Passions, Mandates, and Quests:
A Writing Project Fellow's Venture Toward Proficiency

            When passions and mandates collide the outcome is inevitable.    I can vouch for that, thanks to my experience with the National Writing Project at Western Kentucky University.  In 1990, I was accepted into the NWP Summer Institute.  Like everyone else who’d gone before me (and since), it transformed me professionally.  I couldn’t wait to get back into my classroom to apply what I’d learned.  Near the end of the institute, representatives from the Kentucky Department of Education came to discuss the Kentucky Education Reform Act that had recently passed.  Students were going to have to write for our new state assessment.  How timely!  I was more than ready.

            Students in my district were needy in many ways.  Our once thriving coal business had dwindled due to a high sulfur content.  That left Muhlenberg County without many resources.  The percentage of our population with income below the poverty level at that time was 27.4% as compared to 16% nationwide.  Our county’s median household income was $28,566.  Unemployment was at 7.6%.  High school dropouts not working (age 16-19) equaled 46.3% and the percentage of working age population (16-64) with literacy levels 1 and 2 was 44.3%.  Also, the number of grandparents as primary caregivers (per 1000 population) fell between 9.7 and 11.4.  Our percentage of 7^th graders scoring proficient or distinguished in writing was only 14.9%.   Our state assessment assigns one of four performance levels: novice, apprentice, proficient, or distinguished.  We had our work cut out for us.   

            I went back to my fifth graders when the school year began, armed with strategies and rationale.  My students and I busied ourselves in the generation of writing from personal narratives to poetry.  We created learning logs and reading logs.  We kept personal journals.   Mini lessons replaced worksheets.  From participles to pronouns, I assessed their knowledge by looking at the writing they generated.  Patterns of mistakes provided me with information about individualized needs to address and the drafts became the worksheets that they then corrected.  Chapter tests were given to ensure that my language arts content was being learned.  It was.  In fact, my fifth graders who represented our school at the governor’s cup competition won every language arts honor available: composition AND grammar.  (And I had many more students capable of doing the same thing.)  Before long, I received an invitation to present at the academic team state conference.  I gave all the credit to my use of writing in the classroom.  Years later, I still do.

            When a KDE writing grant became available in 1992, my principal placed the application on my desk and supervisors at our district office helped me fill it out.  The funding released me from my classroom each afternoon to provide job-embedded, ongoing professional development via modeling in other classrooms.  With teachers present, I drafted in full view of each class while thinking aloud about choices I made. I helped students “read like writers” by critically reading texts generated by others, highlighting and labeling our favorite parts, reworking scrambled paragraphs from feature articles based on what they notice about the organizational signals… I scaffolded the students and their teachers through the writing process. 

On Fridays, I traveled to other schools in my district pulling teachers together to share my findings.  We met for ½ day in the library or lunchroom with coffee and snacks and discussed what was/wasn’t working and why.  When the grant ended, teachers across my district wrote our superintendent to request that he find a way to hire me as a full-time, district-wide language arts consultant.  I created my job description and I’ve been working in this capacity ever since. 

Initially, I divided my time evenly, spending a week at a time in each elementary school.  I saw all grade levels worked with all content areas.  Five year-olds, for example,  “wrote” personal narratives about boo-boo stories.  We first shared our stories orally.  I distributed construction paper and crayons, so they could draw pictures of themselves.   Band-Aids were placed on each drawing to represent boo-boos.  Young authors were instructed to “write” personal narratives about their boo-boos: scribbling, stringing random letters, sounding out words, and copying environmental print.  (We shared immediately because if much time lapsed, they’d forget what they wanted the piece to say, which is developmentally appropriate.) 

            First graders listened to predictable texts like Rosie’s Walk by Pat Hutchins (Simon and Schuster, 2005), which is full of prepositional phrases that move readers through a barnyard setting.  We generated dialogue and thoughts for the two main characters in each setting recording our text on cutouts of speech bubbles and thought clouds.  After memorizing Rosie’s Walk in its original format, we used the pattern to generate new stories where new characters moved through new settings for new reasons.  For instance, one class was studying how big cities and rural towns differ.  Our setting became the city with our main character (a shopper) moving past the taxicab, through the turnstile, and into the subway.  Once we’ve collaborated to generate text and students are ready, I then allow for independent work.  In this case, the setting was the school.  Young writers could choose a teacher, the janitor, a student, or the principal as the main character.  I gave them “books” to write their stories in and we toured the building and yard looking for things to walk under, around, and through.

          With older students, I did genre studies.  From memoirs to scripts, I brought sample texts for critical reading.  We analyzed each writer’s craft as we discovered the characteristics of a genre.  Titles, transitions, and tense were studied in the context of these “touchstone texts”.  I always modeled the process.  Next, we collaborated and generated a text together.  Finally, I turned them loose to try their hand at a genre.

