CESI Conference January 2002 St.Patrick's College

The Primary School Curriculum (1999) being introduced at present recommends the use of the ‘process approach’ for the teaching of Irish writing and recognises the potential of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in facilitating this process. This study is therefore of great significance as it is grounded in the theory and recommendations of the revised curriculum.

Background
The study is set in a primary school situated in a rural town in the West of Ireland. English is the main language of instruction and Irish is taught as a second language. The research was undertaken over a six-month period with twenty-five fourth-class girls. The research methodology was based on the critical educational paradigm of Action Research. Throughout the study, pupils worked collaboratively in pairs at the computer. Clicker, a multimedia-authoring program, was the computer software used. Data was collected, analysed and eventually categorised as findings emerged.

Rationale
In Irish primary schools, language skills are generally taught in the order of listening, speaking, reading and writing. Language is presented entirely orally in the infant classes with written form being withheld until later stages. In the teaching of writing, the focus has mainly been on functional writing and composition writing. Traditional approaches have emphasised form and structure rather than process and creativity.

The nature of written discourse, as well as the writing process, has attracted renewed interest from educational researchers, linguists and teachers. However, research into second language written discourse seems to have fallen behind. Much remains to be discovered about how second language learners write and learn to write and about the kinds of instruction they benefit from. It was this need that prompted my action research project.

For some time, children’s poor attitude towards Irish writing had become evident in my classroom. I realised that their feelings about writing were likely to be influenced by the way that writing is taught and the messages that the teacher transmits about writing. I appreciated that for children engaging in learning to write in Irish, the complexity of mastering writing skills is compounded by the difficulties inherent in learning the Irish language.

The time had come for me to develop a framework for action. Given my belief in the power of ICT, I made a decision to integrate the use of computer software into the teaching and learning process. I adapted a multimedia-authoring program, for Irish language use within my classroom.

My aim, in conducting this qualitative inquiry, was to tap the energy and enthusiasm of the children for writing in their native language while developing strategies and skills required for the planning, drafting and editing stages of the second language writing process.

I wanted to lure those who resist Irish writing as well as those who experience learning difficulties to become deeply involved in the writing process. I hoped to dispel any negative perceptions the children might have about Irish writing and enable them to view writing as a purposive, meaningful and rewarding activity for everyday use, rather than as another desktop activity.

The value of writing
While traditionally it has been listed as the second of the “Three Rs” – and consequently a cornerstone in the child’s education – writing, nevertheless, has generally not been accorded the same importance as reading, either by parents or by teachers (Ó Beoláin, 1987: 5).

Many of us associate writing with what we were taught in school and we lose out on learning about the purpose and place of writing for ourselves. Most of us are so burdened by required writing that we forget about the writing we unconsciously initiate every day, from what appears at first glance to be trivial – from signing a cheque book, writing a shopping list, leaving a message to sending a greeting or keeping a diary. Graves (1994: 36) points out that writing is a highly personal medium through which we communicate the facts and meaning of our experience.

Arnold (1991: 13) feels writing is too rarely esteemed for the intrinsic benefits it can confer on those who experience its self-developing and self-affirming potential. Writing allows freedom and creativity and enables the writer to connect to others while expressing oneself and defining one’s feelings. Vygotsky (1978) discussed the different psychological functions involved in writing compared with talk and attributed a different cognitive status to the written form while others, working along Piagetian lines, have suggested that literacy may be the key factor to higher reasoning abilities.

A ‘process approach’ to writing
Many models of the writing process have been developed. Each model is based on an analysis of writing as a series of stages each with a distinctive type of behaviour. Though the definition of the writing process and the number of stages differ between writers; several writers (Atwell 1987; Graves 1983; MacArthur; Montague 1990) describe writing as a complex, non-linear and recursive process encompassing the steps of planning, drafting, revising and editing. Competent writers draw upon their knowledge, skills, and cognitive strategies to set goals for their writing, organize ideas, generate text, evaluate, revise and edit their work (Bahr, Nelson, Van Meter and Yanna, 1996: 150).

