Teacher Journal

Here I am now, thinking about peer conferencing, knowing that it is important and wondering how I can incorporate that in a novel, meaningful way. At the beginning of the year, I tried to incorporate much more peer conferencing in my every day activities with the students. I felt that the best way that I could do this was through peer editing in Writers' Workshop. I think this felt the most natural for me because I had actually utilized this practice in my own writing. It was also helpful for me as I could look at a students' work prior to their conference and post-peer conference .

Though I knew that I could incorporate peer conferencing in Writers' Workshop, I am wondering where else this practice would be effective. I view peer conferencing to be an experience where each individual brings knowledge on the subject that they share with one another. I don’t necessarily think of it as something where the students work together on a problem and arrive at an answer. I see it as a space where the students work together to raise the bar for one another. I mostly view a situation where one student is an expert in a particular area and the expert is working to help support the improvement of the other writer. I am not sure if I have the exact definition and worry that I am misinformed into the ways that I can incorporate peer conferencing.

One of the reasons that I believe that I think the way that I do is because I use teacher/student conferencing on a daily basis in both Readers' and Writers' Workshop. The students arrive at the conference with their schema and it is my job to raise their thinking or share a new strategy with them. I guess that this is what I feel should be happening in a peer conference.

Another aspect to peer conferencing that I think is extremely important is the metacognitive thinking that occurs. Each student serves as a “teacher” to the other and when they have to teach the concept it is reinforced in their minds. Furthermore, not only will students assess one another, through this peer assessment, they in turn are able to assess themselves in a deeper way. For instance, if a child is struggling with the use of commas, a child will bring their own knowledge of commas to the conference. They may share that, “since you have a list of animals here, you need to use a comma in between each animal in order to list it properly.” Not only have they taught their partner something new about commas, they are better prepared to look for that type of use of commas in their own writing. Therefore, both members of the peer conference are helped in some way.

Looking for research on the subject of peer conferencing has been difficult. Perhaps it is because there are many different terms for it from peer conferencing to cooperative learning to metacognitive thinking. It is hard to run a search for peer conferencing and find specific work on this subject. At the same time, peer conferencing has many aspects involved in its existence. Not only do students have to have the social skill in order to deal effectively with one another, they must have the knowledge, self-confidence, ability to communicate, and so on in order to make the experience an effective one. One of the major aspects of using peer conferencing, I have found, is that I need to teach into the social and communication skills needed in order for the peer conference to work. This seems like a mundane task but is necessary in order for the work to go smoothly and successfully.

One of the things that I think I was missing in the beginning was candidly talking with the students about behaviors that are characteristic of good partners. What does it sound like to have a good conversation? What are some ways that we can share our ideas with our partners in a nice way? What are some strategies that we can use in order to explain an idea to our partner? What seems so natural to a teacher, is not necessarily natural to a child. Many students have the innate talent to teach another child while other children need to be instructed on how to do that. After all, isn’t that true of adults who go through a teacher education program? We can’t expect teachers to go into a classroom without a toolkit from which they can pull from in order to be an effective teacher. So, after much consideration and having one of those Oprah coined “Ah-ha” moments, I realized that I needed to arm my students with a toolkit.

Knowing this now, I will push on to do thinking and research around the ways that I can get my students ready to be good peer conferencers. What are some strategies that I can teach them? How can I give them the solid base that they will need in order to be effective in their peer conferencing practice? This is what I will focus my work around. I think that providing these techniques and strategies can lead to students using them in a more universal way in the classroom. I need to push my thinking in terms of looking at peer conferencing as an effective technique not just in writing but in other subject areas such as Math, Reading, Social Studies, etc. If I can employ this practice in an effective way, why can’t I utilize it in a variety of areas?

2.10.05

I had the students read their poetry out loud to one another in order to gain feedback. This made a world of difference. Students realized what they should have included, they didn’t like the way something sounded, they wanted to play around with the punctuation, etc. It was eye opening for me because this was such a simple thing and it was helping them immensely as they got a sound for their piece as they read it aloud. Sometimes I think that we miss what we write because we don’t read it out loud. This was a great piece of the process for the kids today.

Once they read out loud I gave them time to edit their work and then had them read it again, the way that they wanted it. Giving that time for immediate editing seemed to help them paint a clearer picture to their reader and permitted them to better acheive the way they wanted their readers to experience their work.

