o f new abilities  The  ways o f e n c o d i n g m e a n i n g s u n d e r l i e s  i n v a r i e d symbol systems  (drawing, music,  l a n g u a g e ) , a l t h o u g h e a c h s y m b o l s y s t e m makes i t s own demands on t h e c h i l d .  I n d e v e l o p i n g as symbol  p r o d u c e r s and r e c i p i e n t s ,  and t h e y l e a r n new  As W o l f a n d G a r d n e r  (1981)  t h e r e i s no r e a s o n t o assume t h a t y o u n g  referents,  ways o f  encoding  c h i l d r e n and  or, I  meaning.  When y o u n g  c h i l d r e n combine  t h e y c a n be r e f e r r e d t o a s by Dyson  adults  C h i l d r e n c o n t i n u a l l y r e f i n e t h e i r ways o f  B o t h d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g c a n be v i e w e d a s events.  linking  illustrate,  f o l l o w i d e n t i c a l r u l e s as t h e y t a l k , draw, p l a y — might add, w r i t e .  unique  users,  c h i l d r e n s e p a r a t e more c l e a r l y s y m b o l s a n d t h e i r  these elements.  how  (1982).  symbolizing  d r a w i n g and  'symbol w e a v e r s ' ,  writing,  a term  coined  Recent r e s e a r c h i n t o t h i s a r e a r e v e a l s the 14  s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s drawings play i n t h e i r development If  as  writers.  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t i n t h e way  c h i l d r e n u s e s y m b o l s , as s u g g e s t e d by W o l f and  young Gardner  ( 1 9 7 9 ) , a n d b o t h d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g a r e v i e w e d symbolizing a c t i v i t i e s ,  t h e n how  do t h e s e  as  individual  d i f f e r e n c e s m a n i f e s t themselves i n t h e s e s e p a r a t e symbol systems?  Can p a t t e r n s o f s y m b o l u s e i n d r a w i n g p r e d i c t  p a t t e r n s o f symbol use i n w r i t i n g ?  Do p a t t e r n e r s  and  d r a m a t i s t s approach the t a s k of w r i t i n g d i f f e r e n t l y ?  Are  t h e i r early written products different? These review.  questions are the c e n t r a l concerns of  The  f o c u s i s on how  young  7 y e a r s , d e v e l o p as symbol u s e r s .  this  c h i l d r e n , aged 2 t h r o u g h Development  i n the  s y s t e m s o f d r a w i n g and o f w r i t i n g a r e e a c h  discussed  separately.  entitled  T h i s i s f o l l o w e d by a s e c t i o n  symbol  ' C h i l d r e n a s S y m b o l W e a v e r s ' i n w h i c h r e s e a c h i n t o how c h i l d r e n combine Gardner's  d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g i s r e v i e w e d .  Wolf  young and  (1979) t h e o r y o f p r e f e r r e d s t y l e s o f s y m b o l u s e i s  then described,  f o l l o w e d by a s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h t h e  q u e s t i o n o f t r a n s f e r of s y m b o l i c s t y l e from drawing, s y m b o l i c p l a y and s t o r y t e l l i n g t o more a b s t r a c t systems such as e a r l y  writing.  15  symbol  Drawing; a s a S y m b o l i z i n g In our  c u l t u r e e v e r y c h i l d d r a w s and,  opportunity, appealing  on  drawings during the preschool  w i t h the discovery surfaces.  random and ordered.  i f given  n e a r l y every c h i l d produces hundreds  comes n a t u r a l l y t o t h e c h i l d . two  Activity  of  Drawing  I t b e g i n s a b o u t t h e age  that c e r t a i n substances leave  These e a r l y marks e v o l v e  disorganized, Vygotsky  years.  the  but  a s t i m e g o e s b y become more  (1978) s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e s e e a r l y  t h e c h i l d u s e s t o i n d i c a t e m e a n i n g , and  m i g h t be v i e w e d a s g e s t u r i n g w i t h Kellogg  (1970),  a widely  respected  s c r i b b l e s which a two-year-old  by  disorganized.  e i t h e r c h i l d or adult.  proportions memory.  scholar  makes w h i l e  They a r e n o t  of  are twenty free  a r e most e a s i l y r e c o g n i z e d  w r i t i n g (Gardner, 1980).  they  r e t a i n e d i n memory  and  retained in age.  the o r i g i n of both  King  drawing  (1980) s t a t e d t h a t :  "The  feature of these e a r l y attempts with a p e n c i l i s  t h a t t h e y a r e more t h a n random m a r k s ; t h e y  represent  children's intentions to create visual constructs messages"  basic  scribbling.  These o f t e n o c c u r around t h r e e y e a r s of  outstanding  they  Images t h a t h a v e b a l a n c e d  S c r i b b l e s a r e t h o u g h t t o be and  that  s c r i b b l e s o v e r l a i d become s o c o m p l e x t h a t  a p p e a r t o be  and  pencil.  c h i l d r e n ' s s c r i b b l e s , determined that there  Several  marks  into scribbles, first  s c r i b b l e s a c t u a l l y have t h e i r o r i g i n i n t h e a c t i o n s gestures  of  (p.164).  Kellogg  (1970) and 16  Brittain  and  (1972) v i e w  young c h i l d r e n ' s s c r i b b l i n g as an accomplishment  leading  toward a r i c h h e r i t a g e o f s e l f - e x p r e s s i o n and warn adult intervention i n the scribbling activity,  against  particularly  against adult l a b e l i n g of s c r i b b l e s as representations  that  were n e v e r i n t e n d e d by t h e c h i l d . At  a b o u t t h e a g e o f f o u r , c h i l d r e n move f r o m t h e  S c r i b b l i n g S t a g e t o t h e P r e s c h e m a t i c S t a g e w h e r e t h e y make their first Brittain,  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l attempts (Lowenfeld and  1987).  Here c h i l d r e n draw t h e t y p i c a l h e a d - f e e t  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f a p e r s o n a n d b e g i n t o d r a w a number o f other o b j e c t s i n t h e i r environment.  These  figures or  o b j e c t s a p p e a r somewhat r a n d o m l y p l a c e d o n t h e p a p e r a n d c a n vary considerably i n size.  The c h i l d  has discovered  s i m p l e forms can s y m b o l i z e o b j e c t s i n t h e r e a l w o r l d . then begins t o b u i l d a graphic vocabulary i n which and l i n e s a r e combined  and m o d i f i e d w i t h g r e a t  to  s t a n d f o r w h a t e v e r he w i s h e s  to  L o w e n f e l d and B r i t t a i n  that He  shapes  versatility  (Goodnow, 1 9 7 7 ) .  According  (1987), i t i s n o t u n t i l t h e c h i l d  r e a c h e s t h i s s t a g e o f making  and r e p r o d u c i n g symbols a t w i l l  t h a t he c a n b e g i n t o u n d e r s t a n d t h a t o t h e r p e o p l e have  also  made s y m b o l s , n o t o n l y i n p i c t u r e s , b u t i n w r i t i n g a s w e l l . The n e x t s t a g e i s t h e S c h e m a t i c S t a g e , w h i c h somewhere a r o u n d s e v e n a n d l a s t s u n t i l age  ( L o w e n f e l d and B r i t t a i n ,  definite the  form concept.  1987).  starts  about n i n e y e a r s o f  Here c h i l d r e n d e v e l o p a  T h e i r drawings symbolize p a r t s o f  e n v i r o n m e n t i n a d e s c r i p t i v e way; c h i l d r e n 17  usually  r e p e a t w i t h some v a r i a t i o n t h e schema t h a t t h e y h a v e d e v e l o p e d f o r a p e r s o n a g a i n and a g a i n . t h a t one  I t i s at this  i n t e r e s t i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of children's  time  drawings  appears: c h i l d r e n arrange the objects they are p o r t r a y i n g i n a straight  line.  W r i t i n g as a S y m b o l i z i n g E v e n t Vygotsky l o c a t e d t h e r o o t s o f w r i t i n g development the  c h i l d ' s growing a b i l i t y t o use v a r i e d symbols.  d e s c r i b e d t h e essence o f w r i t i n g as  in He  'the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f  meaning by s y m b o l i c s i g n '  ( 1 9 7 8 , p. 1 1 4 ) .  d i s c u s s e s t h e development  of a c h i l d ' s w r i t t e n language i n  terms o f advancing from f i r s t order symbolizm t o d i r e c t  Vygotsky  o r d e r symbolism t o second  symbolism.  F i r s t o r d e r s y m b o l i s m was  d e f i n e d as a h i g h l y  means o f r e p r e s e n t i n g o b j e c t s i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t . is  s y m b o l i c , but not s t a t i o n a r y , nor does  arbitrary Meaning  representation  a l l o w f o r c o n s i s t e n t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n among g r o u p s o f p e o p l e . G e s t u r e s , s y m b o l i c p l a y , and d r a w i n g a r e f i r s t because of t h e i r h i g h l y a r b i t r a r y ,  o r d e r symbols  i n c o n s i s t e n t and t e m p o r a l  constraints. S e c o n d o r d e r s y m b o l i s m i s a c o n v e n t i o n a l i z e d means o f r e p r e s e n t i n g words i n o r a l language t h r o u g h w r i t t e n Once m e a n i n g i s a s s i g n e d t o a s y m b o l , i t becomes a m a i n t a i n i n g i t s meaning a c r o s s t i m e and s p a c e . or  symbols. sign,  Ideographic  r e b u s w r i t i n g and a l p h a b e t i c w r i t i n g a r e f o r m s o f s e c o n d 18  order  symbolism. D i r e c t s y m b o l i s m i s a t t a i n e d when t h e i n t e r m e d i a t e  of spoken language d i s a p p e a r s . d i r e c t l y represent concepts, With  Words on t h e p r i n t e d p a g e  a c t i o n s , and  communication, transcending temporal i s maintained.  p e r h a p s t h e most c r i t i c a l develop see  relationships.  d i r e c t symbolism, a c o n v e n t i o n a l i z e d system  constraints,  t o be  The  and  of a l l a b i l i t i e s the c h i l d The  And  t o do t h i s ,  t h e c h i l d must  i t c a n be c r e a t e d , and w h a t i t s u s e s a r e .  i n m u s i c , and As in  four d i f f e r e n t areas:  e a r l y a s age  Sulzby  & Teale,  a g e s o f t h r e e and  what i t i s , T h i s can  i n play, i n  2 o r 3, c h i l d r e n b e g i n t o  be  drawing,  1985;  differentiate  drawing  Woodward, 1 9 8 8 ) .  (DeFord, Between  the  six, children's scribbling gradually  acquires the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of p r i n t — linearity,  horizontal orientation,  letterlike  forms  ( C l a y , 1975).  and  DeFord  including the arrangement  l e f t - t o - r i g h t m o t i o n and  top-to-bottom  of  (1980) h a s c h r o n i c l e d  the development of u n i f o r m i t y , i n n e r c o m p l e x i t y ,  children's  first  i n drama.  t h e i r s c r i b b l e s b e t w e e n w r i t i n g and  1980;  must  c h i l d m u s t come t o  come t o g r i p s w i t h t h e c h a r a c t e r o f s y m b o l —  achieved through  symbols i s  i n a l l i t s m a n i f e s t a t i o n s a s an a b s t r a c t  symbolizing process.  how  of  contextual  a b i l i t y t o use  an e f f e c t i v e w r i t e r .  language use  link  symmetry,  directionality  in  scribbles.  Woodward (1988) a n a l y z e d a v i d e o t a p e 19  o f one  student,  "Eric",  age  t h r e e y e a r s , engaged i n d i a l o g u e w i t h h i s  t e a c h e r a b o u t a p i c t u r e he h a d  drawn.  In t h i s  encounter,  E r i c a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e d as a maker o f meaning c o n t i n u e d t o l e a r n a b o u t l a n g u a g e and  t h e use  s y s t e m s b y u s i n g them i n a m e a n i n g f u l  situation.  and  of other sign Eric's art  symbols were s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t t h a n t h o s e used f o r writing.  For t h e young c h i l d ,  as a p r o c e s s t h e s e two  l e a r n i n g t o w r i t e i s viewed  o f g r a d u a l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g and c o n s o l i d a t i n g  forms of g r a p h i c symbolism.  development, drawing  In  writing  i s the precursor of pictography,  f i r s t graphic expression w i t h the symbolic to  the ideographs  humans e m p l o y i n w r i t i n g .  to  t h e c h i l d ' s e v o l v i n g sense o f symbol  P i c t o g r a p h y s e r v e s a s an i m p o r t a n t  features closest It i s crucial  (Klein,  1985).  t r a n s i t i o n from drawing  - representing personal i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of r e a l i t y p e n c i l or crayon is  —  i n t h a t what i s drawn s t a n d s  s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n what i s drawn.  The  -  with  t o an a b b r e v i a t e d f o r m o f d r a w i n g  s o r t of a shorthand  the  that  for  c h i l d then  partials  o u t r e a l i t y by l e a v i n g o u t c r i t i c a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l f e a t u r e s i n the drawing. than presents.  The  The  drawing  p i c t o g r a p h i s a symbol t h a t stands  something g r e a t e r i n both dimension itself.  The  child  and  i s i n the process  on p a p e r by a b b r e v i a t i n g w i t h p e n c i l . the preschooler.  then represents r a t h e r  The  conception  for  than  of summarizing  reality  This i s c r i t i c a l  p r e s c h o o l c h i l d must u n d e r s t a n d  for  that  m a r k s on p a p e r c a n be g r e a t e r i n r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l p o t e n t i a l 20  than t h a t from which they d e r i v e and, p o s s i b l y , than f o r which they The  that  stand.  p i c t o g r a p h i c element i n c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g  d e v e l o p m e n t h a s n o t b e e n g i v e n much a t t e n t i o n i n r e c e n t studies of early writing. do  I t seems c l e a r t h a t many c h i l d r e n  employ a ' p i c t o g r a p h i c h y p o t h e s i s '  a b o u t w r i t i n g a t some  p o i n t , a n d t h a t more may b e p e r h a p s l e a r n e d a b o u t c h i l d r e n ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s by examining t h e s e genuine h y p o t h e t i c a l systems. Luria  (1983) s e t o u t t o l o o k a t y o u n g c h i l d r e n ' s  c o n c e p t s o f w r i t i n g and t h e i r a b i l i t y t o u s e n o t a t i o n as a t o o l before  they had l e a r n e d t o w r i t e .  He f o u n d t h a t t h e  youngest c h i l d r e n ( f o u r / f i v e y e a r o l d s ) were g e n e r a l l y unable t o respond t o h i s requests.  They were  only  i n t e r e s t e d i n " w r i t i n g l i k e grown-ups" as t h e y t r i e d t o copy the  f o r m o f a d u l t w r i t i n g ; f o r t h e m t h e a c t o f w r i t i n g was  not  a means o f r e m e m b e r i n g , o r r e p r e s e n t i n g  but  an a c t t h a t i s s u f f i c i e n t Luria describes  discovered  i n i t s own  some m e a n i n g ,  right.  t h e way i n w h i c h some c h i l d r e n  i n the course of experimental  s e s s i o n s how t o u s e  m a r k s o n p a p e r a s mnemonic s i g n s , s o m e t i m e s b y t h e u s e o f rudimentary pictographs.  L u r i a was i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e  t r a n s i t i o n f r o m p u r e l y p i c t o g r a p h i c w r i t i n g t o a more ideographic experimental ideas.  s t y l e o f w r i t i n g which sometimes o c c u r r e d  when  s u b j e c t s w e r e a s k e d t o r e c o r d more a b s t r a c t  He n o t e d t h e p r o g r e s s i o n 21  from s i m p l e marks w h i c h a c t  a s a j o g t o memory, t o p i c t o g r a p h s , t o more a b s t r a c t s i g n s . I t w o u l d be v a l u a b l e t o h a v e more o b s e r v a t i o n s o f c h i l d r e n ' s use Britton  (1983) r e c a l l e d how,  of p i c t o g r a p h i c signs.  i n the beginning,  d a u g h t e r seemed t o h o l d a t o p o g r a p h i c writing  James  h i s grand-  hypothesis  about  ( t h e p o s i t i o n o f m a r k s on t h e p a p e r r e c a l l i n g  meanings). Britton  naturalistic  When, a s a  ' w a i t r e s s ' , she  i n t h e r o l e o f c u s t o m e r , she  their  t o o k down o r d e r s  'read back' h i s  from  order  a c c o r d i n g t o the arrangement of her marks.  From t h i s  she  moved t o a p i c t o g r a p h i c h y p o t h e s i s when s h e  'drew' a  letter  t o a neighbour which depicted f i v e l i t t l e w h i c h meant ' P l e a s e buy  me  circles,  i n a note  some e g g s ' .  These examples suggest t h a t t h e younger c h i l d r e n were employing a t r a n s i t i o n a l pictograph hypothesis, a c t i v e l y explored the nature they  f u l l y understood  of the w r i t i n g system,  i t s alphabetic nature.  l e a r n t h a t , i n Vygotsky's words, o b j e c t s but a l s o speech'  as  'one  ( 1 9 7 8 , p.  they before  They needed t o  can draw n o t  only  115).  Once t h e y g e t t h e i d e a o f w h a t c a n be done i n w r i t i n g , c h i l d r e n s e t a b o u t d i s c o v e r i n g more and more a b o u t process.  A t t e m p t s t o d e s c r i b e young c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g  s t r a t e g i e s have r e v e a l e d a g e n e r a l , but  complicated  developmental p a t h , moving from l o w e r - a p p e a r i n g scribbling,  drawing,  and m a k i n g l e t t e r - l i k e  s t r i n g s o f l e t t e r s and and  the  forms  forms, t o  p h o n e t i c a l l y based invented  f i n a l l y t o using r e g u l a r orthography.  The  like using  spelling,  developmental  p a t t e r n s h a v e n o t y e t b e e n f u l l y d o c u m e n t e d , b u t we c a n t r a c e some o f t h e f o r m s i n a r o u g h c h r o n o l o g i c a l  sequence,  k e e p i n g i n mind t h a t d i f f e r e n t c h i l d r e n appear t o u s e d i f f e r e n t developmental paths toward conventional Sulzby, Barnhart, & Hieshima  (1989)  writing.  conducted a  l o n g i t u d i n a l s t u d y o f t h e forms o f w r i t i n g and r e r e a d i n g t h a t 123 k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n u s e d when a s k e d t o w r i t e stories.  C h i l d r e n from two o f t h e f i v e c l a s s e s were  f o l l o w e d i n t o grade one. D u r i n g t h e f i r s t group d a t a c o l l e c t i o n s e s s i o n , t h e f i v e major w r i t i n g modeled  forms used by k i n d e r g a r t e n e r s were  ( s c r i b b l e , drawing, l e t t e r s t r i n g s , invented  spelling,  and c o n v e n t i o n a l w r i t i n g ) .  e i g h t w r i t i n g and r e r e a d i n g samples  The c h i l d r e n  produced  i n a group s e t t i n g i n  t h e i r r e g u l a r classrooms a t approximately monthly interviews. samples  I n a d d i t i o n , they produced another t h r e e  i n individual  i n t e r v i e w s conducted q u a r t e r l y .  While  t h e c h i l d was w r i t i n g o r i m m e d i a t e l y a f t e r w a r d , t h e researcher  ( o r t e a c h e r ) checked t h e a p p r o p r i a t e boxes  "Forms o f W r i t i n g a n d R e r e a d i n g " c h e c k l i s t B a r n h a r t , & Hieshima, 1989). writing  (p. 52, S u l z b y ,  The m o s t common f o r m s o f  i n O c t o b e r were d r a w i n g , s c r i b b l i n g ,  patterned l e t t e r strings. was w r i t t e n m o n o l o g u e .  The p r e d o m i n a n t  a n d random o r  form o f r e r e a d i n g  These r e s e a r c h e r s s t r e s s e d t h e need  t o e x a m i n e t h e f o r m s o f w r i t i n g b y e x a m i n i n g how reread t h e i r  on t h e  writing. 23  children  C h i l d r e n a s 'Symbol  Weavers'  Many o b s e r v e r s h a v e n o t e d t h a t when y o u n g  children  w r i t e , t h e y o f t e n d r a w p i c t u r e s a s p a r t o f t h e same activity.  S t u d y i n g t h e composing b e h a v i o r s o f young  c h i l d r e n , Graves  (1979) f o u n d t h a t some 6 a n d 7 - y e a r  seemed t o u s e d r a w i n g a s a " r e h e a r s a l "  f o rwriting,  whereas  o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s have s u g g e s t e d t h a t f o r b e g i n n i n g w r i t i n g and d r a w i n g sometimes medium" Dyson  f u n c t i o n as a s i n g l e  ( H a r s t e , Woodward, & B u r k e 1 9 8 4 ; G u n d l a c h  olds  writers, "mixed  1982).  (1982) d e s c r i b e d c h i l d r e n a s ' s y m b o l w e a v e r s ' .  She  b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s t h e y f o r m on p a p e r may r e l y on v a r i e d symbol systems o r media - d r a w i n g , t a l k i n g , writing. In h i s study o f c h i l d r e n ' s drawings, Gardner n o t e d t h a t i n some c a s e s i n w h i c h c h i l d r e n c o m b i n e  (1980) drawing  and w r i t i n g , t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l r o l e o f w r i t i n g i s secondary e a r l y i n t h e c h i l d ' s w r i t t e n language  development  a n d becomes i n c r e a s i n g l y d o m i n a n t a s t h e c h i l d becomes a more f l u e n t w r i t e r .  To d e m o n s t r a t e t h i s p o i n t ,  Gardner  r e p o r t s t h e c a s e o f a c h i l d whose d r a w i n g s w e r e c o l l e c t e d b y Gertrude H i l d r e t h a t Columbia Teacher's C o l l e g e i n t h e 193 0 s . trains  H i l d r e t h ' s s u b j e c t was a p p a r e n t l y " o b s e s s e d w i t h [ a n d ] d r e w many h u n d r e d s u c h v e h i c l e s o v e r a t e n y e a r  24  period  (p.155)."  Gardner c o n t i n u e s :  I f one l o o k s a t t h e r o l e o f w r i t i n g i n t h e s e d r a w i n g s , one c a n o b s e r v e a s u b t l e y e t u l t i m a t e l y d e c i s i v e t r a n s i t i o n i n the d e p i c t i o n of the t r a i n s : i n the p r e s c h o o l y e a r s , l e t t e r s and words were u s e d m e r e l y as d e c o r a t i o n s upon t h e t r a i n s ; but i n the years of m i d d l e c h i l d h o o d i t i s t h e v e h i c l e s and t r a c k s t h a t a r e merely d e c o r a t i v e , f o r the major t h r u s t of the n a r r a t i v e i s now c a r r i e d by v e r b a l means ( p . 1 5 5 ) . I t seems p l a u s i b l e t o s u g g e s t t h a t t h i s c h i l d b u i l t  a  b r i d g e f o r h i m s e l f from t h e a c t i v i t y o f drawing t o t h e a c t i v i t y of w r i t i n g .  He  i n i t i a l l y used w r i t t e n language  s u p p o r t t h e f u n c t i o n s a l r e a d y s e r v e d by d r a w i n g and  to  then,  o n c e he became more a d e p t a t h a n d l i n g t h e f o r m s o f w r i t t e n language,  i n h i s l a t e r c o m b i n a t i o n s o f d r a w i n g and  he more f u l l y e x p l o i t e d t h e n a r r a t i v e p o t e n t i a l o f There  i s no r e a s o n t o s u p p o s e  writing language.  that t h i s l i n k provided the  only bridge t o the c h i l d ' s explorations of the p o s s i b l e of w r i t i n g ; rather,  uses  i t seems l i k e l y t h a t c h i l d r e n make  c o n n e c t i o n s o f s e v e r a l k i n d s between v a r i o u s s y m b o l - u s i n g a c t i v i t i e s and t h e a c t i v i t y o f w r i t i n g  (Gundlach,  1982).  A major weakness o f Gardners' a n a l y s e s i s t h a t i t has b e e n d r a w n f r o m an " a f t e r t h e f a c t " p e r s p e c t i v e .  He d i d n o t  o b s e r v e t h e c h i l d a c t u a l l y f o r m i n g t h e s e r e l a t i o n s h i p s as  he  d r e w a n d w r o t e ; he c a n o n l y s p e c u l a t e a b o u t t h e m a f t e r w a r d s b a s e d on t h e p r o d u c t c r e a t e d .  Recent r e s e a r c h e r s have noted  the importance of d i r e c t o b s e r v a t i o n of the p r o c e s s as a d a t a g a t h e r i n g approach.  25  composing  Hayes and C h e r r i n g t o n  (1985) o b s e r v e d  t h r e e , f o u r , and  f i v e y e a r o l d s as t h e y engaged i n w r i t i n g a c t i v i t i e s i n t h e i r r e g u l a r classrooms. asked  I n a d d i t i o n , t h e c h i l d r e n were  i n d i v i d u a l l y t o draw p i c t u r e s , w r i t e a b o u t them,  what t h e y had w r i t t e n , and respond  t o questions  t h e i r knowledge o f w r i t t e n language. examined i n terms o f Vygotsky's symbolic progression. c h i l d r e n progress  were  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f w r i t i n g as  However, t h e p r o g r e s s i o n i s o f a d u l t s who a l l o w  w i t h t h e many f o r m s o f w r i t i n g .  (1986) a l s o r e c o g n i z e d t h e n e e d f o r  s u p p o r t i v e a d u l t s t o help c h i l d r e n connect  the function of  w r i t i n g t o t h a t o f o t h e r means o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n . t o observe  I n order  y o u n g c h i l d r e n c o m p o s i n g , h e s e t up a w r i t i n g  center i n a preschool classroom. children,  He n o t e d  that the  r a n g i n g i n age from t h r e e t o f i v e , u s u a l l y w r o t e  as a v e r y s o c i a l group o f t h r e e s t u d e n t s a t a t i m e .  The  w r i t i n g c e n t r e was a f r e e c h o i c e a r e a a n d t h e a v e r a g e spent  a t t h e c e n t e r was 35 t o 40 m i n u t e s .  Karnowski  t h a t a s t h e young w r i t e r s composed, t h e y a l s o u s e d language,  that  i n t h e i r use o f i n c r e a s i n g l y a b s t r a c t  d i s c o n t i n u o u s and r e q u i r e s t h e support  Karnowski  guaging  Hayes and C h e r r i n g t o n c o n c l u d e d  symbolism t o communicate.  them t o e x p e r i m e n t  This data  read  drawing,  m u s i c , a n d drama t o i n c r e a s e  communication p o t e n t i a l . redefine their  He c o n c l u d e s  26  noted oral  their  that teachers  i d e a s about w r i t i n g and c h i l d r e n ' s  communication knowledge.  time  must  Hubbard  (1987) i l l u s t r a t e d t h e ways c h i l d r e n f r o m  f i r s t - g r a d e c l a s s r o o m were encouraged mental  t o communicate  i m a g e s o f movement, s p a t i a l c o n c e p t s , a n d  through drawings  and w r i t i n g .  t h e c l a s s r o o m , she o b s e r v e d  She  their  imagination  As a r e s i d e n t r e s e a r c h e r i n  t h e c h i l d r e n ' s p r o g r e s s as  w r o t e , d r e w , t a l k e d a b o u t t h e i r w o r k , and pieces.  a  shared  they  their  f o u n d t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n s c h i l d r e n made a b o u t  t h e i r w o r d s and p i c t u r e s h e l p e d t h e i r g r o w t h by p r o v i d i n g meaning.  She  concluded t h a t the  and  development  relationship  b e t w e e n a r t and w r i t i n g becomes m u t u a l l y s u p p o r t i v e when c h i l d r e n a r e encouraged will  t o use whatever communication  system  w o r k b e s t f o r them i n e a c h p a r t i c u l a r i n s t a n c e . A l t h o u g h t h e f i n d i n g s from Hayes & C h e r r i n g t o n  Karnowski  (1985),  ( 1 9 8 6 ) , and H u b b a r d ' s (1987) r e s e a r c h s u p p o r t  other, the reporting of these studies i s incomplete. n o t know much a b o u t t h e c h i l d r e n who  were o b s e r v e d  the r e g u l a r l i t e r a c y a c t i v i t i e s of the classroom. q u e s t i o n s a r e l e f t u n a n s w e r e d : how o b s e r v e d ; how  long d i d these studies l a s t ?  drawing writing.  Many  I f more could  d e s c r i p t i o n of methodology i s p r o v i d e d  1 9 8 5 a , 1985b, 1986a) who  believes that  and t a l k i n g p r o v i d e c h i l d r e n w i t h t r a n s i t i o n s She  about  studies.  A more c o m p l e t e by Dyson (1982,  nor  do  collected  d e t a i l e d i n f o r m a t i o n w e r e made a v a i l a b l e t o u s we b e t t e r judge these  We  many c h i l d r e n w e r e  many w r i t i n g / d r a w i n g s a m p l e s w e r e  and b y whom; how  each  investigated the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s 27  to  between  drawings,  early writing,  b o t h phenomena o c c u r . was  and t h e c o n t e x t o f t a l k  i n which  P a r t i c i p a n t o b s e r v a t i o n methodology  used i n a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d p u b l i c school k i n d e r g a r t e n i n  o r d e r t o g a t h e r d a t a d a i l y d u r i n g a 3-month p e r i o d .  The  classroom  c h o s e n was n a t u r a l l y - i n t e g r a t e d a n d b a l a n c e d  socially,  ethnically,  and a c a d e m i c a l l y .  p a r t i c i p a n t s , t e n were female;  O f t h e 22 c h i l d  t w e l v e were male.  At the  b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s t u d y t h e mean a g e o f t h e c h i l d r e n was 5 y e a r s , 7 months. classroom's case  study  F i v e c h i l d r e n who r e f l e c t e d t h e  ranges o f t y p e s o f c h i l d w r i t e r s were chosen f o r investigation.  