Updating and Upgrading Early Elementary School Writing Experiences with Storytelling and Technology
Dr. Lauren E. Burrow and Dr. Shaunna Smith
|
| ||
This article employs a narrative summary of generative change (Ball, 2009) to tell the evidence-based story of two educators’ increasing advocacy for considering the updating and upgrading of preschool-based storytelling dictations and dramatization practices -- like Vivian Paley’s (1981) storytelling and story acting curriculum – in order to encourage young writers in early elementary (K-3) classrooms. Aided by the innovative and purposeful use of technology -- specifically digital storytelling – these educators have witnessed the benefits and successes of transferring traditional storytelling and story acting practices from their typical preschool classroom placements into early elementary classrooms. The ultimate effect has been pedagogy that capitalizes on 21st technology to successfully meet the still developing writing needs of 21st century learners.
Aretha Ball (2009) describes “generative change” as the “process of self-perpetuating change wherein a teacher’s pedagogical practices are inspired and influenced by the instructional approaches and theory that they are exposed to in professional development” (p. 6). In this instance, the former classroom experiences and continued dialogue between Burrow (first author/early childhood educator) and Smith (second author/technology instructor) act as the professional development. As actors in the professional development, both authors facilitated the knowledge gained, acted as the catalyst for changes in instructional planning, and acquired knowledge by learning from, and about, students. As such, this article is not a traditional “how-to” piece, but rather a “how could” piece that presents possibilities and perspectives while posing wonderings about how writing can be approached with technology. Ultimately, we encourage readers to undergo their own generative change by learning from our story in order to “produce or originate new knowledge that is useful to them in pedagogical problem solving and in meeting the education needs of their students” (Ball, 2009, p. 6).
This article will use classroom-based anecdotes to briefly describe the traditional practices of preschool storytelling curriculum. Then, using selected student examples and accompanying educator reflections, we will illustrate how to upgrade those practices in order to encourage updated writing practices that leverage technological advances to publish and plan students' best stories in a meaningful, multimodal way. Collected as part of normal class routines over a multi-year period, the student-work samples are representative of a diverse range of students (Kindergarten – 3rd grade) from multiple school types (including parochial, Gifted and Talented, and Title 1 public schools). Discussions of how to use digital storytelling to satisfy young writers’ content knowledge needs (i.e., the writing process, digital writing) will also be presented and are based on our personal reflections and discussions with early childhood teachers across the nation as we engaged in professional development. Ultimately, the discussions in this article can equip educators to use TPACK (“technological pedagogical and content knowledge”) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- a framework which essentially guides educators to think about technology as a tool that can enhance the meaningful content they are already teaching (Harris & Hoffer, 2009; Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- to decide “when” and “why” to include the tools of digital storytelling with young students’ writing experiences. Everyone has a story to tell (Paley, 1981; Rowe, 2008) and with the aid of technology and modern storytelling processes, like digital storytelling, educators may be able to help young students better prepare and present those stories in innovative ways for a changing world.
Writing in the Early Years with Vivian Paley
In the 1980s, Vivian Paley, noted pre-school and kindergarten educator and early childhood education researcher, allowed for children’s social writings with her “storytelling curriculum” which included two basic components: storytelling and story acting. Known for its ability to prompt, improve, and showcase a young student’s writing before they are even able to write, Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum is widely used, in some variation, in most high-quality toddler and preschool classrooms across the nation. Burton, Bacigalupa, Wright, and Black (2008), Cooper (1993), and Sulzby (1996) detail how Paley’s storytelling curriculum has found its way, in a variety of forms into a number of preschools that seek to provide literacy activities that emphasize “authentic, oral language practices between educators and children” (Gray, Mathes, Cooper, & Capo, 2007, p. 251). Often translated as “dictation and dramatization,” the educator-dependent practice allows the youngest writers to share their stories with their classroom of peers and families.
The first tenet – storytelling (or dictation) -- asks educators and students to enter a “literacy apprenticeship” in which the educator acts as a scribe while the student dictates a story about a topic of his or her own choosing. During this phase the educator can ask questions to help the child clarify the meaning of their words and even offer assistance (Gray, et al., 2007). The second tenet -- story acting (or dramatization) -- involves the acting out of the dictated stories. During this phase the educator acts as the director and narrator, while the student-author and his or her chosen peers act out the dictated story (the remaining students act as an audience) (Gray, et al., 2007). Since the acting is an informal activity with the main purpose being to “publish” or present/share the student’s ideas with their classmates, direction in dialogue and staging can be interjected by the educator in order to guide, improve, or sustain the action. In addition to mimicking the essential early childhood function of play, the use of dramatizations (or story acting) can provide a motivation for young children to participate in the story dictation process (Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement [CIERA], 1999, p. 363) in the first place. Strickland and Morrow (2000) similarly advocate dramatization of dictated stories since noticing, celebrating, and sharing writing with a variety of audiences in and out of school is beneficial.
An effective pedagogy for encouraging the development of writing technique, the educator-student dialogues and accompanying activities associated with Paley’s curriculum are relatively simple practices. The true art of her storytelling curriculum does require a dedicated amount of time from the educator, though. How, then, could technology -- specifically, digital storytelling and writing-based software and applications -- allow early elementary (K – 3) classroom educators to also engage in this beneficial, but time-consuming activity? As former classroom educators and current tech-realists, we believe that writing-based technologies could make possible a new pedagogy by which to address the advancing writing needs and skills of elementary school-aged writers.