Contemporary thinking encourages us to teach children to view text as something to be considered, evaluated and revisited. Jessel (1992) explains:

…text can convey ideas and the recording of text allows ideas to be re-read and reflected upon…If we wish children to work in this way it is important to encourage them to view writing as a mutable entity, something to be experimented with in the process of their learning.

(cited in McFarlane, 1997: 112)

Graves believes children want to write and are natural writers, keen to express themselves. His philosophy of the process approach and the pedagogical methods he recommends are breathtakingly simple. The children decide on a topic to write about, they write every day, they talk about it with others, they revise and produce multiple drafts of their work and finally, they present it in some form for others to read. The only essential requirement is the presence of teachers who understand the philosophical principles, which underpin process writing, who see their role as primarily recognising the children as writers who are to be supported and guided as they work on their writing. ‘The teaching of writing demands the control of two crafts – teaching and writing. They can neither be avoided, nor separated’ (Smith and Elley, 1998: 41).

Figure 1: Model of Process Approach to Teaching Writing

Second Language Writing
Second language (L2) process-oriented research has lagged behind process-oriented theory and practice. However, the valuable research done on first language (L1) writing by investigators such as Flower and Hayes in the early nineteen eighties forms a useful basis for researchers into L2 writing.

Browne (1996: 161) believes children’s second-language writing will follow the same pattern of development as first-language writers. According to Zamel:

… research into second-language composing processes seems to corroborate much of what we have learned from research in first-language writing.

(Krapels, 1990: 38)

Zamel, Raimes and others have recommended teaching writing as a process in L2 classrooms, thereby decreasing the focus on surface-level errors and achieving correctness. They encouraged their colleagues to learn from L1 composition theory, practice and research and apply effective L1 techniques to L2 writing instruction. However, they stressed L2 researchers must be careful not to let L1 studies guide or determine their investigations of L2 writing processes because the research contexts are not the same (Krapels, 1990: 38).

Studies conducted by linguists such as Jones, Jacobs and Zamel have found that factors beyond linguistic competence determined the quality of students’ writing. They make the point that competence in the composing process is more important in the ability to write proficiently in a second language. The research findings of Edelsky (1982), Gaskill (1986), Jones and Tetroe (1987) show that one’s L1 writing process transfers to, or is reflected in one’s L2 writing process (Krapels 1990: 49). These studies indicate that the use of the process approach might also be effective for teaching L2 writing.

Writing without a pen
Many educators pose the question ‘Why use ICT?’ The answer is quite simple. Children arrive in the classroom having encountered and used new technologies in many aspects of their everyday lives. Society has undergone a ‘technological revolution’ and ICT now permeates work, leisure, learning and home life.

If education is about learning – cognitive, social, emotional, spiritual, moral and physical – teachers must consider the best experiences, resources and environments in which it can be supported. Many claims are made for the potential of ICT to enhance cognitive learning, develop problem-solving and higher-level thinking skills and to extend physical and mental abilities (Loveless, 1995: 2).

Many extol the virtues in using ICT in children’s writing. Westwood (1997: 147) believes the arrival of word processors in the classroom heralded a new opportunity for students of all levels of ability to enter the realm of writing and composing with enthusiasm and enjoyment.

Bright (1990) advises the teacher to be aware when integrating technology into the writing curriculum that it cannot eliminate problems, but with instruction and support from teachers and peers, most students can experience success in writing through the use of the word processor (Simic: 1994).

The use of ICT has implications for the drafting stage of the writing process. All writing produced on the computer, whatever the quality, looks good. The computer does not allow for differentiation between those with well and poorly developed physical writing skills. Because word-processed text has a professional physical appearance, this is an immediate and important step towards its goal of effective communication (Wray, 1990: 64).

If you write with a goose quill you scratch the sweaty pages and keep stopping to dip for ink. Your thoughts go too fast for your aching wrist…but with him (word processor) your fingers dream, your mind brushes the keyboard, you are borne on golden pinions…

Umberto Eco (cited in Davies, 1991: 16)

Word processors have also implied substantial changes for writers with regard to revision processes. The revising opportunities give room for a more flexible organisation of the writing process, allowing writers to work recursively and to explore their topic through reconsidering what has been written (Eklundh and Kollberg, 1996: 163).