            I have to say I’m probably the one who learned most.  Going from room to room, trying strategies and reflecting on what worked or didn’t and why, afforded me experience way ahead of my years.  By the time I’d made my rounds through the county, I had a genre figured out.  I typed up my processes and my findings.  I collected student samples to share.  I compiled bibliographies containing touchstone texts, as well as professional reading recommendations.  My brief stint as statewide primary writing consultant in 1996 afforded me the opportunity and motivation to put these ideas into a more “sharable” format.  I entitled the document, “Building the Foundation the Write Way” and our state department mailed a copy to every elementary school in Kentucky. 

Amy Driskill, 4^th grade teacher in my district said, “What I have come to appreciate about Donna over the years is her consistent voice of reason.  Donna always helps me look at a piece of writing or a technique of teaching with fresh eyes.  Though there are a few tried and true approaches she brings to my classroom every year, one of the best things is how she is constantly coming up with a new writing strategy that makes my job a lot easier.  Donna’s middle name is “SHARE”!  She is so good about passing along ideas that she generates and accumulates across the county and beyond.  There’s nothing more satisfying than to walk away from an afternoon with Donna saying, “Hey, I can DO this.”

            Serving my writing project at Western Kentucky University as elementary co-director for nine years kept my level of inspiration high.  Working closely with likeminded others from all grade levels and content areas offered me new perspectives that I brought back to my district each fall.  I was able to keep abreast of current reading.  (Gurus like Atwell, Graves, Murray, and Routman are now vicarious houseguests of mine on a regular basis.) Dr. John Hagaman, director of the WKU project also sends me packing throughout the region via the WKU Outreach Program to serve other districts.  Another way I stay in touch with the WKU/NWP is by attending all of the sessions provided that bring national experts to campus: Stephanie Harvey, Cris Tovani, Carl Anderson, Shelley Harwayne…  Collectively, these opportunities to grow benefit my own district by making me a greater conduit of “the cause”.  

            A fringe benefit of my classroom visits, according to teachers, is the passion for writing that I bring.  Janet Steele, 7^th grade language arts teacher puts it this way: My students look forward to Mrs. Vincent coming into our classroom.  They know that she has written many published pieces and want her opinion about their writing.  Students love it when Donna reads their pieces and gives them praise and advice.  When we begin a new piece of writing, students will ask, ‘Is Mrs. Donna Vincent coming?’  It has also helped ME as a new teacher to have an expert come into my classroom to give me guidance and answer questions that I have about the teaching of writing.” 

            Another South Middle teacher, Lauren Newman, agrees, Donna offers great examples and spring boards that motivate my students to write.  She offers various writing strategies that help my students to get their creativity moving.  She is a wonderful asset and a great help to me.” 

            To determine the impact of this implementation, we experimented with tuning protocols and applied the Ky. Marker Papers to analyze student work.  My state provides great tools for teachers to use to measure student progress.  These Marker Papers are collections of student samples from Kentucky representative of all grade levels, all performance levels, and multiple genres.  They’re annotated to assist teachers in the analysis for the purpose of informing instruction, which is another technique I model and encourage. 

            During the 1994-95 school year, two KDE writing consultants, Pam Ladd and Sharon Hatton, came to Muhlenberg County to determine what was making the difference.  Our state assessment portfolio scores at the fourth grade level had gone from 74.7% novice in 91-92 down to 10.7% novice in 94-95.  Apprentice scores had jumped from 22.65% to 64.69.  Our proficient scores rose from 2.65% to 23.92% during the same time period.  The criteria for proficient writing in Kentucky includes focusing on a purpose, meeting the needs of the audience, employing voice and/or suitable tone.  Ideas must be elaborated and relevant.  Proficient organization is described as logical and predictable with a variety of sentences, acceptable, effective language, and few errors relative to the length and complexity of the piece.  My efforts were paying off!  Ladd and Hatton interviewed students and teachers.  They analyzed student work and included samples in their report (which is available on ERIC ED409570). Findings suggest marked improvement in focused purpose and audience awareness, and enhancement of idea development and organization, with the most noted improvement in sentences, language, and correctness. Overall, student writing became more expressive and imaginative according to Ladd and Hatton.  Credit was given to the language arts consultant for successfully leading teachers toward a greater understanding of how writing instruction works. 