Cooper (2005) acknowledges that “each educator and classroom of children will put their individual stamp on storytelling and story acting methodology” (p. 232). When I (Burrow) transitioned to teaching in early elementary classrooms, as both a traditional educator and as a visiting creative writing teaching artist, I therefore felt justified in updating the components of Paley’s storytelling curriculum in order to improve literacy skills far beyond what was traditionally thought possible for my young students. Updating of the curriculum allowed me to capture the words and ideas of my students who were still too young to write (Kindergarten) or whose length of writing was hampered by the daunting developmental task of legible handwriting (grades 1 – 3).
Upgrading Storytelling Dictation for Traditional Use
In my elementary classrooms I was eager to take the successful practices of Paley’s preschool-focused curriculum and update those principles for the benefits of my older students. I quickly discovered that storytelling can enhance the pre-writing and drafting stages of the writing process for those young writers in the early elementary school grades who have still not found their voice, lack writing confidence, or are generally intimidated by the writing process.
I often inspired storytelling from new or struggling story writers by reading to them fun, familiar adult-authored texts that exposed them to repetitive themes within children’s literature. I then elicited students’ stories by prompting them to merely retell to me a familiar text. This use of concrete models to inspire student writing often facilitated the pre-writing stage until these students were more confident in constructing their own ideas and stories. Sometimes I prompted new writers with examples of visual art or even their own student-created illustrations in order to ease their writer’s block by giving them the chance to write a story about what was happening within the visual representation of a snapshot in time (see Figures 1 and 2). Oftentimes, I found that allowing students to follow a template for their poetic writings would then lead to a fountain of words just waiting to bubble over on to the page. Other times it just took a prompt as simple as, “What did you paint a picture of?” and then requesting that the young student record their response on the artwork. Additionally, I found that just being available to discuss their writing at the onset of the writing time, often prompted reluctant writers to actually put pen to paper. Finally, for my students who were still struggling with penmanship, I often struck a compromise in which I would transcribe their dictation up to a certain point and then ask them to take over the writing. The results of these updated storytelling practices was lengthier papers and a general improvement in attitudes towards writing times.
Aretha Ball (2009) describes “generative change” as the “process of self-perpetuating change wherein a teacher’s pedagogical practices are inspired and influenced by the instructional approaches and theory that they are exposed to in professional development” (p. 6). In this instance, the former classroom experiences and continued dialogue between Burrow (first author/early childhood educator) and Smith (second author/technology instructor) act as the professional development. As actors in the professional development, both authors facilitated the knowledge gained, acted as the catalyst for changes in instructional planning, and acquired knowledge by learning from, and about, students. As such, this article is not a traditional “how-to” piece, but rather a “how could” piece that presents possibilities and perspectives while posing wonderings about how writing can be approached with technology. Ultimately, we encourage readers to undergo their own generative change by learning from our story in order to “produce or originate new knowledge that is useful to them in pedagogical problem solving and in meeting the education needs of their students” (Ball, 2009, p. 6).
This article will use classroom-based anecdotes to briefly describe the traditional practices of preschool storytelling curriculum. Then, using selected student examples and accompanying educator reflections, we will illustrate how to upgrade those practices in order to encourage updated writing practices that leverage technological advances to publish and plan students' best stories in a meaningful, multimodal way. Collected as part of normal class routines over a multi-year period, the student-work samples are representative of a diverse range of students (Kindergarten – 3rd grade) from multiple school types (including parochial, Gifted and Talented, and Title 1 public schools). Discussions of how to use digital storytelling to satisfy young writers’ content knowledge needs (i.e., the writing process, digital writing) will also be presented and are based on our personal reflections and discussions with early childhood teachers across the nation as we engaged in professional development. Ultimately, the discussions in this article can equip educators to use TPACK (“technological pedagogical and content knowledge”) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- a framework which essentially guides educators to think about technology as a tool that can enhance the meaningful content they are already teaching (Harris & Hoffer, 2009; Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- to decide “when” and “why” to include the tools of digital storytelling with young students’ writing experiences. Everyone has a story to tell (Paley, 1981; Rowe, 2008) and with the aid of technology and modern storytelling processes, like digital storytelling, educators may be able to help young students better prepare and present those stories in innovative ways for a changing world.
Writing in the Early Years with Vivian Paley
In the 1980s, Vivian Paley, noted pre-school and kindergarten educator and early childhood education researcher, allowed for children’s social writings with her “storytelling curriculum” which included two basic components: storytelling and story acting. Known for its ability to prompt, improve, and showcase a young student’s writing before they are even able to write, Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum is widely used, in some variation, in most high-quality toddler and preschool classrooms across the nation. Burton, Bacigalupa, Wright, and Black (2008), Cooper (1993), and Sulzby (1996) detail how Paley’s storytelling curriculum has found its way, in a variety of forms into a number of preschools that seek to provide literacy activities that emphasize “authentic, oral language practices between educators and children” (Gray, Mathes, Cooper, & Capo, 2007, p. 251). Often translated as “dictation and dramatization,” the educator-dependent practice allows the youngest writers to share their stories with their classroom of peers and families.
The first tenet – storytelling (or dictation) -- asks educators and students to enter a “literacy apprenticeship” in which the educator acts as a scribe while the student dictates a story about a topic of his or her own choosing. During this phase the educator can ask questions to help the child clarify the meaning of their words and even offer assistance (Gray, et al., 2007). The second tenet -- story acting (or dramatization) -- involves the acting out of the dictated stories. During this phase the educator acts as the director and narrator, while the student-author and his or her chosen peers act out the dictated story (the remaining students act as an audience) (Gray, et al., 2007). Since the acting is an informal activity with the main purpose being to “publish” or present/share the student’s ideas with their classmates, direction in dialogue and staging can be interjected by the educator in order to guide, improve, or sustain the action. In addition to mimicking the essential early childhood function of play, the use of dramatizations (or story acting) can provide a motivation for young children to participate in the story dictation process (Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement [CIERA], 1999, p. 363) in the first place. Strickland and Morrow (2000) similarly advocate dramatization of dictated stories since noticing, celebrating, and sharing writing with a variety of audiences in and out of school is beneficial.
