Final Action Research Report

 

 

 

 

 

Will using mentor texts help to improve students’ editing and revising skills? 

Elizabeth Exias

Lamar University

 

 

Abstract

This paper studies the use of mentor texts as models to improve students’ editing and revising skills.  This paper examines the use of a writer’s workshop and editing instruction as described by Jeff Anderson (2005) and describes how a writer’s workshop offers scaffolded instruction so that students can gradually obtain independence with the skills.  The students in the study were given a benchmark assessment that consisted of two parts.  The first part consisted of scoring a sample of writing that was edited by the students using a rubric.  The second component consisted of an assessment that was multiple choice.  In this portion of the assessment, the students needed to choose the answers that correctly edited and revised a piece of writing.  This portion was similar to the Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT,) the assessment they would be given in the spring as a result of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB.)  The same assessments were given at the end of the year to assess the effectiveness of the instructional strategies that were being studied.  This approach to editing and revising instruction was effective for the class as determined by the results of the post-assessment.  The readers of this action research report will be able to learn the benefits of incorporating this instructional strategy in their classrooms.

Will using mentor texts help to improve students’ editing and revising skills?

Elizabeth Exias

Introduction 

This study took place in a third grade classroom at Cider Mill Elementary School in Wilton, CT.  According to the strategic school profile in 2012, .7% of the student population was African American, 1.3% of the student population was Hispanic, 92.6% of the student population was white, and 5.5% of the student population was Asian.  .6% was economically disadvantaged, .5% was Limited English Proficient, and 10% qualified for special education.  When analyzing the students’ performance on the Connecticut Mastery Test, I found that our writing scores were +9.7% higher than the state proficiency level.  The scores for proficiency in reading were significantly higher than the state scores (+20.3%) and the math scores were higher as well (+11.4 %.)    Grade 3 performed seventh in the District Research Group (DRG) in writing.  The difference between the students at Cider Mill reaching the state goal in writing and the top of the DRG was 38 students in third grade.  This demonstrated the need for action research to be conducted in writing instruction to enhance student performance in writing. 

My third grade team discussed the need to improve our instruction of editing and revising because our students tend to do more poorly on this portion of the CMT than on the prompt writing.  I gave a benchmark assessment to my students in October.  The benchmark assessment had two parts.  The first component required the students to edit a piece of writing from their writer’s notebook.  Their writing was scored using an editing rubric.  I have listed the average percents and disaggregated the data based on gender and special education.  100% of my students were of Caucasian descent. 

	Authentic Writing Benchmark Editing Assessment	CMT-Type Benchmark Assessent
Total Student Average Percent	1654/22= 75.18%	1163/22= 52.86%
Girl Average Percent	836/12= 69.67	528/12= 44%
Boy Average Percent	818/10= 81.8%	635/10= 63.5
SPED Average Percent	80/2= 40%	28/2= 14%

 

This information led me to wondering how the use of mentor texts would help to improve my students writing skills mainly in the area of editing and revising.  The editing and revising portion of the CMT results in 50% of the students’ scores.  Also, this is an area of instruction that teachers have expressed a desire to improve.  My objective was to use mentor texts within a writer’s workshop to improve my students’ writing from a total average score of 75.18% as determined by their authentic writing benchmark editing assessment given in October of 2011 to an average score of 85.18% as determined by the authentic writing summative editing assessment given in May of 2012.  My second objective was to improve my students’ performance on a CMT-Type editing and revising assessment from 53% accuracy as determined by the benchmark CMT style assessment to 80% accuracy as determined by the summative end-of-year CMT style assessment.

The information in this report will benefit all of the stakeholders at Cider Mill Elementary as well as any teacher of writing. They will benefit by reading a professional literature review on how to embed editing instruction into a writer’s workshop.  They will also be able to see how effective the implementation of these strategies was on a classroom of students. 

Definition of Terms

CMT- Connecticut Mastery Test

Editing- Modifying writing so that it follows rules of grammar and sentence structure

Writer’s Workshop- The method of teaching writing using a workshop method

Scaffolding instruction- Delivering instruction that builds upon what it already understood

Literature Review

Writer’s Workshop

Karsbaek (2011) and Gray P., Strubhar J., & Tornquist K. (2009) describe a writer’s workshop approach to writing instruction as an effective format of instruction for their students.  Karsbaek (2011) describes a writer’s workshop as “a positive emotional environment [that] is attained by the teacher listening to the children and modeling a positive attitude toward writing, creating a safe environment for writing, and allowing the students to have choice and control over their writing” (p. 7).  The writer’s workshop format includes a mini-lesson that includes scaffolded instruction centered on a writing strategy that is connected to a mentor text.  During the mini lesson, students are given time to discuss the learned writing strategies with partners.  Then, they have a chance to try out the strategy or skill during the independent writing block.  The students use the writing strategies from the mentor text to model their writing after. During independent writing, the students have choice in their writing topic and the teacher is involved in conducting conferences or small group instruction.  The workshop ends with a share-time to wrap up the lesson.  While students are independently writing, they can be in any stage of the writing process.  The stages of the writing process are Prewriting and planning, Drafting, Revising, Editing, and Publishing.

