1

Play-Based Writing: A Case for Reintegrating Play into the Primary Classroom

Molly (Tranel) Thielen

Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Wisconsin-Madison

April 29, 2021

 2

In an attempt to motivate a student during independent writing time and steer him away
from violence, I grabbed a few indoor recess toys and told him to play with them a while and
then write about his experience. This in-the-moment behavior management approach was the
start of the experiment surrounding the concept of play-based writing (PBW).
While the concept of PBW was new to me at the time of conception, I discovered that a
similar idea has been briefly discussed within research articles on play and writing under
different names, such as “Storymaking” (Hall & Robinson, 2013) and “Play and Write” (Biordi
& Gardner, 2014). Both of these ideas were byproducts of a larger research scope and have not
received much recognition since publication. Therefore, this paper is intended to build upon the
concept, while providing teachers with a framework to introduce it. This way, PBW can be
integrated into their writing workshop and later be used during student’s independent writing
time.
To accomplish this goal, I planned a six-week long fictional narrative inquiry-based unit
of study (Ray, 2006) with another second grade teacher that we implemented into our writing
block. Throughout the unit, our classes identified the essential components of a fictional
narrative and studied “craft moves” (Shubitz, 2016) that highly-acclaimed authors use to engage
readers. We met with the author of one of our mentor texts, Maribeth Boelts, to discuss her
writing process, and guided students through the writing and publishing process. The purpose of
this framework was to determine if play would improve the quality of students’ fictional writing.
“Research findings across many decades (e.g., Bennett, Wood, & Rogers, 1997; Bodrova
& Leong, 2007; Moyles, 2015; Vygotsky, 1978) have shown how play can provide an authentic
context or activity to foster young students’ language, literacy, and all other learning” (as cited in
Potier, Friedrich, & Peterson, 2019, p. 17). While many studies on the relationship between play
and writing have been conducted, they primarily focus on dramatic play in the preschool setting
and the beginning writing stages (Tsao, 2008; Myhill, 2010; Christie, 1990), where writing is
used to support play narratives (e.g. labeling the play areas, creating a menu, or writing a grocery
list). This paper is intended to build on this research using an inverse correlation--while
preschool classrooms use writing to support play, I argue that primary grade levels can use play
to support writing.
 3

The first central claim of this paper is that play, as I define it, can be used as a tool to
scaffold thinking, spark students’ imaginations, and unlock available designs that can later be
used to assist with the writing of creative stories. My definition of play in the term “play-based
writing” is the act of engaging with self-selected props and toys individually or in a group
setting, while drawing upon personal experiences and interactions with peers for the purpose of
composing a narrative.
Secondly, this paper develops the concept of PBW through theories of play and
imagination that are then integrated into the writing workshop model and aligned with the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS). For example, the CCSS for English Language Arts &
Literacy (2010) include a second grade standard for writing that specifically states students will
“Write narratives in which [students] recount a well-elaborated event or short sequence of events,
include details to describe actions, thoughts, and feelings, use temporal words to signal event
order, and provide a sense of closure” (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.2.3). Using this standard as a
framework provides a structure that has the potential to be adopted by other teachers and
implemented in their classrooms.
In essence, the implementation of the PBW framework set out to answer the question:
Does this framework increase students’ imagination during the writing process and lead to the
composition of creative written stories? To answer this question, I analyzed student writing
samples from before and after this unit, looking specifically at plot development and language
usage. Gaining insight from my observations and students’ work, I argue that supporting
fictional narrative writing with play assists in the creation of unique and creative stories by
drawing upon the affordances of play, available designs, and the pre-existing writing workshop
structure.
Literature Review
Affordances of Play
Aligning with Vygotsky's (1978) idea of Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), defined
as “The distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem
solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under
adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86), play serves as a scaffold. In
this framework, play supports students’ generation of ideas, word usage, and plot development.
Ultimately, it elevates students’ writing to a level that could not be reached without it. Through
 4