An effective pedagogy for encouraging the development of writing technique, the educator-student dialogues and accompanying activities associated with Paley’s curriculum are relatively simple practices. The true art of her storytelling curriculum does require a dedicated amount of time from the educator, though. How, then, could technology -- specifically, digital storytelling and writing-based software and applications -- allow early elementary (K – 3) classroom educators to also engage in this beneficial, but time-consuming activity? As former classroom educators and current tech-realists, we believe that writing-based technologies could make possible a new pedagogy by which to address the advancing writing needs and skills of elementary school-aged writers.
Cooper (2005) acknowledges that “each educator and classroom of children will put their individual stamp on storytelling and story acting methodology” (p. 232). When I (Burrow) transitioned to teaching in early elementary classrooms, as both a traditional educator and as a visiting creative writing teaching artist, I therefore felt justified in updating the components of Paley’s storytelling curriculum in order to improve literacy skills far beyond what was traditionally thought possible for my young students. Updating of the curriculum allowed me to capture the words and ideas of my students who were still too young to write (Kindergarten) or whose length of writing was hampered by the daunting developmental task of legible handwriting (grades 1 – 3).
Upgrading Storytelling Dictation for Traditional Use
In my elementary classrooms I was eager to take the successful practices of Paley’s preschool-focused curriculum and update those principles for the benefits of my older students. I quickly discovered that storytelling can enhance the pre-writing and drafting stages of the writing process for those young writers in the early elementary school grades who have still not found their voice, lack writing confidence, or are generally intimidated by the writing process.
I often inspired storytelling from new or struggling story writers by reading to them fun, familiar adult-authored texts that exposed them to repetitive themes within children’s literature. I then elicited students’ stories by prompting them to merely retell to me a familiar text. This use of concrete models to inspire student writing often facilitated the pre-writing stage until these students were more confident in constructing their own ideas and stories. Sometimes I prompted new writers with examples of visual art or even their own student-created illustrations in order to ease their writer’s block by giving them the chance to write a story about what was happening within the visual representation of a snapshot in time (see Figures 1 and 2). Oftentimes, I found that allowing students to follow a template for their poetic writings would then lead to a fountain of words just waiting to bubble over on to the page. Other times it just took a prompt as simple as, “What did you paint a picture of?” and then requesting that the young student record their response on the artwork. Additionally, I found that just being available to discuss their writing at the onset of the writing time, often prompted reluctant writers to actually put pen to paper. Finally, for my students who were still struggling with penmanship, I often struck a compromise in which I would transcribe their dictation up to a certain point and then ask them to take over the writing. The results of these updated storytelling practices was lengthier papers and a general improvement in attitudes towards writing times.
|
“The Light Out Lantern” by Owen
The photograph and accompanying poem for “The Light Out Lantern” were both created by Owen, a second grader. He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. His writing was completed independently by following a class template for Senses Poetry writing. |
|
Figure 2: “Rocks” by Alex
The photograph and accompanying poem for “Rocks” were both created by Alex, a first grader. He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. Alex completed his free-verse poem by selecting phrases from the written transcription that Burrow (author) transcribed during their one-on-one conversation about his image. |
|
Revision and proofreading happen naturally throughout the pre-writing and drafting stages of storytelling as educators prompt students with simple verbal indicators that call students’ attention to opportunities for revision (“Can you tell me more about the princess? What was she wearing?”) and editing (“Do you want to say the boys are or the boys is?”). Revision and editing also occurs as students publish when students have the opportunity to witness the visualization of their writing on stage and receive “audience” (or peer) feedback. In my classrooms, peers were very willing to point out when “You didn’t say the pirate ran away from the bear!” Sometimes my students did not even realize what they meant to say until they saw the theatrical publication of their story (Cooper, 2005, p. 246). I could then prompt the new writer with, “Do you want to add that into your story?”
The process of storytelling can allow new, struggling, and even veteran student writers to craft, explore, and share their personal stories with the added bonus of an adult expert’s model or guidance. Combined with story acting, the entire process can provide a unique and compelling visual to prompt students’ deeper understanding of their narrative and provide the provocation for investigating authorial intent and story sequence (Cooper, 2005). As a result, story acting (or dramatization) provides a motivation for young children to participate in the storytelling (or dictation) process (CIERA, 1999, p. 363), thus perpetuating the presently championed “cycle-version” of the writing process.
While the dialogues designed to prompt students to share their stories and encourage the development of writing technique are fairly simple, the time required by these simple activities may be a luxury most educators simply do not have. As a preschool teacher, parceling out dictation times for each student was a week-long process that lasted at least an hour per day; given the required focus on other subjects for my older elementary-school students, finding an hour’s block of time in any given day was nearly impossible, though. For those who see merit in Paley’s storytelling curriculum, Smith’s (2nd author) understanding of the capabilities of technology integration may help transform this writing pedagogy into a digital storytelling experience that meets the growing requirements of 21st-century learning. It is this natural tailoring of the curriculum which ultimately allowed Smith to help me (Burrow) adapt Paley’s ideas to best benefit and fit the writing needs of my older elementary school-aged students for deeper and more complete literacy learning in a digital age.