A w r i t i n g c e n t e r was e s t a b l i s h e d a n d c h i l d r e n drew and w r o t e w h i l e Dyson o b s e r v e d  freely  and i n t e r a c t e d w i t h them  t o g a i n i n s i g h t i n t o t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s about these a c t i o n s . A total  o f 12 5 g r a p h i c e p i s o d e s w e r e r e c o r d e d .  were i d e n t i f i e d  i n how t h e c h i l d r e n c o m b i n e d t h e d r a w i n g a n d  w r i t i n g processes and  Patterns  i n t h e promotion  i n t h e manner t h e y u s e d d r a w i n g  o f one g r a p h i c and w r i t i n g  r e f e r e n t i a l l y a c r o s s p r o d u c t i o n modes.  product  terminology  On t h e b a s i s o f  t h e s e p a t t e r n s , i n f e r e n c e s w e r e made a b o u t w r i t t e n l a n g u a g e development.  L e a r n i n g t o w r i t e was p o r t r a y e d a s a  process  o f g r a d u a l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g and c o n s o l i d a t i n g t h e s e p a r a t e meanings o f t h e s e two forms o f g r a p h i c In h e r second major study  symbolism.  i n t h i s a r e a , Dyson  (1986b)  examined t h e meanings young c h i l d r e n e x p r e s s  i n talk,  pictures,  children  and w r i t t e n t e x t ,  f o c u s i n g o n how 28  draw  u p o n a l l t h r e e i n one c o m p o s i n g e v e n t . t o o k p l a c e an average period  Data  collection  o f t w i c e p e r week o v e r a f i v e m o n t h  ( J a n . - May, 1985) i n a p u b l i c s c h o o l k i n d e r g a r t e n .  During the f i r s t  f i v e - w e e k phase, Dyson o b s e r v e d and  i n t e r a c t e d w i t h t h e c h i l d r e n , e s t a b l i s h i n g h e r r o l e as a p a r t i c i p a n t , not as a teacher.  A l t h o u g h a l l 18 c l a s s  members w e r e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h i s s t u d y , f o u r c h i l d r e n w e r e s e l e c t e d as case s t u d i e s d u r i n g t h i s Regina,  initial  phase: J e s s e ,  C h r i s t o p h e r , and Reuben.  D u r i n g t h e second  data c o l l e c t i o n phase, each  c o m p o s i n g p r o c e s s was o b s e r v e d journal entries  as they produced  (picture/text sets).  Collected  i n c l u d e d t h e c h i l d r e n ' s drawn and d i c t a t e d  their data  products,  audiotaped recordings of the children's t a l k while and  child's  drawing  o f t h e i r d i c t a t i o n s , and o b s e r v a t i o n a l n o t e s . The  drawing  s t u d y ' s f i n d i n g s i l l u s t r a t e how t h e s e c h i l d r e n and t a l k t o c r e a t e i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s .  used  A t t h e same  time, problems arose f o r these c h i l d r e n as they attempted t o t r a n s f e r those worlds t o text. noted  i n how c h i l d r e n u s e d  I n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s were  s y m b o l i c media t o c r e a t e t h e i r  worlds. Dyson (1988a,  1988b) e x p a n d e d on t h i s r e s e a r c h b y  c o n t i n u i n g t o g a t h e r d a t a from t h e s e s t u d e n t s f o r f o u r m o n t h s d u r i n g 1986.  She a d d e d t w o more c l a s s e s t o t h e  s a m p l e a n d u n d e r t h e s u p e r v i s i o n o f t h e same t e a c h e r , "journal time" i n three classes 29  (kindergarten, first/second  grade,  and  s e c o n d / t h i r d g r a d e i n an u r b a n ,  e t h n i c a l l y d i v e r s e s c h o o l ) was approximately  socially  investigated.  80 s t u d e n t s w e r e o b s e r v e d ,  and  Although  the study  focused  c l o s e l y on e i g h t s t u d e n t s , f o u r k i n d e r g a r t e n e r s a n d first  four  graders. C h i l d r e n ' s t a l k was  audiotaped,  t h e i r b e h a v i o r were r e c o r d e d , photocopied.  and  C a s e s t u d i e s o f two  o b s e r v a t i o n a l notes  on  a l l j o u r n a l s were of the students  illustrate  t h e n o t i o n o f m u l t i p l e w o r l d s where w r i t i n g c o u l d appear i n t h e c o n t e x t s o f an and  a wider  developed  imaginary world, a present s o c i a l  experienced  world.  a s i t became a way  experiences  and  In these contexts,  of understanding  of i n t e r a c t i n g with others.  world,  writing  their Dyson  own (1988b)  explains: When I f i r s t b e g a n v i s i t i n g M a r g a r e t ' s room, I d i d n o t have t h i s broad p e r s p e c t i v e , t h i s n o t i o n of m u l t i p l e w o r l d s .... I e x a m i n e d t h e s e t o f " c o m p o s i n g e v e n t s " compiled f o r each c h i l d . For each composing event I h a d t h e c h i l d ' s d r a w n p i c t u r e , an a u d i o t a p e o f t a l k , and t h e c o m p l e t e d w r i t t e n t e x t . I f o c u s e d o n l y on t a l k t h a t seemed " t a s k i n v o l v e d " — d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t t o t h e w o r l d t h e c h i l d was c o n s t r u c t i n g . ( p . 5) Dyson  (1988b) e x p l a i n s f u r t h e r :  As I c o n t i n u e d t o f o l l o w t h e c h i l d r e n , t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h e a c h o t h e r g r e w . And I b e g a n t o r e a l i z e t h a t I c o u l d n o t t e l l t h e s t o r y o f any one c h i l d ' s g r o w t h as a w r i t e r w i t h o u t i n c l u d i n g t h e s t o r i e s o f o t h e r c h i l d r e n as w e l l . The c h i l d r e n ' s i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s w e r e i n c r e a s i n g l y embedded w i t h i n t h e i r o n g o i n g s o c i a l w o r l d (p. 6 ) . T h u s , t h e r e w e r e now  two  new  kinds of t a l k t o attend  t a l k i n v o l v i n g o t h e r s i n o n e ' s own  30  w o r l d , and  talk  t o —  involving  oneself i n other's worlds. Finally,  t h e c h i l d r e n ' s comments on e a c h o t h e r ' s w o r k  l e d t o t a l k t h a t was  t a s k - r e l a t e d — t a l k about the  wider  e x p e r i e n c e d w o r l d o f p e o p l e , p l a c e s , e v e n t s , and t h i n g s . The c h i l d r e n ' s i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s w e r e t h u s i n c r e a s i n g l y embedded w i t h i n y e t a n o t h e r w o r l d . T h i s embedding, t o o , c o u l d l e a d t o c l a s h e s , as t h e c h i l d r e n w r e s t l e d w i t h how t r u e e x p e r i e n c e s and p e r s o n a l o p i n i o n s f i g u r e d i n t o t h e i r "made-up" w o r l d s ( D y s o n , 1988b, P«6). Data a n a l y s i s of the c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k , p i c t u r e s ,  and  t e x t i l l u s t r a t e d t h a t c h i l d r e n i n v e n t symbols f o r f i g u r e s , o b j e c t s , and  e v e n t s ; engage i n t h e t h i n k i n g p r o c e s s e s  o r g a n i z i n g and concepts; others.  and  a b s t r a c t i n g as t h e y work t o p o r t r a y t h e i r communicate t h e i r i d e a s t o t h e m s e l v e s  D y s o n (1988a) s t r e s s e s t h a t b o t h d r a w i n g  provide children with opportunities to r e f l e c t o r g a n i z e , and  share experiences.  dictated or written text.  talk  upon,  Interest i s i n developing from  C h i l d r e n n e e d t o w o r k t o make t h e v i s u a l  their the  the image  cooperate.  V a r i a t i o n i n Symbolic I n W e r n e r and K a p l a n ' s  Development  (1963) m o d e l o f s y m b o l u s e ,  s y m b o l i c a c t i n v o l v e s the symbol i t s e l f ,  the  r e f e r e n t , the person p r o d u c i n g t h i s symbol, recipient.  and  organize  a b i l i t y t o communicate a message i n d e p e n d e n t l y  and t h e l a n g u a g e  and  Drawing i s important  p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e i t h e l p s c h i l d r e n p l a n and  pictures.  of  symbol's and  an  intended  W i t h d e v e l o p m e n t , t h e s e f o u r e n t i t i e s become 31  any  i n c r e a s i n g l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d o r d i s t a n c e d f r o m one and  a l s o l i n k e d o r i n t e g r a t e d i n new  W e r n e r and  Kaplan's  p o i n t out t h a t ,  ways.  Building  i d e a s , W o l f and G a r d n e r  i n e a r l y symbolic growth,  another on  ( 1 9 7 9 , p.  children  127)  may  c o n c e n t r a t e on d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f t h i s s y m b o l i c p r o c e s s : "...  e a c h c o m p o n e n t i n t h e s y m b o l i c e q u a t i o n may  be  h i g h l i g h t e d o r n e g l e c t e d ; t h e c h a l l e n g e o f s y m b o l i z a t i o n may be a p p r e h e n d e d i n d i v e r s e ways by d i f f e r e n t As a p a r t o f H a r v a r d ' s s y m b o l i z a t i o n ) , Gardner,  Wolf,  12 c h i l d r e n r a n g i n g i n age t h e i r approach  P r o j e c t Zero & Smith  f r o m 2.5  t o symbol use.  individuals."  (a s t u d y o f  (1975,  1982)  t o 5 y e a r s and  early observed  examined  T h e y w e r e d r a w n a t random  from a n u r s e r y s c h o o l t h a t e n r o l l e d t h e o f f s p r i n g o f  middle-  class families.  several  These y o u n g s t e r s were o b s e r v e d  over  m o n t h s a s t h e y e n g a g e d i n d a i l y p r e s c h o o l a c t i v i t i e s and they p l a y e d spontaneously w i t h v a r i o u s media. was  a l s o seen  i n more " c o n t r o l l e d " s u r r o u n d i n g s by  e x p e r i m e n t e r who responses  Each  examined t h e c h i l d ' s approach  as  child an  and h i s  t o a number o f e x p e r i m e n t a l demands.  Children  w o r k e d i n d i v i d u a l l y w i t h an o b s e r v e r i n a s e r i e s  of  a p p r o x i m a t e l y f o u r s e s s i o n s s p r e a d o u t o v e r no more t h a n  a  month. Because of t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n the c h i l d r e n ' s w i t h d i f f e r e n t symbols,  and  i n the range  w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r symbol system, two  dimensions.  F i r s t of a l l , 32  of  performance  performance  these tasks varied  e a c h c h i l d was  along  asked t o work  w i t h f o u r s e p a r a t e s y m b o l i c media: language  (storytelling);  s y m b o l i c p l a y ( a c t i n g out a scene w i t h g e o m e t r i c b l o c k s t h a t could "stand f o r " imaginary characters); depiction  two-dimensional  ( d r a w i n g w i t h M a g i c M a r k e r s ) ; and t h r e e -  dimensional depiction  (molding or s c u l p t i n g w i t h P l a y  Then, w i t h i n each o f t h e s e f o u r media, t h e c h i l d had perform  f o u r t a s k s : p r o d u c e a "work", o r s y m b o l i c  spontaneously; complete left  Doh). to  product  a work w h i c h , though begun, had  been  i n c o m p l e t e by t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r ; assemble a work o u t  s e v e r a l p a r t s o r segments s u p p l i e d by t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r ; copy o r reproduce performance  of and  as f a i t h f u l l y as p o s s i b l e a work o r  e x h i b i t e d by t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r .  Usual  e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o c e d u r e s were employed: s e s s i o n s were r e c o r d e d and t r a n s c r i b e d ; t h e o r d e r o f t a s k p r e s e n t a t i o n was c o u n t e r - b a l a n c e d a c r o s s c h i l d r e n ; and t h e d a t a was s e p a r a t e l y by,  and t h e n d i s c u s s e d among, t h r e e  p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y t r a i n e d experimenters u n t i l consensus  analyzed  on t h e f i n d i n g s h a d b e e n  a preliminary  reached.  A l t h o u g h c a u t i o u s about t h e i r f i n d i n g s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s d i d i d e n t i f y complex p a t t e r n s o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n early symbolic functioning.  These i n t e n s i v e o b s e r v a t i o n s o f  i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n have u n d e r l i n e d t h e m u l t i f a c e t e d q u a l i t y o f e a r l y symbol An  use.  i n t e n s i v e l o n g i t u d i n a l study of nine  middle-class children  (3 m a l e s and  6 females)  first-born, was  t o f u r t h e r examine i n d i v i d u a l c a p a c i t i e s i n a range 33  undertaken o f media  areas  ( G a r d n e r , 1976;  & Gardner, 1979).  S h o t w e l l , W o l f , & G a r d n e r , 1980;  T h e s e c h i l d r e n w e r e f o l l o w e d on a  (weekly or biweekly) b a s i s f o r f i v e years beginning age  o f one.  parents  T h e y w e r e o b s e r v e d by t h e r e s e a r c h e r s  as t h e y i n i t i a l l y  e n c o u n t e r e d and  a mastery of seven separate  symbolic  ( p a r t i c u l a r l y s t o r y t e l l i n g and  dimensional  d e p i c t i o n (drawing),  ( c o n s t r u c t i o n s out  ranging  and  o f c l a y and  number.  their  acquired  language play  language),  two-  three-dimensional  depiction  b l o c k s ) , m u s i c , movement  from standard  t e s t s o f i n t e l l i g e n c e and t e s t s of symbolic  showed t h a t c h i l d r e n d i s p l a y e d p a t t e r n s  cognition,  competence,  i n t e n s i v e t r a n s c r i p t s of f r e e - p l a y sessions.  to  Observations  of media  preference  s t y l e s of working that r e f l e c t e d l e v e l s of s k i l l  various  the  A v a r i e t y of measures were employed,  to researcher-designed  and  at and  metaphor), symbolic  s e q u e n c e s u s i n g o b j e c t s and  regular  gradually  media:  ( a c t i n g out  (dance),  Wolf  with  media.  These f i n d i n g s suggested the e x i s t e n c e styles"  ( G a r d n e r , W o l f , & S m i t h , 1975,  characteristic patterns mastered symbolic  of behavior  forms.  The  i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s was s t u d i e s , and proposed.  t h e two  W o l f and  c h i l d r e n who  p.  initial  "cognitive or children  classification  more c l e a r l y d e f i n e d  of  in  later  Dramatist  were  (1979) d e s c r i b e d  displayed a strong  u s e s o f m a t e r i a l s and  18),  i n t h e way  l a b e l s P a t t e r n e r and Gardner  of  Patterners  interest in configurational  the making of p a t t e r n s , s t r u c t u r e s 34  as  and  orders.  They o b s e r v e d t h a t g i v e n m a t e r i a l s , s u c h c h i l d r e n  w e r e more o f t e n i n t e r e s t e d i n m e c h a n i c a l and  design  p o s s i b i l i t i e s than communication or r e c r e a t i o n of experience.  Patterners'  m a n i f e s t e d an considerable  abiding  complements, l a b e l e d  personal  "dramatists,"  i n t e r e s t i n t h e human s u r r o u n d i n g s .  p o r t i o n of these c h i l d r e n ' s energies  was  devoted toward e f f e c t i v e communication w i t h others toward dramatic sharing of experiences, Patterners  their of  object  block b u i l d i n g , they focused  p h y s i c a l aspects of the m a t e r i a l s , mixed.  and  consisted of a high p r o p o r t i o n  I n p a i n t i n g and  and  124)  f o c u s e d on t h e p h y s i c a l w o r l d  f i r s t vocabularies names.  (p.  s u c h a s how  the  on  paint  T h e i r s y m b o l i c a c t i v i t y t e n d e d t o d e p e n d on  p h y s i c a l p r o p e r t i e s of the  the  s y m b o l i c m a t e r i a l so t h a t ,  for  instance,  a r e d r o u n d s h a p e w o u l d be  r e f e r r e d t o as  "apple".  In contrast,  language contained  high proportion  "dramatists'"  o f p r o p e r names and  These c h i l d r e n t e n d e d t o use communicate w i t h blocks  d i d not  others.  child  a  expressions. block building to  T h e i r s y m b o l i c use  of p a i n t i n g  a "person", a " f i s h " ,  or  so  and a  whatever  wished.  According t h e way  an  r e l y h e a v i l y on p r o p e r t i e s o f o b j e c t s ,  r e d r o u n d s h a p e c o u l d be the  social  p a i n t i n g and  A  t o G a r d n e r and  his associates, differences  young c h i l d r e n l e a r n u s i n g  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f g r o w t h and  s y m b o l s was  development.  a  Their  work  s u g g e s t e d t h a t c e r t a i n c h i l d r e n u s e d m e d i a i n a way 35  that  in  emphasized a "dramatic"  or person-centered  approach,  while  o t h e r s u s e d m e d i a i n a way t h a t e m p h a s i z e d a " p a t t e r n e d " o r object-centered While  preference.  o b s e r v a t i o n s h a v e b e e n made c o n c e r n i n g t h e r o l e  of symbolic  f u n c t i o n i n g i n development, and p a r t i c u l a r  approaches t o s y m b o l i z a t i o n charted, these views confirmation.  await  The r e s e a r c h e r s a t P r o j e c t Z e r o d e s c r i b e d a  t h e o r e t i c a l b a s i s t o account  f o rpatterns of individual  development, y e t s u f f i c i e n t e m p i r i c a l evidence s u b s t a n t i a t e t h e i r o b s e r v a t i o n s has n o t been  to fully  obtained.  T h e i r f i n d i n g s w e r e b a s e d o n a s m a l l s a m p l e t h a t was s t u d i e d under a t y p i c a l c o n d i t i o n s .  In reporting their  findings,  t h e y d i d n o t i n d i c a t e t h e number o f c h i l d r e n who w e r e c a t e g o r i z e d as P a t t e r n e r s o r D r a m a t i s t s , n o r i f any s u b j e c t s fell  between t h e s e two c a t e g o r i e s .  limitations,  this  D e s p i t e these and o t h e r  i n t e n s i v e study o f a s m a l l group o f  c h i l d r e n has provided a l o g i c a l p o i n t o f departure study o f symbolic  for the  development.  S i m i l a r d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n more s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d a n d o b j e c t - o r i e n t e d s t y l e s have been noted  i n t h e area o f  language development as w e l l , p a r t i c u l a r l y by Nelson and  Peters  (1977).  F o r example, Nelson  w o r d s o f 18 c h i l d r e n f r o m a p p r o x i m a t e l y age.  The s t u d y u t i l i z e d  studied the f i r s t 1 t o 2 1/2 y e a r s o f  r e c o r d s kept by mothers as w e l l as  t a p e - r e c o r d i n g s o f language used by mother and c h i l d monthly v i s i t s  (1973)  during  i n t h e home a n d p e r i o d i c a l p r o b e s o f s u c h 36  developments as comprehension, i m i t a t i o n , c a t e g o r i z a t i o n , and r e f e r e n c e .  A m a j o r o u t c o m e o f t h i s s t u d y was t h e  f i n d i n g o f i n d i v i d u a l approaches t o t h e t a s k s o f l e a r n i n g the  language.  These approaches were r e f l e c t e d  o f ways, f i r s t  i n a number  i n t h e k i n d s o f words and p h r a s e s c h i l d r e n  l e a r n e d and used d u r i n g t h e s i n g l e - w o r d  period.  N e l s o n f o u n d t h a t f o r m o s t o f t h e c h i l d r e n , whom s h e referred t o as " r e f e r e n t i a l , " e a r l y vocabularies  consisted  l a r g e l y o f o b j e c t names (nouns) w i t h some v e r b s ,  proper  names, a n d a d j e c t i v e s .  F o r a l a r g e m i n o r i t y , whom s h e  r e f e r r e d t o a s " e x p r e s s i v e , " v o c a b u l a r i e s w e r e more v a r i e d and i n c l u d e d a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n o f s o c i a l r o u t i n e s it,"  " I want i t . " ) .  ("Stop  N e l s o n ' s r e f e r e n t i a l c h i l d r e n were  s i m i l a r t o Wolf and Gardner's p a t t e r n e r s , and h e r e x p r e s s i v e c h i l d r e n were s i m i l a r t o t h e i r  dramatists.  In a review o f t h e research particularly  i noral  on i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s ,  language development, N e l s o n  s t r e s s e s t h a t m o s t c h i l d r e n no d o u b t f a l l extremes o f d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s ;  (1981)  between t h e  f u r t h e r , c h i l d r e n may e x h i b i t  d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s o f u s i n g language i n d i f f e r e n t  situations.  N o n e t h e l e s s , a s s h e p o i n t s o u t , s t u d y i n g c h i l d r e n who a r e e x t r e m e l y d i f f e r e n t i n s t y l e does i l l u m i n a t e t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s y s t e m t o be l e a r n e d .  37  Avenues t o L a t e r As t h e w o r l d friends circle,  Symbolization  of c h i l d r e n enlarges  c h i l d r e n must not  a l s o l e a r n h i g h l y u n f a m i l i a r and of c u l t u r a l  information.  Wolf, & Gardner  beyond t h e  o n l y meet new  family-  contexts  seemingly a r b i t r a r y  These a r e d i s c u s s e d by  but  forms  Shotwell,  (1980) a s f o l l o w s :  Although i t i s t r u e t h a t normal school-age c h i l d r e n s h a r e p e r f o r m a n c e s k i l l s i n p a t t e r n i n g and d r a m a t i z i n g , i t may be c r u c i a l t o make t h e m o s t o f t h e i r f a v o r e d means o f a c c e s s a s t h e y a r e a s k e d t o become c o m p e t e n t u s e r s o f s u c h c u l t u r a l f o r m s a s t e x t s , maps, and number (p. 194). As t h e c h i l d r e n i n t h e i r s t u d y some o f t h e s e  came i n t o c o n t a c t  i s s u e s , S h o t w e l l e t a l . (1980) h a d  o p p o r t u n i t y t o o b s e r v e d i f f e r e n c e s i n how m a p p i n g and  w r i t i n g problems.  already taken  t h e age  o f 4,  They f o u n d t h a t o f t e n  r o l e s and  r o o t i n p a t t e r n i n g and  the dramatist's  symbolic  skills  that By  interest in interpersonal  patterner's interest i n object attributes, and  the  dramatizing.  n a r r a t i v e sequences, c o n t r a s t e d w i t h  relationships,  the  they handled both  c h i l d r e n ' s a p p r o a c h e s seemed t o be m e d i a t e d b y had  with  the  spatial  correspondences, culminated  in  s t r i k i n g l y d i f f e r e n t forms o f emergent mapping s k i l l s . T h u s , when a s k e d t o e n a c t a p r e t e n d make a map f o c u s was entered fully,  of the t r i p ,  picnic trip  and  c h i l d r e n v a r i e d as t o w h i c h  p e r f o r m e d most s t r o n g l y .  i n t o the symbolic  Julie  (the  to  task  dramatist)  p l a y s e q u e n c e c o n f i d e n t l y and  o f t e n d i r e c t i n g the p l a y h e r s e l f .  38  Anita  later  (the  p a t t e r n e r ) , on t h e o t h e r hand, i n f r e q u e n t l y t o o k t h e initiative  i n imaginary  The y o u n g s t e r s ' the event,  play.  maps a l s o d i f f e r e d . When a s k e d t o map  J u l i e ' s map was c u r s o r y :  She [ J u l i e ] d r a w s a j a g g e d l y c u r v e d e n c l o s u r e a n d t h e n p o i n t s out t h e t r i p ' s h i g h l i g h t s as t h e Experimenter r e q u e s t s them. Although she a p p a r e n t l y has a v e r y g e n e r a l i d e a o f where t o p l a c e p o i n t s t o r e p r e s e n t t h e i r a c t u a l s p a t i a l l a y o u t , s h e o n l y o r d e r s them l i n e a r l y b y s i t u a t i n g them r o u g h l y ( b u t a p p r o p r i a t e l y ) f r o m r i g h t t o l e f t on t h e e n c l o s u r e ( S h o t w e l l e t a l . , 1980, p. 1 9 5 ) . A n i t a ' s map, h o w e v e r , d e m o n s t r a t e d a c l e a r a n d c a r e f u l concern  t o reproduce the s p a t i a l  graphic  form.  layout of the t r i p i n  She [ A n i t a ] c a n n o t o n l y o r i e n t p o i n t s i n t w o d i m e n s i o n a l s p a c e , b u t c a n a l s o draw t h e shapes o f v a r i o u s o b j e c t s a t t h e h i g h l i g h t p o i n t s as w e l l ( S h o t w e l l e t a l . , 1980. p . 1 9 5 ) . The c h i l d r e n seemed t o a l s o a p p r o a c h w r i t i n g with c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s , which  issues either  r e f l e c t e d o r made u s e o f t h e i r l e v e l o f m a p p i n g s k i l l s a n d their sylistic  concerns.  The r e s e a r c h e r s  m a i n i n t e r e s t i n w r i t i n g was i n i t i a l l y  found t h a t  Julie's  t o be a b l e t o s i g n  h e r name a t t h e b o t t o m o f a l l h e r p i c t u r e s .  This  evolved  name, t h e n many  i n t o "endless p r a c t i c i n g of her f u l l  interest  h o u r s s p e n t w r i t i n g a l l t h e words she c a n t h i n k t o a s k h e r mother t o s p e l l o u t " (p.195).  Over a p e r i o d o f months,  J u l i e l e a r n e d s e v e r a l w o r d s t h a t h e r m o t h e r no l o n g e r h a d t o s p e l l o u t l e t t e r by l e t t e r , as whole u n i t s .  These words were l e a r n e d  almost  J u l i e d i d not e x p l o i t t h e correspondence o f 39  l e t t e r s t o sound.  R a t h e r , she o p e r a t e d on c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s  between d i f f e r e n t u n i t - c o m b i n a t i o n s o f l e t t e r s and e v e n t s and p e o p l e .  F o r example,  her mother, " J u l i e "  she q u i c k l y l e a r n e d " C a r o l " f o r  f o r herself,  "Merry C h r i s t m a s " f o r t h e  h o l i d a y s , and " c a t " f o r a p i c t u r e o f a c a t .  O v e r a l l , she  seemed p r i m a r i l y t o b e c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e map b e t w e e n t h e w r i t t e n and t h e s o c i a l w o r l d o f o b j e c t and p e r s o n interaction. S h o t w e l l e t a l . found t h a t p a t t e r n e r s '  interest i n  mapping c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s and shapes g u i d e d t h e i r c o n c e r n s i n a somewhat d i f f e r e n t  writing  direction:  In g e n e r a l , t h e r e i s l e s s r e l i a n c e on r i t u a l i s t i c p r a c t i c i n g o f whole words and l e s s i n t e r e s t i n t h e i n t e r a c t i o n a l dynamics o f h a v i n g t h e p a r e n t s p e l l o u t words. P a t t e r n e r s f o c u s f i r s t on p r a c t i c i n g t h e i n d i v i d u a l l e t t e r shapes, g o i n g on e v e n t u a l l y t o l e a r n some l e t t e r r e c o g n i t i o n s k i l l s , a l o n g w i t h s i m p l e correspondences between l e t t e r s and t h e sounds r e p r e s e n t e d (p.196). T h e i r i n t e r e s t i n w r i t i n g appeared  t o stem l e s s  from  l a b e l i n g t h a n from d i s c e r n i n g and r e p a t t e r n i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e of  spoken  words.  S h o t w e l l e t a l . (1980)  c o n c l u d e t h a t p a t t e r n e r s and  d r a m a t i s t s h i g h l i g h t e d d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f w r i t i n g and mapping a b i l i t i e s languages.  i n t h e i r f i r s t encounters with graphic  While they s t r e s s e d t h a t a l l normal  seem t o a c h i e v e a p o o l o f c o m p l e m e n t a r y  children  stylistic  t h a t p r o v i d e t h e means o f e f f e c t i v e s y m b o l  approaches  use, they  felt  t h a t i t was w o r t h e x a m i n i n g t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h a c h i l d ' s  40  original  s t y l e may  D y s o n (1986a) study c h i l d r e n appeared  persist. noted i n her d e s c r i p t i o n o f four  (Ashley, Rachel, V i v i ,  case  and Tracy) t h a t  "they  t o h a v e d i f f e r e n t ways o f a p p r o a c h i n g w r i t t e n  language, approaches  t h a t made s e n s e when e a c h c h i l d  was  v i e w e d w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e i r own u n i q u e i n t e r e s t s a n d styles of functioning" words by memorizing  (p. 2 1 1 ) . F o r example,  l e t t e r s and t h e i r s p a t i a l  Tracy  wrote  arrangements.  T r a c y ' s i n t e r e s t s i n d r a w i n g and i n c o n s t r u c t i v e p l a y were to "build" particular entities.  Her i n t e r e s t i n words as  e n t i t i e s was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h a t d r a w i n g a n d p l a y  style.  I n c o n t r a s t , R a c h e l wrote by r e q u e s t i n g words and a l s o b y s i m p l y p u t t i n g down l e t t e r s r a n d o m l y , awareness  despite her  t h a t s u c h w r i t i n g was n o t " r e a l " .  However, R a c h e l  wrote f o r a v a r i e t y o f purposes; she attempted l i s t s o f peers, notes t o friends, dialogue f o r her s t o r i e s .  