|
|
FEATURES: The Lucy Calkins Project
By Barbara Feinberg
Parsing a self-proclaimed literacy guru
Once upon a time there was a thoughtful educator who raised some interesting
questions about how children were traditionally taught to read and write,
and proposed some innovative changes. But as she became famous, critical
debate largely ceased: her word became law. Over time, some of her methods
became dogmatic and extreme, yet her influence continued to grow.
That educator is Lucy McCormick Calkins, the visionary
founding director of Teachers College Reading
and Writing Project. Begun in 1981, the think tank and teacher training
institute has since trained hundreds of
thousands of educators across the country. Calkins is one of the original architects of the
“workshop” approach to teaching writing to children, which
holds that writing is a process, with distinct phases, and that all
children, not just those with innate talent, can
learn to write well. She is author of some 20 books, including the
best-selling The Art of Teaching Writing (250,000 sold). According to the project web site, books by
its leaders are “widely regarded as
foundational to language arts education throughout the English-speaking
world.”
While her influence is geographically broad, Calkins
is perhaps nowhere more powerful than in New York City, where the project
began as a consulting service to a few elementary schools and grew into a
highly profitable venture. According to Andrew Wolf of the New York Sun, Calkins charges
$1,200 to send one of her assistants into a school for one day. In 2003
schools chancellor Joel Klein appointed her and the project, through a
no-bid three-year $5.4 million contract, to the task of revamping the way
literacy skills are taught in more than 100 district schools, including
most of those in Brooklyn and Queens, the project’s mission is to
retrain—through onsite workshops, leadership seminars, curricular
materials, and an intensive summer institute—primary and upper-grade
teachers, administrators from principals up through district
superintendents, and central department policymakers.
Stories That Matter
Calkins’s approach to literacy grows out of a
pedagogical theory that prides itself on being in step with the natural
development of both writers and children. Her earliest mentor was the
progressive educator Donald Graves, who observed in the 1970s that while
American children were taught reading and math, they were only rarely
taught how to write beyond grammar and spelling. Graves argued that in
being deprived of lessons that would develop the skills and habits that
most good writers have, children were relegated to the status of
“receivers,” never “senders,” of information.
Graves, in turn, was deeply influenced by Pulitzer Prize–winning
writer and college journalism professor Donald Murray, perhaps one of the
earliest to describe the craft of writing. By observing his own writing
process, Murray delineated a method all writers could follow.
“Writing might be magical,” he is often quoted as saying,
“but it’s not magic. It’s a process, a rational series of
decisions and steps that every writer makes and takes, no matter what the
length, the deadline, even the genre.”
Graves adapted Murray’s approach to teaching
writing to children. The idea was to make them more conscious of what
successful adult writers do—draft ideas, revise, edit, and publish.
By involving children in this process, he sought to help them become more
active in their own education, and not incidentally, more self-aware; he
advocated that children write extensively about themselves and their
observations.
Calkins popularized and developed many of the
positions taken by Graves regarding writing and later applied them to
reading. At the heart of her philosophy is the notion that children ought
to be given a “voice,” encouraged to discover and refine their
own personal writing style, as they compose “stories that
matter.” Calkins is a “constructivist,” believing that
children should generate their own texts, using material from their own
lives. Her belief in self-expression as a key to learning extends to
reading: children develop a passion for reading when they are given freedom
to choose books that are meaningful to them. Her approach to literacy
reviles “direct teaching,” where the teacher stands in front of
the room and lectures, preferring instead that children work in small
groups and consult each other as much as possible. And she advocates that
teachers routinely engage in conferences with each individual child about
his writing and reading experiences (see sidebar). She writes of the
“art” involved in teaching and conferring, and thereby suggests
that while aspects of literacy can be taught, there also exists a degree of
creative intuition in the process, on the part of both the child and the
teacher.
