My Goal:
· To improve the engagement levels of 5male and 2 female reluctant writers
· To provide a range of purposeful and authentic writing opportunities
· To improve the surface feature achievement of the group from working at level 1iii and 2 up at least 1 level and improve their audience awareness, use of content, structure and organization.
· Develop some manageable strategies that are engaging in writing. The strategies will be focused on planning and presenting clear ideas with detail for the reader.
What I did:
- Taught spelling and grammar explicitly in a additional time to writing. This was in addition to how I normally focus on surface features during writing time.
- Used Lexia software to help identify needs as well as provide relevant practice activities.
- Had the children share their learning digitally and at time in analogue form to enourage the synthesis of knowledge.
- Used the class blog and other mediums to share writing, comments, learning etc. This was a place for authentic sharing as well as a place to stress the need for clarity in writing.
- Had the children as part of rotation, regularly proofread work using the COPS template as a guide.
- Used shared books for each writing group during teaching time to record learning.
- Regularly refer children to the school writing matrix, national exemplars, and school stage feedback sheets to assess and set future goals.
- Used Podcasts, keynote, blog posts, comic life and vocaroo to share writing to our audience.
- Daily handwriting practice and instruction all year to target the needs of children who had much difficulty forming letters and spacing them apart.
The Results:
- The children are more engaged in their writing and spelling. Spelling identified as one of their preferred tasks at school (Over Maths and reading). See last post.
- The 2 boys both improved in spelling age however only 1 made any real gains against their chronological age. The 2 girls both ended up with poorer results against their chronological age.
- Against the literacy exemplars again the results are the same with only 1 child improving up 1 level.
Outside of the target group
- Majority of the class improved in spelling age by 1 - 1.5 years.
- Spelling is found by all children one of the preferred subjects at school.
- Many children improved in their surface features against the exemplars
My Thoughts
Was it worth it? It was a lot of work planning, marking, preparing and there were many very good results in the class. Many of these children however are very competent spellers and probably would have made good progress.
I guess I am unsure whether such an approach was worth it. By spending 2 hours a week explicitly on spelling and the hour or so a week planning could have been spent on language experiences, whole language teaching, more enriched writing groups, etc. Apporaches to learning which have equally engaging results. The children are all well aware of their needs in surface features and how to improve so I guess this was a sound approach. But was it the best?
I guess I am unsure whether such an approach was worth it. By spending 2 hours a week explicitly on spelling and the hour or so a week planning could have been spent on language experiences, whole language teaching, more enriched writing groups, etc. Apporaches to learning which have equally engaging results. The children are all well aware of their needs in surface features and how to improve so I guess this was a sound approach. But was it the best?