Her  i n t e r e s t i n t h e p u r p o s e s o f w r i t i n g was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h h e r i n t e r e s t s as a person. imaginative play —  She e n g a g e d o f t e n i n d r a m a t i c ,  even h e r drawings t o o k shape w i t h i n  elaborate narrations.  Rachel's imaginative narratives,  like  o t h e r i n f o r m a l c o n v e r s a t i o n s , g e n e r a l l y f o c u s e d on r e l a t i o n s h i p s between p e o p l e . D y s o n (1986b) f o u n d s i m i l a r v a r i a t i o n s i n f u r t h e r study a n a l y s i s .  case  As t h e o b s e r v e d c h i l d r e n drew and t a l k e d ,  t h e y were busy c r e a t i n g i m a g i n a r y w o r l d s .  They b u i l t  scenes  from t h e c a s t o f c h a r a c t e r s t h e y had drawn; t h e c h a r a c t e r s 41  were o f t e n engaged i n a c t i o n s and,  i n the l a t t e r h a l f of  the  k i n d e r g a r t e n y e a r ; i n c r e a s i n g l y t h e y were l o c a t e d i n s e t t i n g s o f t i m e and p l a c e .  Dyson o b s e r v e d  t h a t t h e r e were:  ... i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n how t h e c h i l d r e n u s e d s y m b o l i c m e d i a t o c r e a t e t h e i r w o r l d s ... t h e c h i l d r e n d i f f e r e d i n t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h d r a w i n g was a " l a n g u a g e " a c t i v i t y , t h a t i s , i n how a n d how much t h e y made u s e o f t a l k and d r a w i n g and i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e d r a w i n g and t a l k i n g a n d t h e d i c t a t e d t e x t (p.403). The  documented i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n ways o f  i n t e r r e l a t i n g s y m b o l i c media suggest t h a t t h e drawing —  support  and t a l k p r o v i d e f o r y o u n g w r i t e r s i n t h i s  t h e r e s o u r c e s and t e n s i o n s t h e y c r e a t e —  different children. The limited,  activity  w i l l vary f o r  T h i s i s i n d e e d what Dyson d i s c o v e r e d .  g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y of these c h i l d r e n ' s behaviors i s i n one  sense,  as t h e sample i s s m a l l .  Further, the  c h i l d r e n were c h o s e n as c a s e s t u d i e s p r e c i s e l y b e c a u s e t h e y had d i f f e r i n g approaches t o t h e j o u r n a l Nonetheless  t h e f i n d i n g s do  activity.  illustrate differences i n  c h i l d r e n i n t e r r e l a t e symbolic media; these d i f f e r e n c e s s i m i l a r t o those observed The  i n varied symbolic  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the  behavior.  42  are  activities.  r e s e a r c h l i t e r a t u r e t h u s c o r r o b o r a t e s and  t h e d e s c r i p t i o n s and  how  strengthens  children's  Summary  R e s e a r c h e r s have begun t o d e t a i l ways i n w h i c h and o r a l language  s u p p o r t each o t h e r i n young  children's  development  as w r i t e r s .  development  that children bring to w r i t i n g i n the  years of schooling. drawing knowledge,  T a b l e 1 shows t h e k e y s t r e a m s  c h i l d r e n of course also b r i n g  of  early  In addition to their l i n g u i s t i c  p e r s o n a l knowledge o f t h e w o r l d . o r a l language,  drawing  and  their  While l i n k i n g w r i t i n g  i t i s n o t i n t e n d e d t o i m p l y t h e two  a r e t h e same, f o r w r i t i n g i s s u r e l y more t h a n t a l k  to  processes written  down. Based  on t h e r e s e a r c h d i s c u s s e d h e r e , t h e r e a p p e a r s  be a d e v e l o p m e n t a l sequence  to  t h a t c h a r a c t e r i z e s t h e young  c h i l d ' s p r o g r e s s i o n from s c r i b b l i n g t o drawing t o w r i t i n g . T h i s s u p p o r t s V y g o t s k y ' s t h e o r y o f symbol  use.  advance i n t h e i r use of i n c r e a s i n g l y a b s t r a c t Drawing  plays a crucial role i n this  Children symbolism.  development.  P i c t o g r a p h y i s an i m p o r t a n t t r a n s i t i o n t o w a r d The  p i c t o g r a p h i s a symbol  t h a n what i s drawn.  writing.  t h a t stands f o r something  This understanding i s c r u c i a l to the  young c h i l d ' s e v o l v i n g sense o f symbol.  C h i l d r e n need t o  g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x p l o r e t h e n a t u r e o f w r i t i n g develop hypotheses v a r i e d symbol  more  f o r themselves.  systems  be  and  Young c h i l d r e n l e a n  on  i n t h e i r e a r l y attempts at w r i t t e n  expression.  They o f t e n use d r a w i n g t o v i s u a l l y r e p r e s e n t  t h e i r deas.  As t h e y i n c r e a s e i n t h e i r a b i l i t y t o u s e w o r d s , 43  c h i l d r e n must work t o make t h e v i s u a l  image a n d t h e l a n g u a g e  cooperate.  Table  1:  DEVELOPMENT 0  Resources C h i l d r e n B r i n g t o W r i t t e n ORAL (Learning  2 yrs. 2+  LANGUAGE  Grammar o f  I  6 yrs.  Gestures  Gestures  !  \  Scribbles  Scribbling Stage Interpersonal Ideational d i sordered (dialogue) (monologue, Diagonals & c o ntrolled self-speech) Curves -named L e t t e r - l i k e shapes Textual Preschematic Stage -first representational attempts -discovers (Words)-Invented that Spelling simple forms can symbolize objects -builds graphic ( g r o u p s o f words) v o c a b u l a r y Symbol/Signs "Messages"  Sustained Talk (explanations, narrative) Dictated  Writing (labels, l i s t s , own s t o r i e s )  Schematic Stage -definite form concept -drawings symbolize in a d e s c r i p t i v e way  Stories  7  Adapted  DRAWING  Functions  School Register (e.g., responses to questions)  5+  WRITING  t h e System)  4 yrs.  5  Discourse  from King  (1980)  44  Researchers a t Harvard's P r o j e c t Zero s e t out t o i n v e s t i g a t e how y o u n g c h i l d r e n p r o g r e s s i n t h e i r as symbol u s e r s .  development  Two m a j o r s t u d i e s , one r e p o r t e d i n  G a r d n e r , W o l f , & S m i t h ( 1 9 7 5 , 1982) a n d t h e s e c o n d r e p o r t e d i n Gardner (1976), S h o t w e l l , Wolf & Gardner (1980), and Wolf & G a r d n e r (1979) l e d t o t h e d i s c o v e r y o f c o m p l e x p a t t e r n s o f i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s on e a r l y s y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n i n g . existence of "cognitive styles"  (Gardner e t a l . ,  The  1975, p.  1 8 ) , o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r i n t h e way c h i l d r e n m a s t e r e d s y m b o l i c f o r m s was s u g g e s t e d . became l a b e l l e d a s P a t t e r n e r s a n d D r a m a t i s t s .  These  Some  y o u n g s t e r s d i r e c t e d t o w a r d a l l m e d i a w h a t was c o n s i d e r e d a " p a t t e r n i n g a p p r o a c h " ; t h e y were c o n c e r n e d w i t h o b j e c t s and w i t h o v e r a l l c o n f i g u r a t i o n s a n d p a t t e r n s , t h e y f o c u s e d on t h e p h y s i c a l a s p e c t s o f t h e media. complementary  Others had a  " n a r r a t i v e " o r "dramatic" emphasis:  they  t r e a t e d media as s e q u e n t i a l ; t h e y were i n t e r e s t e d i n s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s and i n e v e n t s w h i c h u n f o l d e d o v e r t i m e . S i m i l a r d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n more s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d a n d o b j e c t - o r i e n t e d s t y l e s were d i s c o v e r e d i n t h e a r e a o f language development  (Nelson, 1973; P e t e r s , 1977).  Nelson  i d e n t i f i e d one g r o u p o f c h i l d r e n , whom s h e r e f e r r e d t o a s " r e f e r e n t i a l " , who w e r e s i m i l a r t o W o l f a n d G a r d n e r ' s patterners.  (1979)  A second group o f c h i l d r e n , s i m i l a r t o Wolf and  G a r d n e r ' s d r a m a t i s t s , were r e f e r r e d t o as " e x p r e s s i v e " . Nelson  (1981) r e v i e w e d t h e r e s e a r c h o n 45  individual  differences the  and  concluded that  most c h i l d r e n  extremes of d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s .  fall  In addition,  between  children  may  e x h i b i t d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s i n d i f f e r e n t s i t u a t i o n s . Yet, p o i n t s out  that  s t u d y i n g c h i l d r e n who  different in styles illuminates be  young c h i l d r e n  abstract  nature of the  p r o g r e s s i n t h e i r use  s y m b o l s , t h e y may  manner s i m i l a r t o t h a t symbols systems.  of  system  to  a p p r o a c h t h e s e new  more  tasks in  u s e d when f i r s t e n c o u n t e r i n g  Shotwell, Wolf, & Gardner  (1980)  y o u n g s t e r s t h e y were s t u d y i n g approached t h e  m a p p i n g and traced  beginning writing with s k i l l s  back t o t h e i r e a r l i e r p a t t e r n i n g  behaviors. new  extremely  learned. As  how  the  are  she  The  t a s k , and  addition,  children  f o c u s e d on  that  or  Dyson  issues  She  The  d e g r e e t o w h i c h t h e y v i e w e d d r a w i n g as  and  In  reflected  i n her  used s y m b o l i c media i n j o u r n a l  as  d i d the  dictated  case  writing a  in  how  tasks.  "language"  r e l a t i o n s h i p between the  drawing,  text.  W h i l e most i n d i v i d u a l s a q u i r e s k i l l approaches —  the  with  observed i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s  children  activity varied  be  concerns.  the  talking,  could  of  d i f f e r e n t aspects of  (1986b) f o u n d s i m i l a r v a r i a t i o n s  study analyses.  described  dramatizing  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e s , which their stylistic  simpler  tasks  t h e i r products d i f f e r e d considerably.  t h e y a p p r o a c h e d t h e s e new  a  i n both  symbolic  indeed, everyday interchange requires 46  both  p a t t e r n i n g and d r a m a t i z i n g c o n t r a s t i n g modes c a n s t i l l of development.  skills —  traces of these  b e o b s e r v e d a t much l a t e r  Wolf & Gardner  (1979) c l a i m  stages  that:  I n o u r s t u d i e s o f e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l c h i l d r e n we f i n d a s i g n i f i c a n t m i n o r i t y who c a n s t i l l b e c h a r a c t e r i z e d r e l i a b l y as strong p a t t e r n e r s o r strong d r a m a t i s t s . M o r e o v e r , even i f most o f u s c a n a d o p t e i t h e r c o g n i t i v e s t y l e , i t may w e l l b e t h a t e a c h i n d i v i d u a l r e t a i n s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c " s t r e n g t h " o r " l e a d i n g p o s i t i o n . " These s t r e n g t h s may b e p a r t i c u l a r l y m a n i f e s t when we e n g a g e i n p l a y f u l a c t i v i t y i n which only our impulses a r e a t s t a k e o r when we c o n f r o n t a new a n d u n f a m i l i a r m a t e r i a l (p.135, 1 3 6 ) . The  extent  of e a r l i e r  t o which p r e f e r r e d  style i n the acquisition  forms o f symbolism a f f e c t l a t e r  symbolic  development h a s , as y e t , n o t been i n v e s t i g a t e d f u l l y . p r e s e n t s t u d y attempted t o add t o t h e r e s e a r c h important  area.  47  into  The this  CHAPTER THREE  Methodology Research Design T h i s s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d t o e x a m i n e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between K i n d e r g a r t e n  students' preferred symbolic  t h e i r . e a r l y w r i t i n g attempts. nature  one  Their perceptions of the  o f w r i t i n g and t h e processes  investigated.  s t y l e and  i n v o l v e d i n i t were a l s o  I t was d i v i d e d i n t o t w o p h a s e s .  During  phase  t h eresearcher s e t out t o i d e n t i f y case study c h i l d r e n  who d e m o n s t r a t e d a s t r o n g , c o n s i s t e n t s y m b o l i c  style  given a v a r i e t y o f tasks t o perform  different  symbolic  media.  using four  The c h i l d r e n ' s d r a w i n g ,  s t o r y t e l l i n g products  were a s s e s s e d ,  when  c l a y modeling, and  as w e l l as t h e i r  response t o a s e r i e s o f symbolic-play tasks using blocks. To o b t a i n m e a s u r e s o f s y m b o l i c  s t y l e i nthese v a r i o u s media,  c h i l d r e n were r e q u i r e d t o complete t h r e e t a s k s t h a t i n c l u d e d prescribed t o p i c s , completion During  t a s k s , and f r e e c h o i c e .  phase two t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s  s e l e c t e d case study  c h i l d r e n ' s drawing,  t a l k were examined u s i n g two i m p o r t a n t  between  w r i t t e n t e x t , and strategiesof  q u a l i t a t i v e research - p a r t i c i p a n t observation and interviewing  (Bogdan a n d B i k l e n ,  1982).  The u s e o f  p a r t i c i p a n t o b s e r v a t i o n methodology r e f l e c t s t h e study's assumption t h a t composing b e h a v i o r  48  i n a n y medium i s s h a p e d  by  i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h p a r t i c u l a r i n t e n t i o n s and  functioning.  The  a i m was  child's perspective. conducted v i e w s on The  styles  to perceive the a c t i v i t y  F o r m a l and  of  from  the  i n f o r m a l i n t e r v i e w s were  w i t h each f o c a l c h i l d t o f u r t h e r examine  their  writing. data c o l l e c t e d  included d e s c r i p t i o n s of  c h i l d r e n as t h e y worked i n t h e i r J o u r n a l s . w r i t t e n p r o d u c t s , and  the  Audiotapes,  o b s e r v a t i o n a l notes were examined.  This q u a l i t a t i v e research involved the c o l l e c t i o n data over a p e r i o d of time.  As an o b s e r v i n g  the researcher c o l l e c t e d data which occured  participant,  from a v a r i e t y o f  n a t u r a l l y i n the classroom  of  sources  setting.  As t h e d a t a w e r e c o l l e c t e d , t h e r e s u l t s w e r e c a t e g o r i z e d and  e v a l u a t e d on t h e b a s i s o f w h a t h a d  t o each c h i l d .  A n a l y s i s was  to f u r t h e r data  collection.  on-going  S i t e and The  p r o j e c t s i t e was  D e l t a , B r i t i s h Columbia. Kindergarten classroom.  f o r m e d and  diversity  The  s e r v e d as a  guide  Program  a p u b l i c elementary Research  was  school i n  c a r r i e d out  in  one  C h i l d r e n from both t h e morning  afternoon sessions participated. b y t h e same t e a c h e r .  and  happened  Both  c l a s s e s were  s e s s i o n s were  and  taught  heterogeneously  i n a c a d e m i c a c h i e v e m e n t was  in  evidence. The  K i n d e r g a r t e n program i n v o l v e d t h e use 49  of l e a r n i n g  centres.  Centre  time occured  f r o m 9:30 t o 10:15 e a c h  m o r n i n g a n d 1:00 t o 1:45 e a c h a f t e r n o o n .  One o f t h e c e n t r e s  a v a i l a b l e was t h e J o u r n a l W r i t i n g C e n t r e . Subjects The class, six 13  s u b j e c t s w e r e e n r o l l e d i n t h e same K i n d e r g a r t e n  e i t h e r i n t h e morning o r afternoon s e s s i o n .  children participated females  a n d 13 m a l e s .  Twenty-  i n t h e f i r s t phase o f t h i s  study,  A t s c h o o l e n t r y t h e y ranged i n age  from f o u r y e a r s , e l e v e n months t o f i v e y e a r s , e i g h t months w i t h a mean a g e o f f i v e y e a r s , f o u r m o n t h s . Twenty-three o f t h e c h i l d r e n spoke o n l y E n g l i s h . c h i l d r e n attended  a regular Kindergarten class i n the  m o r n i n g and a s p e c i a l Language Enhancement class i n the afternoon.  The s o c i o - e c o n o m i c  f a m i l i e s v a r i e d from lower t o upper middle children living  Three  Kindergarten status of their class status with  i n e i t h e r s i n g l e p a r e n t , two p a r e n t o r  e x t e n d e d f a m i l y homes. Phase two i n c o r p o r a t e d case they continued communication.  s t u d i e s o f s i x c h i l d r e n as  i n their efforts t o acquire s k i l l  i nwritten  T h i s group c o n t a i n e d o n l y E n g l i s h speaking  c h i l d r e n who r a n g e d i n a g e f r o m f i v e y e a r s o n e m o n t h t o f i v e years  s i x m o n t h s w i t h a mean a g e o f f i v e y e a r s t h r e e m o n t h s  (at  t h e b e g i n n i n g o f phase two).  two  boys.  I t i n c l u d e d f o u r g i r l s and  C r i t e r i a and method o f s e l e c t i o n a r e f u r t h e r  described i n t h e data a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n l a t e r i n t h i s chapter. 50  Data  Collection  The data c o l l e c t e d was h o l i s t i c , d e s c r i p t i v e d a t a :  the  c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k , t h e i r products, and o b s e r v a t i o n s o f t h e i r behavior.  Data c o l l e c t i o n took p l a c e i n both phases.  Data  c o l l e c t i o n f o r phase one occured an average o f t h r e e times per week f o r a six-week p e r i o d (mid October November 1990).  1990 through  Phase two data c o l l e c t i o n occured an  average o f f o u r times p e r week f o r a four-month p e r i o d (February 1991 through May 1991). Phase One:  I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Phase.  During t h e f i r s t  six-week phase, a l l 26 c h i l d r e n were observed d u r i n g Centre time.  C h i l d r e n was assessed t o determine t h e i r p r e f e r r e d  s t y l e o f symbol use i n f o u r separate media:  language  ( s t o r y - t e l l i n g ) ; symbolic p l a y ( a c t i n g out a scene w i t h geometric b l o c k s t h a t c o u l d "stand f o r " imaginary c h a r a c t e r s ) ; two-dimensional  depiction  (drawing w i t h Magic  Markers); and t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l d e p i c t i o n s c u l p t i n g w i t h Play-Doh). c h i l d performed  W i t h i n each o f these media t h e  three tasks:  product spontaneously  (modeling o r  they produced  a symbolic  ( f r e e c h o i c e t a s k ) ; completed  which, though begun, had been l e f t r e s e a r c h e r ; and produced  a work  incomplete by t h e  a product g i v e n a p r e s c r i b e d t o p i c .  The v a r i o u s t a s k s have been summarized below: 1.  Drawing.  A l l the drawing  t a s k s were completed  1/2 x 11 i n c h white paper u s i n g c o l o r e d markers. c h i l d r e n were i n v i t e d t o c r e a t e a drawing 51  on 8  The  o f a n y t h i n g they  wanted t o f o r t h e f r e e - c h o i c e t a s k .  For the completion  t h e c h i l d r e n were g i v e n an i n c o m p l e t e and  asked t o f i n i s h i t .  Plav-Doh M o d e l l i n g .  modelling simple  drawing o f a v e h i c l e  The t h i r d d r a w i n g t a s k r e q u i r e d t h e  c h i l d r e n t o produce a drawing o f a 2.  person.  P l a y - D o h was u s e d f o r t h e  t a s k s , and t h e c h i l d r e n were a l s o g i v e n a s e t o f  tools.  F o r t h e f r e e - c h o i c e t a s k c h i l d r e n were asked  t o make a m o d e l o f a n y t h i n g  they wanted.  The  completion  t a s k r e q u i r e d t h e c h i l d r e n t o f i n i s h an incomplete an a n i m a l .  task.  Language ( S t o r y t e l l i n g ) .  completed i n i n d i v i d u a l being was  figure of  To make a m o d e l o f a p e r s o n was t h e t h i r d  modelling 3.  task  tape recorded.  The l a n g u a g e t a s k s w e r e  s e s s i o n s w i t h r e s p o n s e s a n d comments F o r t h e f r e e - c h o i c e t a s k each  a s k e d t o make up a s t o r y o f t h e i r  completion  t a s k t h e c h i l d was t o l d  own.  child  For the  the beginning  of a story  w h i c h b e g a n a s f o l l o w s : "Once t h e r e was a c a t who w a n t e d t o be  a person.  help.  He t h o u g h t t h a t e a t i n g w h a t p e o p l e a t e w o u l d  So e v e r y  day f o r l u n c h t h i s  c a t had t h r e e  sandwiches,  f o u r k i n d s o f soup, s i x c o o k i e s , two marshmallows, and t e n pickles". third  The c h i l d was a s k e d t o f i n i s h t h e s t o r y .  The  task required the child t o construct a story that  contained  specific  butterfly).  characters  (boy/girl,  t i g e r , and  The c h i l d was g i v e n a p i c t u r e c a r d o f e a c h o f  the p r e s c r i b e d characters t o help stimulate response.  52  4.  Symbolic play using blocks.  Small  s e t s o f wooden  b l o c k s were used t o s t r u c t u r e t a s k s t h a t r e q u i r e d t h e c h i l d t o r e s p o n d v e r b a l l y and t o m a n i p u l a t e o b j e c t s symbolic  play.  i n a form o f  F o r t h e f i r s t t a s k t h e c h i l d was g i v e n  o f a m b i g u o u s l y s h a p e d wooden b l o c k s  (some o f w h i c h  a set  suggested  p e o p l e , some o f w h i c h w e r e more c o n v e n t i o n a l l y b l o c k l i k e ) and  cars.  A s a warm-up e x e r c i s e , t h e r e s e a r c h e r  asked the  c h i l d t o i m a g i n e what s e v e r a l o f t h e shapes m i g h t be. t h e c h i l d was g i v e n t h e e n t i r e s e t o f b l o c k s "pretend  w h a t e v e r you want."  c h i l d t o use imaginery being  told  using blocks.  The s e c o n d t a s k r e q u i r e d t h e  a parking  with a "lady" - block  space along  c a r h a s p u l l e d o u t o f t h e row s o t h e r e The r e s e a r c h e r  after  o f a s t o r y a n d shown t h e a c t i o n s  The s t o r y s t a r t s  car, hunting.for  and asked t o  p l a y t o complete a problem  the beginning  Then  a row o f c a r s .  in a One  i s a n empty s p a c e .  then l e f t the story t o the c h i l d t o resolve.  The t h i r d  task required the c h i l d to t e l l  a s t o r y about a  boy/girl,  a b o a t , a n d a d o g a n d show t h e a c t i o n s u s i n g t h e  blocks. Two p r o c e d u r e s w e r e u s e d t o g a t h e r  the information.  C h i l d r e n w e r e t e s t e d i n random g r o u p s o f f i v e Doh a n d d r a w i n g t a s k s .  Media were c o u n t e r b a l a n c e d  groups, as were t a s k s w i t h i n each s e s s i o n . on  storytelling  and s y m b o l i c  was s e e n i n d i v i d u a l l y . observation  notes,  f o r the Playbetween  To o b t a i n  p l a y u s i n g b l o c k s , each  As w e l l as t h e p r o d u c t s  p h o t o g r a p h s , and v i d e o 53  tape  data child  created,  t r a n s c r i p t i o n s helped f a c i l i t a t e scoring  procedures.  A l t h o u g h a l l c l a s s members p a r t i c i p a t e d o n l y s i x c h i l d r e n who d e m o n s t r a t e d  i n this  phase,  t h e most c o n s i s t e n t  p r e f e r r e d s t y l e o f symbol use ( p a t t e r n e r o r d r a m a t i s t ) all  media, were f o l l o w e d i n t o phase two.  These  over  children's  s c o r e s f e l l w i t h i n t h e o u t e r q u a r t i l e s o f t h e range o f scores. S e l e c t e d case s t u d y s u b j e c t s were a d m i n i s t e r e d t h e Peabody P i c t u r e V o c a b u l a r y T e s t - R e v i s e d t o check  ( P P V T - R ) , Form L,  on t h e s i m i l a r i t y between t h e two g r o u p s  ( P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s ) on r e c e p t i v e language Comparisons o f approach  knowledge.  t o w r i t i n g w e r e made b e t w e e n g r o u p s  o f P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s . P h a s e Two: February second  Research  Phase.  T h i s phase l a s t e d  1991 t o t h e e n d o f May 1 9 9 1 .  The p u r p o s e  from of this  p h a s e was t o c o l l e c t d a t a on e a c h c a s e s t u d y  composing process d u r i n g t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f j o u r n a l  child's entries  ( p i c t u r e / t e x t s e t s ) and on t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e n a t u r e o f w r i t i n g and t h e p r o c e s s e s i n v o l v e d i n i t .  Informal  c o n v e r s a t i o n s o c c u r r e d w i t h each case s t u d y c h i l d , a s worked r e g a r d i n g t h e i r w r i t i n g and d r a w i n g s . c o n v e r s a t i o n s were a u d i o - t a p e d .  they  These  C h i l d r e n were i n t e r v i e w e d ,  i n d i v i d u a l l y a b o u t t h e i r v i e w s on w r i t i n g .  Samples o f  c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t t e n work from a c r o s s t h e s c h o o l y e a r were gathered. Data were c o l l e c t e d  f o u r t i m e s p e r week a t t h e j o u r n a l 54  w r i t i n g centre during the r e g u l a r centre time. o f d a t a were c o l l e c t e d :  audio  recordings of  c h i l d r e n ' s responses t o the researchers* handwritten  children's w r i t t e n products, trends  types  recordings of the c h i l d r e n ' s  spontaneous t a l k at the c e n t r e , audio  the w r i t i n g process,  Five  and  the  interventions into  observational notes, l o g e n t r i e s on  i n both the w r i t i n g of the case study  the  perceived  c h i l d r e n and  t h a t o f t h e c l a s s as a whole. 1.  Spontaneous t a l k :  During  the observational period,  the researcher sat at the w r i t i n g center w i t h the A t a p e - r e c o r d e r was  p l a c e d e i t h e r on t h e f l o o r o r on  edge o f t h e t a b l e b e h i n d papers. middle  t h e box  I t was  the  c o n t a i n i n g the c h i l d r e n ' s  A u n i d i r e c t i o n a l m i c r o p h o n e was of the t a b l e .  children.  placed i n the  d i r e c t e d toward the case  study  child. 2.  Interventions:  At c e r t a i n times during the  center observations, the researcher intervened questions.  An  a t t e m p t was  order to minimize processes.  made t o l i m i t  with  interventions in  t h e i n f l u e n c e on t h e c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g  However, u n d e r s t a n d i n g  the c h i l d r e n ' s reasoning  sometimes r e q u i r e d the p o s i n g of q u e s t i o n s .  The  t h e q u e s t i o n s a s k e d depended upon t h e p a r t i c u l a r being  observed.  writing  nature  of  behaviors  F o r example, as t h e c h i l d r e n were d r a w i n g  and w r i t i n g , t h e r e s e a r c h e r a s k e d t h e m t o e x p l a i n t h e i r o r a s k e d them where t h e y g o t t h e i d e a f o r t h e i r p i e c e writing. 55  of  work  3.  Observational notes:  As t h e c a s e - s t u d y  child  wrote,  b r i e f n o t e s were t a k e n on w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s s u c h a s t h e order o f production, erasings, use o f references m a t e r i a l s , sound e f f e c t s and o t h e r l i t e r a r y d e v i c e s . 4.  Written products:  The j o u r n a l s w e r e k e p t  near t h e w r i t i n g centre.  i n a box  J o u r n a l s were c o l l e c t e d (and  p h o t o c o p i e s made) s o t h a t t h e y c o u l d b e e x a m i n e d a s p a r t o f the data 5. in  analysis.  Daily log:  a journal.  both  D a i l y e n t r i e s w e r e made b y t h e r e s e a r c h e r  The e n t r i e s d e a l t w i t h t h e w r i t i n g t r e n d s o f  i n d i v i d u a l case s t u d y c h i l d r e n and t h e c l a s s as a  whole.  (See appendix  A f o r an example.)  Data A n a l y s i s P h a s e One:  Identification  Phase  D a t a g a t h e r e d d u r i n g p h a s e one w e r e e x a m i n e d i n o r d e r to  determine  each c h i l d ' s approach  administered.  t o the symbolic  F i e l d notes, completed  products,  tasks  photographs,  and v i d e o t a p e s w e r e e x a m i n e d b y t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o n o t e p a t t e r n s o f behavior which  pointed t o Patterner o r Dramatist  styles.  A t r a i n e d a s s o c i a t e (who was a n e x p e r i e n c e d  teacher)  conducted  collected.  To  r a t i n g o f 24% o f t h e d a t a  These two r a t i n g s were conducted  t h e n compared. overall  an independent  The p e r c e n t a g e  interrater reliability  - s e p a r a t e l y and  o f agreement y i e l d e d an o f .96.  o b t a i n measures o f s y m b o l i c s t y l e , 56  Primary  rating  indices  adapted  by S u l l i v a n  r e s e a r c h were used. responses  and  A p p e n d i x B.  (1986) f r o m W o l f and Criteria  Gardener's  (1979)  used f o r d e t e r m i n i n g media  a sample o f t h e r a t i n g index used a r e g i v e n i n A description  of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c responses  made  by a P a t t e r n e r and a D r a m a t i s t a r e a l s o p r o v i d e d i n Appendix The  B. tasks u t i l i z e d  a n a l y z e d and responses  scored i n the following  way.  The  children's  t o each o f t h e a s s i g n e d t a s k s were c a t e g o r i z e d  i n t o three areas — Approach t o Design. a r e as  t o a s s e s s s y m b o l i c s t y l e were  A p p r o a c h t o T a s k , Use The  elements  o f Language,  i n c l u d e d i n each  and  category  follows:  A.  Approach t o Design - response t o experimental s e t t i n g ( r e l u c t a n t or enthusiastic) - response t o t a s k (task-centered or experimentercentered)  B.  Use o f L a n g u a g e - amount o f l a n g u a g e ( l i t t l e o r a l o t ) - language/action r e l a t i o n s h i p (separate or simultaneous) - language/task r e l a t i o n s h i p (related or unrelated) - form o f language ( d e s c r i p t i v e o r e x p r e s s i v e )  C.  Approach t o Design - orientation (object-oriented or person-oriented) - a r r a n g e m e n t b a s e d on f o r m a l p r o p e r t i e s o r n a r r a t i v e properties - e m p h a s i s on d e s i g n o r  content  N e g a t i v e numbers w e r e a s s i g n e d t o P a t t e r n e r - t y p e responses  and p o s i t i v e numbers w e r e a s s i g n e d t o  type responses.  One  Dramatist-  point (either p o s i t i v e or negative)  g i v e n f o r t h e i n c l u s i o n of each element.  57  was  R a t i n g s were g i v e n  f o r e a c h t a s k f r o m -10 a c c o r d i n g t o how each s t y l e .  c l o s e t h e r e s p o n s e s came t o r e p r e s e n t i n g  t o +120)  summing t h e f i n a l  was  (ranging  computed f o r each c h i l d  from  by  s c o r e s f o r each o f t h e t w e l v e t a s k s .  r e s u l t s of the administration of the twelve  S y m b o l i c S t y l e T a s k s i n p h a s e one performance  i n d i c a t e d a range  a c r o s s a l l o f t h e 26 c h i l d r e n t e s t e d .  r a n g e d f r o m -101  t o +92  w i t h a m e d i a n s c o r e o f +5.  r e s u l t s are presented i n Figure Figure  (Dramatist)  An o v e r a l l s y m b o l i c s t y l e r a t i n g  a p o s s i b l e -120  The  ( P a t t e r n e r ) t o +10  of Scores These  1.  1  Ogive curve of Symbolic S t y l e n=2 6  Scores  Cumulative Percentage  (Patterners)  Raw  Score 58  (Dramatists)  A n a l y s i s showed t h a t o n e - h a l f o f t h e c h i l d r e n t e s t e d s c o r e d n e g a t i v e numbers i n d i c a t i n g P a t t e r n e r - t y p e and  t h e o t h e r h a l f s c o r e d p o s i t i v e numbers  Dramatist-type  responses.  S i x females  and  indicating seven males  s c o r e d as P a t t e r n e r s , whereas seven females s c o r e d as D r a m a t i s t s .  The  and  s i x males  average P a t t e r n e r score  -53.7; t h e average D r a m a t i s t  s c o r e was  responses,  was  +52.2.  T h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s c o r e s i s summarized i n F i g u r e  2.  T h i s b o x - a n d - w h i s k e r p l o t shows t h e s c o r e s d i v i d e d i n t o quartiles. middle  The  "box"  extends  f r o m Q l t o Q3  50 p e r c e n t o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n .  F i g u r e 1, Q l and respectively.  Q3  The  d e f i n e s t h e median  w e r e e s t i m a t e d t o be vertical  and  defines  the  From t h e o g i v e i n -36  and  l i n e c r o s s i n g t h e box  +45, at  "+5"  (Q2).  Figure 2 Box-and-whisker p l o t of Symbolic S t y l e s c o r e s  ft  -82  R  -3fa  F i v e c h i l d r e n who s c o r e d a b o v e Q3  +5  s c o r e d b e l o w Q l and  +45  five children  were s e l e c t e d f o r f u r t h e r t e s t i n g . 59  +14  These  who  c h i l d r e n r e p r e s e n t e d t h o s e whose r e s p o n s e s w e r e m o s t consistently within their preferred style or  Dramatist).  Revised  The P e a b o d y P i c t u r e V o c a b u l a r y T e s t -  (PPVT-R),  A comparison  (either Patterner  Form L was a d m i n i s t e r e d t o t h e s e  children.  o f r e s u l t i n g s t a n d a r d s c o r e e q u i v a l e n t s (SSE)  w i t h S y m b o l i c S t y l e S c o r e s i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 2. G i v e n t h i s d a t a , s i x c h i l d r e n were s e l e c t e d t o f o c u s oh d u r i n g P h a s e Two.  ( T h e i r names h a v e b e e n c h a n g e d t o a s s u r e  t h e i r anonymity.)  C a r o l i n e , Sammy, a n d J i l l i a n  t h e D r a m a t i s t g r o u p ; Meghan, D o n a l d ,  represented  and Kathryn t h e  P a t t e r n e r group.  /  Table 2 Comparison  o f S y m b o l i c S t y l e S c o r e s a n d PPVT-R S c o r e s Symbolic S t y l e  Score  PPVT-R s c o r e  *Meghan  -90  91  *Donald  -92  112  -101  102  Jackie  -71  83  David  -75  81  •Caroline  +89  87  *Sammy  +92  115  *Jillian  +75  102  Amber  + 60  115  Michelle  +92  154  *Kathryn  * C h i l d r e n s e l e c t e d as f o c a l  children.  60  P h a s e Two: As  Research Phase  the  data gathering  p r o c e e d e d i n p h a s e two,  handwritten notes, transcribed t a l k , w e r e e x a m i n e d e a c h week i n an  and  written  To  for classifying  all,  Inductive  third,  those u n i t s vary.  procedures first  categories  composing d e s c r i p t o r s  Both the  nonverbal behaviors during  Therefore, the  of  a l s o examined.  and  t h e t o p i c s and  These c a t e g o r i e s  d i c t a t e data analysis.  gathering The  patterns  The  and goal  analysis  children's  were c o n s t a n t l y  A n a l y s i s was  informed but  of  views  modified did  not  a l s o g u i d e d by  the  c o d i n g o f v a r i a b l e s t o be  Rather, the  data  proceeded.  o f t h i s q u a l i t a t i v e a n a l y s i s was  aim  was  not  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of observed 61  exact  statistically  to develop categories  of behaviors t h a t would a l l o w the  d e s c r i p t i o n and  the  functions  q u e s t i o n s w h i c h were f u r t h e r r e f i n e d as t h e  m e a s u r e m e n t and related.  verbal  the w r i t t e n / d r a w n p r o d u c t s t h e m s e l v e s were  f i n d i n g s from p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s  research  to  w r i t i n g were o f i n t e r e s t .  accompanying t a l k i n p a r t i c u l a r .  a b o u t w r i t i n g and  children's  i d e n t i f i e d referred to both  w r i t i n g process i n general,  and  inductive analysis  segmenting c h i l d r e n ' s behavior i n t o u n i t s ; second,  s p e c i f y how  the  possible  a n a l y s i s procedures involve,  c o m p a r i n g l i k e u n i t s ; and,  and  possible  data.  organize t h i s data,  were used.  products  attempt to determine  d i r e c t i o n f o r f u t u r e d a t a c o l l e c t i o n as w e l l as categories  the  and  comprehensive behaviors.  The f i r s t t a s k was t o o r g a n i z e t h e d a t a i n t o u n i t s which t o base the a n a l y s i s .  The b a s i c o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  i n t h i s s t u d y was t h e c o m p o s i n g e v e n t .  upon  unit  A composing event  refers t o a l l the behaviors involved i n the production of one j o u r n a l e n t r y .  This refers to a focal child's  talking,  d r a w i n g and composing b e h a v i o r s . W r i t i n g P r o c e s s Components: the  The c o m p o s i n g e v e n t  framework f o r d e f i n i n g a s p e c t s o r components o f t h e  w r i t i n g process.  I n an e a r l i e r s t u d y o f young  emerging w r i t i n g ,  D y s o n (1985) i d e n t i f i e d  components o f t h e w r i t i n g p r o c e s s . not  was  children's  f o u r main  These components were  l i n e a r segments, b u t r a t h e r o v e r l a p p i n g and  recursive  a s p e c t s o f t h e c o m p o s i n g e v e n t w h i c h c o u l d be combined i n a l t e r n a t e ways.  The f o u r c o m p o n e n t s i d e n t i f i e d b y D y s o n  ( 1 9 8 5 , p p . 7 1 , 72) w e r e : 1. M e s s a g e F o r m u l a t i o n : conveyed i n p r i n t ;  d e v i s i n g t h e m e s s a g e ( s ) t o be  2. M e s s a g e E n c o d i n g : using strategies t o convert the f o r m u l a t e d message(s) i n t o p r i n t ; 3. M e c h a n i c a l F o r m a t i o n : physically placing the l e t t e r s o r l e t t e r - l i k e forms on p a p e r ( i . e . , h a n d w r i t i n g ) ; and, 4. M e s s a g e D e c o d i n g : using strategies to translate unknown m e s s a g e w h i c h h a d a l r e a d y b e e n w r i t t e n . Analysis of the w r i t i n g process followed components.  P r o p e r t i e s were i s o l a t e d w h i c h  an  these  characterized  e a c h c o m p o n e n t a n d d e s c r i p t o r s w e r e composed t o s p e c i f y distinguishing characteristics.  62  To i l l u s t r a t e ,  t h e Message  Formulation message.  component d i f f e r e d  T h e r e w e r e two  the property  i n the s p e c i f i c i t y of  alternate c h i l d behaviors  of s p e c i f i c i t y :  defining  s p e c i f y i n g only the t o p i c of  t h e message, o r s p e c i f y i n g t h e e x a c t words c o n t a i n e d message.  R e s u l t i n g w r i t i n g process  a d a p t e d from Dyson's data,  and  i n the  c a t e g o r i e s , w h i c h were  (1985) w o r k t o d e s c r i b e t h i s s e t  a copy of the worksheet used t o a n a l y z e  t h e s e w r i t i n g process: components a r e p r o v i d e d  A n a l y s i s of C h i l d r e n ' s Talk: the primary  the  code  i n Appendix  C.  C h i l d r e n ' s t a l k became  window f o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g  the c h i l d r e n ' s  approaches to symbolizing experiences views about w r i t i n g .  and  of  and  their  evolving  Basic categories of a n a l y s i s included  d e s c r i p t o r s f o r t o p i c s , l a n g u a g e f u n c t i o n s , and  meaning  elements. A.  Topics  of Talk:  t a l k w e r e e x a m i n e d and characteristics. relevancy activity.  The  t o p i c s of the c h i l d r e n ' s  compared, n o t i n g t h e i r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  D i f f e r e n c e s were n o t e d i n t h e d e g r e e  of  of the c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k t o t h e i r ongoing j o u r n a l The  D y s o n , 1989,  following topic categories  pp.  287,  289)  1.  Task-involved  own  ongoing j o u r n a l entry.  degree of symbolic  (adapted  from  describe these d i f f e r e n c e s .  t a l k i s d i r e c t l y relevant to the  V a r i a t i o n s were n o t e d i n t h e  involvement i n the task.  m i g h t : f o c u s on t h e i r own  child's  f e e l i n g s and  a c t i o n s or s t a t e of the depicted 63  The  child  a c t i o n s ; focus  f i g u r e s and  events;  on  the  differentiate  between t h e d e p i c t e d f i g u r e s and e v e n t s and  the imagined  f i g u r e s o r e v e n t s t o be r e n d e r e d ; o r f o c u s on  the symbolic v e h i c l e i t s e l f , depicted experience.  s e p a r a t e from t h e imagined o r  V a r i a t i o n s were a l s o n o t e d i n t h e  n a t u r e o f t h e time frame c r e a t e d .  A c h i l d might  create a  s t a t i c t i m e f r a m e i n w h i c h t h e d e p i c t e d f i g u r e s d o n o t move t h r o u g h t i m e o r a dynamic t i m e frame i n which t h e d e p i c t e d f i g u r e s do move t h r o u g h t i m e . 2.  Other s-task-involvedtalk 1  peer's composing event. degree  The c h i l d ' s  t a l k c a n be coded f o r  o f s y m b o l i c involvement and n a t u r e o f t h e time  governing that 3.  i sdirectly relevant to a  talk.  T a l k i n v o l v i n g o t h e r i n o n e ' s own t a l k  both t h e c h i l d ' s  i s f o c u s e d on  o n g o i n g t a s k and on a n o t h e r c h i l d .  t a l k c o u l d a l s o be coded  f o r degree  of symbolic  and t h e n a t u r e o f t h e t i m e frame g o v e r n i n g t h a t 4.  Task-related talk  the c h i l d ' s  frame  i s t a l k which  o n g o i n g work.  i sclearly  This  involvement talk. related to  T a l k may b e t h e m a t i c a l l y  related  or use t h e r e f e r e n t category o f t h e o b j e c t s o r events being depicted. 5.  Nontask-invloved t a l k  i s t a l k which doesn't  fall  into  any o f t h e p r e c e d i n g c a t e g o r i e s . B.  Language F u n c t i o n s :  were compared i n o r d e r t o i d e n t i f y f o r which they used t a l k .  The c h i l d r e n ' s u t t e r a n c e s t h e range o f f u n c t i o n s  T h e i r spontaneous  categorized, basing the i n i t i a l  t a l k was  category system  on t h e work  o f Dyson (1985, 1989).  These  f u n c t i o n s were m o d i f i e d ,  d e l e t e d , and added t o i n o r d e r t o a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e t h e c o l l e c t e d data.  The r e s u l t i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m  f i v e major f u n c t i o n s w i t h accompanying  strategies.  Appendix C f o r a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s system.)  In brief,  has (See  classification  the c h i l d r e n used language t o r e p r e s e n t  r e a l and i m a g i n a r y s i t u a t i o n s  ( r e f e r r e d t o as  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l l a n g u a g e ) ; t o m o n i t o r and d i r e c t t h e i r  own  b e h a v i o r , i n c l u d i n g t h e i r d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s ( d i r e c t i v e l a n g u a g e ) ; t o seek i n f o r m a t i o n  (heuristic  l a n g u a g e ) ; t o e x p r e s s t h e i r f e e l i n g s and a t t i t u d e s l a n g u a g e ) ; a n d t o manage s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s language).  (interactional  (The l a b e l s u s e d f o r t h e s e f u n c t i o n a l  w e r e b a s e d on t h o s e by H a l l i d a y , C.  Meaning  Elements:  (personal  categories  1973.) T h i s d e s c r i b e d t h e meanings  the c h i l d r e n expressed not only i n t h e i r t a l k , but a l s o i n t h e i r d r a w i n g s and i n t h e i r w r i t t e n p r o d u c t s . f o r m u l a t i n g t h e meaning w o r k was  elements c a t e g o r i e s , Dyson's  again i n f l u e n t i a l .  identified:  In  The  (1989)  f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s were  o b j e c t s , a c t o r s , a c t i o n s , placement i n time  ( p a s t , p r e s e n t , f u t u r e ) and space sensorimotor q u a l i t i e s  (direction,  F o r each o b s e r v e d composing  (location),  f o r c e , speed, volume).  e v e n t , t h e meaning  contained i n the c h i l d ' s drawing, t a l k i n g , were compared.  and  and  elements composing  Figure 4 i n Appendix C i l l u s t r a t e s  worksheet used t o r e c o r d t h i s  analysis. 65  the  Analysis children's  of W r i t i n g  I n t e r v i e w Responses:  responses to the  structured  were examined t o n o t e p o s s i b l e differences and  the  Product Analysis:  similarities  d r a w i n g and  writing  A l l of the  i n the  the  A. was  d r a w i n g and  How  w r i t i n g and  c a r r i e d out writing.  e a r l i e r work i n f l u e n c e d  following  was  1)  to the  p a r t of the  provided the s i m p l y an  children  took  as  these texts  t o d e t e r m i n e how  children  contained  the  children  combined drawing  F i n d i n g s from Dyson's the  descriptors  D r a w i n g and  writing  and  writing.  66  the  The the  contributed Writing  drawn g r a p h i c s ;  drawn g r a p h i c , and;  i l l u s t r a t i o n of the  into  (1982)  from examining  meaningful context f o r the  used  used to s p e c i f y  c o m p l e t e p r o d u c t ; 2)  a l a b e l f o r at l e a s t p a r t of the  Writing  graphic  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each category.  collected products:  as  combined  d r a w i n g were combined:  four categories resulted  roughly equally  children  were  Composing e v e n t s were o r g a n i z e d  i n s i m i l a r ways.  distinguishing  writing  movement.  c a t e g o r i e s i n which the writing  nature of  p r o d u c t i o n o f one  t o assess whether or not  evidence of n a r r a t i v e  and/or  products c o l l e c t e d  e p i s o d e ; t o d i s c o v e r what s t a n c e t h e a u t h o r s , and;  questions  in i t .  a n a l y z e d i n o r d e r t o : d e t e r m i n e how  Analysis  interview  i n each groups* views of the  processes involved  The  4)  writing  served 3)  Drawing - i t was  not  B. Examination author  Personal Stance i n C h i l d r e n ' s  of the c h i l d r e n ' s t e x t s i n d i c a t e d that a  m i g h t assume any  observer,  Texts:  of three r o l e s :  and/or a c t o r .  The  commentator,  r o l e o f commentator i n v o l v e d  the c h i l d d e s c r i b i n g h i s p i c t u r e s u s i n g phrases such "This l i t t l e  girl"  and/or p r o g r e s s i v e verbs  This r e s u l t e d i n products notes". observer  child  ("is  as  jumping").  w h i c h D y s o n (1989) l a b e l l e d  "art  A t o t h e r t i m e s , t h e c h i l d m i g h t assume t h e r o l e of the events  T h i s s t a n c e was the t e x t .  and  reflected  things w i t h i n the t e x t  T h i s s t a n c e was  the f i r s t - p e r s o n pronoun, I . appear t o change s t a n c e s  reflected  Finally,  abruptly:  N a r r a t i v e Movement:  i n t h e use  of might  such t e x t s were stances.  As d e f i n e d p r e v i o u s l y ,  n a r r a t i v e movement e x i s t e d i f t h e r e w e r e two temporally ordered,  actor  a c h i l d author  c l a s s i f i e d as s h i f t i n g between d i f f e r e n t C.  itself.  i n third-person c o n s t r u c t i o n of  A c h i l d m i g h t a l s o assume t h e r o l e o f  w i t h i n the text.  of  o r more  independent clauses p r e s e n t i n g a c t i o n or  a character's reaction.  The  f o l l o w i n g i s an  example:  The b i r d One d a y t h e r e was a l i t t l e g i r l who c a t c h e d a bird. And s h e w o u l d n ' t l e t i t go. She p u t i t on her d r e s s e r but i t f a i l e d . The b i r d g o t o u t o f t h e c a g e . And i t f l i e d a r o u n d . And i t g o t o u t b y t h e window. Texts was  c o u l d a l s o i m p l y movement, a l t h o u g h  not a c t u a l l y accomplished,  t h a t movement  as i n t h e f o l l o w i n g t e x t :  T h e r e was a t r e e . I t was w a i t i n g f o r a a n i m a l go i n i t and t h e r e was f o o d i n i t .  67  to  0  Each t e x t was examined f o r evidence o f n a r r a t i v e movement, no n a r r a t i v e movement o r i m p l i e d movement.  68  narrative  CHAPTER FOUR Results  Introduction R e s u l t s are o r g a n i z e d f o r p r e s e n t a t i o n i n t o t h r e e main sections Writing  - P r o d u c t A n a l y s e s , Composing P r o c e s s A n a l y s e s , Interview Analysis.  comparisons (D).  The  a r e shown b e t w e e n P a t t e r n e r s (P) and first  examination how  W i t h i n each s e c t i o n ,  section presents the findings  of the written/drawn  products.  t h e c h i l d r e n combined drawing  s t a n c e was  The  ./ Dramatists  from  This  the includes  and w r i t i n g , w h a t p e r s o n a l  e v i d e n t i n t h e i r w r i t t e n p r o d u c t s , and  o f n a r r a t i v e movement i n t h e i r second  to analysis  analysis  texts.  section presents those  of the composing p r o c e s s .  findings  pertaining  Analysis  of  the  w r i t i n g p r o c e s s components d a t a as w e l l as a n a l y s i s children's  talk  meaning elements)  of  the  (examining t o p i c s , language f u n c t i o n s ,  and  are reported.  Findings gathered through the w r i t i n g interviews presented  i n the t h i r d section.  P r o d u c t and  and  are  Summaries o f r e s u l t s  P r o c e s s a n a l y s i s a r e g i v e n a t t h e end  of  from this  chapter.  Product By t h e end 20 h o u r s  Analyses  of the data c o l l e c t i o n period,  of audiotaped  d a t a and 69  107  journal  approximately  entries  produced  by  t h e f o c a l c h i l d r e n had been c o l l e c t e d .  in the presentation D.  Conventions used  o f t r a n s c r i p t s a r e provided i n Appendix  T a b l e 3 shows t h e number o f j o u r n a l e n t r i e s  f o r each c h i l d , those w r i t t e n  divided  collected  i n t o t h o s e which were d i c t a t e d ,  i n d e p e n d e n t l y , and t h o s e c o n s t r u c t e d  c o m b i n a t i o n o f d i c t a t i o n and i n d e p e n d e n t w r i t i n g . a v e r a g e number o f w o r d s c o n t a i n e d i n e a c h c h i l d ' s texts  through a The written  i s a l s o shown.  Table 3 Number o f J o u r n a l E n t r i e s C o l l e c t e d a n d A v e r a g e Number o f Words p e r E n t r y  Dramatists:  Number o f E n t r i e s Dictated Own Combo.  A v e r a g e Number o f Words  Jillian  5  9  1  33.7  Caroline  9  7  0  32.5  Sammy  7  12  3  15.4  4 = 53  27.2  28.0  Totals:  21  +  28  +  Patterners: 8  2  7  Donald  14  2  1  Meghan  8  11  1  12.0  9 = 54  19.4  Kathryn  Totals:  30  +  15  +  70  8.5  How  d r a w i n g and w r i t i n g were  What r o l e d i d d r a w i n g product?  combined  and w r i t i n g s e r v e i n one g r a p h i c  A r e t h e r e d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e way P a t t e r n e r s a n d  D r a m a t i s t combine drawing  and w r i t i n g ?  were posed i n Chapter  To a d d r e s s  1.  These two q u e s t i o n s  these issues, a l l  j o u r n a l e n t r i e s c o l l e c t e d were examined t o d e t e r m i n e t h e observed  r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e drawing  processes. T a b l e 4.  and w r i t i n g  The r e s u l t s o f t h i s a n a l y s i s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T h i s t a b l e i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t t h e most p r e v a l e n t  type o f w r i t t e n product produced  by both D r a m a t i s t s and  P a t t e r n e r s was c a t e g o r y D i n w h i c h meaningful  t h e drawing  context f o rthe writing.  provided a  Examples o f p r o d u c t s  f r o m e a c h o f t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s a r e shown i n A p p e n d i x E. Table 4 How  Writing  and D r a w i n g were  Combined  P r o d u c t Type  Dramatists % No.  Patterners % No.  A.  D r a w i n g a n d w r i t i n g c o n t r i b u t e d 28 (roughly) e q u a l l y t o t h e complete product  15  20  11  B.  W r i t i n g s e r v e d a s a l a b e l f o r a t 25 l e a s t p a r t o f t h e drawn g r a p h i c s .  13  28  15  C.  W r i t i n g was p a r t o f t h e d r a w n graphics.  4  2  0  0  D.  Drawing p r o v i d e d t h e meaningful c o n t e x t f o r t h e w r i t i n g ; i t was n o t s i m p l y an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f the w r i t i n g .  43  23  52  28  71  '  Personal  stance i n children's  As d e s c r i b e d i n C h a p t e r appeared ranged  texts  3, t h e o b s e r v e d  children  t o take v a r i o u s stances as authors.  These  stances  from commentator, i n which t h e c h i l d r e n d e s c r i b e d  t h e i r picture, t o observer  ( r e f l e c t e d i n t h e use o f t h i r d -  person c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t e x t ) , c h i l d r e n themselves  t o actor,  i n which t h e  were i n v o l v e d i n t h e t e x t  the use o f t h e f i r s t - p e r s o n pronoun I ) .  (reflected i n  To d e t e r m i n e  P a t t e r n e r s a n d D r a m a t i s t s assumed d i f f e r e n t s t a n c e s ,  if each  p r o d u c t c o l l e c t e d was e x a m i n e d t o n o t e w h a t r o l e t h e s e a u t h o r s were assuming t h r o u g h t h e i r t e x t s . the r e s u l t s of t h i s  child  Table 5 presents  analysis.  T a b l e 5 i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t t h e r o l e s o f commentator and o b s e r v e r w e r e m o s t common among b o t h t h e D r a m a t i s t a n d P a t t e r n e r groups. stance.  The r o l e o f a c t o r was t h e l e a s t  Some s h i f t i n g b e t w e e n s t a n c e s was n o t e d  the c h i l d r e n .  At f i r s t  glance i t appears  observed  f o r each o f  that generally the  o b s e r v e r s t a n c e was p r e f e r r e d b y t h e D r a m a t i s t s a n d t h e c o m m e n t a t o r s t a n c e was p r e f e r r e d b y t h e P a t t e r n e r s . H o w e v e r , c l o s e r e x a m i n a t i o n r e v e a l s t h a t a l t h o u g h b o t h Sammy and J i l l i a n (a  assumed t h e o b s e r v e r s t a n c e m o s t o f t e n , C a r o l i n e  f e l l o w Dramatist) appeared  commentator b e s t .  to prefer the role of  I n addition, Kathryn d i d not f i ti n with  the other Patterners.  She o n l y d e m o n s t r a t e d  use o f t h e  commentator s t a n c e t w i c e compared w i t h Donald's e i g h t and Meghan's 13 t i m e s .  E i g h t y - t w o p e r c e n t o f h e r t e x t s were  written  Table  from an o b s e r v e r  stance.  5  Personal  Stance  i n Children's  Commentator Observer % No. % No.  Child  Texts  Commentator/ Actor Observer % No. % No.  Commentator/ Actor % No.  Dramatists Sammy  43  10  48  11  0  0  9  2  0  0  Caroline  50  8  31  5  6  1  13  2  0  0  Jillian  13  2  74  11  13  2  0  0  0  .0  Totals:  37  20  50  27  6  3  7  4  0  0  Donald  76  13  6  1  12  2  6  1  Meghan  40  8  25  5  10  2  20  4  5  1  Kathryn  12  2  82  14  0  0  0  0  6  1  Totals:  43  23  37  20  7  4  9  5  4  2  Totals: 40 43  44  47  6  7  8  9  2  2  Patterners  Overall  N a r r a t i v e movement  i n children's  0  texts  F i n d i n g s confirmed t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n used time  i n d i f f e r e n t ways w i t h i n t h e i r t e x t s .  analyzing  t h e products  f o r evidence  73  0  narrative  The r e s u l t s o f  o f movement a r e  p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 6.  This  analysis indicated that half of  the  c o l l e c t e d products d i d not contain  and  h a l f e i t h e r implied o r a c t u a l l y contained Differences  were e v i d e n t  movement i n c l u d e d Patterners. 59%  n a r r a t i v e movement movement.  i n t h e amount o f n a r r a t i v e  i n t e x t s w r i t t e n by D r a m a t i s t s and  Patterners  e i t h e r u s e d o r i m p l i e d movement i n  o f t h e i r t e x t s , whereas D r a m a t i s t s o n l y  included or  i m p l i e d movement i n t h e i r t e x t s 4 1 % o f t h e t i m e . Table 6 P r e s e n c e o f Movement i n C h i l d r e n ' s T e x t s Child  No Movement % No.  I m p l i e d Movement % No.  Movement % No.  Dramatists: Sammy  61  14  Caroline  56  9  Jillian  60  9  Totals:  59  17  4  22  5  19  3  25  4  0  40  6  13  7  28  15  0  32  Patterners: Donald  47  8  18  3  35  6  Meghan  45  9  20  4  35  7  Kathryn  29  5  18  3  53  9  Totals:  41  22  18  10  41  50  54  16  17  34  Overall  Totals:  74  22  37  Composing P r o c e s s A n a l y s e s  Writing Process  Analysis  A n a l y s e s o f w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s were u n d e r t a k e n determine  to  s i m i l a r i t i e s o r d i f f e r e n c e s between P a t t e r n e r s ( P )  a n d D r a m a t i s t s (D)  i n terms o f message q u a l i t y  (the c h i l d ' s  c o n t r o l o v e r t h e m e s s a g e t o be e x p r e s s e d a n d t h e s y s t e m f o r e x p r e s s i n g t h a t message).  The  f o u r components o f t h e  w r i t i n g p r o c e s s were examined f o r each  A.  used  group.  Message F o r m u l a t i o n  When f o r m u l a t i n g t h e i r m e s s a g e s , t h e P a t t e r n e r s o b s e r v e d t e n d e d t o s p e c i f y o n l y t h e t o p i c o f t h e i r message b u t n o t t h e a c t u a l w o r d i n g o f t h a t message.  D r a m a t i s t s , on  t h e o t h e r h a n d , d i d s p e c i f y e x a c t w o r d i n g d u r i n g a few of t h e i r journal w r i t i n g sessions.  However, t h e m a j o r i t y o f  t h e t i m e o n l y t o p i c s were s p e c i f i e d by b o t h  groups.  