No Detours, No Surprises
Some of Calkins’s ideas on writing have made
exciting contributions to the life of the classroom. In her nearly 600-page
1986 tome, The Art of Teaching Writing, Calkins lays out her rationale and methods for
implementing a writers’ workshop in the classroom. She instructs
teachers to make room for students to keep a “writer’s
notebook,” a place where they can “jot down things they notice
and wonder about” and record “bits of life.” Calkins
offers up this notion in a relaxed spirit, conjuring a playful atmosphere
that encourages creativity. Photographs of lively students and
reproductions of students’ writing assignments, done in their own
quirky handwriting, add to the friendly and appreciative tone of the book.
In her later work, however, Calkins’s notion of
the writer’s notebook is prescriptive, even rigid. She instructs
teachers as well as parents to make sure children “never miss a
day” of writing in their notebooks, because “if you allow kids
to get off the hook once, they’ll try to get off it all the
time.” In Raising Lifelong Learners (1998), she describes how she needs to stand over her son
while he writes down his thoughts after returning from a play date. The
earlier “jotting” and “bits of life” sensibility
seems to be gone, as she complains that her sons, then six and four
years old, “often say non-sequiturs,” and how she, and all
parents and teachers, should confront “sidetracks,” and
prohibit any “detours.”
Project staff instruct children to revise their
writing, according to sometimes peculiarly stringent guidelines, and do the
same to their drawings. Writing coaches instruct even kindergartners to
redo their pictures, making some things bigger, smaller, using less white
space, etc. At a project open house in 2004, Calkins said, “I tell
kids that after they’ve finished writing [personal narrative] they
should go back and lop off the beginning and lop off the ending. Those
parts are always weak. The meat is always in the middle.” When an
audience member asked if there were exceptions to this, she said
emphatically, “No.”
To keep the focus on autobiographical writing, the
project trains teachers to deter children from writing fantasy of any kind.
A six-year-old child whose classroom was under the project’s tutelage
remarked to me, “Once upon a time is against the law in our
school.” Not long ago Calkins altered her stance modestly and decided
that staff in her program can now teach children how to write
“realistic fiction.”
“What’s most important to me,”
explained a project staff member during the open house, “are social
issues. I teach fiction writing to teach social justice.” She went on
to describe her methodology: “I tell students that they must always
first start with an issue—gender discrimination, racism,
poverty—not a character. Then we create a character around the
issue.” She explained that she instructed children to plot the story
from start to finish before setting out, telling them to be certain to
alternate between “incident, dialogue, incident, dialogue.”
While virtually all professional writers of fiction describe the element of
surprise and discovery as central to the process, this teacher takes an
alternate view: “By the time children begin to write, they know
exactly what their characters will do and say. The point is, there should
be no surprises when you sit down to write fiction.”
The leader then projected copies of student papers on
the wall, where we read several stories about bullying, gender
discrimination, etc. The stories were impressively written, although they
seemed, after a while, to sound almost uniform; without exception, each
protagonist was a victim of some kind. Fictional characters in a project
workshop might be described in the same way as literary critic, Sheila
Egoff, describes characters in many current teen novels: they are
“defined by the terminology of pain.”
It Takes Two to Read a Book
The publication of The Art
of Teaching Reading (2001) catapulted
Calkins to expert status in reading as well. The book offers ideas about
setting up libraries in classrooms and the value of offering students a
wide selection of books, adults reading aloud, and many other things that
go into Calkins’s idea of helping children live a “richly
literate life.”
Beginning in kindergarten, children are to regard
books as objects of study. They are asked, for example, to compare two
books and try to figure out which characters have a “worse
life”; make a “study” of Frog and Toad books; or debate
whether Enchantress from the Stars is fiction or fantasy. Children are asked to keep
track—on Post-its, or other diagramming material—of the ways
characters’ lives resemble their own. Post-its loom particularly
large in the Calkins universe. “If I could change the world,”
she writes, “children across America would carry books that were
furry with slips of paper and jotted writing.” Indeed, project
methods require a vast array of accoutrements: charts,
matrixes, Venn diagrams, page numbers, graphs, reading marathons,
bookmarks, book corners, book bags, book celebrations, jazzed up
“book talk,” and great discussions about how to live
“readerly lives.”