this experience, students learn, although unbeknownst to them, that the process they are using to
create a story with toys and props can be done separate from the physical objects.
Vygotsky (2004) argues that play acts as a pivot between thought and object, suggesting
that “seperating words from things requires a pivot in the form of another thing” (p.14). Thus, in
order for a child to separate a word from the thing it represents, there must be a transitional
phase. PBW supports this pivot point from which a child separates the meaning of a word from
the object. For example, a child playing with a volcano will have access to the meaning of a
volcano and associated concepts more easily after a PBW experience because the meaning is
being solidified in his/her schema. As Vygotsky explains, “School age play is converted to an
internal process, becoming part of inner speech, logical memory, and abstract thought” (p. 14).
Thus, PBW is meant to serve as the pivot point between thought and object, supporting the
internal process by which kids understand words as abstract items with meaning, separate from
their physical object. Later on, students will access these memories when they are thinking and
writing. Essentially, play deepens the understanding of an object or process, making it accessible
during an abstract thinking situation.
In this way, PBW functions as a bridge between the concrete and the abstract. In order to
move from one sphere to the next, students need support, which play provides them. In making
play available beyond preschool, educators are using students’ natural desires to increase abstract
thought and creativity.
While outlining the imagination and creative process, Vygotsky (2004) explains that the
brain has two functions, reproductive and creative. The reproductive function is the act of
restating or reciting what was previously experienced or what already exists. The creative
activity takes place when a person uses previous experiences and integrates them to create new
ideas. In this way, accumulating experiences is essential to a child’s development because they
serve as the catalyst for creativity.
The implication of this for education is that, if we want to build a relatively strong
foundation for a child’s creativity, what we must do is broaden the experiences we
provide him with. All else being equal, the more a child sees, hears, and experiences, the
more he knows and assimilates, the more elements of reality he will have in his
experience, and the more productive will be the operation of his imagination (p. 15)
 5

Using this knowledge, educators should strive to present students with diverse opportunities to
collect new and varied experiences as a way to enhance their imagination, which is the goal of
PBW.
Drawing upon Vygotsky’s idea, while exploring how imagination is nurtured, Hassett and
Wood (2017) theorize that available designs---the ideas that are accessible to people as a result of
interactions and experiences-- serve as the springboard for creativity. Essentially, the more
available designs accessible to a student, the more likely s/he is to author a creative, engaging
story. Thus, it is important for educators to present opportunities for students to build their
available design repertoire, which can be done through a variety of ways. This paper focuses on
increasing students’ available designs through individual play and engaging with mentor texts.
Essentially, “The imagination’s role in the process of designing, then, includes the recombination
of available designs that correspond to both real and unreal occurrences, experienced vicariously
or first hand” (p. 177). In this way, when students generate ideas for writing, they are relying on
their available designs to inform their imagination.
In both theories, Vygotsky (2004, 1967) and Hassett and Wood (2017) claim that play
assists students in acquiring more experiences that can later be accessed through their
imagination and used to create new ideas. Not only does play expand students’ available design
repertoire, it also supports their literacy-development, specifically as it pertains to narrative
elements. As Roskos and Christie (2011) discovered during their review of research on the “the
play-literacy nexus” --the intersection of play, language, and emerging literacy
behaviors--“Pretend play stories provide a playful frame for exploring and practicing narrative
elements—setting, problem, plot, and resolution—that children can later apply to stories in other
contexts, such as oral storytelling and reading and writing stories” (p. 215). Drawing upon this
idea, PBW aims to access the narrative elements that already exist during play and use them to
support the creation of written stories.
Wohlwend (2013) also acknowledges the connection between play and story by claiming,
“Children’s play worlds are storied worlds with texts filled with vibrant dialogue, characters, and
storyline” (p. vii). Thus, the process of play and fictional writing are similar--written stories are
the product of playful worlds recorded for others to read. The reintegration of play in primary
classrooms supports students' access to available designs while providing a storyline for them to
use in their writing.
 6