Writing is a major part of our state assessment.  Portfolios, on-demand writing, and open response questions require students to write in every content area.  As our Commonwealth Accountability Testing System (CATS) scores reflected growth at the elementary level with teachers moving to a more independent level, my superintendent moved me to middle school in 2002-03.  At South Middle, portfolios with novice scores had always hovered around 74.  In two years, with the same kinds of modeling, critical reading of texts, and scaffolding, I’d helped reduce the number of novice portfolios from 72 to 2.  In that same time period, the number of proficient portfolios jumped from 15 to 99.  North Middle experienced similar increases with novice dropping from 68 to 5 in two years.  Proficient jumped from 31 to 78.  My visits to elementary classrooms during this time were few.  I mainly worked with new fourth grade teachers or teachers new to writing.  Fourth grade portfolio and on-demand scores continue a steady climb.  Our elementary writing scores have gone from 72.2236 to 79.2163 since my focus moved to the middle schools in 2002.  

Debbie Houghland, instructional supervisor values Donna’s input:  “Muhlenberg County Students, teachers and administrators are fortunate to have Donna Vincent in residence.  Before 1990 and the passage of the Kentucky Education Reform Act, teachers who possessed skills similar to Donna’s were an isolated few.  Donna was always ahead of the crowd, but now she is able to and impassioned about sharing her deep understanding of the reading/writing connection with all who come in contact with her.  As our school district explores the impact of various approaches to school improvement, we are able to see in concrete data how our elementary and middle schools have improved their writing scores due to Donna Vincent’s leadership.”

   In addition to visiting classrooms regularly to assist with prewriting and revision strategies, I also send out emails that serve as professional development to all teachers in my district.  I attach power points that I’ve designed to be engaging, quick, and easy to read, because I know that teachers are busy.  There’s just so much time and energy to go around.  I notify them of state and national learning opportunities and updates sent to them range from the latest best practice approaches and newly-passed state regulations.  Teachers tell me they have a folder on their computers where they save all my emails for future reference.  Stephanie Woodson, an elementary teacher from Greenville Elementary states, “As a Language Arts teacher, I am thankful to have Donna Vincent just an email, phone call, or central office visit away every day.  The wealth of resources, updated information, hands-on lessons, and encouragement she provides help our students as they  progress toward proficiency.  I can’t imagine trying to teach reading and writing without her guidance.  Our district is extremely fortunate to have her.”

            Since professional reading is so necessary, I form professional study groups each year.  Leah Kirkpatrick, a middle school teacher, always takes part in these.  I get great ideas from Donna and from other teachers during these meetings.  She has given me wonderful books to read about how to teach reading in middle school.  The students love these activities and learn so much!  Even though I’m a relatively new teacher, I was able to help our textbook committee choose a reading text with some of the professional authors that we’ve studied listed in its bibliography: Beers, Daniels, Robb! 

I select several titles on the same topic: literature circles, emergent writing, engaging boys in literacy…  I send out an email and invite teachers to select a title.  The district provides the books, the food, and a small stipend to encourage teachers from all grade levels and content areas to join.  We try to see the author, if possible.  Harvey Daniels.  Cris Tovani.  Sometimes I take teachers to a state conference and sometimes I help bring the expert to the district.  Knowing that the best way to learn something is to teach it to others, I occasionally take a teacher or two on the road with me during the summer to help me share with other districts what we’ve learned together.  I also write up initiatives for our district’s school improvement plan to facilitate professional growth and impact student learning.

Wondering about the impact I’m having at the high school level?  Most of my services to them are still indirect at this point.  Those emails I mentioned earlier plus the writing foundation I’ve provided their students when they were in elementary and middle school.  Also, a couple of summers ago, I analyzed their portfolios to determine school-wide needs and made some instructional recommendations.  I sometimes go and speak to the entire group about assessment concerns regarding writing.  I suspect my next move will be in their direction. 

Even without direct access to me, there are small gains being made at the high school.  In 1999, for example, Muhlenberg North High School had 59.1932  in the proficient range for writing accountability.  This past year, they had increased proficient numbers to 67.6715.  The number of novice portfolios was reduced from 26.53 to 7.24 this past year.  On-demand scores had a novice reduction, too: from 26.02 to 17.22.  South High’s numbers look even better.  Since 1999, they’ve reduced novice portfolios from 42.86 to 2.52 and the on-demand novice reduction moved from 26.25 down to 18.47.  Proficiency, which is our world-class goal has risen from 14.38 in 1999 to 21.66 this past year.  This isn’t a huge gain, but it’s a gain no less.       

            National Writing Project turns curiosity into quest.  Teachers longing for knowledge gather to reflect upon what works best in the classroom.  That knowledge kindles the passion needed to rise to the occasion… to meet the challenge.  With or without the mandate, we writing project folks are propelled into action by this experience.  We’re compelled to share what we know about good teaching with all who will listen.  Kentucky’s mandate, along with our passion, provides the audience. 

--Donna Vincent, Project V, Language Arts Consultant for Muhlenberg County Schools