WTS 7 Page 1 of 25

Teaching Writing Conventions

Ashley Sonn

Saint Mary’s University of Minnesota

School of Graduate and Professional Programs

Portfolio Entry for Wisconsin Teacher Standard 7

EDUW 699 – Independent Studies

Stephanie Belter, Advisor

December 22, 2018

 WTS 7 Page 2 of 25

Selected Wisconsin Teacher Standard Descriptors

Wisconsin Teacher Standard (WTS) 7: Teachers are able to plan different kinds of lessons.

The teacher organizes and plans systematic instruction based upon knowledge of subject

matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.

Knowledge. The teacher understands learning theory, subject matter, curriculum

development, and student development and knows how to use this knowledge in planning

instruction to meet curriculum goals.

Dispositions. (a) The teacher values both long-term and short-term planning. (b) The

teacher values planning as a collegial activity.

Performances. (a) The teacher creates lessons and activities that operate at multiple

levels to meet the developmental and individual needs of diverse learners and help each progress.

(b) The teacher creates short-range and long-term plans that are linked to student needs and

performance, and adapts the plans to ensure and capitalize on student progress and motivation.

Danielson Domains

Domain 1: Planning and Preparation

Component 1e: Designing Coherent Instruction

 Learning activities

 Instructional materials and resources

 Instructional groups

 Lesson and unit structure

Component 1f: Assessing Student Learning

 Congruence with instructional goals

 Criteria and standards

 WTS 7 Page 3 of 25

 Use for planning

Domain 3: Instruction

Component 3c: Engaging Students in Learning

 Representation of content

 Activities and assignments

 Grouping of students

 Instructional materials and resources

 Structure and pacing

Component 3d: Providing Feedback to Students

 Quality: accurate, substantive, constructive, and specific

 Timeless

Component 3e: Demonstrating Flexibility and Responsiveness

 Lesson adjustment

 Response to students

 Persistence
 WTS 7 Page 4 of 25

Pre-assessments

Self-assessment of Instruction Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning

Objective(s)

Wisconsin Teaching Standard (WTS) 7 states that teachers use the curriculum goals and

subject matter to plan different kinds of lessons. I want to improve my writing instruction by

creating different lessons that help students with the use conventions in their writing. This year

our school-wide goal for writing is for students to improve their score in the area of conventions

by at least one point if below benchmark and students at or above benchmark to maintain or

increase one point.

I chose five WTS 7 descriptors to guide my learning through research. After analyzing

my student data for the fall District Writing Assessment, I noticed a significant need for tailored

instruction on language usage and conventions. All of my students scored below benchmark in

this area, so the knowledge descriptor I chose was that teachers “understand subject matter,

curriculum development, and student development” to help guide the planning of instruction in

order to meet those goals.

The two disposition descriptors I chose were the teacher “values long-term and short-

term planning” as well as planning with colleagues. After giving the writing assessment to all

second graders, we sat down with district grade-level teachers and evaluated students’ writing

using a common rubric. As a team we took those rubrics and looked for common areas of need

among our students. I want to be able to find resources and lessons I can share with my

colleagues to help support instruction in their classrooms. We will work together to find

strategies that are useful both short-term and long-term in writing genres we will teach our

students.
 WTS 7 Page 5 of 25

The first performance descriptor I chose relates to finding lessons and activities that are

differentiated to meet the needs of all my students and that help them meet our school-wide

writing goal. I want to create and adapt current plans to maximize student progress levels and

motivation for learning. Knowing the different pieces that conventions entail such as spelling,

punctuation, and capitalization, I know there will by many ways I can vary my instruction to

meet the needs of all students.

Assessment of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

A typical writing time falls at the end of the school day and somewhat follows a

workshop model. I teach a mini lesson for five to ten minutes and then students independently

write for roughly twenty to twenty-five minutes. We sometimes stop and save a few minutes at

the end to share what they wrote. Other writing is incorporated into our Daily 5 time in the

morning. Students are given a prompt for the day or a list of prompts to choose from throughout

the week. This writing does not follow a particular learning target other than getting them to

practice writing complete sentences and thoughts, writing more, and responding to questions.

Students are sometimes given sentence starters that are brainstormed beforehand by the class.