Updating Paley for Technological Use
We contend that technological integration with Paley’s curriculum provides a modern and comprehensive update that can increase elementary school-aged students’ writing capabilities, capture their interests, record their stories, and meet their advancing needs as 21st-century learners. By having students work through the creation of a “written” work with digital storytelling and writing-based software applications, it allows for the dictated stories of young students to be captured with more ease, increased frequency, and innovative representation. Digital storytelling also later allows for more public “dramatizations” with added creative, visual, and multimodal publishing possibilities suitable for the modern age.
Whereas, traditional storytelling dictations tend to focus on modeling concepts of print with a pen to paper method that demonstrates to children that their spoken words can be written down to create a published story, digital storytelling focuses on celebrating that child’s spoken words or visual imagery selections as equitable stories worth sharing. Just as Vasquez (2014) claims that new technologies and social media can be used as tools to accomplish critical literacy work, digital storytelling can enable students to use their own voices to give an accurate, authentic voice to their messages and ideas, thereby providing a suitable (and sometimes superior) platform to students who are confident in their ideas and comfortable sharing them verbally, but are still wary of entering the world of writing. Digital Storytelling capitalizes on and celebrates their efforts while conditioning them to take greater risks and more frequent turns at the “writer’s wheel.”
One way that I (Burrow), was able to effectively carry over the traditional approaches to storytelling and story acting into digital realms was with Smith’s guidance on how to use digital storytelling as a means to enable young children to narrate (dictate) their stories without waiting on my availability. Storytelling in this medium can occur more frequently because not every stage is completely dependent upon waiting for an adult scribe to have the free time to take dictation; stories can happen in real-time as they are happening thereby never missing a moment of student creativity. Additionally, narrated stories ensured more accurate representations of students’ ideas by minimizing the natural deletions or substitutions that can occur when educators transcribe. Using recording hardware and/or speech-to-text software, I was able to review students’ digital stories, at my convenience, and suggest edits. It is our belief that, after teacher modeling and with a rubric for guidance, supplemental input could also come from peers and even the self-reflective young writer themselves.
Additionally, Smith also taught me (Burrow) how the digital story, itself, could become an enhanced, multimodal dramatization/publication of young students’ written work (taking the place of the traditional in-class story acting). The act of writing may be a solitary one, but the impact and celebration of it should be shared. Digital storytelling provides an enhanced platform for sharing student’s writing in ways that traditional classroom publications just cannot; extending the intended social element of the traditional storytelling process beyond educator-student conversations to foster student-student conversations that can speed up the development phases of writing. Furthermore, like Vasquez (2014), we believe that other writing-based software, applications, or social media (e.g., blogs, Prezi, discussion boards) can be combined with digital storytelling to transform the way students and teachers think about text construction and production.
In talking with other educators at many of our professional development and conference presentations, we are confident that the elements of digital story can be especially beneficial to students with special needs that may limit their handwriting or even speech capabilities. Teachers of special needs students suggest encouraging students to produce visual essays in which they select stock photos, choose accompanying music to convey tone, mood, setting, and add action—all are multimodal acts that allow more students to feel like writers.
This digital transformation of Paley’s storytelling curriculum required me to commit to spending classroom time, up front, on the upgraded traditional storytelling and story acting writing process so that students had a model for stories worth sharing through the all-encompassing digital storytelling process. So, while engaging in the storytelling process ignited many of my students’ creative ideas, engaging in the digital storytelling process propelled my students into action. Participation in this educational technology integration authentically supports cognitive and psychosocial development by allowing students to translate their verbal communication into visual communication, thus opening the proverbial door to multimodal expression. I have seen digital storytelling artifacts successfully created by learners of all ages that exemplify a range of stories, including personal narratives, informative reports, and/or content-specific tales (Robin, 2008).
Theodosakis (2009) indicates that activities of this type have cognitive benefits that encourage higher order thinking skills, such as visioning skills, research, problem solving, logic, planning, and critical thinking. Most of my young students were more eager to engage in the dynamic nature of digital storytelling to plan out their writing than were apt to write a traditional outline. Once familiar with the technology, many of my students were able to leverage the visual format of digital stories to display researched knowledge, well beyond what I have typically seen students that age accomplish when writing traditional reports (see Figure 3). So, if an educator is confident in the benefits of digital story for early elementary school writers, how can they begin to integrate the technology into their own classroom?
The process of storytelling can allow new, struggling, and even veteran student writers to craft, explore, and share their personal stories with the added bonus of an adult expert’s model or guidance. Combined with story acting, the entire process can provide a unique and compelling visual to prompt students’ deeper understanding of their narrative and provide the provocation for investigating authorial intent and story sequence (Cooper, 2005). As a result, story acting (or dramatization) provides a motivation for young children to participate in the storytelling (or dictation) process (CIERA, 1999, p. 363), thus perpetuating the presently championed “cycle-version” of the writing process.
While the dialogues designed to prompt students to share their stories and encourage the development of writing technique are fairly simple, the time required by these simple activities may be a luxury most educators simply do not have. As a preschool teacher, parceling out dictation times for each student was a week-long process that lasted at least an hour per day; given the required focus on other subjects for my older elementary-school students, finding an hour’s block of time in any given day was nearly impossible, though. For those who see merit in Paley’s storytelling curriculum, Smith’s (2nd author) understanding of the capabilities of technology integration may help transform this writing pedagogy into a digital storytelling experience that meets the growing requirements of 21st-century learning. It is this natural tailoring of the curriculum which ultimately allowed Smith to help me (Burrow) adapt Paley’s ideas to best benefit and fit the writing needs of my older elementary school-aged students for deeper and more complete literacy learning in a digital age.