Word processors provide the freedom to edit easily and writing takes on a form where ideas can be explored, extended and reviewed. Fisher stresses this facility for redrafting could have important consequences for cognitive development:

As they mould and remould their thoughts, a click here, a press there and they have a new improved version of their writing without any of the agony of re-writing in longhand.

(Davies, 1991: 17)

The Concept Keyboard is a powerful addition to the hardware of any classroom as a support for writing. Keys can be configured to represent pre-programmed vocabulary that the learner finds difficult. Text can be entered from the concept keyboard as letters, single words, phrases, sentences or even paragraphs. The vocabulary forthcoming when this organisation is used is invariably much richer. By touching a series of keys, struggling writers can successfully produce written drafts with maximum accuracy. They are released from the physical burden of putting pen to paper or even having to think about spelling and can give full rein to their creative processes (Mann, 1989: 63).

The multimedia-authoring program Clicker assumes a model of the Concept Keyboard. It includes Clicker grids made up of cells that can hold letters, words, phrases or pictures. By clicking on a cell, the child can send its contents to Clicker Writer in the same way as a concept keyboard. Grids can be tailored to meet the needs of individual students. Grids can also be linked to each other in a semantic structure.

Computer Software
The supportive writing and multimedia tool, Clicker, was used for this study. This program incorporates text, graphics, sound, animation and video for the creation of multimedia presentations.

The Clicker screen, though similar to other word processing screens, is divided into Clicker Writer and a Clicker grid:

Figure 1: Clicker Screen

Clicker grids, displayed beneath the Clicker-Writer screen, give children instant access to a bank of words, pictures and sounds. Children have the option of producing text in Clicker-Writer with or without the use of a Clicker grid. Though there are a number of ready-made grids available, these have been prepared for use in the English language classroom. We faced the enormous challenge of building our own Irish-language word grids, picture grids and sentence builders. The sounds and labelled graphics provided by the program had to be matched with the appropriate Irish vocabulary.

Figure 2: Clicker Word-Grid

Figure 3: Sentence-building Grid

Clicker also comes with a child-friendly talking word processor. As the language used by the voice synthesiser was English, this facility could not be used as a support for the children learning second language in this study. As an alternative, the children decided to record themselves narrating their own text when written drafts were completed.

Project Activities
The following is an explanation of some of the writing activities engaged in by the pupils with their peers.

· Pre-writing activities: In preparation for the drafting stage, the children engaged in brainstorming activities on a chosen topic and together created word banks and story webs. The children built their own Clicker grids with words; phrases and pictures that they felt would be useful to them in their writing. They became adept at linking grids, thus giving them access to a wider range of vocabulary.

Figure 4: Word Grid

Figure 5. Sentence Building Grid

The children explored many different genres of writing in Irish:

· Pupil Profile: Each child brought in a favourite photograph of themselves. Photographs were scanned and children wrote their own profile with the help of a ‘Mé Féin’ Clicker grid.

· Field-trip report: After a trip to Coole Park as part of National Heritage Week, children drafted a report entitled ‘Cuairt ar an gCoill’ describing the class outing. The report was presented in book format. Photographs of the trips were scanned into pages of the book in the order of events e.g. on the bus, arriving at the forest, at the lakeside… Children described in detail the happenings of the day, recorded their own narration and linked each page of the report together.

· Story-Writing: Children composed their own narratives on themes that were being worked on in class e.g. An Nollaig. Images from humorous Christmas cards were useful for developing ideas.

· Letter-writing: This genre was explored before Christmas as children drafted letters to Santa Claus. The letters were composed in Clicker Writer with the help of a Clicker grid. When completed, all letters were printed off and posted to the North Pole!

Figure 6: Image used for Story Writing

The children also began a correspondence with pupils in another school. On this occasion, letters were again drafted in Clicker but without the use of a Clicker grid. On completion, these letters were emailed to their E-pals.