Based on the fall district writing assessment scores, all my students scored below

benchmark in the use of conventions when writing a personal narrative or short sequence of

events. For the purpose of this research and analyzing data, I have decided to focus on six of my

twenty-one students. The students I chose represent different levels of my class in the area of

language usage and conventions; low to high. The scores provided in Artifact (A) show the

students’ rubric scores for the fall benchmark writing assessment as well as the areas of

conventions they were lacking. Student A and B are considered the low group, Student C and D

are the medium group, and Student E and F were considered the high group. To determine the
 WTS 7 Page 6 of 25

three groupings of students I looked at the quality of their writing. It was hard to place a student

using good punctuation in the high group if their writing only included a few sentences. So for

instance, Student C and D in my middle group were placed there for their quality of writing even

though they received a score of one in the area of conventions. All six of the students were

lacking convention skills in the areas of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling of high-

frequency sight words.

The Common Core State Standard 2.5 for writing states students “with guidance and

support from adults and peers, focus on a topic and strengthen writing as needed by revising and

editing”. I hope that the strategies and lessons I find that require guidance will transpire into

students using them independently and even more so on writing assessments and other published

pieces. I hypothesize that through numerous times practicing different skills that work on

conventions that my students will improve at least one point on the next district writing

assessment in the area of conventions.

Assessment of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Objective(s)

This year my class consists of twenty-one second grade students. We have a full time

special education assistant in our room that oversees two students in the EBD (Emotional

Behavioral Disorder) program. Looking at the six students I choose to focus my data on, Student

B receives special education services for a learning disability. He is pulled for reading

intervention, thirty minutes daily and also receives speech and occupational therapy. There are

times that he is not interested or willing to write when given an assignment. Student E was

dismissed from receiving speech and language services in October after he took the fall writing

assessment. All of the other students get support in the regular education classroom.
 WTS 7 Page 7 of 25

During a typical writing block, I would teach a mini-lesson on the targeted writing

strategy lasting about five to ten minutes depending on the skill. Many of my lessons stem from

the Lucy Calkins Writer’s Workshop curriculum. Other times I will use Jennifer Serravallo’s

The Writing Strategies Book. During the lesson I model the skill for a story I wrote and would

continue to use throughout all my lessons. After the lesson I send students to work

independently on their writing. This could be writing a new story or using a previous piece of

writing to demonstrate their learning of the skill that was taught. Time at the end of independent

writing is devoted to pair share of whole group share. I then have other students provide positive

comments and feedback about things they notice the other student did really well or parts they

liked about the story.

Upon reflecting on my current use of Lucy Calkins and some of the writing strategies I

find in The Writing Strategies Book, I feel I need to find additional ways that motivate students

to be engaged and enjoy the process of writing, but ultimately improve their writing conventions.

Assessment Conclusion and Essential Question to Guide Research

The self-assessment, assessment of student performance, and learning environment

assessment show that I have some instructional strategies in place to help with conventions, but I

need to find additional ways to support all levels of student writing. I will incorporate lessons

and activities in both Writer’s Workshop as well as Daily 5 writing assignments. The essential

question to guide my research draws its wording from Domain 1: Component 1e of Danielson’s

Framework for Teaching: How does teaching conventions affect the quality of writing produced

by elementary students?
 WTS 7 Page 8 of 25

Research Summary

The category of conventions in writing consists of four components: grammar, spelling,

capitalization and punctuation. Together these components make a piece of writing clear and

understandable to the reader. Goodlad (1984) observed elementary and secondary schools nation

wide and found that the main emphasis for English language arts instruction was “basic language

skills and mastering mechanics— capitalization, punctuation, paragraphs… speech, etc.” (p.

205). Studies have shown, however, that traditional methods for teaching conventions, like

identifying parts of speech in a sentence have no significant impact on the quality of student

writing.

Andrews, Torgerson, Beverton, Freeman Locke, Low, & Zhu (2006) defined grammar

instruction as “the study of syntax (word order), clause and phrase structure, and the

classification of parts of speech (e.g. noun, verb, predicate, clause, etc.)” (p. 42). Their definition

also included the progression of instruction, which ranged from transformation of basic rules to

reading and writing actual sentences. Reading and writing require students to use syntax to help

with meaning and intent when communicating. According to Fearn and Farnan (2007), the most

widely used methods used by teachers include the use of isolated skill activities and exercises

that are typically given as worksheets. When students are asked to solely focus on identifying a

part of speech within a sentence, Collins and Norris (2017) found that they lose the meaning of

the sentence and the context in which the single word is used. Research focused around this

method of teaching grammar, known as Discrete Grammar Instruction (DGI), uncovers no real

impact on reading, oral language, and writing.