Similarly, Hall and Robinson (2013) found that the act of composing in play has a direct
correlation with the act of composing in writing (p. 19):
In both cases a story is being told. The children are creating a story. They are the authors
of the play. It is clear that the creation of a socio-dramatic play text is surprisingly like the
creation of a written fictional text. The main difference is that at the end of one there is a
product, at the end of the other, a memory (p. 26).
Since play and writing share many common characteristics, combining the two results in the
simultaneous creation of a memory and a product without much additional effort.
Writing Workshop and Mentor Texts
To further the idea of PBW, a framework was needed so that other teachers could
implement it into their classrooms. For this reason, a fictional narrative genre study integrated
with play was created. The intention for using fictional narrative as the framework for writing
instruction was to align with the CCSS and build upon the creative functions of children’s brains,
as discussed previously, so that they could have access to more available designs.
Longtime leaders in the field of reading and writing, Lucy Calkins and her colleagues at
the Teachers College Reading and Writing Project at Columbia University, have made the
workshop model a common practice in classrooms across the nation. While Calkins’ reading
workshop model was recently reviewed by Adams et al. (2020) and found to be an insufficient
approach to reading instruction, the critic focused mostly on how reading was being taught, not
the structure of the writing workshop. Since no research was found against the writing workshop,
with advocates still for it (Ray, 2006), I felt confident moving forward with this approach,
especially because I knew I would be enhancing it with play-based imaginative techniques.
When using a writing workshop model, it is commonly known that mentor texts serve as
a useful tool in the teaching of writing (Ray, 2006; Gallagher, 2014; Culham, 2014). Similar to
the affordances of play, integrating mentor texts into writing workshops nurture students’
available designs and lead to more creative stories and improve students’ overall writing
(Thompson & Reed, 2019; Kerr & Vasudevan, 2017). Teachers use mentor texts as a way to
expose students to quality writing and craft, with the hopes that they will incorporate these
elements into their own writing.
Ray (2006) outlined an inquiry-based writing workshop model, where teachers gather a
variety of texts in a specific genre and closely study the genre elements, using students' interests
 7

and questions as a guiding force. Then, using their new insights, students produce a piece of
writing within the genre. This framework for writing has multiple benefits. Specifically, Ray
claims:
When teachers immerse students in reading and studying the kind of writing they want
them to do, they are actually teaching at two levels. They teach students about the
particular genre or writing issue that is the focus of the study, but they also teach students
to use a habit of mind that experienced writers engage in all the time. (p. 242)
Encouraging students to think and read like writers when engaging with texts creates more
opportunities for students to learn the craft of writing from a variety of teachers, specifically the
authors they read. With this mindset, students’ favorite books could become their most
influential writing teachers.
Immersing students in mentor texts places them in the world of narrative genre writing,
which encourages inspiration from established authors. The point of PBW is not simply for
students to play, but to use the affordance of play mentioned above to assist in the composition of
creative texts. In order to effectively do so, the use of mentor texts is necessary as it brings
structure and awareness to the type of genre elements that need to be included in the play and
writing. In order for students to compose to their fullest potential, a foundation needed to be laid.
In essence, play is the praxis of a written narrative because it allows students to demonstrate their
knowledge of the genre through action. This layered approach established the rules for students'
play and writing, which ensured alignment with the CCSS.
As shown in the previous sections, the PBW framework draws upon the
interconnectedness of play, the brain, imagination, and literacy to support students' writing of
fictional narrative stories.
Methods:
Using Ray’s (2006) inquiry-based writing workshop model, along with Shubitz’s (2016)
“craft moves,” I created a unit of study to immerse students in the elements of fictional
narratives, while supporting their composition of a piece of writing in the genre through the use
of mentor texts and play.
Ray’s instructional framework:

1. Gathering Texts: The teacher, often along with students, gathers examples of the kinds of
writing students will do.
 8