Updating Paley for Technological Use
We contend that technological integration with Paley’s curriculum provides a modern and comprehensive update that can increase elementary school-aged students’ writing capabilities, capture their interests, record their stories, and meet their advancing needs as 21st-century learners. By having students work through the creation of a “written” work with digital storytelling and writing-based software applications, it allows for the dictated stories of young students to be captured with more ease, increased frequency, and innovative representation. Digital storytelling also later allows for more public “dramatizations” with added creative, visual, and multimodal publishing possibilities suitable for the modern age.
Whereas, traditional storytelling dictations tend to focus on modeling concepts of print with a pen to paper method that demonstrates to children that their spoken words can be written down to create a published story, digital storytelling focuses on celebrating that child’s spoken words or visual imagery selections as equitable stories worth sharing. Just as Vasquez (2014) claims that new technologies and social media can be used as tools to accomplish critical literacy work, digital storytelling can enable students to use their own voices to give an accurate, authentic voice to their messages and ideas, thereby providing a suitable (and sometimes superior) platform to students who are confident in their ideas and comfortable sharing them verbally, but are still wary of entering the world of writing. Digital Storytelling capitalizes on and celebrates their efforts while conditioning them to take greater risks and more frequent turns at the “writer’s wheel.”
One way that I (Burrow), was able to effectively carry over the traditional approaches to storytelling and story acting into digital realms was with Smith’s guidance on how to use digital storytelling as a means to enable young children to narrate (dictate) their stories without waiting on my availability. Storytelling in this medium can occur more frequently because not every stage is completely dependent upon waiting for an adult scribe to have the free time to take dictation; stories can happen in real-time as they are happening thereby never missing a moment of student creativity. Additionally, narrated stories ensured more accurate representations of students’ ideas by minimizing the natural deletions or substitutions that can occur when educators transcribe. Using recording hardware and/or speech-to-text software, I was able to review students’ digital stories, at my convenience, and suggest edits. It is our belief that, after teacher modeling and with a rubric for guidance, supplemental input could also come from peers and even the self-reflective young writer themselves.
Additionally, Smith also taught me (Burrow) how the digital story, itself, could become an enhanced, multimodal dramatization/publication of young students’ written work (taking the place of the traditional in-class story acting). The act of writing may be a solitary one, but the impact and celebration of it should be shared. Digital storytelling provides an enhanced platform for sharing student’s writing in ways that traditional classroom publications just cannot; extending the intended social element of the traditional storytelling process beyond educator-student conversations to foster student-student conversations that can speed up the development phases of writing. Furthermore, like Vasquez (2014), we believe that other writing-based software, applications, or social media (e.g., blogs, Prezi, discussion boards) can be combined with digital storytelling to transform the way students and teachers think about text construction and production.
In talking with other educators at many of our professional development and conference presentations, we are confident that the elements of digital story can be especially beneficial to students with special needs that may limit their handwriting or even speech capabilities. Teachers of special needs students suggest encouraging students to produce visual essays in which they select stock photos, choose accompanying music to convey tone, mood, setting, and add action—all are multimodal acts that allow more students to feel like writers.
This digital transformation of Paley’s storytelling curriculum required me to commit to spending classroom time, up front, on the upgraded traditional storytelling and story acting writing process so that students had a model for stories worth sharing through the all-encompassing digital storytelling process. So, while engaging in the storytelling process ignited many of my students’ creative ideas, engaging in the digital storytelling process propelled my students into action. Participation in this educational technology integration authentically supports cognitive and psychosocial development by allowing students to translate their verbal communication into visual communication, thus opening the proverbial door to multimodal expression. I have seen digital storytelling artifacts successfully created by learners of all ages that exemplify a range of stories, including personal narratives, informative reports, and/or content-specific tales (Robin, 2008).
Theodosakis (2009) indicates that activities of this type have cognitive benefits that encourage higher order thinking skills, such as visioning skills, research, problem solving, logic, planning, and critical thinking. Most of my young students were more eager to engage in the dynamic nature of digital storytelling to plan out their writing than were apt to write a traditional outline. Once familiar with the technology, many of my students were able to leverage the visual format of digital stories to display researched knowledge, well beyond what I have typically seen students that age accomplish when writing traditional reports (see Figure 3). So, if an educator is confident in the benefits of digital story for early elementary school writers, how can they begin to integrate the technology into their own classroom?
|
Insert Figure 3: “Avery the Caterpillar” by Nicole, Kindergarten
The screenshot represents a science inquiry report completed by Kindergartener, Nicole. Her report was recorded using the free iPad app, Shadow Puppet Edu. Nicole and Burrow (1st author) selected images together from Creative Commons Flickr and then uploaded them into the app. Nicole’s narration reflects her own learned knowledge about how a caterpillar becomes a butterfly and includes dialogue between her and Burrow. The presentation concludes with a follow up to Nicole’s expressed interest in knowing more about the mechanics of butterflies drinking. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her report. |
|
TPACK: Framing Teacher Knowledge for the Integration of Digital Storytelling
Drawing upon Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK (Technological Pedagogical And Content Knowledge) framework for understanding teacher knowledge allows us to transcend the typical debate surrounding the integration of technology and writing, which tends to center on whether to instruct students on how to write for technology or with technology and, instead, allows educators to focus not on an either/or scenario but a when/why consideration. The use of the TPACK Framework can assist teachers in framing their knowledge to integrate technology in support of their pedagogy and content, which in turn allows them to take into account the multiple purposes for young students’ writing experiences. TPACK is the means by which educators can determine how to effectively and appropriately balance pedagogical truths from the past with revelatory modern-day practices. When the TPACK framework is used appropriately, an educator can plan for a multilayered learning experience that factors in appropriate pedagogy (PK), relevant content (CK) and meaningfully integrates technology (TK). TPACK mimics the same decision-making process that educators employ when they examine traditional classroom activities to determine the pedagogy that best meet the needs of their diverse learners. In the case of digital storytelling as part of elementary school writing activities (Figure 4), this interconnected web of 21st-century educator knowledge ensures successful implementation by focusing on all aspects of the plan. |
Figure 4. TPACK Domains of Knowledge used in Teaching Elementary School Digital Storytelling.