“Every reader has two lives, one public, the
other secret,” noted poet and chairman of the National Endowment for
the Arts, Dana Gioia. Not so in a project classroom. Calkins
maintains—for reasons never explained—that reading is
fundamentally a “social activity.” “The books that matter
in our lives are the books we have discussed.” Or “It takes two
to read a book.” She relays approvingly how a teacher asks
kindergartners who are enjoying a book, “But where are your tools,
your logs, your Post-its?”
Rarely are children invited to simply sink into a
story and experience it emotionally. In fact, when an unguarded emotion
occurs while a teacher is reading aloud, it is perceived as a unique,
nearly baffling event. Calkins relates approvingly how a teacher, while
reading the very moving book The Hundred
Dresses by Eleanor Estes to a group of
six-year-olds, noticed a boy whose “facial expression showed how
Peggy felt as she stood by and watched her classmate Wanda being taunted.
‘Oh my goodness,’ [the teacher] said to the class when she saw
what Robert was doing, ‘Let me keep reading and all of you watch the
way Robert’s face shows what Peggy was feeling.’ Soon everybody
was following Robert, supplying the facial expressions and gestures to
match the interpretations of Peggy’s mood.”
Yet Calkins herself, in the middle of The Art of Teaching Reading,
describes with some derision two 2nd-grade students using jargon to discuss
a book. She hears them say that they are making “text-to-self”
connections, and “text-to-text” connections, phrases
they’d obviously been taught to use. When she asks them what they are
referring to and their response is flimsy, she concludes that all their
jargon is much ado about nothing. “If anything,” she muses,
“the long metacognitive detour had probably pulled these readers out
of ‘the virtual dream’ of the story, and broken the spell of
the enchantment.” Apt words, indeed.
|
The Calkins tome One
to One: The Art of Conferring with Young Writers (2005) is the result of 18 months of poring over
transcripts of her own and her protégés’
conferences with very young children, in an attempt to extrapolate
their own “best teaching moves.” The goal is then to
refine those moves, sort them into categories, and write scripts to
accompany them. Calkins has managed to bring the whole unwieldy
world of teaching writing into neat, snap-on categories. There are
four phases for conducting a conference: the research phase (to
last no longer than two minutes), in which the teacher assesses
what she or he will teach the young writer; the decision phase, in
which the teacher decides what kind of conference (there are four
kinds) to implement; a teaching phase; and, finally, a link phase,
which involves extracting an oath from the child. “From this
day on, for the rest of your life,” the teacher asks the
child to pledge, “are you always going to remember to do X
when you write?”
Calkins instructs teachers to give two
compliments during their conferences with students, one at the
beginning and one at the end, and to “briefly record what you
have complimented in a box containing the child’s
name.” The Conferring CD-ROM comes with a letter from Calkins that
advises teachers to “study the compliment section in every
conference. What do you see us doing over and over again? Compare
the way we tend to give compliments and the way you have done this.
By doing this, you will be able to create your own Guide to Giving
Powerful Compliments.”
While the idea of meeting one-on-one with a
child to discuss his work might suggest spontaneous communication
between two people, conferences as described by Calkins have a
prepackaged, often manipulative quality. She writes, “One
effective strategy for buoying a writer’s identity is to tell
the child he or she has written just like a professional
writer.” She suggests saying, “You’re trying to
do something you’ve seen another
author do. That’s so professional of
you!” Calkins reports proudly how well a member of her staff
intervened when two kindergarteners were squabbling over Magic Markers:
“Writers…do not wrestle over markers. Can you imagine Mem
Fox or Tomie DiPaola wrestling over markers?”
Another approach brings a similar result.
“We try the technique of pretending that the child has been
doing exactly what we hoped he or she would do,” Calkins
explains. “I help Olivia see that her experience is a story
that has a beginning, a middle, and an end,” she writes,
describing a “successful” conference she had with a
child about a drawing. “I condense her long explanation of
her picture into a tighter narrative line that is within her reach
of being able to write. But I do this acting as if she’s done
all the work herself, and she willingly believes that all
I’ve just done is to restate the story she invented. When we
assist a writer, it is often helpful if the writer is fooled into
thinking she’s done the job herself!”
|
So Do Her Methods Work?