· ‘Photo Stories’: Children made a collection of funny photographs. After scanning a photograph and creating an appropriate Clicker grid, children drafted the story of the photograph.

· Cloze Stories: Using scanned pictures from the class reader; children wrote their own version of the story. Some words were omitted and a clicker grid was built using these ‘missing’ words. Other groups were given the challenge of finding the correct words and clicking on the correct cell to enter it in the blank space.

· ‘Scéalta Réaltaí’: Children used stories from the class reader ‘Réaltaí’ to make mini-books. Pictures from a chosen story were scanned on each page of the book and the story was retold from the point of view of one of the characters.

· Poetry: After listening to and reflecting upon the vocabulary, structure and layout of sample poems, the children composed their own verse in interactive book format. Each verse of the poem corresponded with a page of the book and all pages were linked to each other. Children chose appropriate graphics and recorded their own voices reciting the poems.

· Class Magazine: With the use of a desktop publishing package, the children published a class magazine entitled ‘Gaeilge go deo’ for Seachtain na Gaeilge. Stories and poems were sent from Clicker Writer to this program. The entire class became involved in this activity and children spent much time at home composing their own poems, stories and puzzles with a view to having them included in the magazine.

Figure 7: Photograph used for story ‘Mo Mhadra Brassé’

Findings
The Computer and the Process Approach
With the emphasis being placed on process and content rather than on the product, many of the children’s fears and anxieties about writing in Irish were dispelled. The provision of a variety of meaningful and relevant tasks together with the opportunity to use technology to support writing in different genres made the experience enjoyable and rewarding.

The children came to value the importance of writing in their native language and took pleasure in recording their own work. A more positive attitude towards the learning of Irish as well as a high level of motivation to write in Irish became apparent through class discussion, interview and pupil questionnaires.

The implementation of the process approach for Irish writing was very successful. The children became more conscious of the stages involved in the writing process – planning, drafting, editing, redrafting and publishing. The learner’s involvement in the task, as well as their knowledge of the processes involved was necessary for effective learning.

Pre-writing activities on and off computer were crucial at the planning stage. Brainstorming activities, discussion, the use of graphics/images and the creation of Clicker grids stimulated conversation and promoted brainstorming activities. Children became more aware of the need to plan and reaped its rewards when they arrived at the drafting stage.

The burden of recording text was lightened by the use of the word processor. Without the worries of presentation, the children’s minds were free to attend to further lines of thought and to concentrate on content. The work could be saved and recovered at any time and drafts could be printed and examined away from the computer.

The task of editing work was challenging. The ability to insert and delete text as well as the use of cut, copy and paste functions at the computer speeded up the process and encouraged risk-taking and experimentation. Most children could easily spot punctuation, spelling and structural errors, but had not mastered the skill of reading critically to improve content or meaning. The use of an editing guide as well as teacher intervention was necessary to encourage learners to extend their sentences, to use new vocabulary as well as appropriate adjectives and adverbs.

The entire class, especially the reluctant writers and those with learning difficulties experienced intense delight in becoming authors, publishing their work and presenting it to others. The amount of written material that the children produced and published throughout the year was unprecedented in our classroom. Published drafts of Irish writing in many different genres were taken from the portfolio and bound into book form. The ability to produce neat, legible drafts in new and varied ways using sight and sound gave the children tremendous confidence in their own ability as Irish language authors. Jessel (1997: 28) and Loveless (1995: 6) also deem this facility to be empowering.

Improvement in Irish
This approach has the potential to offer opportunities for the integration of listening, speaking, reading and writing skills. Research findings reflect a marked improvement in these skills.

Assessment using criteria based on an adaptation of the writing indicator sets appropriate to the class level from Drumcondra English Profiles (Shiel and Murphy, 2000: 47) indicate a marked improvement in writing proficiency when pre and post study samples were examined.

As the children worked with the multimedia-authoring program Clicker, they were not only developing skills in written discourse but were also using oral language as they discussed the ideas, content and structure and as they created talking books and used the voice recorder.