|
In this article the valuable pedagogy (PK) that was discussed was “storytelling and story acting,” a practice that educators can use within older classrooms in order to successfully meet the content needs (CK) of young writers (i.e., the writing process). Once educators can elicit quality stories from young students, the attention can then be turned to acquiring and practicing the technological know-how (TK) necessary to improve writing experiences. By considering the TPACK of elementary school-aged digital writing, educators can be better informed as how to update traditional writing methods (like an upgraded version of Paley’s storytelling curriculum) to enable, shape, and share new writing opportunities for their students.
Tips for Successful Implementation of Digital Storytelling
Based on my (Burrow) own classroom successes and informed by Smith’s knowledge of successful technology integration into multiple classroom types, the following can help other educators successfully integrate digital storytelling into their classrooms. Since good writing is a year-round endeavor in schools, educators will need to continuously identify if students’ writing is in need of an updated medium for “publication” or “process” and then provide the developmentally appropriate instruction and technology accordingly.
I have seen digital storytelling be a creative, 21st-century vehicle through which my young students were able to showcase the final versions of their handwritten work. In this instance, digital storytelling can provide an unparalleled means by which student work can reach audiences beyond the walls of the classroom. For example, I sometimes uploaded digital stories to student-safe YouTube channels to send to other classrooms around the world or transferred them to flash drives to share with family members at home. Additionally, digital storytelling enabled my students to present their writing in a multimodal way. For example, I allowed the use of stock photos and nontraditional artwork to alleviate the fears of those students who (like me) often question their artistic abilities for illustration-purposes, while Smith explained to me how student narrations could reclaim student ownership over the voice and intent of their original writing piece (see Figure 5).
Likewise, digital animation allowed my stage-shy students to control and present the “dramatization” of their work without having to perform live (see Figure 6). This activity also enabled the student-authors to view their performances for self-critique (an activity that is difficult to accomplish when students are in the midst of traditional dramatizations). By writing for technology, my students were able to engage in a publishing experience that was both enjoyable and reflective of their technology-filled worlds.
Tips for Successful Implementation of Digital Storytelling
Based on my (Burrow) own classroom successes and informed by Smith’s knowledge of successful technology integration into multiple classroom types, the following can help other educators successfully integrate digital storytelling into their classrooms. Since good writing is a year-round endeavor in schools, educators will need to continuously identify if students’ writing is in need of an updated medium for “publication” or “process” and then provide the developmentally appropriate instruction and technology accordingly.
I have seen digital storytelling be a creative, 21st-century vehicle through which my young students were able to showcase the final versions of their handwritten work. In this instance, digital storytelling can provide an unparalleled means by which student work can reach audiences beyond the walls of the classroom. For example, I sometimes uploaded digital stories to student-safe YouTube channels to send to other classrooms around the world or transferred them to flash drives to share with family members at home. Additionally, digital storytelling enabled my students to present their writing in a multimodal way. For example, I allowed the use of stock photos and nontraditional artwork to alleviate the fears of those students who (like me) often question their artistic abilities for illustration-purposes, while Smith explained to me how student narrations could reclaim student ownership over the voice and intent of their original writing piece (see Figure 5).
Likewise, digital animation allowed my stage-shy students to control and present the “dramatization” of their work without having to perform live (see Figure 6). This activity also enabled the student-authors to view their performances for self-critique (an activity that is difficult to accomplish when students are in the midst of traditional dramatizations). By writing for technology, my students were able to engage in a publishing experience that was both enjoyable and reflective of their technology-filled worlds.
|
Image 5: “My Puppet”
by Triston, preschool
The screenshot represents an original creative story completed by preschooler, Triston. His story was inspired by his discovery of a plethora of super hero-related images on Creative Commons Flickr. Burrow (1st author) assisted him in uploading the images into the free iPad app, Shadow Puppet Edu. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear his story. |
|
Figure 6. “Dog Bite by Coley”
The screenshot represents the digital dramatization of a joke told by Kindergartener, Coley. Coley dramatized her joke by narrating it into the free iPad add, Sock Puppet. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her joke. |
|
Beyond being a means of multimodal publication, digital storytelling and writing-based software and applications updated the ways in which my young students were able to work on the process of creating a story. As suggested by the National Writing Project report by DeVoss, Eideman-Aadahl, and Hicks (2010) internet searches, blogging networks, Google Docs, social networking sites, and digital storytelling can help students plan, revise, and edit their stories. By writing with technology, my students engaged in the development stages of the writing process in a more globally social manner. I often gave time for my students to post their ideas and outlines on secure student blogs for feedback and discussion from students in older grades – a mutually-beneficial activity that encouraged my young writers and strengthened the older writers. Giving my students control over images, voice (narration), and pacing/timing provided real reasons for writing and real reasons for sharing the writing. My students were excited to add the “bells and whistles” to their stories, but knew I would not allow them to do so if they did not first craft a quality story worth enhancing.