2. Set the Stage: The teacher explains that students will be expected to finish a piece of
writing that shows the influence of the study.
3. Immersion: The teacher and students spend time reading and getting to know the texts
they’ll study. They make notes of things they notice about how the texts are written. They
think about the process writers use to craft texts like the ones they are studying.
4. Close Study: The class revisits the texts, framing talk with the question, “What did we
notice about how these texts were written?” Teacher and students work together to use
specific language to say what they know about writing from this close study, developing
curriculum as they go. The teacher, through modeling, takes a strong lead in helping
students envision using what they are learning in their own writing.
5. Writing under the Influence: Students (and often the teacher) finish pieces of writing that
show the influence of the study in specific ways. (p. 239)

Shubitz’s craft moves for fictional picture books:

Dialogue Show, Don’t Tell

Internal Thinking Specific Details
Lead/Ending Turning Point
Punctuation to Create Voice Structure
Repetition Varied Sentence Length (p. 11)

Participants:
18 second graders (8 girls and 10 boys) in K-8 school in a Midwest, Wisconsin metropolitan
area.

Materials:
The fictional narrative unit of study involved two mentor texts: Those Shoes by Maribeth Boelts
and Noah Jones, and Soaked! by Abi Cushman, plus 18 pre-selected fictional narrative children’s
books with six or more craft moves for students to engage with:
1. A Sick day for Amos McGee 3. The Dark
By: Philip & Erin Stead By: Lemony Snicket, Jon Klassen
2. The Cow Who Climbed a Tree 4. Jabari Jumps
By: Gemma Merino By: Gaia Cornwall
 9

5. The Little Red Fort 12. The Bad Seed

By: Brenda Maier, Sonia Sanchez By: Jory John, Pete Oswald
6. Hoot Owl: Master of Disguise 13. Bo the Brave
By: Sean Taylor, Jean Jullien By: Bethan Woollvin
7. Kaia and the Bees 14. Pigeon Wants a Hot Dog
By: Maribeth Boelts, Angela Dominquez By: Mo Willems
8. The Snow Lion 15. Big Snow
By: Jim Helmore, Richard Jones By: Jonathan Bean
9. Pigeon Wants a Puppy 16. Carmela Full of Wishes
By: Mo Willems By: Matt De La Peña, Christian Robinson
10. A Bike Like Sergios 17. Pup 681
By: Maribeth Boelts, Noah Jones By: Jean Reidy, Ashley Crowley
11. Henry Holten Takes the Ice 18. We Don’t Eat Their Classmates
By: Sandra Bradley, Sara Palacios By: Ryan Higgins

Additionally, toys, props, and character cut outs from well-known books were used
during students’ play. Graphic organizers (linked in lesson plans) were used to support
instruction. Other common writing materials were available to students, such as pencils, writing
sheets, art supplies, thesauruses, and dictionaries.

Procedures:
For six weeks, students participated in the lessons embedded below, which focused on
different concepts related to the fictional narrative writing process with play integrated
throughout. Early on, students received a pre-assigned mentor text (based on student interest,
reading level, and text complexity) and selected 3-7 props to use for the entirety of the writing
unit. The props were kept in a plastic bag for organizational reasons and safekeeping. Each
lesson was between 20-30 minutes long--direct instruction typically lasted 15 minutes and play
took place during the remaining time. Using the available designs from instruction, mentor texts,
and play, all 18 students were asked to compose a text using the objective: I can use play to
compose a fictional narrative text that includes: character(s), setting, plot, and mood, while using
craft moves to engage readers.
 10

Design:
The following charts outline the lesson plans for the PBW framework. It is important to
note that these lessons were taught during the COVID-19 pandemic, with social distancing
protocols, a mask mandate, and a 4-day-a-week synchronous learning schedule, which drastically
influenced the structure of the design.
Following this six-week long unit of study, students were presented with additional toys
to use during their independent writing time.
 11