A study done by Collins and Norris (2017), looked at another method called Embedded

Grammar Instruction or (EGI). This method used reading passages at or above student reading
 WTS 7 Page 9 of 25

levels, as a way to teach an oral language lesson and analyze written sentences. Instead of the

traditional method of finding a part of speech, students were guided to “reconstruct the author’s

word, syntax, and punctuation choices.” (p. 19). This new method provided students the

opportunity to reflect on more complex grammar and learn how a more complex language

works. When students can understand the function each convention component has within a

sentence, they are more likely to apply this knowledge to their writing in a more meaningful

way. In comparison, the DGI method focuses on quiet, individual work while the EGI method

promotes critical thinking and problem solving skills.

Another study done by Needels and Knapp (1994), found that the quality of students’

writing was correlated with a sociocognitive model. The following list contains examples from

classrooms they observed where this type of instruction was evident; (a) teaching component

skills within the context of writing, (b) assigning meaningful writing tasks, (c) connecting

writing to student backgrounds or experiences, (d) encouraging peer interaction, and (e)

modeling writing as a problem-solving process. By using embedded grammar instruction versus

the traditional direct, students’ acquisition of writing conventions develop faster when given

opportunities to practice.

Collins and Norris (2017) described how positive effects on writing occur when students

are provided “meaningful and authentic writing opportunities, explicit instruction and modeling

of planning and organizing, learning to combine ideas into complex syntactic structures, and an

understanding of good writing.” (p. 18). One helpful strategy that can be used to improve

writing skills is the use of digital storytelling. Digital storytelling, defined by Frazel (2010) is

the process of blending media in with writing to develop spoken language. A benefit of digital

storytelling is the activation of all language skills; reading, writing and speaking. A variety of
 WTS 7 Page 10 of 25

digital tools include iMovie, Google Slides, Photostory, Pixton, microphones, digital cameras,

and scanners etc. Digital storytelling engages students while combining all elements of literacy

skills.

Research from these sources show that embedding grammar instruction into meaningful

and purposeful writing assignments for students, yields better quality work and opportunities to

apply and demonstrate what students learn. On the other hand, the traditional ways of teaching

grammar skills one at a time has been shown to not make a significant difference in quality.

Overall, teachers need to engage their students in the writing process in order for them to apply

the mechanics of grammar.

Research Implications

My essential question to guide research was “How does teaching conventions affect the

quality of writing produced by elementary students?” While conducting research I kept thinking

to myself that I have been teaching grammar wrong this whole time. The model of discrete

grammar instruction (DGI) is what I have been using in my teaching thus far. I have picked a

learning target such as adjectives and taught my students just on the one skill, applying it many

different ways on worksheets and with games. When I later notice in their writing that they are

not demonstrating the skill, I reflect on how I could have taught the skill in a different way. After

researching the topic I now know that the most efficient and effective way, is to teach through

embedded grammar instruction. Using read aloud books and other complex writing samples,

provides exposure to students that they will not get from direct instruction.
 WTS 7 Page 11 of 25

Research-based Action Plan

Action Plan Summary Outline

1. Utilize embedded (EGI) strategies when focusing on a convention skill throughout all

content areas. Design lessons that include practice using complete sentence structure. I

will also incorporate mini-lessons from Jennifer Serravallo’s The Writing Strategies

Book.

2. Deliver lessons and meaningful writing opportunities to students to practice conventions.

These may include, but not limited to: whole group interactive writing, writing prompts,

peer and self-editing, genre writing (narrative, poetry, lab reports, writing about reading).

3. Assess outcomes of these strategies on the winter district writing assessment in January.

I will reassess the six students whose data I used in this research paper before winter

break.

4. Compare data of winter assessment to fall assessment and notice any changes in their

rubric scores as well as what areas of conventions they made improvements on or skills

they may still be lacking.

Targeted Student Learning Objective

1. Common Core State Standards for Second Grade Writing 2.5, “With guidance and

support from adults and peers, focus on a topic and strengthen writing as needed by

revising and editing.

Task(s) and Essential Proficiency Criteria for Targeted Learning Objective(s)

1. Task Objective: Improve at least one point on the district benchmark writing

assessment in the area of conventions if below benchmark or maintain/improve

score if at benchmark.
 WTS 7 Page 12 of 25

2. Criteria that Prove Proficiency in Meeting Targeted Learning Objective(s)

a. Students will be considered proficient if they score a (3) on the rubric for

including the following: (a) correct spelling of high-frequency sight words,

capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, and punctuation at the end, (b)

correctly capitalizes holidays, product names, and geographic names, and

(c) uses contractions correctly.