Anderson (2005) and Karsbaek (2011) describe the importance of giving students the opportunities to share their writing with others.  Karsbaek (2011) writes “Children also need to see writing as a way of communication and know that they are creating something meaningful when they write. They need to write for a purpose. Knowing that someone else will read what they write gives a sense of purpose and audience” (p. 10).  Since others will be reading their writing, they need to communicate their ideas in a way that others will understand.  This is where editing comes into the writing process.  Anderson (2005) writes “Grammar and mechanics are not rules to be mastered as much as tools to serve a writer in creating a text readers will understand” (p. 5).  Once students understand the purpose of editing, they will be much more inclined to edit their pieces.

Using Mentor Texts

Anderson (2005) and Karsbaek (2011) agree that it is important to use mentor texts in writing instruction.  Anderson (2005) describes the importance of using mentor texts to help “children to make decisions about the design and quality of their own writing” (p. 8).  He describes using mentor texts in teaching editing skills and strategies.  He describes it as “sentence stalking” (p. 17).  He and his students pull sentences out of authentic literature to demonstrate a rule of grammar and editing.  When a sentence is displayed, the students notice features of it, such as comma placement or use of capitals.  Once the rule is understood, students search for other sentences that follow the rule and practice writing the sentences correctly.  A running editor’s checklist is created and displayed for the students.  When students complete a piece of writing, they will use this checklist to correct their sentences.  The focus of using mentor texts is to focus on great sentences, not pick apart incorrect sentences. 

Scaffolding Instruction 

Karsbaek (2011) and Read (2010) agree on the need for scaffolding instruction based on Vygotsky’s (1978) theory of the zone of proximal development.  This means that teachers must deliver instruction to their students at a level just above where they can work independently.  The steps for scaffolding instruction, as described by Read (2010,) include inquiry, modeling, shared writing, collaborative writing, and independent writing (IMSCI). 

Editing

Anderson (2005) describes incorporating editing into a writer’s workshop approach to writing.  He spends the first ten minutes of the workshop, teaching an editing skill to his students.  Anderson (2005) writes,

Grammar includes all the principles that guide the structure of sentences and paragraphs:

syntax – the flow of language: usage – how we use words in different situations; and rules – predetermined boundaries and patterns that govern language in a particular society.  Mechanics, on the other hand, are ways we punctuate whatever we are trying to say in our writing; punctuation, capitalization, paragraphing, and formatting. (p. 5) 

Teaching grammar and mechanics within a writer’s workshop takes a balanced approach. 

Anderson (2005) stresses the importance of teaching the principles of grammar and mechanics, not simply correcting errors.  He explains that using daily sentences with multiple errors that students must correct isn’t an effective way to learn mechanics.  There is too much to discuss in order to discuss it well.  Also, this strategy demonstrates what is wrong, instead of what is right and it does not transfer into the students’ daily writing.  Instead of using incorrect sentences to teach, he suggests using correct sentences to demonstrate the proper use of mechanics and grammar so that students can emulate these skills in their daily writing.  Anderson (2005) writes “Processing what works in a piece makes it more likely that the stuff of powerful writing will spill over into student’s writing.  I am teaching students to pay attention, to live consciously, to think, to analyze, to connect, to synthesize” (p. 18).  Additionally, he stresses the importance of teaching one principle at a time so that students can truly understand and retain and apply the new skill to their daily writing.

Editing Checklists

            Anderson (2005) and Gray, Strubhar, & Tornquist (2009) describe how essential editing checklists are for students to independent editors.  The checklists are a great tool to help students keep track of what they have learned.  Gray, Strubhar, & Tornquist (2009) and Reed (2010) describe how editing with the use of colored pencils or pens is very helpful in the editing process so that students can see where they have fixed errors in their own writing.  Once students edit and revise their own writing, they can bring it to a peer for peer revisions. 