A l t h o u g h a l l t h e m e s s a g e s w e r e i n some way t h e g r a p h i c s on t h e p a g e , t h e l e v e l o f c o h e r a n c e b e t w e e n t h e two g r o u p s .  related  to  varied  F o r t h e D r a m a t i s t s , o n l y 58% o f t h e  time d i d the e n t i r e product produce remainder  (16%)  a coherant whole.  o f t h e t i m e t h e messages appeared  r e l a t e d t o the g r a p h i c s produced.  o n l y somewhat  Cohesiveness between t h e  g r a p h i c s and t h e w r i t t e n m e s s a g e s a p p e a r e d important t o the P a t t e r n e r s observed.  75  The  t o be more  Eighty-four percent  o f t h e t i m e t h e s e two cohesive  components went t o g e t h e r t o form  a  whole.  Analysis revealed that the l e v e l of o r g a n i z a t i o n ranged more s e n t e n c e s .  linguistic  from s i n g l e words t o groups  The  o f two  D r a m a t i s t s w r o t e m e s s a g e s o f two  more s e n t e n c e s 72% o f t h e t i m e .  The  remainder  of  texts f e l l  1  or  their  e n t r i e s were s i m p l e s e n t e n c e s o r one-word l a b e l s . Patterners  or  The  (roughly) equally i n t o e i t h e r  single  or m u l t i p l e sentence lengths.  B.  Message  Encoding  S e g m e n t i n g t h e o r a l m e s s a g e d u r i n g e n c o d i n g was  much  more common among t h e P a t t e r n e r s t h a n t h e D r a m a t i s t s . P a t t e r n e r s segmented t h e o r a l message i n t o p h r a s e s , words, s y l l a b l e s o r s o u n d s 84% o f t h e t i m e . t o o n l y 4 5% f o r t h e D r a m a t i s t s . r e s u l t s i s presented i n Table  T h i s i s h i g h compared  A breakdown o f t h e s e  7.  A c o m b i n a t i o n o f s y s t e m a t i c and  nonsystematic  p r o c e d u r e s w e r e u s e d by t h e c h i l d r e n when e n c o d i n g message segments.  Adult-dependent  r e g u l a r l y u s e d by b o t h g r o u p s  encoding procedures  to request  object labels. well-known  The  period).  frequently to obtain  l a b e l s r e q u e s t e d were t y p i c a l l y f o r  o b j e c t s and/or  environment.  used  objects i n the  immediate  On a number o f o c c a s i o n s D o n a l d 76  were  spellings  ( p a r t i c u l a r l y at the beginning of the observational F o r P a t t e r n e r s , t h i s s t r a t e g y was  their  (P) w e n t  beyond s i m p l y r e q u e s t i n g t h e s p e l l i n g o f words t o a c t u a l l y g u i d i n g t h e a d u l t ' s r e c o r d i n g o f t h e s e words i n a way.  This request procedure i s i l l u s t r a t e d  specific  i n the following  excerpt: Donald:  I n e e d a new w o r d . How do y o u s p e l l blocks? ( D o n a l d was d i r e c t i n g h i s r e q u e s t t o me.)  M r s . S.:  Okay, j u s t h a n d me t h e f e l t and y o u r w o r d c a r d s —  pen  Donald:  — I want t o u s e two c o l o r s . A pattern! I want a p a t t e r n ! ( D o n a l d g a v e me t w o f e l t p e n s i n s t e a d o f t h e u s u a l one.)  M r s . S.:  Okay.  Donald: Blue, red, blue, red, blue, red. ( D o n a l d seemed more c o n c e r n e d w i t h c r e a t i n g a pattern than with h i s o r i g i n a l request f o r the word b l o c k s . ) Table 7 S e g m e n t a t i o n o f O r a l Language D u r i n g E n c o d i n g Type o f S e g m e n t a t i o n  Not a p p l i c a b l e No s e g m e n t a t i o n  (one w o r d  Dramatists % No. message)  existed  Patterners % No.  1.5  2  0  0  53.5  73  16  22  30  40  37  51  Segmented i n t o  phrases  Segmented i n t o  words  9  12  26.5  36  Segmented i n t o  syllables  1  1  9.5  13  5  7  Segmented i n t o sounds  77  11  15  Among t h e D r a m a t i s t s , r e q u e s t s f o r s p e l l i n g s w e r e a l s o made t o b o t h a d u l t s a n d p e e r s .  But u n l i k e Patterners,  Dramatists o f t e n had s p e c i f i c , words t h e y r e q u e s t e d .  personal reasons  forthe  The f o l l o w i n g e x c e r p t s a r e  illustrative: *How d o y o u w r i t e [ l a s t name]? 'Cause I w a n t t o w r i t e my l a s t name. ~" *How d o y o u s p e l l Edmonton? T h a t ' s w h e r e my cousin l i v e s . * I n e e d t h e name L i l a . 'Cause I d o n ' t know a n d t h a t ' s my A u n t i e ' s name. I w a n t t h i s m e r m a i d t o be L i l a . A v a r i e t y o f systematized, orthographic procedures used by t h e c h i l d r e n t o encode t h e i r Sammy a n d J i l l i a n  independently.  (both Dramatists) used a letter-name  s t r a t e g y when w r i t i n g i n d e p e n d e n t l y . Sammy's b i r d  messages  were  This i si l l u s t r a t e d i n  s t o r y shown i n F i g u r e 3.  In this  example, he  u s e d t h e l e t t e r Y f o r t h e w o r d "why" a n d t h e l e t t e r U f o r t h e word "you". The  H i s story reads,  "Why d o y o u q u a c k ? " .  u s e o f a p e r s o n a l o r c o n v e n t i o n a l system o f  sound/symbol correspondences  was t h e m o s t f r e q u e n t l y u s e d  s t r a t e g y by t h e D r a m a t i s t s .  P a t t e r n e r s a l s o used  strategy, b u t n o t as o f t e n . visual (D), On  recall.  S p e l l i n g s were a l s o based on  By t h e e n d o f p h a s e t w o J i l l i a n  a n d Meghan (P) w e r e s p e l l i n g  many w o r d s  t h e o t h e r hand, C a r o l i n e (D), Donald  w r o t e v e r y few words u s i n g t h i s environmental  print  this  ( D ) , Sammy  independently.  ( P ) , a n d K a t h r y n (P)  strategy.  Word l i s t s a n d  were used a s r e f e r e n c e s b y b o t h  78  groups.  Figure  3  Sammy's b i r d  C.  story  Mechanical Formation  C o n v e n t i o n a l u s e o f s y m b o l s was c o n s i s t e n t among e a c h of  the c h i l d r e n observed.  of  the written products.  L e t t e r s were used i n a l m o s t a l l The u s e o f l e t t e r - l i k e  o n l y e v i d e n t i n a few i n s t a n c e s .  fluently.  ( i n c l u d i n g d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n and  79  was  A l l l e t t e r s were produced  as u n c o n n e c t e d symbols and most were p r o d u c e d S p a t i a l arrangement  forms  spacing groups.  o f t e x t s ) v a r i e d o n l y s l i g h t l y between t h e two Both Dramatists'  conventional  a n d P a t t e r n e r s ' t e x t s showed  d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n s a n d some u s e o f s p a c e s  between words.  I n a d d i t i o n , t w o o f Meghan's (P) t e x t s w h i c h  were q u i t e e x t e n s i v e d i d n o t c o n t a i n any arrangements o r spacing conventional  of text.  unconventional  She w r o t e i n a  d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n and l e f t  spacing  between  words.  D.  Message Decoding  Fewer i n s t a n c e s o f d e c o d i n g were o b s e r v e d t h a n were i n s t a n c e s o f message f o r m u l a t i o n and e n c o d i n g .  Among t h e  P a t t e r n e r g r o u p , Meghan r e r e a d many o f h e r j o u r n a l e n t r i e s without  s e g m e n t i n g t h e w r i t t e n message.  She a p p e a r e d t o  b a s e d e c o d i n g on v i s u a l r e c a l l o f words and u s e d a conventional  system o f sound/symbol correspondences t o  " s o u n d o u t " unknown w o r d s . read  I t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t she a l s o  o t h e r t e x t s (books, c h a r t s )  Donald  (P) n o r K a t h r y n  independently.  Neither  (P) w e r e o b s e r v e d d e c o d i n g  messages i n d e p e n d e n t l y .  their  They r e l i e d on t h e t e a c h e r t o  reread t h e i r journal entries. Based on t h i s l i m i t e d d a t a , and  Jillian  i t was n o t e d t h a t Sammy (D)  (D) s e g m e n t e d t h e w r i t t e n m e s s a g e i n t o  about 20% o f t h e time.  phrases  They u s e d t h e f o l l o w i n g s t r a t e g i e s  t o decode t h e i r messages: name s t r a t e g y ; a p e r s o n a l  situational context; or conventional 80  a  letter-  system o f  sound/symbol word.  correspondences, and; v i s u a l r e c a l l o f t h e  L i k e Donald  (P) a n d K a t h r y n ( P ) , C a r o l i n e  (D) r e l i e d  on someone e l s e t o d e c o d e h e r w r i t t e n m e s s a g e s .  Analysis of Children's Talk Three q u e s t i o n s were posed talk:  i n regards t o the children's  What t o p i c s a r e e v i d e n t i n t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k a n d  how r e l e v a n t i s t h i s t a l k t o t h e o n g o i n g j o u r n a l  activity?;  What r o l e d o e s l a n g u a g e p l a y i n e a c h g r o u p s ' a p p r o a c h t o w r i t i n g ? ; What m e a n i n g e l e m e n t s a r e c o n t a i n e d i n t h e i r t a l k i n g , d r a w i n g , and composing? examined  The c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k was  i n t h e s e t h r e e a r e a s and r e s u l t s from t h i s  are reported i n t h i s  analysis  section.  T h i s a n a l y s i s was b a s e d o n t h e t r a n s c r i p t i o n o f a u d i o t a p e s o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k as t h e y worked writing centre.  at the journal  The u n i t o f a n a l y s i s o f c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k was  an u t t e r a n c e (a p h r a s e o r i d e a u n i t ) .  The,amount o f t a l k  w h i c h o c c u r r e d v a r i e d b e t w e e n g r o u p s a n d among children.  individual  The a v e r a g e number o f u t t e r a n c e s p e r c o m p o s i n g  e v e n t f o r t h e D r a m a t i s t s was 32 w i t h a r a n g e o f 24 t o 4 0 . P a t t e r n e r s a v e r a g e d 21 u t t e r a n c e s p e r c o m p o s i n g r a n g e o f f r o m 10 t o 39. Donald  event w i t h a  Sammy (D) s p o k e s l i g h t l y  (P) more t h a n t h e o t h e r members o f t h e i r  81  l e s s and  group.  1.  Topics of  Talk  Examination of the t a l k revealed the  t o p i c s of the  some d i f f e r e n c e s  focal  children's  i n the degree of relevancy  c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k to t h e i r ongoing j o u r n a l a c t i v i t y .  major t o p i c s r e l a t e d to relevancy  were  Task- i n v o l v e d Talk Other's-task-involved talk T a l k i n v o l v i n g o t h e r s i n o n e ' s own Task-related t a l k  E.  Non  Percentages of t a l k which f e l l topics  (see  calculated. t o p i c s and category  Chapter three  task-involved i n t o each of  f o r d e s c r i p t i o n and  V a r i a t i o n s were d i s c o v e r e d  t h i s a n a l y s i s are  also calculated.  shown i n T a b l e s 8 and  r a t h e r than the  9.  a c t u a l number o f  82  talk these  examples) were these  i n t o each sub-  The  r e s u l t s of  Since the  of t a l k d i f f e r e d from c h i l d t o c h i l d , p e r c e n t a g e s reported  task  w i t h i n some o f  the percentage of t a l k which f e l l ( v a r i a t i o n ) was  Five  identified:  A. B. C. D.  task-related/non  of  are  utterances.  amount  Table 8 Topics of Dramatists' * Topics •Children  A C J  S  Overall p e r c e n t a g e s 46 59 68 Degree o f s y m b o l i c involvement i ) f o c u s on 18 16 21 own f e e l i n g s / a c t i o n s i i ) focus 44 48 32 on a c t i o n s o f f igures/events iii) differ0 3 2 e n t i a t i e between d e p i c t e d and i m a g i n e d figures/events iv) focus 30 26 39 on s y m b o l i c vehicle Nature of time frame c r e a t e d i) s t a t i c 5 3 4 i i ) dynamic 3 4 2  Talk  S  B C J  S  17 13  7  7  S  8  8  21 32 50  50 46  13  31 28 21  17 15  0  7 8 0  D C J  2  41 32 29  0 0 0 0 0 0  33 39  7  1  J=Jillian  83  E C  25 19  87  0 0 0 0 0 0 64 75  20  36 25  80  Topics: A. Task-involved t a l k B. Other s-task-involved talk C. T a l k i n v o l v i n g o t h e r s i n o n e ' s own t a s k D. Task-related talk E. Non t a s k - r e l a t e d / n o n t a s k - i n v o l v e d t a l k  * S=Sammy; C = C a r o l i n e ;  S  0 0 0  Thematicallv related Use o f r e f e r e n t category *  4  C C J  J  10  Table 9 Topics  of Patterners  1  Talk  * Topics **Children  A D M K  B D M K  C D M K  Overall percentage  56 73 80  18  16  Degree o f s y m b o l i c involvement i ) f o c u s on 36 10 7 26 99 20 own f e e l i n g s / a c t i o n s i i ) f o c u s on 20 45 54 36 1 0 actions of figures/events iii) differ0 0 0 2 0 0 e n t i a t e between d e p i c t e d and i m a g i n e d f igures/events iv) focus 41 35 30 36 0 80 on s y m b o l i c v e h i c l e Nature of time frame c r e a t e d i) s t a t i c 1 2 i i ) dynamic  3 7  4 5  0 0  0 0  0 0  0 33  6  0 0  0  0  0 67  0 0  0 0  Thematically related Use o f r e f e r e n t category  17  1  task  Non t a s k - r e l a t e d / n o n t a s k - i n v o l v e d t a l k  ** D=Donald;  1 50  83 99  *Topics: A. Task-involved t a l k B. Other s-task-involved talk C. T a l k i n v o l v i n g o t h e r s i n o n e ' s own D. Task-related talk E.  E D M K  7 20 7  41  53  D D M K  M=Meghan; K = K a t h r y n  84  50  Data r e v e a l e d involved. (60%)  t h a t t h e m o s t o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k was  For  D r a m a t i s t s t h i s amount was  than f o r Patterners  g r o u p s ' t a l k was composing event  (65%).  perceived  An  a v e r a g e o f 12%  (other's-task-involved i n v o l v i n g others  somewhat l o w e r : 6%  f o r Dramatists;  percentage of Task-related  b o t h g r o u p s : 4%  lower of  as d i r e c t l y r e l e v a n t t o a  percentage of t a l k  The  slightly  f o r Dramatists;  3%  talk).  for  both  peer's  The  i n o n e ' s own 11%  task-  task  was  Patterners.  t a l k was  similar  for Patterners.  for Yet,  when d i v i d e d i n t o t h e m a t i c a l l y r e l a t e d t a l k v e r s u s  talk  which used the  events  being  r e f e r e n t category of the  depicted,  d i f f e r e n c e s were n o t e d .  objects  or  Dramatists  more (64%)  about t h e m a t i c a l l y r e l a t e d experiences  Patterners  (only 17%).  In a d d i t i o n , Patterners  talked  than  used  the  r e f e r e n t c a t e g o r y more o f t e n i n t h e i r t a s k - r e l a t e d t a l k Dramatists  (83% v s .  36%).  Data a n a l y s i s r e v e a l e d a s much non  task-involved,  Patterners. w i t h i n any  This of the  Further  t h a t D r a m a t i s t s engaged i n non  task-related talk  i s t a l k w h i c h was other  perceived  as not  falling  categories.  a n l a y s i s o f t h i s d a t a was  undertaken  to and  D r a m a t i s t s i n the degree of symbolic involvement i n  the  A l l talk  f a l l i n g w i t h i n the  (task-involved talk, involving others  twice  than  i n v e s t i g a t e p o s s i b l e d i f f e r e n c e s between P a t t e r n e r s  task.  than  f i r s t three  other's-task-involved  i n o n e ' s own  task) 85  was  talk,  categories and  examined t o  talk identify  the focus.  T a b l e 10 shows t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s  analysis.  G i v e n t h i s breakdown o f d a t a , i t appears t h a t  (overall)  t h e D r a m a t i s t s t a l k e d most o f t e n about t h e a c t i o n s o r  state  o f t h e d e p i c t e d f i g u r e s and e v e n t s whereas t h e P a t t e r n e r s t a l k e d most o f t e n about t h e s y m b o l i c v e h i c l e  itself.  However, t h e p e r c e n t a g e s d i d n o t v a r y c o n s i d e r a b l y i n t h e s e areas.  S i m i l a r i t i e s w e r e n o t e d i n t h e f o c u s on o n e ' s  f e e l i n g s and a c t i o n s . imagined  Table  D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g between d e p i c t e d and  f i g u r e s a n d e v e n t s was  the children's  the l e a s t evident focus of  talk.  10  Degree o f Symbolic Involvement  Focus of Talk  S N %  Dramatists C J N % N %  Focus 24 22 31 22 on own a c t i o n s /feelings  38 24  Focus 45 40 61 44 on a c t i o n s o r state of depicted figures & events  46 30  Differ- 2 2 5 4 e n t i a t e between depicted & imagined f i g u r e s & events FOCUS  own  38  36  42  30  Total N % 93 23  152  2 2  71  45  i n Children's Texts  38  9 2  151  on s y m b o l i c v e h i c l e 86  37  D N %  Patterners M K N %  68 36  8 10  81  27  40 21 13 46 42 52  95  32  0  82  0  43  5 18  Total N % N %  0  0  10  36  0  31  0  38  0 0  123  41  2.  Language F u n c t i o n s  The c h i l d r e n ' s u t t e r a n c e s w e r e c o m p a r e d i n o r d e r t o determine t h e range o f f u n c t i o n s f o r which t h e s e c h i l d r e n used t a l k .  The r e s u l t i n g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s y s t e m was  t i e r e d , w i t h f i v e m a j o r f u n c t i o n s and t h e s t r a t e g i e s used t o e f f e c t each. which f e l l  Table  accompanying  The p e r c e n t a g e o f  i n t o e a c h o f t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s was  T a b l e 11 shows t h e r e s u l t s o f t h i s  two-  talk  calculated.  analysis.  11  L a n g u a g e F u n c t i o n s o f C h i l d r e n ' s T e x t s (by p e r c e n t a g e ) Child  Rep. Lang.  Direct. Lang.  Heuristic Personal Lang. Lang.  Interact. Lang.  Dramatists: Sammy  37  41  10  8  4  Caroline  27  52  6  11  3  Jillian  12  69  10  7  2  Totals:  24  56  9  9  2  Patterners: Donald  20  50  10  13  5  Meghan  30  55  2  7  7  Kathryn  4  85  2  7  1  Totals:  18  60  7  11  4  57  8  10  3  Overall Totals: 21  87  Language w h i c h s e r v e d t o d i r e c t t h e a c t i o n s a n d / o r o t h e r s was t h e m o s t f r e q u e n t l y followed  by r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l  heuristic,  and f i n a l l y  of self  used.  T h i s was  language, then  personal,  i n t e r a c t i o n a l language.  This  ranked  o r d e r o f r e s u l t s was t h e same f o r b o t h P a t t e r n e r s a n d Dramatists. V a r i o u s s t r a t e g i e s were used w i t h i n each o f t h e s e functions.  T a b l e 12 shows t h e s t r a t e g i e s u s e d w i t h i n t h e  representational  and d i r e c t i v e f u n c t i o n s .  i n t e r p r e t e d as f o l l o w s :  Representational  r e p r e s e n t e d 3 7 % o f Sammy's l a n g u a g e Of  this,  13% i n v o l v e d  detailing,  I t c a n be language  ( a s shown i n T a b l e 1 1 ) .  l a b e l i n g , 18% i n v o l v e d  elaborating or  6 2 % was r e p o r t i n g , 5% was n a r r a t i n g , a n d t h e  r e m a i n i n g 2% was  reasoning.  Those s t r a t e g i e s used w i t h i n t h e H e u r i s t i c and language f u n c t i o n s  a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 13.  Personal  These s c o r e s  r e p r e s e n t t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f u s e w i t h i n e a c h f u n c t i o n a n d may be was  i n t e r p r e t e d a s was T a b l e 12.  No d i v i s i o n i n t o  made i n t h e I n t e r a c t i o n a l l a n g u a g e I n most i n s t a n c e s  Patterners  to serve s i m i l a r functions. as w e l l .  function.  and D r a m a t i s t s used t a l k strategy  u s e was s i m i l a r  One i n t e r e s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e c a n b e s e e n b y  e x a m i n i n g T a b l e 13 a n d n o t i n g strategies. playful  Their  strategies  the Personal  Language  D r a m a t i s t s engaged i n about t h r e e  language use than P a t t e r n e r s .  Patterners  l a n g u a g e u s e was more s e l f - e v a l u a t i v e t h a n 88  t i m e s more 1  personal  Dramatists'.  Table  12  Representational Strategies  and D i r e c t i v e Language S t r a t e g i e s Used Dramatists J *S C  Patterners **D M K  Representational Language Labeling  13  14  18  25  0  0  b) E l a b o r a t i n g  18  12  14  18  28  0  c)  Reporting  62  63  54  52  57  100  d)  Narrating  5  2  0  2  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  2  9  14  3  15  0  0  2  0  2  0  0  a)  e) f)  Dramatizing Reasoning  Directive Language a)  Monitoring  b)  Planning  25  25  31  36  19  27  c)  Encoding  24  53  44  23  54  63  d)  Decoding  19  4  15  6  15  6  e)  Accessing  12  2  3  1  0  1  1  4  1  6  4  0  18  8  5  23  8  3  1  2  1  3  0  0  f) I n s t r u c t i n g g)  Requesting  h) O f f e r i n g  * S=Sammy, J = J i l l i a n , C = C a r o l i n e ** D=Donald, M=Meghan, K = K a t h r y n  89  Table  13  Heuristic  and P e r s o n a l Language S t r a t e g i e s Used Patterners **D M K  Dramatists *S  Strategies  Heuristic Language 50  50  72  28  0  50  50  24  69  100  0  0  4  7  35  29  15  67  12  b) E v a l u a t i n g s e l f  36  35  29  75  33  63  c) P l a y i n g w i t h language  57  30  42  10  0  25  a)  Seeking confirmation  b) S e e k i n g c)  fact  Seeking demonstration  100  Personal Language a) E v a l u a t i n g others  * S=Sammy, J = J i l l i a n , C = C a r o l m e ** D=Donald, M=Meghan, K = K a t h r y n  3.  Meaning Elements  The f i n a l investigation  analysis of the children's t a l k o f meaning elements.  components t h r o u g h  i n v o l v e d an  Meaning elements  (those  which meanings a r e expressed) e v i d e n t i n  t h r e e mediums ( t a l k , d r a w i n g ,  and w r i t i n g ) were compared t o  f i n d answers t o t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s . w e r e m e a n i n g e l e m e n t s most e v i d e n t ? w h i c h m e a n i n g e l e m e n t was e x p r e s s e d 90  (1) I n w h a t medium  (2) W i t h i n e a c h medium, most  often?  In r e l a t i o n t o t h i s revealed  f i r s t question,  that the highest  were e v i d e n t  Patterners  (40% f o r P a t t e r n e r s , 43%  T h i s was f o l l o w e d b y w r i t i n g ( 3 6 % f o r  and Dramatists) and, f i n a l l y ,  Patterners,  analysis  percentage o f meaning elements  i n the children's talk  for Dramatists).  data  21% f o r Dramatists).  drawing  (24% f o r  T a b l e 14 p r e s e n t s t h e  r e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f data r e l a t i n g t o t h e second posed.  Amounts a r e g i v e n  i n percentages so that  c o u l d b e made b e t w e e n P a t t e r n e r s  and  question  comparisons  Dramatists.  14  Table  Meaning Elements Contained i n T a l k ,  Drawing and W r i t i n g  Meaning Elements Medium  Sensorimotor Qualities P  Talk  D  1  Drawing  P  Writing  P  D  0  D  0  Within  2  0  Time/ Space P 18  1 P  0  P 16  D 15  Objects  Actors  P 25  P 22  D 24  P 34  D 34  0  P 55  D 59  P 29  D 34  P 16  D 5  D 16  P 19  D 22  P 23  D 25  P 42  D 37  D  t h e medium o f t a l k ,  Patterners'  meanings were m o s t l y r e l a t e d t o a c t i o n s . by  D 26  Actions  expressed  T h i s was  followed  t a l k r e l a t e d t o o b j e c t s , a c t o r s , time/space, and s e n s o r i -  motor q u a l i t i e s . about a c t i o n s .  Like Patterners,  Dramatists talked mostly  T h e i r s e c o n d m o s t common m e a n i n g e l e m e n t 91  e x p r e s s e d t h r o u g h t a l k was a c t o r s , time/space, speed,  f o l l o w e d by o b j e c t s ,  and s e n s o r i - m o t o r q u a l i t i e s  (direction,  force,  volume).  W i t h i n t h e medium o f d r a w i n g , on o b j e c t s ,  b o t h g r o u p s f o c u s e d most  f o l l o w e d by a c t o r s and a c t i o n s .  Dramatists  also  e x p r e s s e d a s m a l l amount o f m e a n i n g r e l a t e d t o s e n s o r i - m o t o r qualities  i n their  drawings.  The t h i r d medium e x a m i n e d was t h e c h i l d r e n ' s Once a g a i n , b o t h g r o u p s d e m o n s t r a t e d focus.  writing.  similar patterns of  A c t i o n s were e x p r e s s e d most f r e q u e n t l y i n w r i t i n g ,  f o l l o w e d by i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g a c t o r s , o b j e c t s and time/space.  Writing Interview Results A s was e x p e c t e d , t h e D r a m a t i s t s s p o k e more  fluently  about t h e i r views o f w r i t i n g than d i d t h e P a t t e r n e r s . groups'  responses  Interview Question  When y o u a r e w r i t i n g and y o u come t o something that i s difficult or hard, w h a t do y o u do?  Each  t o t h e q u e s t i o n s asked were as f o l l o w s :  Responses Dramatists ( S ) I j u s t t r y t o do i t r i g h t . I l e a r n e d t o s p e l l words by t h e s o u n d s . (J) I t h i n k v e r y , v e r y h a r d . (J) I e r a s e i t . (C) I go a n d l o o k a r o u n d t h e room a n d s e e i f I c a n f i n d any w o r d s o r I l o o k i n my w o r d s a n d c o p y one o f t h o s e . (C) I a s k t h e t e a c h e r o r somebody e l s e . 92  Patterners (D) I s c r i b b l e over i t or I erase i t . (K)I ask the teacher f o r help. (M) I make a picture.  Interview Question  Responses Dramatists  Patterners  Who i s a good w r i t e r t h a t you know? What makes him/her a good w r i t e r ?  He's 9 a n d (S) My b r o t h e r , i n grade f o u r . (C) I f t h e i r f a v o r i t e t h i n g i s w r i t i n g then they would do i t a l l d a y . ( J ) My mom, 'cause she writes very nice, l i k e princess writing.  If this good w r i t e r had t r o u b l e with their writing, what would t h e y do about i t ?  (D) He w o u l d (S) He w o u l d e r a s e i t . erase i t . (C) T h e y w o u l d p r o b a b l y j u s t s t i c k i t o u t . I f t h e y w a n t e d (M) He m i g h t do a p i c t u r e . t o w r i t e a s t o r y and t h e y (K) I d o n ' t had a problem, t h e y ' I d j u s t know. have t o t h i n k about i t . ( J ) Maybe s h e w o u l d a s k me o r my d a d .  What w o u l d do y o u do i f y o u saw someone was h a v i n g trouble with their writing?  (S) I w o u l d t e l l t h e t e a c h e r . (D) E r a s e i t & (C) I ' I d ' t e l l t h e m s t o r i e s . i t f o r them. ( J ) I w o u l d a s k them: (M) H e l p them. "What's w r o n g w i t h y o u r w r i t i n g ? " . (K) H e l p them.  What w o u l d teacher do t o h e l p that person?  (S) it (C) the (J) and  She w o u l d j u s t s a y , " F i x up!". H e l p them w i t h some o f writing. T a l k a l o t about l e t t e r s how i t s o u n d s .  (D) She w o u l d a erase i t . (M) Maybe s h e w o u l d do i t . (K) H e l p them.  How d i d y o u learn to write?  (S) My mom t o l d me t h a t y o u make t h e s o u n d s a n d when y o u p u t them t o g e t h e r y o u h a v e a word. (C) My mom t a u g h t me how t o s p e l l h e r name. ( J ) My p r e s c h o o l a n d my mom t o l d me t h e s o u n d s .  (D) I l e a r n e d by m y s e l f by trying. (K) The t e a c h e r h e l p e d me. (M) I d i d i t myself.  93  (D) My b r o t h e r . He's b i g g e r t h a n me. (M) K e v i n . He made a l e t t e r f o r me. (K) I d o n ' t know.  Interview Question  Responses Dramatists  Patterners  What would (S) S p e l l more words. (K) I don't you like (C) C o l o r i n the l i n e s . know. t o be a b l e (J) Do p i c t u r e s i n s t e a d of (D) P r i n t t o do words so I c o u l d read i t . nicer. b e t t e r as (M) Have more a writer? ideas. (S) Yes, because I can s p e l l . (D) Yes, 'cause (C) No, because I s c r i b b l e . I w r i t e good. (J) Yes, because I know (K) No, I don't sounds. know how t o write. (M) Yes, because I w r i t e and c o l o r good.  Are you a good writer? Why/ Why not?  Examination of these responses p o i n t s t o the v a r y i n g p e r c e p t i o n s which each group h e l d i n regards t o w r i t i n g . P a t t e r n e r s appeared t o h o l d a view of w r i t i n g i n which form and c o n v e n t i o n a l i t y of t e x t was  important.  focused on encoding and neatness of t e x t s . d i s c u s s e d aspects of encoding but t h i s was  also  (such as sounding out words) ideas,  r e a d i n g what you or o t h e r s have  They appeared t o h o l d a much more i n c l u s i v e view  of w r i t i n g . Dramatists  Dramatists  i n a d d i t i o n t o comments about f i n d i n g  s h a r i n g s t o r i e s , and written.  T h e i r responses  Content and  form were important  interviewed.  94  t o the  Summary o f R e s u l t s How drawing; a n d w r i t i n g w e r e c o m b i n e d All  o f t h e c o l l e c t e d p r o d u c t s c o n t a i n e d drawings and  w r i t i n g s which were t h e m a t i c a l l y r e l a t e d . . p r e v a l e n t type o f product produced  The m o s t  by b o t h D r a m a t i s t s and  P a t t e r n e r s was one i n w h i c h t h e d r a w i n g p r o v i d e d a meaningful context f o r the w r i t i n g . Personal  stance  The r o l e s o f c o m m e n t a t o r a n d o b s e r v e r w e r e m o s t common among b o t h D r a m a t i s t s a n d P a t t e r n e r s . percentages  Although cumulative  indicated that Dramatists preferred the observer  s t a n c e and P a t t e r n e r s p r e f e r r e d t h e commentator s t a n c e , was n o t c o n s i s t e n t among a l l t h r e e c h i l d r e n i n e a c h  this  group.  