Method(s) to Assess Proficiency of Targeted Learning Objective

1. District Writing Assessment will be administered as normal for the six

representative students I focused on for this research. The rest of my students will

take the assessment in January during the district-testing window.

Post-assessments

Instructional Insights Related to WTS and Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

After researching and finding that it was more beneficial to embed the instruction

into other content areas, I wanted to see first hand for myself. Our second grade team,

three teachers, and split our students into groups based on need in the area of sentence

writing. One group focused on handwriting and one focused on expanding sentences and

adding in more detail. My group focused on parts of a sentence and components that

make them complete. I started out my lessons the traditional way by teaching nouns and

finding different worksheets and activities to practice using and identifying them in a

sentence. The following week I did verbs and followed the same procedure as I did for

nouns. It seemed that students could tell me what nouns and verbs were and provide

numerous examples. At the end of the two weeks I wanted students to then find sentences

in their independent books and identify both nouns and verbs. To my surprise there were
 WTS 7 Page 13 of 25

many students who could not identify them from their books, even though they could

orally provide examples out of context. Was it true that explicit teaching of the grammar

was not beneficial?

I then took the following two weeks to take the other approach of embedding the

instruction into reading of individual sentences or passages. I taught students the acronym

of C.O.P.S (Capitalization, Organization, Punctuation, Spelling). We used this to help

them identify parts of a sentence as well as edit sentences. Almost all students were able

to edit errors in the sentences with minimal prompting. I was then able to apply this

strategy to other areas. I included errors in my morning message for students to fix such

as leaving out capitals at the beginning of a sentence, punctuation, and spelling of high-

frequency sight words. Students became very good at that. Interactive writing was also

helpful in getting students to practice skills together as a whole class.

Comparison of Student Performance Related to Targeted Student Learning Objective(s)

The learning objective focused on students strengthening their writing as needed by

revising and editing with peer and adult support. Proficiency in the area of conventions on the

district writing assessment requires students to include correct spelling of high-frequency sight

words, capitalization at the beginning of a sentence, punctuation at the end, correctly capitalizing

holidays, product names and geographic names, and using contractions correctly.

On the assessment given in the fall, my low and middle students scored a one in the area

of conventions. They lacked all the proficiency skills listed above and some showed little to no

use of capitalization and punctuation. Both of my low students were lacking the use of

punctuation in their entire piece. All four of these students scored a two on the winter
 WTS 7 Page 14 of 25

assessment. There were only minor errors in capitalization of proper nouns and punctuation.

More sight words were spelled correctly than in the fall.

My two high students both scored a two in the area of conventions for the fall and winter

assessments. They only missed a few capitals, punctuation marks and sight words. On the

winter assessment they improved their punctuation by including the use of quotation marks. For

being mid year, I am very pleased with the progress with my low and middle students for

increasing a point. Even though my high students did not increase a point, I am still happy they

were able to maintain and started to include conventions that could bump them to proficient or

possibly advanced by the end of the school year.

Comparison of Learning Environment While Learning Targeted Learning Objectives

Upon reflecting on my current use of Lucy Calkins and some of the writing strategies I

find in The Writing Strategies Book, I still think I can incorporate more into other content areas.

When teaching other subjects it is not always on my mind to stop and find conventions in the

passage we are reading or the book we are using during guided reading groups, but being aware

of it now will help me to do so. I kept the learning environment the same as far as mini lessons

within my writing block and providing student ample time to write. During Daily 5 writing, I

changed some of my prompts to include more open-ended sentence starters that they can take in

any direction. By incorporating these new prompts I am hoping they find ways to use more

conventions and different types such as quotation marks.

One of my next steps will be to teach students the writing process and going through each

of the steps for any writing assignment. I will be using a clip chart that students will

independently move their number clip for when they move on to the next step of the process. It

will be a visual for them and me to see which students are moving along and those I may need to
 WTS 7 Page 15 of 25

check in with. This will be a time I can really focus on getting students to expand their sentences

and look for mistakes to correct.

Reflection of Entire Learning Process

The essential question guiding this entry was “How does teaching conventions affect the

quality of writing produced by elementary students?” I found that strategies for teaching

grammar and conventions are way different than how I thought it should be done. Traditional

methods of instruction included a specific skill that went along with a worksheet to show which

students were able to apply the skill. Knowing now that embedding the instruction into reading

and other content areas will be more beneficial, I feel I will be able to get my students to think

critically and show improvements independently in the area of writing conventions.