Based on classroom experiences and ongoing discussions, we have determined that considerations should be made to ensure a students’ productive and quality interaction with the technology experience, including:
Consistency. It is imperative to emphasize the student’s original story concept throughout every phase of the digital storytelling process. As the technology is integrated, student learning outcomes and the overall writing goals must remain center stage. Digital storytelling software will limit the length of young writers’ writing--a truth that may delight word-shy students and challenge verbose ones. As a result, mini-lessons in word choice, conciseness, or idea focus may be warranted. The limitations of the technology should never limit the student’s original story concept, though.
Patience. There are many technology-related factors that have potential to cause difficulties for both educators and students. The best approach is to always have a back-up plan (such as alternative writing prompts and activities) for dealing with a lack of technology or dealing with unreliable technology. Imparting a patient outlook onto the students is yet another way project-based learning activities, such as this, can prepare even young children with the reality of technology’s limitations.
Safety. In order for students to feel free to be creative enough to write their best story, a safe environment must be provided. I had discussions with my classes about how to provide constructive criticism in order to help them develop important social skills while also assisting them to develop a keen awareness of self-assessment in relation to others’ comments (emphasizing that the criticism is “about your work, not you!”). This is especially important in elementary school settings as these students are still developing their voices and learning to accept criticism for not being “perfect.” As an educator, this truth translated into my commitment to assess projects like these based on the process involved in the creation and helping parents resist the urge to expect a Hollywood blockbuster.
An iterative creative process. As with other design processes, digital storytelling is not a linear model and students may cycle back to redo a section of the project in order to achieve the intended vision. Based on my (Burrow) classroom experiences, Smith outlines a 4-phase process:
(1) Planning. Comparable to Paley’s storytelling stage, it can be carried out as part of in-class or virtual writer’s workshops through the use of in-class discussions or micro-blogs and class discussion board postings as students work with the educator to write the script and create the storyboard.
(2) Creating. It adds a “rehearsal” component that is not required in Paley’s storytelling curriculum as students harness their visual and auditory voice to locate and/or create appropriate images (photographs, video clips, drawings, etc.) and audio (soundtrack, recorded voice, sound effects, etc.). Since this process is not linear, some of my students actually started with image acquisition as a way of prompting written content.
(3) Editing. Software (such as PhotoStory for Windows or iMovie for Mac) can be used to combine images while being mindful of pacing and economy. DeVoss, et. al. (2010) gives evidence that the use of digital storytelling actually enhanced the essential but potentially laborious revision phase of the writing process because it gave students reason and desire to engage in the activity, of their own accord (p. 38).
(4) Presentation. Comparable to Paley’s story acting stage, students’ final creations and efforts are celebrated by sharing the stories online with parents and the school community or by hosting a school-wide red carpet Academy Award Night to screen student work. The presentation phase should be prefaced with an explanation to the audience about the emphasis on process and the accomplishment associated with students’ developing writing skills.
Digital Writing: Updating Storytelling for 21-st Century Learning
This article discussed and offered examples of how to help young students write well and how to use technology for and with their writing. Ultimately, we suggest that educators consider the TPACK framework as a means of justifying the choice of when and why to effectively use technology to enhance young students’ writing experiences. If elementary school educators are willing to upgrade and update the traditional writing practices of Paley with technology integration, then they can retain the valuable literary experiences of storytelling curriculum while simultaneously meeting the advancing needs and challenges of 21st-century writing. Focused instruction in early writing skills answers a vital call to give children the means by which to use imagination and play to comprehend, work through, share, and celebrate the world that they will someday be asked to excel in. Storytelling gives voices to children, but digital storytelling may be better able to help them plan and produce that voice for their technology-focused worlds.
References
Ball, A. (2009). Toward a theory of generative change: In culturally and linguistically complex classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1). Retrieved from http://aer.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/46/1/45
Burton, M., Bacigalupa, C., Wright, C., & Black, T. (2008). Windows into Children’s thinking: A guide to storytelling and dramatization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4), 363.
Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA). (1999). Emergent Literacy: A Polyphony of Perspectives. University of Michigan School of Education: D. B. Yaden, D. W. Rowe, & L. MacGillivray.
Cooper, P. (1993). When stories come to school: Telling, writing, and performing stories in the early childhood classroom. Teachers & Writers Collaborative: New York.
Cooper, P. M. (2005). Literacy learning and pedagogical purpose in Vivian Paley's 'storytelling curriculum'. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 5(3), 229.
DeVoss, D.N., Eidman-Aadahl, E., & Hicks, T. (2010). Because digital writing matters: Improving student writing in online and multimedia environments. National Writing Project. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gray, L., Mathes, B., Cooper, P., & Capo, K. (2007). One authentic early literacy practice and three standardized tests: Can a storytelling curriculum measure up? Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 28(3), 251.
Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE).
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108, 1017-1054. Retrieved from: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishra-koehler-tcr2006.pdf
Paley, V.G.(1981) Wally’s Stories. Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory Into Practice. 47. pp. 220-228.
Rowe, D. W. (2008). The social construction of intentionality: Two-year-olds’ and adults’ participation at a preschool writing center. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(4).
Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (2000). Beginning Reading and Writing. Teachers College Press. Teachers College, Columbia University: New York and London.
Sulzby, E. (1996). Roles of oral and written language as children approach conventional literacy. In C. Pontecorvo, M. Orsolini, B. Burge, & L. Resnick (Eds.), Children's early text construction (pp.25–46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Theodosakis, N. (2004). The director in the classroom. San Diego, CA: Tech4Learning.
Vasquez, V. (2014). Reader’s commentary: Critical literacy and technology. Council Chronicle(23),3.