Week 1:
Day 1: Set the Stage Day 2: Reading like Writers Day 3: Identify Fictional Narrative Day 4: Fictional Narrative Immersion

-While holding mentor text (MT), ask the questions:
1.Who do you think made this book?
2. What tools do you think s/he used?
3. How do you think s/he got the idea for the story?
4. How do you think s/he did it-- did s/he draw the
pictures or write the words first?
5. How long do you think it took him/her?
-Introduce a collection of books: explain that the
books all have one thing in common, they are
fictional narratives
-Read MT, remind students that the text will be
revisited at a later time to discuss what makes it a
good fictional narrative. For today, just enjoy the
story!
-Good writers read like writers by:
1.Noticing something about the craft of the text
2. Talking about it and making a theory about
why a writer might use this craft
3. Giving the craft a name
4. Thinking of other texts they know. Have they
seen this craft before?
5. Trying this craft in their own writing.
(Ray, 1999, p. 120)
-Practice reading MT like a writer
-Record students’ notices (e.g. the author used
bolded words to show emphasis, an eclipse to
build suspense, sensory details to describe the
setting)
-Reintroduce fictional narratives
-Discuss common fictional narrative
genre elements: characters, plot,
setting, point of view, and mood.
-Using graphic organizer, read MT and
identify the fictional narrative features
-Independent Writing-- start or
continue a fictional narrative
-Share session: Who are the characters
in your fictional narrative?
-Review common fictional narrative genre
elements: characters, plot, setting, point of
view, and mood
-Read aloud MT, stopping to point out
genre elements
-“Book Study”: each student gets a
pre-selected fictional narrative book, reads
it, and identifies the genre elements using
a graphic organizer

Week 2:
Day 1: Identifying Craft Moves Day 2: Identifying Craft Moves Cont. Day 3: Genre Selection Day 4: Time to Play!

-Reintroduce: reading like a writer
-The strategies writers use to engage their
readers are called “craft moves”-- they
give characters voice, share details,
communicate meaning, and structure
writing
-Read aloud MT, pointing out specific
fictional narrative craft moves
-While reading, use sticky notes to label
craft moves
-Review craft moves
-Read aloud MT, stopping to highlight the
craft moves the author used
-“Book Study”: each student returns to their
pre-selected fictional narrative book, reads it,
and identifies the craft moves using a graphic
organizer
-Independent Writing Time
-Share session: Which craft move did you try?
Share the line from your writing.
-Read a text, model how to determine if it fits
within the fictional narrative genre while
reading. (Reminder: can’t base decision on
illustrations alone. Some nonfiction texts also
have illustrations, show some non-examples).
-”Book Study”: Students self-select a
fictional narrative text and read it
-Share session: What evidence do you have
that the book you selected is a fictional
narrative
-Revisit a MT and ask: “What is the writer doing
in this text that makes it interesting and
engaging?”
-Make a list of students’ notices and review
elements of a fictional narrative
-Reconsider: “How do authors get the ideas for
the stories they write?”
-Discuss the various ways authors could find
topics to write about
-”Now, we are going to draw inspiration from
our play.”
-Students choose props and toys, play for 10
minutes
 12
Week 3:
Day 1: The Process of Writing Day 2: The Process of Writing cont. Day 3: Author Visit! Day 4: Lead