What Worked and Why

1. The lessons I designed for my WIN group focused on sentence structure and what things

needed to be included in order to make them complete. We spent time learning specific

grammar topics such as nouns and verbs, but then focused a majority of our lessons on

editing sentences using the C.O.P.S. acronym. The letters stand for Capitalization,

Organization, Punctuation, and Spelling. We used this method when correcting sentences

with errors as well as when correcting their own work. Students also learned about

editing marks and how to use them when finding errors in writing. I believe this worked

because students were engaged in the learning and were able to feel like the teacher when

they were finding mistakes and that they understood what things they were looking for

when editing.
 WTS 7 Page 16 of 25

2. Using my morning message daily to help students correct sentences for conventions.

Each day I would purposely make errors (leave out capitals and punctuation, misspell

words, etc.) and have students come up to the board to make the changes.

3. Providing students with many opportunities to write and a variety of topics, students were

able to apply the skills learned with different genres of writing.

What did Not Work and Why

1. It did not work to instruct students on one grammar component such as nouns or verbs

and working with that concept before moving on. I discovered that students were not

able to find specific grammar components when looking in writing examples or within a

book. It had to be a one-sentence example for them to be able to distinguish or pick out

all the parts. This was surprising since we had discussed the grammar term for a week

before practicing. I found that discussing all the different components of a sentence

together and applying all of them at the same time was more beneficial.

My Next Steps

1. Continue to apply the EGI strategy and incorporate grammar and conventions in other

content areas.

2. Teach the writing process (prewrite, draft, edit, revise, publish) and incorporate a writing

process clip chart. After teaching the process, students will use the clip chart to show

what stage of the writing process they are at for a specific writing assignment.

3. Explore technology-based ways for students to become more engaged in the writing

process. I want to give blogging and digital storytelling a try. Since I teach second

grade, blogging will be in the form of a discussion board that will only be visible for
 WTS 7 Page 17 of 25

students in my class. I am hoping the digital storytelling will be easily shareable with

families so they can view more of their child’s writing.

I feel that with enough implementation in other content areas, my students will start to

apply the convention skills independently. Knowing now that explicitly teaching a grammar

concept is not the most beneficial strategy I will be able to incorporate other forms of writing, for

example technology, that are more engaging for students. My ultimate goal is to increase the

quality of writing not necessarily the quantity.

 WTS 7 Page 18 of 25

References

Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Beverton, S., Freeman, A., Locke, T., Low, G., … Zhu, D. (2006).

The effect of grammar teaching on writing development. British Educational

Research Journal, 32(1), 39–55. https://doi-

org.xxproxy.smumn.edu/10.1080/01411920500401997

Collins, G., & Norris, J. (2017). Written Language Performance Following Embedded Grammar

Instruction. Reading Horizons, 56(3), 16–30. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.smumn.edu.xxproxy.smumn.edu/login?

url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1154815&site=eds-live

Fearn, L., & Farnan, N. (2007). When is a verb? Using functional grammar to teach writing.

Journal of Basic Writing, 63–87.

Frazel, M. (2010). Digital storytelling: Guide for educators. Eugene, OR: International Society

for Technology in Education (ISTE).

Goodlad, J. (1984). A place called school. New York: McGrawHill.

Needels, M., & Knapp, M. (1994). Teaching writing to children who are underserved. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 86, 339-349.

 WTS 7 Page 19 of 25

Artifact A: Fall and Winter Rubric Scores

This chart shows the scores for the six students on their fall and winter district writing
assessments. It compares the conventions they were lacking in the fall to how they made
improvements in the winter.

Artifact B: Fall and Winter Student Writing Samples

Below are writing samples from a low and high student. It is comparing their fall assessment to
their winter assessment.
 WTS 7 Page 20 of 25

Student B (low)
Pictured first= fall sample, pictured second= winter sample
WTS 7 Page 21 of 25
 WTS 7 Page 22 of 25

Student F (high)

Pictured first= fall sample, pictured second= winter sample

 WTS 7 Page 23 of 25

Artifact C: WIN Lesson Plans- Sentence Structure

These are the lesson plans I followed for my WIN group that focused on sentence structure and
the parts needed to make it complete. It started by using the traditional model of grammar
instruction and moved to EGI model of embedding into other content areas.
 WTS 7 Page 24 of 25

Artifact D: Writing Process Clip Chart

Here is what I envision the writing process clip chart to look like. Students will each have a clip
with their class number on it that they move down each step after completion.
WTS 7 Page 25 of 25