Based on classroom experiences and ongoing discussions, we have determined that considerations should be made to ensure a students’ productive and quality interaction with the technology experience, including:
Consistency. It is imperative to emphasize the student’s original story concept throughout every phase of the digital storytelling process. As the technology is integrated, student learning outcomes and the overall writing goals must remain center stage. Digital storytelling software will limit the length of young writers’ writing--a truth that may delight word-shy students and challenge verbose ones. As a result, mini-lessons in word choice, conciseness, or idea focus may be warranted. The limitations of the technology should never limit the student’s original story concept, though.
Patience. There are many technology-related factors that have potential to cause difficulties for both educators and students. The best approach is to always have a back-up plan (such as alternative writing prompts and activities) for dealing with a lack of technology or dealing with unreliable technology. Imparting a patient outlook onto the students is yet another way project-based learning activities, such as this, can prepare even young children with the reality of technology’s limitations.
Safety. In order for students to feel free to be creative enough to write their best story, a safe environment must be provided. I had discussions with my classes about how to provide constructive criticism in order to help them develop important social skills while also assisting them to develop a keen awareness of self-assessment in relation to others’ comments (emphasizing that the criticism is “about your work, not you!”). This is especially important in elementary school settings as these students are still developing their voices and learning to accept criticism for not being “perfect.” As an educator, this truth translated into my commitment to assess projects like these based on the process involved in the creation and helping parents resist the urge to expect a Hollywood blockbuster.
An iterative creative process. As with other design processes, digital storytelling is not a linear model and students may cycle back to redo a section of the project in order to achieve the intended vision. Based on my (Burrow) classroom experiences, Smith outlines a 4-phase process:
(1) Planning. Comparable to Paley’s storytelling stage, it can be carried out as part of in-class or virtual writer’s workshops through the use of in-class discussions or micro-blogs and class discussion board postings as students work with the educator to write the script and create the storyboard.
(2) Creating. It adds a “rehearsal” component that is not required in Paley’s storytelling curriculum as students harness their visual and auditory voice to locate and/or create appropriate images (photographs, video clips, drawings, etc.) and audio (soundtrack, recorded voice, sound effects, etc.). Since this process is not linear, some of my students actually started with image acquisition as a way of prompting written content.
(3) Editing. Software (such as PhotoStory for Windows or iMovie for Mac) can be used to combine images while being mindful of pacing and economy. DeVoss, et. al. (2010) gives evidence that the use of digital storytelling actually enhanced the essential but potentially laborious revision phase of the writing process because it gave students reason and desire to engage in the activity, of their own accord (p. 38).
(4) Presentation. Comparable to Paley’s story acting stage, students’ final creations and efforts are celebrated by sharing the stories online with parents and the school community or by hosting a school-wide red carpet Academy Award Night to screen student work. The presentation phase should be prefaced with an explanation to the audience about the emphasis on process and the accomplishment associated with students’ developing writing skills.
Digital Writing: Updating Storytelling for 21-st Century Learning
This article discussed and offered examples of how to help young students write well and how to use technology for and with their writing. Ultimately, we suggest that educators consider the TPACK framework as a means of justifying the choice of when and why to effectively use technology to enhance young students’ writing experiences. If elementary school educators are willing to upgrade and update the traditional writing practices of Paley with technology integration, then they can retain the valuable literary experiences of storytelling curriculum while simultaneously meeting the advancing needs and challenges of 21st-century writing. Focused instruction in early writing skills answers a vital call to give children the means by which to use imagination and play to comprehend, work through, share, and celebrate the world that they will someday be asked to excel in. Storytelling gives voices to children, but digital storytelling may be better able to help them plan and produce that voice for their technology-focused worlds.
References
Ball, A. (2009). Toward a theory of generative change: In culturally and linguistically complex classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1). Retrieved from http://aer.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/46/1/45
Burton, M., Bacigalupa, C., Wright, C., & Black, T. (2008). Windows into Children’s thinking: A guide to storytelling and dramatization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4), 363.
Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA). (1999). Emergent Literacy: A Polyphony of Perspectives. University of Michigan School of Education: D. B. Yaden, D. W. Rowe, & L. MacGillivray.
Cooper, P. (1993). When stories come to school: Telling, writing, and performing stories in the early childhood classroom. Teachers & Writers Collaborative: New York.
Cooper, P. M. (2005). Literacy learning and pedagogical purpose in Vivian Paley's 'storytelling curriculum'. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 5(3), 229.
DeVoss, D.N., Eidman-Aadahl, E., & Hicks, T. (2010). Because digital writing matters: Improving student writing in online and multimedia environments. National Writing Project. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gray, L., Mathes, B., Cooper, P., & Capo, K. (2007). One authentic early literacy practice and three standardized tests: Can a storytelling curriculum measure up? Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 28(3), 251.
Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE).
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108, 1017-1054. Retrieved from: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishra-koehler-tcr2006.pdf
Paley, V.G.(1981) Wally’s Stories. Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory Into Practice. 47. pp. 220-228.
Rowe, D. W. (2008). The social construction of intentionality: Two-year-olds’ and adults’ participation at a preschool writing center. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(4).
Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (2000). Beginning Reading and Writing. Teachers College Press. Teachers College, Columbia University: New York and London.
Sulzby, E. (1996). Roles of oral and written language as children approach conventional literacy. In C. Pontecorvo, M. Orsolini, B. Burge, & L. Resnick (Eds.), Children's early text construction (pp.25–46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Theodosakis, N. (2004). The director in the classroom. San Diego, CA: Tech4Learning.
Vasquez, V. (2014). Reader’s commentary: Critical literacy and technology. Council Chronicle(23),3.