N a r r a t i v e movement Results indicated that half of the collected  products  d i d n o t c o n t a i n e v i d e n c e o f n a r r a t i v e movement a n d h a l f e i t h e r i m p l i e d o r / a c t u a l l y c o n t a i n e d n a r r a t i v e movement. P a t t e r n e r s appeared  t o i n c l u d e o r i m p l y movement i n t h e i r  t e x t s more o f t e n t h a n D r a m a t i s t s d i d . Writing Process  Components  The f o u r c o m p o n e n t s o f t h e w r i t i n g p r o c e s s w e r e analyzed t o determine  s i m i l a r i t i e s between P a t t e r n e r s and  D r a m a t i s t s i n t e r m s o f message q u a l i t y .  This included  c o n t r o l o v e r t h e message t o be e x p r e s s e d and t h e i r for expressing i t . and  T a b l e 15 s u m m a r i z e s t h e s e  differences. 95  their  system  similarities  Table  15  W r i t i n g P r o c e s s Components: Component  Dramatists  Message *specified Formulation a c t u a l words  Dramatists vs. Patterners  *specified topic * a l l messages related to graphics * s i n g l e and m u l t i p l e sentence lengths  *higher level of coherance  *one-word labels  Message Encoding  •45% o f t i m e  Both Groups  Patterners  *84% o f t i m e  *used l e t t e r name s t r a t e g y Mechanical Formation  *segemented o r a l message *adult-dependent *used p e r s o n a l o r conventional system o f sound/symbol correspondence • s p e l l i n g s based on v i s u a l r e c a l l *used r e f e r e n c e s •conventional use of l e t t e r s o r letter-like symbols, f l u e n t l y formed •conventional directional pattern, some s p a c i n g  Message •Sammy & •Meghan d e c o d e d Decoding J i l l i a n s e g - w i t h o u t segmentmented w r i t t e n ation message i n t o •Kathryn & phrases Donald r e l i e d •used s i t u a t i o n a l on an a d u l t •used a p e r s o n a l / c o n t e x t and l e t t e r c o n v e n t i o n a l system name s t r a t e g i e s o f s o u n d/symbol •Caroline relied c o r respondence on a d u l t f o r d e c o d i n g •used v i s u a l r e c a l l 96  Topics  of  Talk  Overall, the  D r a m a t i s t s t a l k e d more t h a n P a t t e r n e r s  observed j o u r n a l w r i t i n g  most o f t e n  to  involving  the  two  e a c h g r o u p s ' t a l k was  perceived  a p e e r ' s composing event. others  Patterners t a l k was  Both groups  and  i n o n e ' s own  Dramatists.  s i m i l a r , but groups.  the  task  The  more o f t e n  The  was  also  focus of t h a t  Generally, or  Patterners  of the  t a l k e d more a b o u t t h e  However, v a r i a b i l i t y g r o u p members.  within  and  Language  Functions  about  the  e v e n t s whereas  symbolic v e h i c l e  t h e s e a r e a s was  Patterners  serve s i m i l a r functions.  noted  itself. among  some a b o u t t h e i r  followed  by  strategy  use  focus of personal  was  and  own  Dramatists used  D i r e c t i v e l a n g u a g e was  representational  language, h e u r i s t i c language, Their  in  actions.  I n most i n s t a n c e s ,  most o f t e n ,  category  Patterners.  f i g u r e s and  Both groups t a l k e d  feelings  to  depicted  related  referent  D r a m a t i s t t a l k e d most o f t e n  state  between  D r a m a t i s t s engaged  t w i c e as much n o n - t a s k r e l a t e d t a l k as  talk  task-related  talk varied  used the  talk.  directly  similar for  D r a m a t i s t s t a l k e d more a b o u t  in task-related  as  Equal  percentage of  percentage of  e x p e r i e n c e s , whereas P a t t e r n e r s  actions  talked  about t h e i r ongoing j o u r n a l w r i t i n g t a s k s .  percentages of related  sessions.  during  and  97  used personal  i n t e r a c t i o n a l language.  s i m i l a r as w e l l .  l a n g u a g e was  language,  talk  evident.  Differences Dramatists  in  the  engaged  i n t h r e e t i m e s a s much p l a y f u l  language as P a t t e r n e r s .  P a t t e r n e r s ' p e r s o n a l l a n g u a g e was  more s e l f - e v a l u a t i v e  than  Dramatists. Meaning Elements F o r b o t h P a t t e r n e r s and  D r a m a t i s t s meaning  were most e v i d e n t i n t h e i r t a l k . meaning elements  in their writing,  T h i s was and  f o l l o w e d by  drawing.  W i t h i n e a c h medium v a r i o u s m e a n i n g e l e m e n t s f o c u s e d on b y e a c h g r o u p . Table  elements  were  These are summarized i n T a b l e  16.  16  M e a n i n g E l e m e n t s f o c u s e d on w i t h i n T a l k , D r a w i n g & W r i t i n g Medium  Patterners  Dramatists  Talk  -actions -actors, objects, time/ space, sensori-motor qualities  -actions -objects, actors, time/space, s e n s o r i motor q u a l i t i e s  Drawing  - f o c u s on o b j e c t s , a c t o r s , actions, & sensori-motor qualities  - f o c u s on o b j e c t s , actors & actions  Writing  - f o c u s on a c t i o n s , a c t o r s , o b j e c t s , & time/space  - f o c u s on actors  98  actions,  CHAPTER F I V E Summary/ D i s c u s s i o n , a n d R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s  Summary The p r e s e n t s t u d y was d e s i g n e d t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e possible  r e l a t i o n s h i p between s y m b o l i c s t y l e (as determined  using Sullivan's children's selected Jillian  [1986] c r i t e r i a )  and k i n d e r g a r t e n  e a r l y w r i t i n g attempts.  from a t o t a l  S i x f o c a l c h i l d r e n were  o f 26 c h i l d r e n .  Sammy, C a r o l i n e ,  represented t h e Dramatist group;  Donald,  Kathryn r e p r e s e n t e d t h e P a t t e r n e r group.  Meghan, a n d  A l l of their  w r i t t e n and drawn p r o d u c t s , o b s e r v a t i o n s o f j o u r n a l sessions,  and responses  to determine approaches  to interview  and  writing  q u e s t i o n s were a n a l y z e d  any s i m i l a r i t i e s o r d i f f e r e n c e s  i n their  t o j o u r n a l w r i t i n g and v i e w s o f w r i t i n g i n  general. The s t u d y s o u g h t  answers t o q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o both  the written/drawn products themselves observed  a s t h e c h i l d r e n were i n v o l v e d  and t o t h e p r o c e s s e s i n writing.  C o m p a r i s o n s w e r e made b e t w e e n P a t t e r n e r s a n d D r a m a t i s t s i n each a r e a . observed  Of i n t e r e s t w e r e t h e f o l l o w i n g  c h i l d r e n combined drawing  issues:  how t h e  and w r i t i n g ; what  p e r s o n a l s t a n c e was e v i d e n t i n t h e i r w o r k ; i f t h e y  included  n a r r a t i v e movement i n t h e i r t e x t s ; t h e m e s s a g e q u a l i t y o f t h e i r work; what t h e y t a l k e d about a s t h e y drew and w r o t e ; the functions  o f t h i s language; 99  what meaning e l e m e n t s  were  contained w i t h i n t h e i r t a l k , drawings,  and w r i t t e n  texts,  a n d ; how t h e y v i e w e d w r i t i n g i n g e n e r a l a n d t h e p r o c e s s e s involved i n learning to write i n particular. The study.  previous chapter presented the r e s u l t s of the A n a l y s e s r e v e a l e d b o t h 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 P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s . members w e r e o b s e r v e d  D i f f e r e n c e s among g r o u p  i n some i n s t a n c e s .  The p r e s e n t  c h a p t e r compares t h e c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t t e n / d r a w n p r o d u c t s and observed w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s both t o each o t h e r ' s and.to described i n the literature..  those  A brief discussion of  d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n groups f o l l o w s . . I t concludes  with  recommendations f o r p r a c t i c e and s u g g e s t i o n s f o r f u r t h e r research.  D i s c u s s i o n o f R e s u l t s from P r o d u c t How d r a w i n g  and w r i t i n g were combined  •  Analyses . 1 ',  ' •  (  D i f f e r e n c e s p e r c e i v e d between P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s i n how t h e y c o m b i n e d d r a w i n g  and w r i t i n g were m i n i m a l . A l l  of t h e f o c a l c h i l d r e n produced contained drawings related.  journal entries  which  and w r i t i n g w h i c h were t h e m a t i c a l l y  This finding d i f f e r s substantially  (1982) r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s .  from  Dyson's  She d i s c o v e r e d , i n h e r s t u d y o f  t h e i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s between drawing t h a t t h e i n t e r m i n g l i n g of drawing  and e a r l y  writing,  and w r i t i n g which were n o t  r e l a t e d t h e m a t i c a l l y was t h e m o s t t y p i c a l t y p e o f w r i t t e n product produced  by t h e k i n d e r g a r t e n c h i l d r e n she observed. 100  One p o s s i b l e e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s d i f f e r e n c e may b e t h a t h e r o b s e r v a t i o n a l p e r i o d was e a r l i e r i n t h e s c h o o l y e a r t h a n i n the present  study.  I n a d d i t i o n , the products  Dyson's s t u d y were s p o n t a n e o u s l y from t h e t e a c h e r .  The p r o d u c t s  shaped by t h e t e a c h e r ' s which included copying  collected i n  p r o d u c e d w i t h no g u i d a n c e collected  i n t h i s study  were  expectations for journal writing, a d i c t a t e d "key word", drawing a  p i c t u r e and w r i t i n g about t h e s e l e c t e d word.  The o r d e r o f  p r o d u c t i o n was n o t s i g n i f i c a n t , b u t t h e e x p e c t a t i o n was t h a t these products  w o u l d be r e l a t e d t h e m a t i c a l l y .  e x p l a i n why t h e m o s t p r e v a l e n t t y p e o f p r o d u c t both  P a t t e r n e r s and D r a m a t i s t s  provided  a meaningful  One o b s e r v e d  context  T h i s may produced by  was o n e i n w h i c h t h e d r a w i n g for the writing.  d i f f e r e n c e i n how d r a w i n g a n d w r i t i n g  c o m b i n e d was t h a t D r a m a t i s t s  were  i n c l u d e d w r i t i n g as a p a r t o f  t h e drawn g r a p h i c u s u a l l y i n t h e form o f a speech b u b b l e holding the depicted figures' talk. o t h e r hand, were n o t observed i n t h i s manner. Dramatists'  P a t t e r n e r s , on t h e  combining drawing and w r i t i n g  T h i s d o e s n o t seem u n u s u a l  given that the  s t o r i e s i n c l u d e d many c h a r a c t e r i n t e r a c t i o n s a n d  d i a l o g u e was common i n t h e i r t o l d s t o r i e s . the d i s t i n g u i s h i n g  T h i s was o n e o f  f a c t o r s o f t h e i r s t o r y t e l l i n g observed i n  phase one. An  a d d i t i o n a l v a r i a t i o n b e t w e e n g r o u p s was n o t e d  i n the  l e v e l o f coherence between t h e g r a p h i c s and t h e w r i t t e n message.  C o h e s i v e n e s s was more e v i d e n t i n t h e P a t t e r n e r s ' 101  products than i n those produced  by t h e Dramatists.  This  f i n d i n g i s supported by p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h (Gardner, Wolf & Smith,  1982; Wolf and Gardner,  1979) i n w h i c h t h e d r a w i n g  b e h a v i o u r s o f D r a m a t i s t s and P a t t e r n e r s a r e d e s c r i b e d as follows. props  When d r a w i n g ,  D r a m a t i s t s used g r a p h i c symbols as  i n a t o l d s t o r y , w h e r e d r a w i n g was p a r t o f a l a r g e r  activity.  P a t t e r n e r s f o c u s e d r e l a t i v e l y more o n t h e  p h y s i c a l a s p e c t s o f a f i g u r e t o be r e p r e s e n t e d , c r e a t i n g a p i c t u r e "about"  the object world.  When e x a m i n i n g t h e  p r o d u c t s c r e a t e d a p a r t from t h e language t h e i r formation, i t i s l i k e l y  which  surrounded  t h a t P a t t e r n e r s ' drawings  ( b e i n g more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e f i g u r e o r o b j e c t s e l e c t e d ) w o u l d b e j u d g e d t o b e more r e l a t e d t o t h e w r i t t e n m e s s a g e than t h e Dramatists. Personal stance i n children's  texts  When t h e c o l l e c t e d p r o d u c t s w e r e a n l a y z e d f o r e v i d e n c e of  p e r s o n a l s t a n c e , t h e r o l e s o f commentator and o b s e r v e r  w e r e m o s t common among b o t h g r o u p s a n d t h e r o l e o f a c t o r was the l e a s t observed Dyson's  stance.  (1989) r e s e a r c h .  year p e r i o d , t h e observed  These r e s u l t a r e s u p p o r t e d by She r e p o r t e d t h a t o v e r a t h r e e c h i l d r e n "moved away f r o m t h e  e a r l y tendency  t o comment o n p i c t u r e s , t o w a r d  observe  scenes  and, f i n a l l y ,  worlds"  (p.296).  t o a c twithin t h e i r  conducted  textual  During t h e f i r s t year o f h e r study t h e  c h i l d r e n were i n K i n d e r g a r t e n . was  a tendency t o  As t h e p r e s e n t  investigation  d u r i n g t h e m o n t h s o f F e b r u a r y t h r o u g h May, i t 102  w o u l d seem r e a s o n a b l e  t h a t some o f t h e c h i l d r e n w o u l d h a v e  advanced beyond t e x t s w h i c h were dominated by d r a w i n g s . T h i s was e v i d e n t  i n t h e i r use o f v a r i o u s p e r s o n a l  stances i n  writing. Movement  i n children's texts  D i f f e r e n c e s were e v i d e n t movement c o n t a i n e d by  Patterners  i n the children's texts.  Texts w r i t t e n  i m p l i e d o r i n c l u d e d movement more t h a n  w r i t t e n by D r a m a t i s t s because t h e Dramatists the depicted  i n t h e amount o f n a r r a t i v e  (59% v s . 4 1 % ) .  Perhaps t h i s  was  h a d t a l k e d more a b o u t t h e a c t i o n s o f  f i g u r e s while drawing than the Patterners  (as r e s u l t s o f a n a l y s i s o f c h i l d r e n s ' t a l k r e v e a l e d ) thereby  those  d i d not include t h i s  had  and  i n their written texts.  This  m e s s a g e h a d a l r e a d y b e e n r e l a y e d t h r o u g h t h e medium o f t a l k . T h i s e x p l a n a t i o n w o u l d be c o n s i s t e n t w i t h D y s o n ' s (1989) d e s c r i p t i o n o f one c h i l d ' s n a r r a t i v e s w h i c h w e r e b a s e d o n a c t u a l movement t h r o u g h t i m e a n d " d e p e n d e d on d i a l o g u e on  new i n f o r m a t i o n b e y o n d t h a t i n c l u d e d  accompanying h e r drawing"  Discussion of Results Writing Process  and  i n the talk  (p.135).  from Composing P r o c e s s A n a l y s e s  Components  I n r e l a t i o n t o t h e w r i t i n g p r o c e s s components a n a l y s i s , Patterners  and D r a m a t i s t s  w e r e a l i k e i n many w a y s .  two r e v e a l i n g d i f f e r e n c e s were e v i d e n t .  However,  Firstly,  s e g m e n t a t i o n o f t h e o r a l m e s s a g e d u r i n g e n c o d i n g was much 103  more p r e v a l e n t among P a t t e r n e r s t h a n D r a m a t i s t s . u s u a l l y d i d not  segment o r a l l a n g u a g e d u r i n g e n c o d i n g .  some d i d , i t was be  Dramatists  t o the phrase l e v e l only.  concerned w i t h keeping  They a p p e a r e d  t h e message f l o w i n g .  and  s o u n d s 84%  of the time.  more on t h e w o r d s w h i c h w e r e b e i n g  recorded  to  Patterners,  on t h e o t h e r h a n d , s e g m e n t e d t h e o r a l m e s s a g e i n t o words, s y l l a b l e s ,  When  phrases,  They  focused  than the  overall  message. Comparing t h i s t o the s t r a t e g i e s observed decoding, level.  Dramatists  Meghan was  independently. message, but  still  o n l y segmented t o t h e  the only Patterner observed  She  d i d not  had  phrase  decoding  a p p e a r t o segment t h e w r i t t e n  r e l i e d on q u i c k v i s u a l r e c a l l  P e r h a p s i f she  during  of words.  n o t been so s u c c e s s f u l w i t h v i s u a l  more s e g m e n t a t i o n w o u l d h a v e b e e n  recall  evident.  S i m i l a r d i f f e r e n c e s i n approaches t o d e c o d i n g were noted i n Bussis, Chittenden,  Amarel, & Klausner's  on  T h e y d e s c r i b e d two  l e a r n i n g t o read  (1985).  c h i l d r e n w i t h varying focuses  during reading.  ( s i m i l a r to the Patterners described on t h e a c c u r a t e ( o r a l reading) out  research  groups One  i n t h i s study)  of  group focused  decoding of words; t h e i r s e l f - d i r e c t e d  talk  r e f l e c t e d t h e i r d e l i b e r a t e attempt t o f i g u r e  i n d i v i d u a l words.  observed) focused  Other c h i l d r e n ( l i k e the  r e l a t i v e l y more on k e e p i n g  the  Dramatists message  flowing smoothly; t h e i r s e l f - d i r e c t e d t a l k revealed  the  o r a l l y reconstructed story.  that  One 104  can  only speculate  these c h i l d r e n would approach  encoding  i n s i m i l a r ways,  f o c u s i n g more on e i t h e r t h e w o r d s o r t h e m e s s a g e . A l t h o u g h b o t h P a t t e r n e r s and  Dramatists frequently  r e q u e s t e d t h e s p e l l i n g s o f words, d i f f e r e n c e s were e v i d e n t i n t h e t y p e s o f words r e q u e s t e d .  Patterners often  l a b e l s f o r common o b j e c t s o r o b j e c t s f r o m w i t h i n  requested  the  immediate environment whereas D r a m a t i s t s ' r e q u e s t s f o r l a b e l s w e r e f o r more s p e c i f i c , p e r s o n a l r e a s o n s .  Many o f  t h e r e q u e s t s f r o m D r a m a t i s t s w e r e f o r names o f p e o p l e places.  This pattern of behavior i s c o n s i s t e n t with  d e s c r i p t i o n s by G a r d n e r , Gardner  Wolf,  & Smith  (1982) a n d W o l f &  (1979) o f P a t t e r n e r s a s o b j e c t - o r i e n t e d a n d  D r a m a t i s t s a s more s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d c h i l d r e n . tendency  This  t o be e i t h e r o b j e c t - o r s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d may  r e l a t e d t o t h e t y p e o f words each group Topics of All  and  be  requested.  Talk o f t h e c h i l d r e n i n t h i s s t u d y used t a l k most o f t e n  t o suggest  o r t o e l a b o r a t e upon t h e meanings o f t h e i r  w r i t t e n t e x t s and d r a w n g r a p h i c s .  own  Further analysis of  t a s k - i n v o l v e d t a l k r e v e a l e d t h a t each group t a l k e d d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f w r i t i n g as t h e y worked.  this  about  Dramatists  t a l k e d most about t h e a c t i o n s o r s t a t e o f t h e i r d e p i c t e d f i g u r e s whereas P a t t e r n e r s t a l k e d most about t h e vehicle itself  (the act of drawing  t a l k e d a b o u t l e t t e r s and and how  symbolic  and/or w r i t i n g ) .  sounds, where t o p u t t h e i r  t o draw v a r i o u s o b j e c t s . 105  They texts,  This f i n d i n g concurs  with  D y s o n ' s (1989) r e s e a r c h i n w h i c h some o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k was drawing;  not only a t o o l  i t a l s o served w i t h drawing  These c h i l d r e n  ( l i k e the Dramatists  commented on a n d ,  writing.  for directing  events  the act  of  t o r e p r e s e n t meaning. i n the present  at other times, dramatized  a c t i o n s o f t h e f i g u r e s and  observed  study)  the f e e l i n g s  i n t h e i r drawings  They used language " i n a c t i v i t y " .  Other  or  and children  ( s i m i l a r t o Patterners) focused t h e i r t a s k - i n v o l v e d t a l k  on  t h e i r own  to  p l a n and  organize —  graphics. In  f e e l i n g s o r a c t i o n s and and  i t served to d i r e c t  e v a l u a t e t h e i r d r a w n and w r i t t e n  They t a l k e d "about" t h e i r  activity.  a d d i t i o n t o t a s k - i n v o l v e d t a l k , both groups a l s o  t a l k e d about what t h e i r p e e r s were d o i n g .  The  percentage  t a l k w h i c h s e r v e d t o i n v o l v e o t h e r s i n o n e • s own similar  —  f o r P a t t e r n e r s and  Dramatists.  task  In a r e l a t e d  of  was study,  D y s o n (1989) d i s c o v e r e d t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n ' s comments on  each  o t h e r ' s w o r k c o u l d l e a d t o t a l k t h a t was  She  found  t h a t i n k i n d e r g a r t e n and  task-related.  e a r l y f i r s t g r a d e most o f  c h i l d r e n ' s t a l k about each o t h e r ' s work o r about t h e w o r l d o f e x p e r i e n c e s happened d u r i n g drawing. of the t a l k observed  i n the present  p a t t e r n i s not unusual  given t h a t drawing  i s one  of  e a r l i e s t means o f g r a p h i c r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o v e r w h i c h gain control.  T h e i r d r a w i n g s and  t h e m a r e o f t e n i n f u s e d w i t h and c h i l d r e n may  the process  surrounded  c o n f r o n t t h e q u e s t i o n : How 106  do  wider  T h i s was  s t u d y as w e l l .  the  true  This the children  of c r e a t i n g  by t a l k . meanings  Thus,  formulated onto the Of  in colorful  flat the  symbolic  drawings and/or l i v e l y surface  t a l k w h i c h was  of w r i t t e n  talk " f i t "  text?  t a s k - r e l a t e d , d i f f e r e n c e s were  n o t e d b e t w e e n what P a t t e r n e r s  and  Dramatist  focused  D r a m a t i s t s t a l k e d more a b o u t r e l a t e d e x p e r i e n c e s Patterners  used the  events being  referent category  depicted  consistent with  more o f t e n .  Therefore, related  i t i s not  experiences  Patterners, referent drawing  being  category in their  unusual  object-oriented,  N o n - t a s k t a l k was the  preceding  was  noted  engaged  objects  i n the  i n two  nontask-involved  talk.  example, C a r o l i n e had  relevance  completing  that  as n o t  falling  often the  to her  case with  party,  party.  peers'  i n t o any  eventually the  107  she  become  Dramatists'  a subject  In r e l a t i o n  groups  did  been t a l k i n g w i t h  though,  of  initially  her  t h a t had  ongoing composing event.  journal entry,  another about her  the  Dramatists  of t a l k  t a l k could  T h i s was  upcoming b i r t h d a y  use  or events of t h e i r  relevance  apparent.  clear  would l i k e l y  t i m e s as much n o n - t a s k t a l k t h a n  perceived  a b o u t an  peers.  amount o f n o n - t a s k t a l k .  However, t h e  For  thematically-  A major d i f f e r e n c e between  Patterners. as  drawing.  talk.  perceived  categories.  or  as b e i n g s o c i a l l y - o r i e n t e d .  f o r them t o u s e  task-related  objects  orientation to  when t a l k i n g t o t h e i r  of the  and  This difference i s  each groups' o v e r a l l  D r a m a t i s t s have been d e s c r i b e d  of the  on.  no  After  immediately  to the  peers  composing  began event  she  was  engaged i n as she  was  nontask-involved.  spoke, the t a l k about her  However, i n r e l a t i o n t o h e r  c o m p o s i n g e v e n t , t h a t same t a l k was f o c u s e d on t h e e v e n t t o be task t a l k  eliminated, both Patterners  for future topics)  and  o f i n t e r e s t when e x a m i n i n g t h e  t o d r a w and  D r a m a t i s t s had  had  w r i t e about next. can  only  As  be  the the  interesting topics  t h i s was  speculate  not  f o c u s e d on  that Patterners  in  may  have  used  talk  Functions D r a m a t i s t s and  to serve s i m i l a r functions.  The  the a c t i o n s of s e l f or others f u n c t i o n observed. w i t h i n the various  was  use  Patterners  of language t o d i r e c t  t h e most f r e q u e n t  l a n g u a g e f u n c t i o n s o b s e r v e d was  i n t e r e s t i n g d i f f e r e n c e i n s t r a t e g y use  the  Personal  p l a y f u l use  Language c a t e g o r y . of language three  t h e i r personal Patterners'. involved talk.  l a n g u a g e was This  language  Although the c h i l d r e n ' s strategy  one  an  f i n d i n g may  finding topics quickly.  I n most i n s t a n c e s ,  I t was  similar  o r i g i n s of the t o p i c s  e a s i e r t i m e d e c i d i n g on  more d i f f i c u l t y  Language  This  non-  was  P e r h a p s , b e c a u s e t h e y t a l k e d more, an  t h i s s t u d y , one  and  When t h i s t y p e o f  percentages of t a l k i n t h i s category.  D r a m a t i s t s had  new  task-involved  rendered.  (which sparked ideas  c h i l d r e n chose.  party  was  similar,  noted  within  D r a m a t i s t s engaged i n  the,  t i m e s more t h a n P a t t e r n e r s  but  l e s s s e l f - e v a l u a t i v e than  r e l a t e s back t o the d i s c u s s i o n of  Dramatists*  use  t a l k was  i n t e g r a l p a r t of the 108  primarily  symbolic a c t i v i t y  task-  expressive. itself.  Patterner's  talk,  was a n a d j u c t constructive  i n c o n t r a s t , was p r i m a r i l y a n a l y t i c .  to activity,  It  a way o f m o n i t o r i n g t h e i r own  behavior.  Meaning; E l e m e n t s Meaning e l e m e n t s were found i n a l l t h r e e examined and  ( t a l k , d r a w i n g , and w r i t i n g ) .  Patterners  talk.  Talk  groups.  mediums  For both  meaning e l e m e n t s were most e v i d e n t  focusing  in their  on a c t i o n s was t h e m o s t common f o r b o t h  P e r h a p s t h i s was due t o t h e f a c t t h a t  e a s i e r t o t a l k about a c t i o n s  i t was much  t h a n i t was t o d r a w them o r ,  f o r some c h i l d r e n , t o w r i t e a b o u t them. Patterners  Dramatists  As c a n be e x p e c t e d ,  f o c u s e d more o f t h e i r t a l k on o b j e c t s ;  f o c u s e d more on t h e a c t o r s .  This  i s consistent  findings related to topics of t a l k discussed  Dramatists  with  previously.  To a l e s s e r d e g r e e , m e a n i n g e l e m e n t s w e r e e v i d e n t the  c h i l d r e n ' s d r a w i n g s and w r i t i n g .  discussed,  drawing i s the f i r s t  children gain  control.  As  previously  s y m b o l i c medium o v e r w h i c h  However, i n o r d e r t o s h a r e t h e  meanings r e l a t e d i n t h e s e d r a w i n g s t h e c h i l d r e n must t a l k a b o u t them.  As t h e s e c h i l d r e n c o n t i n u e d t o  w r i t i n g t h e y were a b l e  to place  m e a n i n g i n t o t h i s medium. within talk,  in  explore  i n c r e a s i n g amounts o f  Analysis  o f meaning elements  d r a w i n g , and w r i t i n g h e l p e d c l a r i f y t h e  information-rich nature of the children's  109  often  talk.  D i s c u s s i o n o f Responses t o W r i t i n g  Interviews  A q u e s t i o n o f i n t e r e s t i n t h i s s t u d y was w h e t h e r i n f a c t a c h i l d ' s n o t i o n s about w r i t i n g c o u l d be r e l a t e d t o t h e i r symbolic style.  I t a p p e a r s t h a t many o f t h e  d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e p r o d u c t s a n d p r o c e s s e s o b s e r v e d may b e r e l a t e d t o t h e c h i l d r e n s ' views about w r i t i n g . the w r i t i n g  Responses t o  i n t e r v i e w questions r e v e a l e d t h a t each  group  seemed t o b e f o c u s i n g o n d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f w r i t i n g . P a t t e r n e r s a p p e a r e d t o b e more c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e f o r m o f t h e i r w r i t i n g t h a n D r a m a t i s t s were.  The D r a m a t i s t s  r e s p o n s e s a l s o f o c u s e d on form, b u t t h e emphasis a p p e a r e d t o be on t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f a message.  Further  investigation  o f t h e c h i l d r e n ' s p e r c e p t i o n s about w r i t i n g would be r e q u i r e d t o make a d e f i n i t e s t a t e m e n t a b o u t  this.  