Calkins is shaping the education of millions of
children, yet no independent research backs the efficacy of her programs.
Aside from grumblings from the New York City teachers required to work
under her system, there has been remarkably little open debate about the
basic premises behind Calkins’s approach, or even feedback on how the
programs are faring in the classroom.
What controversy exists generally centers around two
concerns: First, her programs do not explicitly teach phonics—which
she calls “drill and kill.” She favors a “whole
language” approach to literacy, which builds on the premise that
reading and writing develop naturally in children. Her detractors argue
that this lack of direct instruction leaves many children, especially those
who already struggle, at a disadvantage.
The other argument, perhaps resonating with a larger
audience, is that her methodology lacks real content, has no reference to
any knowledge that should be learned. In The
Art of Teaching Reading, she explains that she
doesn’t want “all reading and writing to be in the service of
thematic studies” but instead seeks to “spotlight reading and
writing in and of themselves.” Calkins’s insistence that
students should focus mostly on writing about their lives rankles the many
educators who believe that curriculum should be focused on content-rich
material, and that students should read and write about information outside
of their own personal lives. Broadening one’s knowledge base
strengthens reading comprehension, builds vocabulary, and deepens knowledge
of the world, all of which help students understand the text, but also, as
E. D. Hirsch writes, “what the text implies but doesn’t
say.”
What has not been openly questioned is the assumption
that Calkins has retained her ordinal stance, that it is the
teacher’s job to midwife a child’s own, often richly
imaginative voice, rather than impose her own. Calkins’s program
originally gained its popularity, at least in part, because of its mission
to help children make their distinct voices heard. She was known as a
champion for flexible, creative teaching, uniquely attuned to children.
“If we adults listen and watch closely,” she wrote in 1986,
“our children will invite us to share their worlds and their ways of
living in the world.” And while this impulse continues to inform
aspects of her approach, she has tended over time to become increasingly
focused on enforcing her own methodology; many of her techniques limit
children’s genuine engagement with reading and writing. This
insistence on only one way to do things, not surprisingly, has translated
into a demand that teachers quiet their own impulses, gifts, and
experiences, and speak in one, mandated voice.
Recently, Common Good, a bipartisan organization
committed to “restoring common sense to American law” asked New
York City public school teachers to keep a diary for 10 days and consider
specifically “how bureaucracy impacts everyday teaching.” The
results were presented in a town hall–style meeting attended by more
than a hundred educators and union representatives. One of the topics was
“mandated teaching,” which referred specifically to the
required presence of Calkins and Teachers College in city schools. The
responses were almost universally negative.
This entry from a teacher’s diary is typical:
“Administrators expect all our reading and writing workshops to
adhere to an unvarying and strict script.…For example:
‘Writers, today and everyday you should remember to revise your
writing by adding personal comments about the facts.’ Sometimes I
feel like I’m a robot regurgitating the scripted dialogue
that’s expected of us day in and day out.”
A kindergarten teacher reported how she was instructed
to ask her students, on the third day of class, “to reflect on how
they’d grown as writers.” She explained that the children were
still preoccupied with missing their mothers and felt the assignment was
“ridiculous.”
The truth is there isn’t one way to teach
writing, or a limited number of ways to have conversations with children
about their imaginative work and their lives. Calkins would have done well
to heed the counsel of Donald Murray, whose prescient caution she quotes in
The Art of Teaching Reading: “Watch out lest we suffer hardening of the ideologies.
Watch out lest we lose the pioneer spirit which has made this field a great
one.”
Barbara Feinberg is a freelance writer whose work has
appeared in such publications as the New York
Times and the Boston
Globe. She is the author of Welcome to Lizard Motel: Protecting the Imaginative Lives of
Children, Beacon Press, 2005.
|
QUICK LINKS:
FREE ISSUE
EMAIL ALERT
PDF
CONTACT US
TOOLS:




|