Action Research Design

Subjects

The target population for this action research project was a third grade class in Wilton CT.  100% of the students were of Caucasian descent.  9% of the students qualified for special education services.  52% of the class was female and 48% was male.  The author was the classroom teacher during the study and implemented the teaching strategies during a writer’s workshop.  This sample set represents 6% of the third grade students in Wilton, CT.  It was chosen because it was the class assigned to the author of the report.

Procedure

The following template outlines the action steps, resources and timeline of the action research project.

Action Planning Template

Goal: To improve writing instruction, with a focus on editing and revising, using student data to inform instruction.

Action Steps	Person(s) Responsible	Timeline: Start/End	Needed Resources	Evaluation
List wonderings	Elizabeth Exias	September ‘11:	CMT Data, Research on editing and revising instruction, Dana (2009) Text	Research that addresses needs
Discuss topic with literacy instructional leader to provide insight.	Elizabeth Exias, Ellen Tuckner	September ‘11:	Ellen Tuckner, Books and other resources that she provides.	Identifying research that matches her insights
Inquire about databases for professional journals provided by Lamar University	Elizabeth Exias Lamar Professor	September ‘11	Email Database	Ability to locate professional journals
Research effective writing instruction with a focus on editing and revising, PLCs, and differentiation.	Elizabeth Exias	September and October ‘11:	Database for journal articles, Texts on editing and revising instruction such as Mechanically Inclined: Building Grammar, Usage, and Style into Writer’s Workshop, Additional workshops in this area	Implementation of strategies in the classroom. Collecting and analyzing student data to monitor their progress after implementing research based strategies.
Give baseline assessment and analyze it.	Elizabeth Exias	September and October ‘11:	Baseline Assessment	Summative assessment in June will provide data that evaluates the implemented techniques. Anecdotal Notes will serve as data for the effectiveness of the PLC
Collect and analyze data	Elizabeth Exias	September and October ‘11:	Benchmark assessment, ongoing formative assessments, and summative assessments, CMT Results, rubric for editing and revising strategies in everyday writing	Analysis of the assessments will evaluate the effectiveness of the instructional strategies used.
Discuss Research-based Practices	Elizabeth Exias PLC Team	October ’11-May 2012	Professional literature	Implementation of research-based strategies in action plan
Meet with the PLC to discuss data and determine an action plan.	Elizabeth Exias	October ‘11	PLC Team, data from a variety of assessments	Anecdotal records, formative and summative assessments, CMT results
Implement the action plan in the classroom.	Elizabeth Exias	October ’11 – June ‘12	PLC, Action Plan, Resources for Instruction	Formative and summative assessments that monitor progress
Monitor the progress of the students with formative assessments and adjust instruction accordingly.	Elizabeth Exias	4 times October ’11 – June ‘12	Data from Formative Assessments	Analysis of data from the formative assessments
Give summative assessment and evaluate the growth that was made through this action research study.	Elizabeth Exias	May ‘12	Summative Assessment	Comparison of benchmark assessment and summative assessment
Share learning with others on blog, in discussion boards and at a staff meeting.	Elizabeth Exias	October ’11 – June ‘12	Blog, discussion boards, staff meeting	Comments on my blog and discussion posts

 

The action plan required the classroom teacher to use a writer’s workshop approach to her writing instruction and embed editing and revising lessons into her workshop lessons.  These lessons used sentences that were pulled directly from the mentor texts to demonstrate a rule of grammar or editing.  The students kept a running list of all of the rules that were discovered in the mentor texts.  They used these rules as a checklist to edit their pieces throughout the year and the teacher monitored their progress through their final edited drafts. 

Data Collection

Data was collected during this project in a variety of ways.  The students were given a benchmark assessment in the fall.  The benchmark assessment consisted of two parts.  The first part was a writing sample that was scored using an editing rubric.  The second component was a CMT like assessment where the students were given a series of multiple choice questions that required the students to identify the correct way to fix errors in a piece of writing.  Throughout the year, students were required to publish six pieces and they were scored using the editing rubric (see appendix A.)  These pieces were used to monitor the progress of the students.  The students were given a post-assessment in the spring to see how much progress was made through the use of mentor texts as models of correct mechanics.   

Findings

The students made progress in their editing skills through the use of mentor texts as models of correct mechanics.  The following charts display the progress that was made.