3.2.05

What do I want to concentrate on in terms of the questions that I have about peer conferring? I see that rubrics, checklists, etc. have helped keep the students on task but how do I push their thinking further? Is it in the questioning? Is it in the details of what is being asked of them? A student told me today that when a substitute comes in the class doesn't get anything done because it takes a long time for the subsitute to explain things. This left me to think about her comment. I don’t know if I have just gotten to know, with time, how to communicate with my students in an effective way or if I don’t give myself enough time to explain things in a thorough manner. I also am thinking, How do I give them a structure without being too structured or not structured enough? Is it the consistency of the language that is used or the accuracy of the questions that makes students delve into the work that they are doing? This is something to consider at this point in time. Where should I focus in?

3.3.05

Today we had a lesson identifying good writing and the elements that characterize it. The kids had a packet to look at where the elements of good writing were highlighted and then they had examples good vs. bad and they had to choose, with their partners, what was good. I tried to push it a step further by asking them what made it good specifically. When we were done with that we read over a sample question done by a “fourth grader”. It had two drafts, Draft A and B, Draft A was the copy that needed some work and we talked about what needed to be changed and Draft B was an example of a better copy. I don’t know if it would have been more effective to have us write one together so that they could see the process but I think that would have taken too long and we would have lost sight of our learning goal.

So the culmination of this lesson was to have the students look over a rubric that I had created based upon a rubric that assesses the picture prompt writing portion of the test. I am having them look over this rubric because I want them to be able to come up with the language that they use to assess themselves. They will be using these rubrics not only for themselves, but for one another when they look at their peer’s writing. I want them to get a sense of ownership over the assessment.

After we went through the packet on good writing and talked through Draft A and B we outlined some basic parts of good writing by them sharing aloud and me jotting them down on chart paper. I thought that this would give them a good focus and visual to work with.

Once we charted this, I had the students turn to their writing buddies to discuss what they would have wanted to change on the rubric to make it clearer for them. I felt as thought this was a little fuzzy when I left them to go and do their work. I thought about this and I think that this may have been because I had given them a rubric that was already written out. Initially I thought that this would be helpful because it would incorporate everything that needed to be included but would allow them to turn it into their own words. I think that having the rubric already completed may have set up a situation where the students had a harder time coming up with their own ideas because what was written may not have been understood by them, kept them in a box instead of allowing them to naturally come up with their own ideas, or were overwhelmed with the amount of text that they were looking at.

If I were to do it again, I think that I would have started them with the rubric and then had them go off where their partners to add on to the work. This might open up room for more of a natural discussion and a better feeling of ownership. I do think that they did a good job making changes. They added on some information that wasn’t in the rubric and they also turned some wording around so that it was clearer to them. I am hoping that this will be a good tool to help them assess themselves and each other and will feel to them as though they have established the tool. I think that this will be a question that I will ask of them when we talk about peer conferring. DOES IT HELP YOU TO HAVE A TOOL THAT YOU HAVE COME UP WITH OR DOES IT NOT MATTER IF YOU OR I HAVE COME UP WITH IT? I have to come up with a better way to ask this question of them.

All in all I think that this lesson went basically well and I think it has established a good base for the children to work with. I think that the more structures that we put into the peer conferring the more successful it will be. Though I think that they discourse and permit for new types of thinking to occur.

3.7.05

I am attempting to create feedback sheets with pointed questions that will help them to be able to give each other structured responses. I am using some questions for each major area that they are looking at in hopes that this will focus them. I don’t know if this will push them too far into my box of what I want them to do. Will it allow them to be creative enough to come up with new, personally helpful questions of their own? I do want to keep them independent enough to work on their own and use their own resources but I don’t want to give them too much. This always seems to be a question that plagues me!

3.11.05

Today I tried taping a peer conference. I wanted to incorporate some of the reading that I have been doing on the subject and try out some of the new things I have been introduced to.

I had the girls read their pieces to one another and make changes to their own pieces after they read them out loud. I have found that this is a very valuable way for them to think and work with their writing. This is echoed in the book Sharing and Responding by Peter Elbow and Pat Belanoff who explain the positive in sharing out loud as it, “…you learn so much by using your mouth and ears” (p. 10). I find that most children do some sort of work to their piece after they read it aloud to a partner.

