Writing Conferences:Powerful Tools for Writing InstructionCSE Technical Report 494Monette Coleman McIver and Shelby A. WolfUniversity of Colorado at BoulderNovember 1998National Center for Research on Evaluation,Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST)Center for the Study of Evaluation (CSE)Graduate School of Education & Information StudiesUniversity of California, Los AngelesLos Angeles, CA 90095-1522(310) 206-1532Project 1.5 The Effects of Standards-Based Assessments on Schools and Classrooms. BrianStecher, Project Director, CRESST/RANDCopyright © 1998 The Regents of the University of CaliforniaThe work reported herein was supported under the Educational Research and DevelopmentCenters Program, PR/Award Number R305B60002, as administered by the Office ofEducational Research and Improvement, U. S. Department of Education.The findings and opinions expressed in this report do not reflect the positions or policies ofthe National Institute on Student Achievement, Curriculum, and Assessment, the Office ofEducational Research and Improvement, or the U. S. Department of Education.1WRITING CONFERENCES:POWERFUL TOOLS FOR WRITING INSTRUCTION1Monette Coleman McIver and Shelby A. WolfUniversity of Colorado at BoulderCenter for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST)AbstractThis report highlights one of six language arts case study teachers whose classroom wehave visited for a two day period to observe writing instruction, to ask questions aboutthe KIRIS assessments and to talk with her students about their writing. In this piece wetalk about questions and how this teacher’s expert use of query gives her students theencouragement they need to make their writing flow as well as the capacity and skills tounplug the writing of their peers. This cycle informs her instruction and constitutes amajor portion of her curriculum. Her commitment to questioning embodies not only herpedagogical content knowledge but her special stance as a curious and critical reader.The students’ responses to their teacher’s questions give her the feedback she needs todecide when and how to incorporate different illustrations and examples into herteaching that will help her students become better writers.Nestled amidst the rolling hills of a Kentucky suburb rests an elementaryschool where students of all ages actively engage in literate activities. In one fourthgrade classroom these activities—reading stories aloud, writing poetry, listening topeer authors and voicing opinions to name a few—are extraordinary chiefly becausethe students have an extraordinary teacher, Mrs. Olinski. We would like to showhow this exemplary teacher talks with her students about writing and how sheemploys the art of questioning in writing conferences.Mrs. Olinski is one of six language arts case study teachers. For the past yearand a half, we have visited her classroom for a two-day period to observe herinstruction, to ask her questions about the statewide performance-based assessmentsand her personal knowledge base, and to talk with her students about their writing. 1 An earlier version of this paper was presented at the National Conference on Large ScaleAssessment titled “From Rhetoric to Reality: Assessment Reform Gets Real,” Colorado Springs, CO,June 14-17, 1998.2I’ve borrowed the pseudonym for this teacher from E. L. Konigsburg’s NewberyAward winning novel The View from Saturday because her classroom practicesclosely resemble those of the teacher in the story. Mrs. Olinski, both fictional andhypothetical, uses questions to encourage her students to take risks because“sometimes to be successful, you have to risk making mistakes” (p. 120).Here we share a snapshot of the type of risks students are willing to take in thisclassroom. Last spring we eavesdropped on an intriguing conversation taking placeduring writers’ workshop time. There were two small boys sitting in the book cornerdeeply engaged in a student-to-student writing conference. We sat quietly andlistened as Richard read his football poem to Joseph. Joseph listened intently beforeresponding based on his dual role of reader and peer.Joseph: Okay, I have a question. Is this supposed to be like a story?Richard: No a poem. A poem doesn't have to rhyme.Joseph: [agreeing] But it doesn't flow like a poem. You need to make it flowmore like a poem.Richard: [perplexed] You mean add a comma? You mean add a pause?Joseph: [struggling to articulate his thinking] To where your words connect likea poem. Since it’s not a rhyming poem, your words are kinda ...Richard: Choppy?Joseph: Yeah, that's why I asked cuz it sounded more like a story.After this brief discussion, Joseph still wasn’t satisfied with the exchange orwith his ability to adequately convey his needs as a reader to Richard. Recognizingthat they were conveniently situated in the book corner, Joseph reached behind him,pulled out a book of poetry and encouraged Richard to look at the poems as a modeleven though they were rhyming poems. They talked about the poetry, and thenJoseph offered Richard the following sound advise, “Some poems kind of stop. Butthen [they] will start flowing again. It's kind of like a waterfall when it gets pluggedup. But then it unsticks and starts flowing again.”In this piece we will talk about questions and how Mrs. Olinski’s expert use ofquery gives her students the encouragement they need to make their writing flow aswell as the capacity and skills to unplug the writing of their peers. This cycleinforms Mrs. Olinski’s instruction and constitutes a major portion of her curriculum.3Her commitment to questioning embodies not only her pedagogical contentknowledge (Shulman, 1986) but her special stance as a curious and critical reader.The students’ responses to Mrs. Olinski’s questions give her the feedback she needsto decide when and how to incorporate different illustrations and examples into herteaching that will help her students become better writers.There are three key points we would like to make. First, teachers’ wealth ofknowledge, including their pedagogical content knowledge, gives them the uniqueperspective necessary to meet the specific instructional needs of their students.Second, the writing conference, albeit short and succinct, provides valuableopportunities for teachers to meet these needs because they are so amenable to theuse of questions. And finally, Mrs. Olinski’s expert model permits her students toopenly question