	Authentic Writing Benchmark Editing Assessment	CMT-Type Benchmark Assessment
Total Student Average Percent	1654/22= 75.18%	1163/22= 52.86%
Girl Average Percent	836/12= 69.67%	528/12= 44%
Boy Average Percent	818/10= 81.8%	635/10= 63.5%
SPED Average Percent	80/2= 40%	28/2= 14%

End of Year Scores

	Authentic Writing Summative Editing Assessment	CMT-Type Summative Assessment
Total Student Average Percent	1885/23= 82%	1732/23= 75%
Girl Average Percent	925/12= 77%	862/12= 72%
Boy Average Percent	960/11= 87%	870/11= 79%
SPED Average Percent	120/2= 60%	77/2= 38.5%

 

Progress was made on the authentic writing assessment.  The total average raised from 75.18% as determined in the fall benchmark assessment to 82% as determined by the spring summative assessment.  Each subgroup made progress as well.  The girls’ scores raised from 69.67% to 77%, the boys’ scores increased from 81.8% to 87% and the special education students’ scores rose from 40% to 60%.  Progress was also made on the CMT type assessment.  The total average increased from 52.86% as determined in the fall benchmark assessment to 75% as determined by the spring summative assessment.  Each subgroup made progress as well.  The girls’ scores raised from 44% to 72%, the boys’ scores increased from 63.5% to 79% and the special education students’ scores rose from 14% to 38.5%. 

Conclusions and Recommendations

 

The progress that was made demonstrates the benefits of using mentor texts as models of effective grammar to teach editing skills.  I found that the lessons took longer than 10 minutes as suggested by Jeff Anderson in his text Mechanically Inclined.  Anderson describes using the strategies in a middle school setting.  Third graders required additional time to try out the sentences and to keep track of the rules.  Due to the time constraints during the year, I was unable to teach an editing lesson daily.  I could not get to all of the skills that are assessed in the CMT assessment in this manner.  I think that if I was able to get to more skills on a consistent basis, the students would have made even more progress.  I recommend using this method of editing instruction and adding more time to the writing lesson so that the lessons can be taught on a more consistent basis.

 

References

Anderson, J. (2005). Mechanicaly Inclined: Building Grammar , Usage, and Style into Writer’s 

Workshop. Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers.

Gray, P.,  Strubhar, J., & Tornquist, K. (2009). The making of a 7-year-old editor. Illinois

Reading Council Journal, 37(1) 27-37.

Karsbaek, B. (2011). Writer’s workshop: Does it improve the skills of yourng writers? Illinois                                     

            Reading Council Journal, 39(2) 3-11.

Read S. (2010). A model for scaffolding writing instruction: IMSCI. The Reading Teacher, 64(1)

47-52.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society: Tbe development of bigber mental processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Appendix A

Editing Rubric

	4	3	2	1
Capitalization	Beginnings of sentences and proper nouns are almost always capitalized.	Beginnings of sentences and proper nouns are capitalized most of the time.	Beginnings of sentences and proper nouns are capitalized some of the time.	Beginnings of sentences and proper nouns are seldom capitalized.
Punctuation	Appropriate punctuation is almost always used (ending punctuation and commas in a series, date, and city & state.)	Appropriate punctuation is used most of the time (ending punctuation and commas in a series, date, and city & state.)	Appropriate punctuation is used some of the time (ending punctuation and commas in a series, date, and city & state.)	Appropriate punctuation is rarely used (ending punctuation and commas in a series, date, and city & state.)
Spelling	Writing includes grade appropriate spelling (homonyms, sight words, and words that follow taught spelling patterns) almost always.	Writing includes grade appropriate spelling (homonyms, sight words, and words that follow taught spelling patterns) most of the time.	Writing includes grade appropriate spelling (homonyms, sight words, and words that follow taught spelling patterns) some of the time.	Writing rarely includes grade appropriate spelling (homonyms, sight words, and words that follow taught spelling patterns.)
Sentence Construction	There are very few examples of run-ons, fragments, and rambling sentences.)	There are few examples of run-ons, fragments, and rambling sentences.)	There are some examples of run-ons, fragments, and rambling sentences.)	There are many examples of run-ons, fragments, and/or rambling sentences.
Word Usage	Verbs (subject-verb agreement and verb tense,) comparative and superlative adjectives, and pronouns are almost always used appropriately.	Verbs (subject-verb agreement and verb tense,) comparative and superlative adjectives, and pronouns are used appropriately most of the time.	Verbs (subject-verb agreement and verb tense,) comparative and superlative adjectives, and pronouns are used appropriately some of the time.	Verbs (subject-verb agreement and verb tense,) comparative and superlative adjectives, and pronouns are rarely used appropriately.