S i m i l a r v i e w s about w r i t i n g were d e s c r i b e d by Dyson (1985). as  T r a c y (who was l a b e l l e d a P a t t e r n e r ) was d e s c r i b e d  follows: "For Tracy, w r i t i n g appeared t o i n v o l v e t h e c r e a t i o n o f a v i s u a l image w h i c h s e r v e d a s a r e f e r e n t ' s l a b e l . T h e r e was no o b s e r v e d a t t e m p t a t w r i t t e n c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r audience" (p.86).  I n c o n t r a s t t o T r a c y , R a c h e l (who was l a b e l l e d a D r a m a t i s t ) was  d e s c r i b e d as f o l l o w s : " F o r R a c h e l , w r i t i n g was n o t t i e d t o c o n c r e t e referents. R a t h e r , i t was a s y s t e m f o r e x p r e s s i n g meanings, meanings w h i c h were f i r s t r e p r e s e n t e d t h r o u g h talk. W r i t i n g was p r i m a r i l y a f o r m o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n " (p.87).  110  These v a r y i n g v i e w s toward written  writing resulted  i n different  products.  One c a n o n l y s p e c u l a t e a s t o t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r o d u c t s  and p e r c e p t i o n s about w r i t i n g .  Perhaps t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p i s not l i n e a r b u t r a t h e r c i r c u l a r i n nature.  As t h e young c h i l d observes  and experiments  with  v a r i o u s w r i t t e n p r o d u c t s , t h e i r v i e w s about what i s important  about w r i t i n g a r e i n f l u e n c e d .  A t t h e same t i m e ,  these developing views a f f e c t t h e products The  r e a c t i o n t o these products by peers  they then  a n d a d u l t s may o n c e  again reform t h e c h i l d ' s p e r c e p t i o n s about w r i t i n g . new p e r c e p t i o n s t h e n  create.  These  i n f l u e n c e subsequent w r i t t e n products.  A p o s s i b l e reason  f o rt h e observed  d i f f e r e n c e s between  P a t t e r n e r ' s a n d D r a m a t i s t s ' v i e w s a b o u t w r i t i n g may l i e i n t h e i r p r e f e r r e d s t y l e o f approaching r e s e a r c h by Dyson  (1985) f o u n d  symbols.  Previous  similar differences.  H o w e v e r , no f i r m c o n c l u s i o n s c a n b e made f r o m t h e l i m i t e d data of t h i s  investigation.  D i s c u s s i o n o f D i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n Groups D e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t t h e f o c a l c h i l d r e n were s e l e c t e d from t h e o u t e r q u a r t i l e s o f symbolic s t y l e  scores,  d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e c h i l d r e n w i t h i n each group were e v i d e n t i n some o f t h e a r e a s e x a m i n e d . t o h a v e d i f f e r e n t ways o f a p p r o a c h i n g  Each c h i l d writing,  appeared  approaches  w h i c h made s e n s e when e a c h was v i e w e d w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t o f 111  his\her  own u n i q u e i n t e r e s t s a n d s t y l e o f f u n c t i o n i n g .  Differences and  w i t h i n groups were e v i d e n t  product  process analysis. Related  personal  t o t h e analysis o f products f o revidence o f  stance,  were noted. the  through both  some i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s among g r o u p members  A l t h o u g h D r a m a t i s t s Sammy a n d J i l l i a n  o b s e r v e r s t a n c e most o f t e n ,  commentator. evident. while  assumed  Caroline u s u a l l y wrote as a  Variation within the Patterner  g r o u p was a l s o  Kathryn appeared t o p r e f e r t h e observer  stance  D o n a l d was u s u a l l y c o m m e n t i n g o n h i s g r a p h i c  ( c o m m e n t a t o r s t a n c e ) a n d Meghan a p p e a r e d q u i t e using  products  flexible  a v a r i e t y o f stances i nh e r w r i t i n g . One e x p l a n a t i o n  f o r s u c h i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s among t h e  g r o u p s may b e t h a t p e r s o n a l some way t o a b i l i t y from Dyson's previously  stance w i t h i n w r i t i n g i s t i e d i n  or experience with w r i t i n g .  (1989) r e s e a r c h  support t h i s view  i n t h e s e c t i o n on p e r s o n a l  Analysis  Findings (as discussed  stance).  o f w r i t i n g p r o c e s s components a l s o  some d i f f e r e n c e s w i t h i n t h e g r o u p s . D r a m a t i s t s and P a t t e r n e r s  Although  used adult-dependent  strategies f o ra t least part  both encoding  of their writing, this  was n o t u s e d e q u a l l y b y a l l o f t h e c h i l d r e n i n a group.  I t was u s e d c o n s i s t e n t l y b y D o n a l d  almost twice  revealed  strategy  given  (P) who d i c t a t e d  a s many e n t r i e s a s t h e o t h e r f o c a l c h i l d r e n .  He r a r e l y w r o t e h i s own t e x t s .  Jillian  ( D ) , Sammy ( D ) , a n d  Meghan (P) w e r e t h e m o s t i n d e p e n d e n t i n t h e i r w r i t i n g , b u t 112  each s t i l l Kathryn  d i c t a t e d about o n e - t h i r d  (P) a n d C a r o l i n e  of their entries.  (D) e a c h d i c t a t e d a b o u t o n e - h a l f o f  t h e i r t e x t s and wrote t h e r e m a i n i n g h a l f These i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s  independently.  among g r o u p members may a g a i n b e  related t o experience with written c h i l d r e n gained increasing  language.  As t h e  c o n t r o l o v e r w r i t i n g t h e y became  more i n d e p e n d e n t a n d r e l i e d  l e s s on an a d u l t  t o record  their  messages. Analysis  of the t a l k which occured a t t h e j o u r n a l  w r i t i n g centre revealed  t h a t t h e amount o f t a l k  between t h e two g r o u p s . than Patterners  A l t h o u g h D r a m a t i s t s t a l k e d more  o v e r a l l , some i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s  group were n o t e d .  varied  Dramatists J i l l i a n  within  and C a r o l i n e  talked  a b o u t t h e same amount w h e r e a s Sammy t a l k e d s l i g h t l y than they did.  Within the Patterner  several First,  and C a r o l i n e .  reasons f o rt h i s d i f f e r e n c e  talked be  i n amount o f t a l k .  Another p o s s i b l e  who t h e c h i l d r e n w e r e w o r k i n g w i t h .  He  There could  t h e c h i l d ' s mood o r s t a t e o f m i n d w o u l d  a f f e c t how much t h e y t a l k e d .  less  group, K a t h r y n and  Meghan w e r e s i m i l a r b u t D o n a l d t a l k e d much more. a l m o s t a s much a s J i l l i a n  each  probably r e a s o n may b e  Friendships  played a  s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e i n how c o m f o r t a b l e t h e c h i l d r e n f e l t i n expressing themselves i n t a l k . which they wrote v a r i e d ,  As t h e s m a l l  group  with  s o t o o d i d t h e amount o f t a l k i n g .  113  Summary D i s c u s s i o n T h i s s t u d y o f young k i n d e r g a r t e n e r s w r i t i n g ,  then,  1  d o c u m e n t s t h e v a r i a b i l i t y and  i n d i v i d u a l i t y of aspects  of  e a r l y l i t e r a c y d e v e l o p m e n t and t h u s c o m p l e m e n t s t h e w o r k o f Bissex Dyson  (1980), B u s s i s e t a l . (1985), C l a y (1975, (1982,  1985,  1987,  1989).  m a t e r i a l s i s an o r g a n i z i n g f o r c e i n w r i t i n g  s o c i a l processes.  Variable child system were e v i d e n t .  strategies f o r exploring the The  Even acknowleding,  i s attending to or  however, t h a t t h e n a t u r e  trying  developmental  For example, young  w r i t e s t o r i e s on b l a n k p a p e r , from w r i t i n g . Gundlach,  child  which does not  children  physically  I n s u c h a t a s k t h e y may 1982;  Harste et a l . ,  told story.  Nonetheless, the c h i l d r e n ' s  q u e s t i o n s r e m a i n t h e same:  mix  1984)  w h i c h t h e w r i t t e n w o r d s and p i c t u r e s a r e a l l e n v e l o p e d one  may  of  and t h u s p a r t i c u l a r  w i l l vary, the e s s e n t i a l  1982;  symbol  language.  c h a l l e n g e s seem g e n e r a l i z a b l e .  (Dyson,  this  exact s t r a t e g i e s a c h i l d uses  children's literacy tasks —  separate drawing  and  well.  t o f i g u r e out about w r i t t e n  behaviors —  their  s u p p o r t e d by d i f f e r e n t s y m b o l i c  v a r y w i t h what e x a c t l y t h e c h i l d  media  development  T h u s t h e i r ways o f c a r r y i n g o u t  a c t i v i t y d i f f e r e d as  may  symbolic  T h e s e c h i l d r e n h a d d i f f e r e n t s t y l e s and  j o u r n a l a c t i v i t y was  and  D y s o n (1989) s t a t e s t h a t a n  i n d i v i d u a l ' s ways o f i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h p e o p l e and  (p.259).  1979),  in  developmental  What o f t h e s t o r y i s a c t u a l l y 114  in  r e c o r d e d ? I n w h a t s y m b o l i c m e d i a ? How c a n t h e i n t e r a c t i o n with  o t h e r s t h a t s u r r o u n d s t h e w r i t i n g be  within the written text itself?  incorporated  S u c h q u e s t i o n s w o u l d seem  t o a r i s e b o t h f r o m t h e c h i l d r e n ' s own a c t i o n s talkers,  as drawers,  and w r i t e r s , and from t h e s o c i a l r e s p o n s e s  work g e n e r a t e s .  These q u e s t i o n s a c t i v a t e t h e t e n s i o n s  inherent  i n the children's multimedia e f f o r t s .  tensions  o r those productive  conflicts,  e x p l o r a t i o n o n i t s way ( P i a g e t Early Writing The  their  Those  s e t l e a r n i n g and  & Inhelder,  1969).  a s Symbol Development  w r i t i n g observed i n t h i s study, i n both  s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s noted a c r o s s c h i l d r e n , complements t h e l i t e r a t u r e on e a r l i e r o c c u r r i n g development.  also  symbol  F o r example, i n a l l a r e a s o f symbol  development there  are reported  of v a r i e d symbolic m a t e r i a l s phenomenon d i s c u s s e d  differences  i n c h i l d r e n ' s use  (language, b l o c k s ,  earlier i n the literature  drawings), a review.  C e r t a i n l y t h e o b s e r v e d c h i l d r e n made c o n t r a s t i n g u s e s o f w r i t t e n and drawn The  differences  associated block use  graphics.  with  i n use o f symbolic materials  d i f f e r e n t forms o f p r o d u c t s  constructions,  drawn p i c t u r e s ) .  1981; Wolf & Gardner, 1979).  speech,  These d i f f e r e n c e s i n  may l e a d t o d i f f e r e n t r o u t e s t o s y m b o l i c  (Nelson,  (e.g.,  have been  competence  Comparisons c a n be  made b e t w e e n t h e v a r i e d w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s o f t h e o b s e r v e d c h i l d r e n and t h e v a r i a t i o n s d e s c r i b e d 115  i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e on  symbol development. on  I n W o l f and  Gardner's terms  t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on t w e l v e s y m b o l i c s t y l e  (and  based  tasks  a d m i n i n s t e r e d i n p h a s e one  of t h i s study),  and  D r a m a t i s t s ; D o n a l d , Meghan,  Jillian  a p p e a r e d t o be  K a t h r y n a p p e a r e d t o be The  Sammy,  r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y do  t h e i r approach to symbolic tasks  are  support the  notion  i n general.  s u f f i c i e n t data to support the  be  differences  may  be  the  environmental input,  s i m i l a r to  suggestion that  there  paths  c h i l d r e n f o l l o w i n l e a r n i n g w r i t t e n language. i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n i s not  of  However, t h e r e  p a r t i c u l a r types of c h i l d w r i t e r s or p r e s e t  d a t a on  and  Patterners.  c h i l d r e n a p p r o a c h i n g w r i t i n g i n ways w h i c h may  i s not  Caroline,  Longitudinal  available.  The  observed  r e s u l t of symbolic s t y l e s ,  a n d / o r some o t h e r f a c t o r s y e t t o  determined.  N o n e t h e l e s s , from the  differences,  certain implications  research are  clear.  These are  children's  displayed  f o r both p r a c t i c e  the  be  focus of the  and  next  sections.  Recommendations f o r B a s e d on investigation,  the  f i n d i n g s and  i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of  several  implications  for practice  Learning to write  involves  graphics function  as  may  f o c u s on v a r i e d  concept of  Practice  follow.  c o m i n g t o u n d e r s t a n d how  a symbol system.  Individual  aspects of the w r i t i n g a c t .  individual differences 116  implies the  this  written children  Thus,  the  importance  of  c a r e f u l observation  so t h a t t e a c h e r s may  understand c h i l d r e n  as unique i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e s of w r i t i n g  and  approaches t o w r i t i n g . Second, as the more e v i d e n t  study progressed i t became more  t h a t young c h i l d r e n express meanings not  i n w r i t t e n t e x t s , but  a l s o i n t h e i r drawings and  i n the t a l k which surrounds the w r i t i n g T h e r e f o r e , as t e a c h e r s , we e x p r e s s i o n and  also consider  only  especially  activity.  must acknowledge a l l modes of  l e g i t i m i z e them as v a l i d forms of  communication f o r the young c h i l d .  school.  and  In a d d i t i o n , we  might  the range of c o n t e x t s f o r w r i t i n g p r e s e n t e d i n  C h i l d r e n need o p p o r t u n i t i e s  t o i d e n t i f y the  range of s i t u a t i o n s i n which w r i t i n g and/or drawing  diverse are  e f f e c t i v e modes of e x p r e s s i o n . T h i r d , the p e r c e i v e d  r e l a t i o n s h i p between young  c h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y w r i t i n g b e h a v i o r s and w r i t i n g argues f o r i n c r e a s e d c h i l d r e n ' s own process.  For  t h e i r n o t i o n s about  v a l u e t o be p l a c e d  spontaneous e x p l o r a t i o n  of the  i t i s through such e x p l o r a t i o n  views are developed and i n s t r u c t i o n could  refined.  on  writing that  these  D i r e c t or i n d i r e c t  a l s o serve t o shape the young c h i l d ' s  views about w r i t i n g . c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g and  The  structure provided f o r  the classroom c o n t e x t both  the influence  the c h i l d ' s n o t i o n s about w r i t i n g . F i n a l l y , the r e s u l t s of t h i s study suggest c a u t i o n treating written  language as a system of r u l e s 117  (e.g  in  governing  letter  f o r m a t i o n , meaning encoding) t h a t can  d i v o r c e d from the i n t e n t i o n s of the s y m b o l i z e r A l s o suggested organized  is  caution i n implementing  around s e q u e n t i a l s k i l l  s e n s i b l e ways t o a c c o m p l i s h  regard  mastery without  ends, and,  first  second,  t h e r e f o r e , both, t h e n e c e s s i t y o f  This  research  critical i n which  t r e a t w r i t t e n l a n g u a g e and  teacher  the importance of  s e n s i t i v i t y t o ways i n d i v i d u a l c h i l d r e n a p p r o a c h  T h i s s t u d y was  for Further  w r i t i n g behaviors. such r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  they  writing.  Research  an a t t e m p t t o b e g i n t o e x p l o r e  general question r e l a t i n g symbolic  skills  without  e v a l u a t i o n s o f l i t e r a c y p r o g r a m s f o r t h e way  Suggestions  child.  organize  f o r the i n d i v i d u a l i t y of each c h i l d .  suggests,  the  curricula  considering the c h i l d ' s i n t e n t i o n s t h a t w i l l in  —  be  s t y l e and  the  emergent  Findings i n d i c a t e the p o s s i b i l i t y However, s u c h a c o n n e c t i o n  this  p o i n t appears too expansive  and  r e s e a r c h t o be  R e s e a r c h i s needed t o f u r t h e r  conclusive.  c o m p l e x f o r any  at  of  explore the o b s e r v a t i o n a l r e s u l t s of t h i s study. suggestions 1.  one  focus  Several  f o r f u r t h e r study f o l l o w .  Within t h i s study,  c h i l d r e n ' s j o u r n a l w r i t i n g was  o n l y t y p e o f w r i t i n g examined. d e s c r i b e d b a s e d on t h i s one same p a t t e r n s o f b e h a v i o r  be  Patterns of behavior  w r i t i n g context. evident i n other  contexts? 118  the  Would  were these  writing  of  2.  How  does the  c h i l d ' s i d e n t i f i e d symbolic s t y l e  t h e i r spontaneous w r i t i n g at school b e t w e e n home and a full 3.  school  o r a t home?  w r i t i n g n e e d t o be  influence  Links  examined t o  gain  p i c t u r e of each c h i l d ' s approach t o w r i t i n g .  A l l of the  c h i l d r e n i n t h i s s t u d y were m o n o l i n g u a l ,  C a u c a s i a n c h i l d r e n who  came f r o m m i d d l e - c l a s s  c h i l d r e n from o t h e r c u l t u r a l ,  ethnic,  and  homes.  Would  socio-economic  backgrounds demonstrate s i m i l a r behaviors?  Are  there  cultural differences  w h i c h a f f e c t how  the  Researchers of e a r l y l i t e r a c y have  use  of symbols?  extensively of w r i t t e n 4.  As  examined v a r i a b i l i t y  young c h i l d r e n  in children's  explore  explorations  language.  e v i d e n c e d i n t h i s s t u d y , c h i l d r e n can  less skilled,  a p p e a r more  d e p e n d i n g upon w h i c h a s p e c t o f t h e  l a n g u a g e s y s t e m we  are  focusing  on.  more t h a n one The  Therefore, on  aspect of the w r i t i n g process.  c h i l d r e n i n t h i s study demonstrated that  e l e m e n t s may  or  written  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s of young c h i l d r e n ' s w r i t i n g s h o u l d f o c u s  5.  not  be  f o u n d i n d r a w i n g , t a l k , and  To  understand the  be  interested only  meaning  written  beginnings of l i t e r a c y researchers in text.  beginnings i n a l l the  They must l o o k  forms of s y m b o l i z i n g  texts. cannot  for i t s that  children  use. 6.  This study considered children's varying  w r i t i n g and  what i s i n v o l v e d  consideration  conceptions  i n learning to write.  r a i s e s another question: 119  Where do  of  This children's  c o n c e p t i o n s o f w r i t i n g come from? d i f f e r e n c e s may  be r e l a t e d i n p a r t t o i n d i v i d u a l makeup,  c e r t a i n l y the environment has 7.  The  While i n d i v i d u a l  a r o l e to  play.  q u e s t i o n of whether or not p e r c e p t i o n s about w r i t i n g  are changeable a l s o a r i s e s from t h i s study. views are not  f i x e d , what i n f l u e n c e s them?  If  children's  What e f f e c t  would d i r e c t or i n d i r e c t i n s t r u c t i o n p l a y ? Contextual considerations, w r i t i n g done a t home and d i f f e r e n c e s , and  school,  l i n k s between spontaneous possible cultural  the q u e s t i o n s of where our  about w r i t i n g come from and  conceptions  i f they are changeable are a l l  p r o m i s i n g areas f o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h .  A more w h o l i s t i c view  o f w r i t i n g development must be taken as r e s e a r c h e r s examine p r o d u c t s , p r o c e s s and  c h i l d intentions  120  for writing.  REFERENCES  Bates, E l i z a b e t h . (1979). The emergence o f symbols: C o g n i t i o n and communication i n i n f a n c y . New York: Academic P r e s s . B i s s e x , G. (1980). Gyns a t wrk: A c h i l d l e a r n s t o read and write. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Bogdan, R. D., & B i k l e n , S. K. (1982). O u a l i t i v e r e s e a r c h f o r e d u c a t i o n : An i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e o r y and methods. Boston: A l l y n & Bacon. B r i t t a i n , W. L. (1972). Research i n the a r t o f young children. In H. D. Lewis (Ed.), A r t f o r the preprimary c h i l d . Washington, DC: N a t i o n a l A r t E d u c a t i o n Association. B r i t t o n , J . (1983). W r i t i n g and the s t o r y world. In B. M. K r o l l & G. W e l l s . E x p l o r a t i o n s i n the development o f w r i t i n g (pp. 21-49). New York: John Wiley P r e s s . Bruner, Jerome S., Rose, R. O l v e r , & P a t r i c i a M. G r e e n f i e l d . (1966). S t u d i e s i n c o g n i t i o n and growth. New York: Wiley. B u s s i s , A. M., Chittenden, E. A., Amarel, M., & Klausner, E. (1985). I n q u i r y i n t o meaning: An i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f l e a r n i n g t o read. H i l l s d a l e , NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Corsaro, W. A. (1979). "We're f r i e n d s , r i g h t ? " : C h i l d r e n ' s use o f access r i t u a l s i n a n u r s e r y s c h o o l . Language i n S o c i e t y , 8, 315-336. Clay, Marie M. (1975). What d i d I w r i t e ? Heinemann E d u c a t i o n a l Books.  Auckland,  NZ:  Clay, Marie M. (1979). Reading: The p a t t e r n i n g o f complex b e h a v i o r (2nd e d . ) . Aukland, NZ: Heinemann. DeFord, D. E. (1980). Young c h i l d r e n and t h e i r w r i t i n g . Theory Into P r a c t i c e , 19, 157-162. Dunn, L l o y d M., Dunn, Leota M., Robertson, G. J . , & E i s e n b e r g , J . L. (1981). Peabody P i c t u r e Vocabulary T e s t -Revised. M i n n e a p o l i s , Minn.: American Guidance S e r v i c e , Inc. Dyson, A. Haas. (1982). The emergence of v i s i b l e language: I n t e r - r e l a t i o n s h i p s between drawing and e a r l y w r i t i n g . V i s i b l e Language, 16, (4), 360-381. 121  Dyson, A. H a a s . ( 1 9 8 3 ) . writing processes. E n g l i s h . 17, 1-30.  The r o l e o f o r a l l a n g u a g e i n e a r l y Research i n the Teaching of  Dyson, A. H a a s . ( 1 9 8 5 a ) . I n d i v i d u a l D i f f e r e n c e s i n E m e r g i n g W r i t i n g . I n M. F a r r ( E d . ) , A d v a n c e s i n w r i t i n g r e s e a r c h V o l . I : C h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y w r i t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t (pp. 591 2 5 ) . Norwood, NJ: Ablex P u b l i s h i n g Corporation. Dyson, A. H a a s . ( 1 9 8 5 b ) . P u z z l e s , W r i t i n g emerges. E d u c a t i o n a l  p a i n t s and p e n c i l s : H o r i z o n s . 64., (1) , 13-16.  Dyson, A. Haas. ( 1 9 8 6 a ) . C h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f w r i t i n g : E x p a n d i n g r e s e a r c h p e r s p e c t i v e s . I n D. B. Yaden, J r . & S. T e m p l e t o n ( E d s . ) , M e t a l i n g u i s t i c A w a r e n e s s and B e g i n n i n g L i t e r a c y (pp. 2 0 1 - 2 1 8 ) . P o r t s m o u t h , NH: Heinemann E d u c a t i o n a l Books, I n c . Dyson, A. H a a s . ( 1 9 8 6 b ) . T r a n s i t i o n s and t e n s i o n s : I n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e d r a w i n g , t a l k i n g and d i c t a t i n g o f young c h i l d r e n . R e s e a r c h i n t h e T e a c h i n g o f E n g l i s h . 20. ( 4 ) , 379-409. Dyson, A. Haas. ( 1 9 8 8 a ) . A p p r e c i a t e t h e d r a w i n g and d i c t a t i n g o f young c h i l d r e n . Young C h i l d r e n . 43., 25-32.  (3) ,  Dyson, A. Haas. (1988b, O c t o b e r ) . D r a w i n g , t a l k i n g and w r i t i n g : R e t h i n k i n g w r i t i n g development. Occasional P a p e r #3 p r e s e n t e d a t t h e C r e a t i n g Word C o n f e r e n c e , Edmonton, A l b e r t a . (ERIC Document R e p r o d u c t i o n S e r v i c e No. ED 292 121) Dyson, A. H a s s . ( 1 9 8 9 ) . M u l t i p l e worlds of c h i l d w r i t e r s : Friends learning to write. New Y o r k : T e a c h e r s C o l l e g e Press. G a r d n e r , Howard. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . P r o m i s i n g p a t h s t o w a r d a r t i s t i c knowledge: A r e p o r t from H a r v a r d P r o j e c t Z e r o . J o u r n a l o f A e s t h e t i c E d u c a t i o n . 10, ( 3 / 4 ) , 201-207. G a r d n e r , Howard. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . A r t f u l o f c h i l d r e n ' s d r a w i n g . New  s c r i b b l e s : The s i g n i f i c a n c e Y o r k : B a s i c Books I n c .  G a r d n e r , H., W o l f , D., & S m i t h , A. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . A r t i s t i c s y m b o l s i n early childhood. New Y o r k U n i v e r s i t y E d u c a t i o n Q u a r t e r l y , 1, ( 4 ) , 13-21.  122  G a r d n e r , H., W o l f , D., & S m i t h , S. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . Max a n d M o l l y : Individual differences i n early a r t i s t i c symbolization. I n H. G a r d n e r ( E d . ) , A r t , mind & b r a i n : A c o g n i t i v e a p p r o a c h t o c r e a t i v i t y (pp. 1 1 0 - 1 2 7 ) . New Y o r k : B a s i c Books. Goodnow, J . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . C h i l d r e n d r a w i n g . C a m b r i d g e , Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press.  Mass.:  G r a v e s , D o n a l d H. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . L e t c h i l d r e n show u s how t o h e l p them w r i t e . V i s i b l e L a n g u a g e. 13., ( 1 ) , 16-28. G r a v e s , D o n a l d H. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . W r i t i n g : T e a c h e r s a n d c h i l d r e n a t work. E x e t e r , NH: Heinemann B o o k s . G u n d l a c h , R. A. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . C h i l d r e n a s w r i t e r s : T h e b e g i n n i n g s o f l e a r n i n g t o w r i t e . I n M. N y s t r a n d ( E d . ) , What w r i t e r s know (pp. 1 2 9 - 1 4 7 ) . New Y o r k : A c a d e m i c P r e s s . H a l l i d a y , M. A. K. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . E x p l o r a t i o n s l a n g u a g e . London: Edward A r n o l d .  i n the functions of  H a r s t e , J . C , Woodward, J.A., & B u r k e , C L . ( 1 9 8 4 ) . s t o r i e s and l i t e r a c y l e s s o n s . P o r t s m o u t h , NH: Heinemann.  Language  Hayes, D a v i d & C h e r r i n g t o n , C h r i s . (1985). C h i l d r e n ' s e a r l y w r i t i n g : F u n c t i o n and command. Educational Horizons. 64. ( 1 ) , 25-27. Hubbard, Ruth. (1987). T r a n s f e r r i n g images: Not j u s t on t h e p a g e . Young C h i l d r e n . 42., ( 2 ) , 60-67. Ives,  glued  W., S i l v e r m a n , J . , K e l l y , H., & G a r d n e r , H. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . A r t i s t i c development i n t h e e a r l y s c h o o l y e a r s : A c r o s s media s t u d y o f s t o r y t e l l i n g , drawing, and c l a y modelling. J o u r n a l o f R e s e a r c h and D e v e l o p m e n t i n E d u c a t i o n , 14, ( 3 ) , 61-65.  K a r n o w s k i , L e e . ( 1 9 8 6 ) . How y o u n g w r i t e r s communicate. E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p . 44. ( 3 ) , 58-60. K e l l o g g , Rhoda. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . A n a l y z i n g c h i l d r e n ' s a r t . P a l o C a l i f . : M a y f i e l d P u b l i s h i n g Co. King,  Alto,  M. L. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . L e a r n i n g how t o mean i n w r i t t e n language. T h e o r y I n t o P r a c t i c e . 19, 163-169.  K l e i n , M a r v i n L. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . The d e v e l o p m e n t o f w r i t i n g i n c h i l d r e n p r e - K t h r o u g h g r a d e 8. E n g l e w o o d C l i f f s , N . J : Prentice-Hall, Inc. 123  L o w e n f e l d , V i k t o r and B r i t t a i n , W.L. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . C r e a t i v e and m e n t a l g r o w t h ( 8 t h e d . ) . New Y o r k : M a c m i l l a n P u b l i s h i n g Company. L u r i a , A. R. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . The d e v e l o p m e n t o f w r i t i n g i n t h e c h i l d . I n M. M a r t l e w ( E d . ) , The P s y c h o l o g y o f W r i t t e n Language. New Y o r k : J o h n W i l e y P r e s s . M i t c h e l l , James V. (Ed.) ( 1 9 8 5 ) . The N i n t h M e n t a l M e a s u r e m e n t s Y e a r b o o k (Volume I I . L i n c o l n , N e b r a s k a : The B u r o s I n s t i t u t e o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f N e b r a s k a . N e l s o n , K. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . S t r u c t u r e and s t r a t e g y i n l e a r n i n g t o talk. Monographs o f t h e S o c i e t y f o r R e s e a r c h i n C h i l d Development, 38. N e l s o n , K. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . I n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n l a n g u a g e d e v e l o p m e n t : I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r d e v e l o p m e n t and l a n g u a g e . D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , 17, 170-187. P e r k i n s , D a v i d , & G a r d n e r , Howard. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . P r o b i n g a r t i s t i c p r o c e s s : A p r o g r e s s r e p o r t from H a r v a r d P r o j e c t Zero. J o u r n a l o f A e s t h e t i c E d u c a t i o n , 8, ( 3 ) , 33-57. P e t e r s , A. M. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . Language l e a r n i n g w h o l e e q u a l t h e sum o f t h e p a r t s ? 573.  s t r a t e g i e s : Does t h e Language, 63., 560-  S h o t w e l l , J . M., W o l f , D., & G a r d n e r , H. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . S t y l e s o f a c h i e v e m e n t i n e a r l y symbol u s e . I n M. L. F r a s e r & S. H. B r a n d e s ( E d s . ) , Symbol a s s e n s e : New a p p r o a c h e s t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f m e a n i n g (pp. 175-199). New Y o r k : Academic P r e s s . S m i t h , Nancy R. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . D e v e l o p m e n t a l o r i g i n s o f g r a p h i c symbolization i n the paintings of c h i l d r e n three to five. R e v i e w o f R e s e a r c h i n V i s u a l A r t s E d u c a t i o n , 13., 9-17. S u l l i v a n , G. L. (1986) . A c o v a r i a n c e s t r u c t u r e model o f symbolic functioning: A study of c h i l d r e n ' s c o g n i t i v e s t y l e , d r a w i n g , c l a y m o d e l i n g , and s t o r y t e l l i n g . V i s u a l A r t s R e s e a r c h , 12, ( 1 ) , 11-32. S u l z b y , E . , B a r n h a r t , J . , & H i e s h i m a , J . A. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Forms o f w r i t i n g and r e r e a d i n g f r o m w r i t i n g : A p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t . I n J a n a M. Mason ( E d . ) , R e a d i n g and W r i t i n g C o n n e c t i o n s (pp. 31-63) . B o s t o n , MA: A l l y n and B a c o n . S u l z b y , E . & T e a l e , W. early childhood.  H. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . W r i t i n g d e v e l o p m e n t i n E d u c a t i o n a l H o r i z o n s . 64, 8-12. 124  V y g o t s k y , L. S. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . M i n d i n s o c i e t y ; The d e v e l o p m e n t o f h i g h e r p s y c h o l o g i c a l p r o c e s s e s . C a m b r i d g e , MA: H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y Press. Werner, H e i n z , & K a p l a n , B e r n a r d . ( 1 9 6 3 ) . Symbol f o r m a t i o n : An o r g a n i s m i c - d e v e l o p m e n t a l a p p r o a c h t o l a n g u a g e and t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f t h o u g h t . New Y o r k : J o h n W i l e y & S o n s . W i n n e r , E . , R o s e n s t i e l , A., & G a r d n e r , H. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . The development o f metaphoric u n d e r s t a n d i n g . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y . 12, ( 4 ) , 289-297. Wolf,  D e n n i e , & G a r d n e r , Howard. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . S t y l e and s e q u e n c e i n e a r l y s y m b o l i c p l a y . I n N. R. S m i t h & M. B. F r a n k l i n ( E d s . ) , S y m b o l i c f u n c t i o n i n g i n c h i l d h o o d (pp. 1171 3 8 ) . H i l l s d a l e , NJ: L a w r e n c e E r l b a u m A s s o c i a t e s .  Wolf,  D e n n i e , & G a r d n e r , Howard. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . On t h e s t r u c t u r e o f e a r l y s y m b o l i z a t i o n . I n R. L. S c h i e f e l b u s c h & D. D. B r i c k e r (Eds.). E a r l y language: A c q u i s i t i o n and i n t e r v e n t i o n (pp. 2 8 7 - 3 2 7 ) . B a l t i m o r e : U n i v e r s i t y P a r k Press.  Woodward, V i r g i n i a A. w r i t i n g a b o u t my 20. ( 8 ) , 3-7.  ( 1 9 8 8 ) . L e s s o n s f r o m E r i c : T a l k i n g and a r t . I n s i g h t s i n t o Open E d u c a t i o n .  125  APPENDIX A Sample L o g E n t r y February Meghan (a Donald -  6. 1991.  word was " f r i e n d s " drew f i r s t , p i c t u r e c o n t a i n e d r a i n b o w , two c h i l d r e n b o y a n d a g i r l ) , g r o u n d , g r a s s , and a s u n s h e w a n t e d t o do h e r own s t o r y ( n o t d i c t a t e ) printed Meghan.AND. then asked f o r s p e l l i n g o f Kyle Meghan.AND.KYLE.WAS.FRIENDS. a s k e d f o r went, knew b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d i n g consonants Meghan.AND.KYLE.WAS.FRIENDS.WENT.TO.THE. asked f o r s t o r e Meghan.AND.KYLE.WAS.FRIENDS.WENT.TO.THE.ST. a p e r i o d was p l a c e d between words, l e f t no s p a c e s a s k e d f o r word " r o c k e t " some d i f f i c u l t y c o p y i n g t h e word c a r e f u l d r a w i n g o f a r o c k e t g o i n g up used g o l d and s i l v e r dictated story I am i n t h e r o c k e t s h i p .  J illian - word was Mom - p i c t u r e o f h e r mom was q u i t e complex - i n c l u d e d h a i r , e y e s , n o s e , mouth, e y e b r o w s , body, s k i r t , arms, l e g s , s h o e s , h a i r r i b b o n s - no c o l o r - g o o d c o p y i n g o f word - no s t o r y ( y e t )  cheeks,  Michelle - word " d r a g o n " - drew w i t h p e n c i l , c o l o r e d w i t h wax c r a y o n - drew p i c t u r e q u i c k l y a n d wanted h e l p w i t h h e r s t o r y . As I and p a r e n t h e l p e r were b o t h b u s y , s h e w o r k e d on h e r own. - w r o t e "One d a y a d r a g o n was w a l k i n g on h i s m o t h e r ' s back. 1 DAD-A-dragon- VAS-UAL KING-ON HIS MOTHERS BACK - helped  by p a r e n t t o s p e l l w a l k i n g , 126  mothers, and back.  APPENDIX B C r i t e r i a f o r Determining Media Responses Dramatist  Patterner Drawing - e m p h a s i s on d e s i g n : human o b j e c t o r i e n t a t i o n personalization - c a r e f u l placement o f p a r t s on t h e p a g e - i n t e r e s t i n shape, l i n e , c o l o r , e l a b o r a t i o n o f scene, d e t a i l -language use: product  t o comment on  - e m p h a s i s on c o n t e n t : orientation, -medium becomes a p r o p t o t e l l story - l a n g u a g e u s e : t o comment on s c e n e o r t a l k a b o u t self, talking — then drawing  Clay modeling -interest i n properties of clay -lack of detail i n i t s e l f (e.g., e x c e s s i v e smoothing p e r f e c t i n g product out, reshaping) -use o f product as a prop -concern with proportion, d e t a i l (e.g., making a c a r and t h e n moving i t ) - c o n t e n t : human orientation language use: as i n drawing -language use: as i n drawing Language ( S t o r y t e l l i n g ) -story includes character - s t o r y p r o p e l l e d by a c t i o n , interactions description - i n t e r p r e t i v e , sequent- a t e m p o r a l — no l o g i c a l tial, autobiographical sequence -a l o t o f d i a l o g u e -a l o t o f o b j e c t s i n c l u d e d , -on c o m p l e t i o n t a s k : itemization dialogue, other or -on c o m p l e t i o n t a s k : r e p e t i t i o n characters introduced immediate e n d i n g Symbolic Block -object orientation imaginary play with objects b a s e d on v i s u a l p r o p e r t i e s o f blocks structural actions: stacking, l i n i n g up -language: blocks Source:  statements about t h e  S u l l i v a n ( 1 9 8 6 ) , p.14 127  play -character orientation: naming, f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n s such as r o l e s , sex -depictive actions: l i t t l e r e l a t i o n between form o f t h e b l o c k and i t s part i n the play -language: dramatic dialogue, narrative  APPENDIX B Symbolic  S t y l e R a t i n g Index;  Patterner v s . Dramatist Task:  Name: A.  Continued  Approach  t o Task  P a t t e r n e r (-)  Response t o e x p e r i m e n t a l s e t t i n g :  reluctant  Response t o t a s k :  taskcentered  Type o f a c t i o n :  structural  B.  (+)  enthusiastic experimentercentered depictive  Use o f L a n g u a g e  Amount o f  Language/task Form o f  a  language:  Language/action  C.  Dramatist  relationship:  relationship:  language:  Approach  separate  alot simultaneous  related  unrelated  descriptive  expressive  objectoriented  personoriented  formal properties  narrative properties  design  content  t o Design  Orientation: Arrangement based  on:  Emphasis on: Source:  little  adapted  from  Sullivan  128  (1986),  p . 19  APPENDIX B  Continued  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c Responses t o Symbolic S t y l e Tasks A Patterner  Profile  K a t h r y n s p e n t 18 m i n u t e s e n g r o s s e d i n h e r f r e e - c h o i c e drawing task. She w o r k e d s i l e n t l y and m e t i c u l o u s l y on a drawing of her f a v o r i t e t o p i c , rainbows. She c a r e f u l l y f i l l e d t h e page w i t h bands o f c o l o u r , u s i n g a l l t h e a v a i l a b l e markers. The r e o c c u r e n c e o f p r e f e r r e d themes i d e n t i f i e d by G a r d n e r , W o l f , and S m i t h (1975) c a n be s e e n i n Kathryn's response t o the f r e e - c h o i c e task i n modelling with Play-Doh. H e r m a s t e r y o f m o t i f s and schema r e l a t e d t o r a i n b o w s were u s e d as she c o m p l e t e d a " d r a w i n g " w i t h P l a y Doh. By a d a p t i n g i m a g e r y and s k i l l t o a l e s s f a m i l i a r medium, K a t h r y n was a b l e t o c r e a t e a c o l o r f u l m o d e l o f a rainbow. K a t h r y n ' s p r e f e r e n c e f o r v i s u a l m e d i a was r e f l e c t e d i n her b r i e f responses to s t o r y t e l l i n g tasks. When p r o b l e m s were c l e a r l y s p e c i f i e d , K a t h r y n ' s a p p r o a c h was l o g i c a l and serious. When t o l d t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s t o r y a b o u t t h e l a d y who i s l o o k i n g f o r a p a r k i n g s p o t and a s k e d t o f i n i s h t h e s t o r y and show t h e a c t i o n s u s i n g wood b l o c k s , K a t h r y n p r o c e e d e d t o show t h e l a d y f i n d i n g a p a r k i n g s p o t , g e t t i n g t h e m i l k f r o m t h e s t o r e , and t h e n r e t u r n i n g home. T a s k s t h a t r e q u i r e d K a t h r y n t o s p e c u l a t e on t h e p o s s i b l e r o l e o f u n u s u a l l y shaped b l o c k s e l i c i t e d a l i s t o f r e s p o n s e s t h a t were b a s e d on v i s u a l s i m i l a r i t i e s . This f o c u s on f o r m was f u r t h e r e m p h a s i z e d when K a t h r y n was a s k e d to t e l l a s t o r y u s i n g the b l o c k s . She s p e n t some t i m e s e l e c t i n g , o r d e r i n g , and m a t c h i n g f o r m s a s s h e a s s o c i a t e d them w i t h o b j e c t s and i d e a s . "I'm g o i n g t o make a c a r , t h e s e a r e t h e w h e e l s , o r I c a n u s e t h i s l o n g p i e c e t o make a b r i d g e , no, I'm g o i n g t o make a h o u s e . " Once underway, K a t h r y n ' s o n l y comments were d e s c r i p t i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e problem a t hand. When a s k e d what h e r s t o r y was she r e p l i e d t h a t she d i d n ' t h a v e a s t o r y to tell. K a t h r y n " s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a p p r o a c h t o symbol u s e c a n be seen t o conform t o the P a t t e r n e r p r o f i l e . Her a l l e g i a n c e t o v i s u a l f o r m s and e x p r e s s i o n and h e r u s e o f p r e c i s e and l o g i c a l p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s k i l l s appear r e l a t i v e l y uniform a c r o s s media. 129  APPENDIX B A Dramatist  Continued Profile  Sammy's r e s p o n s e t o t h e f r e e - c h o i c e t a s k i n d r a w i n g was c o m p l e t e d i n a few m i n u t e s , y e t t h e d e t a i l i n t h e d r a w i n g d i d not match t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e v e r b a l d e s c r i p t i o n . Sammy t o o k some t i m e t o e x p l a i n why t h e boy i n t h e p i c t u r e was s a d and why t h e c l o u d s l o o k e d t h e way t h e y d i d . "Are y o u w a n d e r i n g why t h e c l o u d s l o o k t h a t way? The c l o u d s a r e m o v i n g away f r o m t h e s u n . He [ t h e boy] w o u l d h a v e t o s t a y i n s i d e u n t i l t h e s u n b u r n went away." The a v a i l a b i l i t y o f P l a y - D o h o f f e r e d a r a n g e o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s a s Sammy i n i t i a l l y u s e d a p l a s t i c k n i f e and f o r k t o make t h e b a l l o f P l a y - D o h i n t o a s a n d w i c h , t h e n p e r o g i e s , and f i n a l l y some c h i c k e n w h i c h he t h e n p r o c e e d e d t o " e a t " as t h e o t h e r c h i l d r e n watched. T h i s was f o l l o w e d by h i s s t a t e m e n t t h a t he was p r e t e n d i n g t o be i n a s t o r e a s he " p a i d " f o r a s a n d w i c h f r o m C a r o l i n e w i t h a l a r g e b l o b o f Play-Doh. " I h a v e $100.00, r i g h t h e r e . " He t h e n p r o c e e d e d t o p r e t e n d t o t a k e a l a r g e b i t e and e x c l a i m e d , "Needs some more s o u r c r e a m . E x t r a s o u r cream, p l e a s e . " S t o r y t e l l i n g p r o v i d e d Sammy w i t h an i d e a l f o r u m f o r h i s r i c h r e p e r t o i r e o f a n i m a t e d a c t i o n s , g e s t u r e s , and e x p r e s s i v e v o i c e a s he c r e a t e d e l a b o r a t e d t a l e s . Sammy's c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e s t o r y o f t h e l a d y who i s l o o k i n g f o r a p a r k i n g s p o t was a g o o d example: S h e ' s g e t t i n g h e r p a r k i n g s p o t now. He's g o i n g t o go s e e i f t h e r e ' s anyone home i n t h i s b i g y e l l o w h o u s e . He a s k e d t h e g i r l t h a t t o o k t h e c a r away i f t h a t was her house. " I s t h a t y o u r h o u s e down t h e r e ? The b i g y e l l o w house w i t h t h e b i g y e l l o w r o o f ? " She s a i d , "Yes." He f o l l o w e d h e r . She went t o h e r h o u s e . She unlocked the door. There. He's g o i n g t o g e t some f u r n i t u r e out. There. She had a bed f o r him, j u s t a l l made and r e a d y . She had a b o a t f r o m a b i g s t r e a m . It was a b i g t u g b o a t . And t h e n h e r went t o t h e b i g t u g boat. The woman f o l l o w e d i t . I t jumped b a c k i n t o t h e s t r e a m and s o d i d t h e l a d y . I t was a w a t e r c a r . And t h e n t h e b o a t f e l l a p a r t and she p u t t h e b o a t b a c k together. T h e n t h e man went a l l t h e way t o t h e g a s station. (I'm g o i n g t o make a g a s s t a t i o n now. What can I use? E s s o g a s s t a t i o n 'cause t h a t ' s where my dad g o e s t o p u t g a s i n h i s work c a r . ) I t sounds l i k e a real car. I t went s o f a s t t h a t i t bumped i n t o a j e e p and t h e j e e p bumped i n t o t h e g a s s t a t i o n . The g a s station f e l l apart. The man i n s i d e t h e s e r v i c e s t a t i o n heard a b i g crash. Then t h e b i g y e l l o w c a r went t o t h e y e l l o w h o u s e and he t h o u g h t t h a t t h e l a d y must h a v e 130  APPENDIX B  Continued  b o u g h t a new c a r . He went a n d s e l l e d h i s j e e p . went t o a s t o r e a n d h e b o u g h t a new c a r - a b i g , red c a r .  He big,  Sammy's n a r r a t i v e was e n h a n c e d w i t h b l o c k s b e i n g u s e d t o d e p i c t t h e ongoing a c t i o n s . T h e s e d e s c r i p t i o n s o f Sammy's u s e o f s y m b o l i c m e d i a conform t o Dramatist c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . His aptitude f o r v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n c a n be s e e n t o i n f l u e n c e h i s r e s p o n s e t o t a s k s a c r o s s media.  131  APPENDIX C Writing process  categories  WRITING PROCESS COMPONENTS Message F o r m u l a t i o n 1. Level of s p e c i f i c i t y (a) t h e t o p i c o f t h e message i s s p e c i f i e d (e.g., " I t ' s about a n i n j a . " ) (b) t h e a c t u a l w o r d i n g o f t h e message i s s p e c i f i e d ( e . g . , " T h i s i s g o i n g t o s a y , 'The n i n j a i s i n karate.•" 2. Level of coherance (a) no a p p a r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t s b e t w e e n t h e message and g r a p h i c s p r e v i o u s l y drawn on t h e p a g e (b) message i s r e l a t e d i n some i d e n t i f i a b l e , t h e m a t i c way t o o t h e r ( b u t n o t a l l ) g r a p h i c s on t h e p a g e (c) e n t i r e p r o d u c t p r o d u c e s a c o h e r e n t w h o l e 3. L e v e l o f l i n g u i s t i c o r g a n i z a t i o n (adapted from C l a y , 1975) (a) word (b) any two- o r t h r e e - w o r d p h r a s e (c) any s i m p l e s e n t e n c e c o n s i s t i n g o f 3 o r more words (d) a g r o u p o f 2 o r more s e n t e n c e s Message E n c o d i n g 1. Segmented o r a l message (a) n o t a p p l i c a b l e ( i . e . , one word m e s s a g e [ s ] n o t segmented i n t o s m a l l e r u n i t s ) (b) no s e g m e n t i n g e x i s t s (c) message i s segmented i n t o p h r a s e s , words, s y l l a b l e s , o r sounds 2. S y s t e m a t i c p r o c e d u r e s f o r e n c o d i n g segments ( i . e . , procedures f o r independently s e l e c t i n g p a r t i c u l a r l e t t e r s to r e p r e s e n t p a r t i c u l a r o r a l l a n g u a g e segments) (a) no o r t h o g r a p h i c s y s t e m a t i z i n g e x i s t s ( r e q u e s t e n t i r e message be e n c o d e d by a n o t h e r ) (b) some s y s t e m a t i z i n g ; c h i l d may ( i ) use a l e t t e r - n a m e s t r a t e g y , ( i i ) use p e r s o n a l o r c o n v e n t i o n a l system o f sound/symbol correspondences, ( i i i ) request s p e l l i n g of a segment f r o m a n o t h e r , ( i v ) b a s e s p e l l i n g on v i s u a l r e c a l l , (v) c o n s u l t a r e f e r e n c e ( e . g . , word l i s t ) (c) a c o m b i n a t i o n o f s y s t e m a t i c and nonsystematic procedures  132  APPENDIX C WRITING PROCESS COMPONENTS  Continued  (Continued)  Mechanical Formation 1. C o n v e n t i o n a l i t y o f symbols (a) i n t e r m i n g l i n g o f l e t t e r s a n d l e t t e r - l i k e f o r m s (b) l e t t e r s 2. Ease and e f f i c i e n c y o f p r o d u c t i o n (a) some s t r o k e s a r e s l o w l y drawn (b) l e t t e r s o r l e t t e r - l i k e f o r m s a r e f l u e n t l y p r o d u c e d 3. S p a t i a l a r r a n g e m e n t ( a d a p t e d f r o m C l a y , 1975) (a) c o n v e n t i o n a l d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n (b) c o n v e n t i o n a l d i r e c t i o n a l p a t t e r n a n d s p a c e s b e t w e e n words (c) e x t e n s i v e t e x t w i t h o u t any u n c o n v e n t i o n a l i t i e s o f arrangement and s p a c i n g o f t e x t Message Decoding 1. Segmented w r i t t e n message (a) n o t a p p l i c a b l e ( i . e . , one word message n o t segmented i n t o s m a l l e r u n i t s ) (b) no s e g m e n t i n g e x i s t s (c) t h e w r i t t e n t e x t i s segmented ( i . e . , p a r t i c u l a r p o r t i o n s o f t h e t e x t a r e f o c u s e d on t o b e d e c o d e d i n t o p a r t i c u l a r o r a l p h r a s e s , words, s y l l a b l e s , o r s o u n d s ) 2. S y s t e m a t i z e d p r o c e d u r e s f o r d e c o d i n g segments (a) no s y s t e m a t i c o r t h o g r a p h i c p r o c e d u r e s u s e d f o r decoding t e x t ; c h i l d may r e q u e s t e n t i r e message b e decoded by a n o t h e r (b) some s y s t e m a t i c o r t h o g r a p h i c p r o c e d u r e o r c o m b i n a t i o n o f p r o c e d u r e s a r e u s e d ; c h i l d may ( i ) r e q u e s t e n c o d i n g o f segment f r o m a n o t h e r , ( i i ) u s e s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t as t h e b a s i s f o r decoding, ( i i i ) use a s y l l a b l e - b a s e d d e c o d i n g system, ( i v ) u s e a l e t t e r - n a m e s t r a t e g y , (v) u s e a p e r s o n a l o r c o n v e n t i o n a l system o f sound/symbol c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s , ( v i ) b a s e d e c o d i n g on v i s u a l r e c a l l o f a s i m i l a r word.  133  APPENDIX C  Continued  Worksheet used t o a n a l y z e and code composing WORKSHEET C h i l d ' s name Composing e v e n t  # COMPOSING EVENT  COMPONENTS Message F o r m u l a t i o n  present absent  1.  Level  of specificity  2.  Level  o f coherence  3.  Level  of l i n g u i s t i c organization  Message E n c o d i n g  present absent  1.  S e g m e n t i n g o r a l message  2.  Systematized  Mechanical Formation  present absent  1.  Conventionality  2.  Discreteness  3.  Ease & e f f i c i e n c y  4.  Spatial  of production  Arrangement  Message Decoding  present absent  1.  Segmented w r i t t e n message  2.  Systematized  134  events  APPENDIX c  continued  Language f u n c t i o n s and  strategies  1. R e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l language: language which s e r v e s t o g i v e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t e v e n t s and s i t u a t i o n s . The strategies are: (a) l a b e l i n g o r naming (b) e l a b o r a t i n g o r d e t a i l i n g (c) r e p o r t i n g an a c t i o n o r e v e n t (d) n a r r a t i n g a s e r i e s o f a c t i o n s o r e v e n t s (e) d r a m a t i z i n g o r a c t i n g o u t a s e r i e s o f a c t i o n s (f) r e a s o n i n g 2. D i r e c t i v e language: language which s e r v e s t o d i r e c t the a c t i o n s o f s e l f and/or o t h e r s . The,strategies are: (a) m o n i t o r i n g ( o n g o i n g a c t i o n s a p p e a r t o be c o n t r o l l e d and d i r e c t e d ) ; f o r example, a c h i l d i s c o p y i n g a word and s a y s , "A g, and t h e n , and t h e n , and t h e n - a o." (b) p l a n n i n g ( f u t u r e a c t i o n s a p p e a r t o be c o n t r o l l e d o r d i r e c t e d ) ; f o r example, a c h i l d i s d r a w i n g and s a y s , "I'm gonna make a s u n i n t h e s k y . " (c) e n c o d i n g (words and p h r a s e s a r e t r a n s f o r m e d f r o m the o r a l t o the w r i t t e n language channel) (d) d e c o d i n g ( s o u n d s , s y l l a b l e s , words, o r p h r a s e s a r e t r a n s f e r r e d from t h e w r i t t e n t o t h e o r a l language channel) (e) a c c e s s i n g ( s e e k i n g o r r e t r i e v i n g l e t t e r s o r words f r o m memory; i n w r i t t e n l a n g u a g e s i t u a t i o n s , t h i s s t r a t e g y i n v o l v e s r e r e a d i n g ) ; f o r example, a c h i l d r e r e a d s t h e t e x t i n o r d e r t o remember what word n e e d s t o be w r i t t e n n e x t . (f) i n s t r u c t i n g ( c o n v e y i n g i n f o r m a t i o n p e r c e i v e d as required by someone e l s e ; l a n g u a g e u s e d t o " t e a c h " ) (g) r e q u e s t i n g (h) o f f e r i n g 3. H e u r i s t i c language: language used t o e x p l o r e o r t o seek i n f o r m a t i o n o r l e a r n about r e a l i t y . Strategies include: (a) s e e k i n g c o n f i r m a t i o n ; f o r example, c h i l d a s k s " I s t h i s how y o u s p e l l was: W-A-Z?" (b) s e e k i n g f a c t ; f o r example, a c h i l d s e e k s t h e i d e n t i t y o f unknown c h a r a c t e r s i n a p e e r ' s s t o r y , a s k i n g "Who's t h e 'them'?" (c) s e e k i n g d e m o n s t r a t i o n s ; f o r example, a c h i l d a s k s , "Do y o u know how t o draw a j e l l y b e a n f o r me?" 4. P e r s o n a l language: language used t o e x p r e s s one's f e e l i n g and a t t i t u d e s . Three s t r a t e g i e s i d e n t i f i e d a r e : (a) e v a l u a t i n g o t h e r s (b) e v a l u a t i n g s e l f (c) p l a y i n g w i t h l a n g u a g e 5. I n t e r a c t i o n a l language: language which s e r v e s t o i n i t i a t e , m a n i t a i n , and t e r m i n a t e s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . No d i v i s i o n i n t o s t r a t e g i e s was done. 135  APPENDIX C Meaning  Continued  Elements  Worksheet  C h i l d ' s Name: Composing E v e n t # Meaning Medium  Sensorimotor Qualities  Talk During Writing  Talk During Interview  Drawing  Dictation (composing)  Elements  Time/ Space  Objects  Actors  Actions  APPENDIX D Conventions  (  )  used  i n the presentation of transcripts  Parentheses e n c l o s i n g t e x t c o n t a i n notes, u s u a l l y about c o n t e x t u a l and nonverbal i n f o r m a t i o n ; e.g., (sighs, looks a t her) Empty p a r e n t h e s e s , o n t h e o t h e r hand, i n d i c a t e u n i n t e l l i g i b l e words o r p h r a s e s ; e . g . , Meghan: Y o u ' r e s u p p o s e d t o h a v e one ( ) .  [  ]  Brackets contain explanatory information inserted i n t o q u o t a t i o n s by t h e o b s e r v e r , r a t h e r t h a n t h e speaker. A s i n g l e l a r g e b r a c k e t i s used t o i n d i c a t e o v e r l a p p i n g speech; e.g. J e n : I w i s h I were i n t h e l a n d o f c o t t o n c a n d y . Sammy: c o t t o n candy.  N-O  C a p i t a l i z e d l e t t e r s s e p a r a t e d by hyphens i n d i c a t e t h a t l e t t e r s were s p o k e n o r words were s p e l l e d a l o u d b y the speaker.  NO  A c a p i t a l i z e d word o r p h r a s e volume.  /n/  P a r a l l e l slashed l i n e s i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e speaker made t h e s o u n d o f t h e e n c l o s e d l e t t e r o r l e t t e r s .  /n:/  A c o l o n i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r e v i o u s symbol i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e g i v e n l e t t e r s o u n d was e l o n g a t e d b y t h e speaker.  indicates increased  E l l i p s i s p o i n t s i n s e r t e d i n t h e middle o f a blank l i n e i n d i c a t e omitted m a t e r i a l ; e.g., Jen: One d a y some g r a s s growed i n t h e g a r d e n . Does i t (day) s t a r t w i t h D? C o n v e n t i o n a l p u n c t u a t i o n marks ( p e r i o d s , q u e s t i o n marks, e x c l a m a t i o n p o i n t s ) a r e u s e d t o i n d i c a t e ends o f u t t e r a n c e s o r s e n t e n c e s , u s u a l l y i n d i c a t e d by s l i g h t p a u s e s on t h e a u d i o t a p e . Commas r e f e r t o p a u s e s w i t h i n s e n t e n c e u n i t s , a s when t h e s p e a k e r s p a u s e d between words o r word p h r a s e s during dictation. Dashes ( — ) i n d i c a t e d interrupted utterances. 137  APPENDIX E Samples o f D r a w i n g / W r i t i n g  T y p e A:  Combinations  D r a w i n g and w r i t i n g c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e completed product.  by  (roughly)  equally  Kitten Kathryn  One d a y t h e r e was a c a t . She r u n n e d away f r o m home. She d i d n ' t come b a c k . But t h e next day she d i d .  138  APPENDIX E T y p e B:  W r i t i n g s e r v e d as drawn g r a p h i c s .  by  Continued  a label  for at least part of  the  Friends Jillian  139  This  i s Kirsten.  This  is  Donaldle.  APPENDIX E T y p e C:  W r i t i n g was  part  Continued  o f t h e drawn Eggs by Sammy  140  graphics.  APPENDIX E T y p e D:  Continued  Drawing p r o v i d e d t h e meaningful c o n t e x t f o r t h e w r i t i n g ; i t was n o t s i m p l y an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f t h e writing. Tree by Meghan  T h e r e was a t r e e . I t was w a i t i n g f o r a a n i m a l i t and t h e r e was f o o d i n i t .  0  TA  ^ Afi^  1  t o go i n  u ua<5 ^  TO G O \M  ^  M  e  D  N  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
France 10 0
United States 6 0
China 2 19
Israel 2 2
Canada 1 1
City Views Downloads
Unknown 12 4
Ashburn 3 0
Sunnyvale 2 0
Beijing 2 0
Montreal 1 1
Redmond 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}
Download Stats

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.831.1-0078321/manifest

Comment

Related Items