After they read aloud, the listener jotted down some ideas about the piece and what they wanted to share with the partner. This allowed for a quick reaction, something that they would have to talk off of when they sat down with one another. Each student got a chance to do this.

I videotaped them reading to one another and then I jumped in to make clear what it was that they were supposed to do for the next step. I felt that I didn’t explain myself very well in the beginning of the conference time and that there was a lot to the instructions and I had to jump in to make sure that they girls knew what was expected of them. I felt that I needed to act as a guide for them. I found that student 1 had written down some reactions while student 2 did not, mostly because she wasn’t sure of the directions that were given. Student 1 had clarified what she was supposed to do before they moved on. In the future I may have left directions on the board or might move to make generic directions for the use of peer conferring. This might be something that they go to each time they enter into a peer conference.

Once they initially shared and gave their overall feelings, they went to the feedback sheet that was prepared for them by me based upon their construction of the rubric that they were using to assess their piece. Part of me felt as though I wanted to open up room for them to come up with their own assessment guide but I think that, in this case, I didn’t want to put as much emphasis on their work with creating an assessment piece rather I wanted them to go through the process of thinking through each other’s piece in a structured way.

Once the girls were done with their work on the worksheet, they shared their overall feedback with one another. What they think went well overall and what they think they could have improved. I had them explain the overview because going through the worksheet would be tedious and they were able to read one another’s comments on their own. I also gave them time off camera to read through the feedback that was given and ask any questions of one another that they needed to in order to clarify and understand what the other had written.

3.22.05

I’m thinking out tomorrow’s lesson and how I would like to implement it and capture it for the website. I have been thinking about the importance of modeling to the students what it is that I want them to be doing. I have been thinking a lot about what Lucy Calkins writes in terms of teaching into what the students’ need through the use of mini-lessons. There are several ways to do those lessons but one that I would like to employ tomorrow is a demonstration mini-lesson so to speak. As she explains, “Mini-lessons can also be a forum for demonstrating writing strategies. Using an overhead projector, we can display our own pages and who our students how we reread an entry, starring and circling special parts” (pg. 194-195, Calkins, 1994). Tomorrow I would like to use that overhead projector in showing the students what I would like them to do with their rubrics and peer’s pieces in their peer conference.

I am looking to check in with the students regarding their reading logs. I have been noticing, as the spring approaches, the students have been getting sloppy with the work that they are doing. They have also been interrupted by state testing and this is a great way to get them back on track and focused in on the work that they are doing with their reading logs. In the beginning of the year we sat down and talked about the essential parts of the log and what we all thought needed to be included in a reading log. From that we created a rubric that they are to use when writing their logs. This is also what I will use to grade them based on a check, check minus, check plus system. There is not mystery in the grading system and they clearly know what the expectations are.

So, back to tomorrow, I have written up a log that would fall into a check category for all of us to look at. I will run that off and we will all use that as a group text as each child will have their own copy. We will read through it and then I will place the rubric with two important questions attached to the end of the rubric. Those questions will ask, What went well with this log? And What could the writer do to improve this log? We will work through the rubric together, and they will advise me to circle certain parts of the rubric where they see the log accurately described. I will guide them to see this log as a check grade. I will then answer the two questions on the overhead along with their help.

3.23.05

Today’s lesson went fairly well. They seemed to understand well what was expected of them and their feedback seemed to be more involved than usual. I think that it helped for me to guide them through what they were supposed to be doing and the model worked out well. This gave them an exact replica of what they needed to do once they went out on their own.

One of the ways that I saw improvement was through the students trying to give one another feedback on where to improve their piece and how. A lot of times feedback will be given regarding how they can improve their piece but they will rarely push themselves to show where the partner can go back to in order to make that piece better. Though I did not see it on everyone’s piece, I saw it on more than I would normally have seen it.

I also think that it was helpful for them to circle what it was that was included in the log. Not only did this help them to identify what was there, it helped them to identify what was not there. Identifying what was not there also gave them some specific things that they could write about when they got to the What could they improve section. I thought this was quite effective in focusing their energies.