Reading skills were improved as the children read and re-read their own work as well as the work of other children. Seventy-five percent of the children showed an improvement in the Drumcondra Irish standardised test (Educational Research Centre, 1978) in the areas of vocabulary, comprehension, spelling and grammar:

Both high and low achievers made considerable progress, however, children with special needs benefited most from this approach. Two children who had failed to score on the pre test in September – one with severe learning difficulties (Sinéad) and another, an American student who had no previous engagement with the Irish language (Claire), showed a significant improvement when re-tested in June:

Graph 1: Drumcondra Irish Test Results – Ciara

Graph 2: Drumcondra Irish Test Results – Éilís

Graph 3: Drumcondra Irish Test Results – Claire

Graph 4: Drumcondra Irish Test Results – Sinéad

Teacher Intervention
Far from being superseded by the computer, the role of the teacher is a primary factor in the successful implementation of this computer-based process approach to second-language writing. As well as having a clear understanding of the writing process, the teacher’s active involvement at each stage is essential if children are to benefit fully from this approach.

The computer represents only part of the learning environment. It is merely a resource to be used and its success depends on what the teacher does with it. A creative and innovative teacher will be able to use ICT as an infinite resource to create purposeful activities that will develop writing and thinking skills.

The creation of a ‘scaffolding’ environment by the teacher in structuring collaborative writing activities using technology combined with appropriate teacher intervention can lead to significant improvement in Irish writing.

Conclusion
This study supports the view that the implementation of the process approach in the teaching of Irish writing, combined with the use of the computer as a tool or ‘scaffold’ in the process, can greatly extend the possibilities for creative and meaningful writing experiences for children.

The world of technology is simply waiting to be explored by creative and innovative educators in search of practical support for a wide range of children with very differing abilities. Not only can this tool enhance the educational achievement of the child but it can also bring a great deal of fun and excitement into learning. So, what are we waiting for? Let’s jump on board and enjoy the Great ICT Adventure!

References

Arnold, R., 1991. Writing Development, UK: Open University Press

Bahr, C.M., N.W. Nelson, A. Van Meter and J.V. Yanna, 1996. Children’s Use of Desktop Publishing Features: Process and Product. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 7.

Browne, A., 1996. Developing language and literacy 3-8, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.

Davies, G., 1991. ‘Talking to myself – through the word processor’. Microscope 32: 16-19.

Graves, D., 1994. A Fresh Look at Writing, New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Ekundlah, K.S. and P. Kollberg, 1996. A Computer tool and framework for analysing online revisions. In: M.C. Levy and S. Ransdell, (Eds.), The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, New Jersey: Lawrence Erbaum Associates Publishers, 163-188.

Krapels, A. R., 1990. An Overview of Second Language Writing Process Research. In: B. Kroll, (Ed), Second Language Writing: Research Insights for the Classroom, U.K. Cambridge University Press, 37-56.

Loveless, A., 1995. The Role of IT: Practical Issues for the Primary Teacher, London: Cassell Educational Limited.

McFarlane, A., 1997. Thinking about Writing. In: A. McFarlane, (Ed), Information Technology and Authentic Learning: Realising the Potential of Computers in the Primary Classroom, London/New York: Routledge, 108-120.

Mann, P., 1989. Language. In: R. Crompton, (Ed), Computers and the Primary Curriculum 3-13, London: Falmer Press, 47-68.

Ó Beoláin, P.S., 1987. Editorial note. Oideas Vol. 31: 5. Department of Education and Science.

Simic, M., 1994. ‘Computer-aided Writing Instruction’, http://www.indiana.edu/~eric_rec/ieo/digests/d97.html, (accessed 15.08.2001)

Smith, J. and W. Elley, 1998. How Children Learn to Write, London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.

Westwood, P., 1997. Commonsense Methods for Children with Special Needs. London/New York: Routledge.

Wray, D., 1990. Text processing with the computer: the implications for literacy. In F. Potter, (Ed), Reading, Learning and Media Education, UK: Blackwell Education