Susan McCollam Reading School of Education East Carolina University mccollams90@students.ecu.

edu

The Effect of Interactive Writing on Phonological Awareness and Writing Development

Results
Phonological Awareness and Writing Development The independent samples t-test analyses revealed significant differences in both phonological awareness and writing development between the intervention and the control classrooms as a presumable result of the Interactive Writing intervention. Table 1 displays the results of the analysis for each measure. The results of the equal variance two-tailed p value for both measures indicate there was a significant difference between the means of the two groups.
Measures DIBELS Phonemic Awareness Assessment Writing Samples Group Intervention Classroom Control Classroom Intervention Classroom Control Classroom Mean Change Scores 11.1 3.4 2.2 -0.2 Standard Deviation 5.6 0.0004 5.9 2.7 0.006 2.2 Twotailed p-value

Abstract
The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to examine the impact of Interactive Writing on kindergarten students' phonological awareness and writing development. During this fiveweek study, both intervention (n=17) and comparison (n=18) classrooms used Writer's Workshop instruction; a supplemental writing strategy was administered to the intervention classroom. This intervention was administered in a rural, public school for 30 minutes per day. Three sources comprised the dataset: DIBELS phonological awareness assessments, writing samples, and a researcher log. An independent samples t-test of equal variance showed statistical significance between the two groups gain scores for phonological awareness (p=0.0004) and writing development (p=.006).

Materials and Methods

This action research study was conducted using a quasiexperimental pretest posttest comparison group design. The independent variable was the type of writing instruction. The first level of the independent variable was Interactive Writing and the second level was the Daily 5 literacy model containing writing strategies from Writers Workshop. The teachers in both the intervention classroom and the comparison classroom used the Daily 5 literacy model to teach English Language Arts (ELA). In January, Interactive Writing was administered to the intervention classroom for approximately thirty minutes per day during a minilesson within the Daily 5 literacy framework. This study contained two dependent variables: achievement in reading and achievement in writing. The first dependent variable, reading achievement, was operationally defined as a phonological score from the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) assessments (Amplify Education, 2013). The second dependent variable, writing achievement, was defined as the number of words written in a writing sample The following materials were needed to conduct the study: Childrens Literature Dry Erase Board and Markers Interactive Writing Procedures 1. Provide opportunities for meaningful writing connected to classroom experiences and childrens literature. 2. Encourage students to interact as they discuss the purpose of the text (i.e. turn-and-talk). 3. The students and teacher negotiate the text to be written together. 4. Students co-construct the text by "sharing the pen." 5. The teacher encourages students to reread the text each time a new word in written. 6. The instructor seizes "teachable moments" to model early literacy skills and provide instruction. 7. Connections are made to prior knowledge of writing, previously read texts, and environmental print.

Conclusions
Literacy professionals strive to provide effective literacy instruction that produces successful reader and writers. It is imperative for these specialists to be aware of a wide range of strategies to aid their students in developing the necessary reading and writing skills to reach this goal. The purpose of this study was to evaluate Interactive Writing to determine its effectiveness as a literacy strategy. Prior research studies suggest that there is a relationship between phonemic awareness and spelling skills. This research determined that instruction in one of these areas of literacy will produce gains in the other area (Bear et al., 2012; Graham et al., 2002; Hecht & Close, 2002). The results of this action research study provided additional findings that support prior research in this area of literacy. These results are critical to both literacy specialists and classroom teachers as they endeavor to meet their students needs in reading and writing. The positive results suggest that Interactive Writing is an effective intervention for both reading and writing, therefore, enabling instructors to integrate these subjects. This is helpful as they face ever-increasing demands in the classroom. Instructors and students will benefit from the level of engagement provided in this intervention. The students are actively engaged throughout lessons that offer one hundred percent participation, thus increasing student focus on important literacy targets. In addition, student interest is high as they interact with their peers and instructor. These lessons allow teachers to act as facilitators and provide instruction within meaningful activities. However, further research in this area of literacy is needed due to the sample size (n=35) of the research study. While the results of the p-value were significant, repeat trials as well as a larger sampling size would be necessary to produce more reliable data.

Introduction
One of the most important responsibilities of a primary teacher is to provide effective literacy instruction that produces successful readers and writers. Researchers Bear, Templeton, Invernizzi, & Johnston (2012) note that instruction in literacy skills formally begins in kindergarten. However, kindergarteners embark on their school careers exhibiting many different stages of reading and writing development. Teachers strive to determine the best methods of instruction to meet their students needs and seek research to support their instructional choices. Various studies report there is a relationship between the spelling, reading, and writing development of children (Graham, Harris, & Chorzempa, 2002; Hecht & Close, 2002). Researchers Hecht and Close (2002) determined relations between phonemic awareness and spelling skills are bidirectional: Spelling influenced growth in phonemic awareness and phonemic awareness contributed to growth in spelling skills (p. 93). Research studies suggest that instruction in one of these areas of literacy will produce gains in the other areas (Bear et al., 2012; Graham et al., 2002; Hecht & Close, 2002). Interactive writing is an instructional tool educators use to assist students in understanding how written language works in order to become independent writers. The interactive writing method allows teachers to work collaboratively with their students as they compose written messages together (McCarrier, Pinnell, & Fountas, 2000). The purpose of this action research was to study the research question: How will Interactive Writing impact kindergarten students phonological awareness and writing development? The results of this study provided useful information for educators today who are searching for the best approaches to literacy instruction. Teachers will be able to discern the effectiveness of Interactive Writing as a form of literacy instruction and consider its usefulness to reading and writing achievement in their own classroom.

Table 1. Quantitative Analysis from Independent Samples t-test (n = 35) for Writing Achievement and Phonological Awareness

Researcher Log The researcher log was studied to determine patterns in the number of correct uses of writing skills that occurred each session. This data showed significant improvement in the areas of the appropriate use of capital and lower-case letters, letter-sound correspondence, and proper letter formation as a presumable result of the Interactive Writing intervention. In addition, instructional procedures, student responses, and student connections to prior texts were analyzed to provide evidence of the effectiveness of Interactive Writing. The following themes were noted as influential elements of this intervention: High Level of Student Engagement Numerous Interactions Between Students Multiple Connections to Prior Texts Role of Teacher as Facilitator

References
Amplify Education. (2013). mClass: Reading 3D (computer software). Brooklyn, New York: Amplify Education. Bear, D., Templeton, S., Invernizzi, M., & Johnston, F. (2012). Words their way. (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Graham, S., Harris, K., & Chorzempa, B. (2002). Contribution of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 669-686. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.94.4.669 Hecht, S., & Close, L. (2002). Emergent literacy skills and training time uniquely predict variability in responses to phonemic awareness training in disadvantaged kindergartners. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 82, 93-115. Retrieved from www.academicpress.com McCarrier, A., Pinnell, G., & Fountas, I. (2000). Interactive writing: How language & literacy come together, k-2. (1st ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Figure 1. These students are taking turns sharing the pen as they co-construct meaningful texts together.
http://www.epic.k12.nd.us/karendavidson/files/2012/05/InteractiveWriting.jpg

Figure 2. Sample of Meaningful Text

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vbB9VhFen1U/TdRqOqjHNaI/AAAAAAAAAtg/sdaPWZl72Pg/s1600/013.JPG