In the future, I may have done a log that was mediocre and one that was really super. This would have given them one to work on and one to strive for. I think that I may have left them with the super piece as it would give them a model of what they needed to push their partner to do.

I am interested to see how tomorrow’s conference goes in that I think the students will be more equipped to have a conversation with one another as they did more detailed work. Having the rubric in front of them will also give them information to be talking off of.

3.23.05 – Night (after reading through their logs and feedback)

I have read through the students' feedback and have chosen a few to type up and save. As I am typing up this feedback I am beginning to think about a few things. Whose should I choose to include? Why should I include them? In this case, I chose to include those students who were able to incorporate a difficult editing exercise. These students were able to point out to their partners where they should go back to improve their writing. This was the technique that I stressed in the lesson abut not all of the students were successful in implementing the practice. I felt like I had to make a difficult choice here. I want the viewer to have a sense of what it looks like when this practice is successfully implemented but I don't want the viewer to think that the entire class did this successfully on their first try. With that being said, I don’t see how it would be helpful for a viewer to see what went wrong in this instance as the central experience I want to capture is successful peer conferencing. I think that it is important that I do mention that the students do need several chances to try out the many techniques that we teach them.

Another question that enters my mind is whether or not I should arrange for the students meet with one another first to read through the log and ask questions about what they don’t understand. I think that it might be important for them to get some common misconceptions out of the way first because some kids are interpreting words wrong or are unable to read bits which makes the feedback not so effective. I am wondering if they can just quickly document the questions that they asked initially and the move on to the feedback. I think that this might help to make the feedback deeper and more focused.

Tomorrow they will meet with one another and share their feedback. I will have them first read their partners over and then discuss it and ask questions. Each student will be able to do so. Once they are done I will hand them a fresh reading log to do their log over again. We’ll see how this goes!!! Will the new product be any better?

3.24.05

Today’s lesson went fairly well. I also asked the students to read over their partner’s feedback and jot down any questions that they had for their partner in their reader’s notebook. Each student then got a chance to present their feedback and then the writer had time to ask questions of them. Then they switched roles and proceeded.

I videotaped two students today as they went through their conference. I met with them and reminded them of what they needed to do structurally. I tried to give them time to talk through their work before I jumped in but I will have to go to the videotape to see if that really happened. Student 1 gave her feedback first and then student 2 asked for clarification on some of the feedback. They then proceeded to talk about student 1’s work and student 2 shared her ideas. It was a little muddy as they worked through what student 2 meant in terms of where student 1 needed to add more explanation of her thoughts. I was there to “talk back” as to what it was that student 2 wanted to say. I think that they both understood one another’s ideas when it was done but I wonder what would have happened if I wasn’t there. I think that I need to videotape a conference without me present just to see how it takes off rather than me guiding it.

This conference time the students had a lot of resources that they were using in order to jot down what they needed to change and how they needed to change their writing. I think that I threw out a lot of information to the initially and that this was overwhelming. I think that I will have them keep their readers notebooks next to them for all conferences in order for them to have a place to jot down what it was that they wanted to remember.

I also think that it would be beneficial for us to create a rubric of peer conferring behaviors. We have a rubric for Writing and Reading behaviors and this might be something that would help the students know what the expectations were for them as to how they were to behave, give feedback, and speak to one another. I think that I may institute the creation of this rubric within the next week or so so that we can cut down on some of the confusion that is experienced by some of the students.

I also have to give my classmate, Deborah, credit for her idea about having the students rewrite their piece based on the feedback that their peer gave them. I think that this has shown to be successful thus far as the pieces are smaller to write. They are able to hold on to some of the positive things that they have done in their logs and they have added on some good things to their logs. This was not an idea that I would have considered on my own and I am grateful to her for that suggestion.

3.25. 05

As I am reading through the logs I am finding that some students have gotten more focused while others have added information that doesn’t seem to fit what the question is asking. I have typed up three before and after logs with their feedback and have been looking at those closely. It looks as though one student has answered her question quickly and then has gone on a tangent in terms of her answer. The peer also missed that the question was not one that was large enough to garner more than a yes or no answer. I think that this is something I will need to revisit. They need to make sure that they are doing the basics before they can worry about the other parts of their writing.

Another student’s log seemed to get more focused but there was still some of parts, such as the last sentence, “They also did not want to make a deal because if they did they would still fight over it”, that could have been explained to a greater degree. I think that this is all part of taking steps towards making his writing better and more focused. I think that it is one step at a time and he has made some headway in focusing in and using evidence from the book to support his answer.

A third student’s log improved some in terms of the use of punctuation and he did explain a bit more but I think that he still has some problems explaining how his evidence fits his text. This is all such a worthwhile experience looking over their work and thinking about what they are doing well and what still needs to be dealt with. I think that the peer conferring is helping them to make some strides in changing their work. I also find that students are able to share their knowledge, which is bringing about a boost in confidence. Writing is one of those things that can always be improved upon. There is no finite way to write properly and I think that peer conferring allows students to look at their writing through a different set of lenses, their peers.

3.28.05

Move toward the goal of having them work to assess themselves. We would still do peer conferencing but I would still give them time to do peer conferencing but they should learn to consider themselves a resource.

Some questions for the discussion:

Do you think you write differently when you know that you will have a peer read your piece?

Do you think that peer conferencing helps you? If so,why? If not, why?

Do you think that when you give feedback to someone, you use your own feedback in your work?

Has your writing changed since we started peer conferencing?

What are your thoughts on peer conferencing?

Does it help to have rubrics when you peer conference?

Does it help to have specific questions to answer when you peer conference?

4.1.05

I was thinking today about what might make a peer conference fall apart. What makes the differences between what you have told the children that you expect of them and then what they go and do when they meet in their groups? I am left to think about whether or not it is too many directives, were they not paying attention, did they not gain the correct clarification, did my instructions not seem clear to them? There are so many ways that I could interpret the idea of why something didn’t go well but a colleague mentioned to me today, why not just ask them? What a novel thought.

4.6.05

Dr. Hatch had asked, “What do I think creates a space for this to happen in the classroom?” I think that some of it may have to do with the fact that these students have been together for 2 years and they are comfortable with one another and trust in one another. I think that some of it has to do with the language that we use and how that has become a common thread in our lives and the ways in which we talk about our work for two years now. I also think that I have an expectation that we will treat one another in a kind way and will take care of one another and the feelings that we have. This is important to note as the children are critiquing one another’s writing and have both “good and bad’ things to say. I am wondering if I could turn these questions to them to see what they are thinking about why they work so well together. These are just my intitial reactions but maybe there is something that I am missing in the experience of the classroom.

4.10.05

Reading back through my journal I have noticed that my ideas about what led to effective peer conferencing experiences have transformed over the last couple of months. I initially thought that the children’s social skills, knowledge of whatever they were conferencing about, self confidence, and communication skills would lead to a great peer conferring experience. I thought that teaching explicitly both social and communication skills would enable the students to have an effective peer conference.

Though all of those things are key components of peer conferring, I am left to think that there are more aspects that I had never considered. These other components of peer conferring came about as I began to critique myself and the peer conferring experiences in my classroom. Other aspects that I began to notice were the use of rubric and checklists as supports to keep the children focused on what they needed to look at. It was also apparent that timing was important. It was much easier to talk about feedback right after a peer looked over the piece and wrote about rather than write about the piece and then go back to that feedback and explain it the next day. It made the feedback much fresher and focused for both the one who was critiquing and the one who was getting critiqued.

I also found that the way that I modeled the way that the conference should unfold was another great way to set the stage for a more successful peer conference. If the students could go through a “trial run” of what they needed to do that day, it was much easier for them to transition into their work. They already had a base from which to emerge and they had “tried out” their conference already.

What has begun to enlighten my thinking is that, though I have begun to realize all those important aspects, the reality is that I am working with human beings. I may be able to utilize all of the different components of a peer conference but ultimately, a student could be having a bad day or an amazing day. The way that you think a peer conference might go might not be the avenue it travels down. I have found that I need to be open to the work that they are doing and the questions that they ask of one another. I have been most pleasantly surprised when I see feedback that I never thought that I would. Letting the students lead the way does surprise you sometimes!

I am also open to the fact that I haven’t found every component that can help to make a peer conference successful. The more that I look into their work and reflect upon my practice, I find that there are different ideas and thoughts that emerge. I can always learn more from my students and I need to remind myself to stay open to that learning.

Back