-Introduce unit objective
-Introduce students to different parts of the writing
process and explain that most writers have a
process that is unique to them as a writer, but
oftentimes, writers spend time collecting ideas and
planning before writing
-Display a few possible writing processes
-Using the selected props, encourage students to
plan out their fictional narrative through play
-Provide students with another fictional narrative
graphic organizer
-Play for 10 minutes
-Record and share session: Characters + setting
-Remind students that each writer has a
writing process they go through when
drafting a text, typically beginning with
collecting ideas and planning. Oftentimes
recording these ideas is a helpful strategy.
-”Today, consider who will be telling the
story (the main character, a narrator,
another character), what the mood will be,
and what are some of the main events (or
plot) that will take place.”
-Play for 10 minutes
-Record ideas on graphic organizer
-Share Session: Plot ideas
-If possible, contact the author of one
of your mentor texts and ask if they
would be willing to meet with your
class to discuss his/her writing
process.
*One of our mentor texts was Those
Shoes by Maribeth Boelts. She
generously agreed to meet virtually
with our class to share her inspiration
for the book and her writing process.
-Debrief author visit-- “What did you find
interesting or helpful to you as a writer?”
-Craft move mini-lesson focus: Lead/Ending
Reread the leads of previous mentor text(s).
Display the wording for students to see. Discuss.
-Display list of leads that authors use to engage
their readers (Shubitz, pg. 202)
- Explain: “Many writers start drafting their story
after they have gathered information and have a
plan. Today, we are going to play while writing,
specifically focusing on the lead.”
-Share Session: Lead

Week 4:
Day 1: Punctuation to Create Voice Day 2: Varied Sentence Length Day 3: Dialogue Day 4: Specific Details

Craft move mini-lesson focus: Punctuation
to create voice
-reread previous mentor text(s) sections
with various punctuation. Display the
sentences for students to see
-Explain that authors use varying
punctuation to create a mood in their
writing
-Students play while writing
-Share session: Favorite sentence that
created voice
-Writing process reminder: reread and make
revisions and edits while writing
-Craft move mini-lesson: Varied Sentence Lengths
-reread previous mentor text(s) sections with varied
sentence lengths. Display the sentences for students
to see
-Explain that authors use varied sentence lengths to
make writing sound lyrical and fun, it can be used to
communicate meaning and tone
-Students play while writing
-Writing process reminder
-Craft move mini-lesson: Dialogue
-reread previous mentor text(s)
sections with dialogue. Display the
sentences for students to see
-Explain that authors use dialogue to
move a story forward and hear the
exchange of language between
characters
-Students play while writing
-Writing process reminder
-Craft move mini-lesson: Specific details
-reread previous mentor text(s) sections with
vivid verbs. Display the sentences for
students to see
-Explain that authors use vivid verbs to help
readers envision what is being described or
explained
-Students play while writing
-Share session: A vivid verb used in a
sentence

*During week 4, draft your own fictional narrative and conference with students regarding their progress toward the unit objective, discuss editing when necessary

Week 5:
Day 1: Self-revising and editing
-Remind students of the different components of the
writing process
-“Last week, we conferenced to see if your story was
meeting the unit objective-- this is something writers
do throughout the writing process, it’s called revising.
You can revise numerous times while writing to
ensure you are meeting the assignment criteria.”
-Reintroduce the unit objective, model rereading a
draft to ensure it meets the criteria
-Students spend time identifying genre elements and
craft moves within their story, revising when
necessary
-Authors also spend time editing their draft for
conventions. Students reread through the text again,
using editing checklist
Week 6:
Day 1: Final Book Creation
-Students work to finish their fictional narrative book,
adding final details before the publisher’s deadline
-Remind students that texts are being published in one
day!
Day 2: Peer-editing
-After authors are confident in their draft,
they often get feedback from others
-Model giving feedback
-Students swap fictional narratives and make
suggestions using the feedback form
-Students spend time revising and editing
-Once students are confident in their draft,
they submit it
*Outside of instructional time, teacher
reviews the texts and provides additional
feedback
Day 2: Publishing Day!
-Students have the opportunity to read their
published fictional narrative to the class
-Once completed, they add it to the fictional
narrative basket
-Celebrate!
13
Day 3: Book Creation Day 4: Book Creation
-Using the feedback gained from peers and -Similar to yesterday, students
the teacher, students produce their final draft finish their final drafts and begin
-Once it has been checked, students begin the the publishing process
publishing process -Remind students that texts are
-During this process, they will be the author being published in two days!
and the illustrator.
-Remind students that texts are being
published in three days!
Day 3: Publishing Day!
-Students have the opportunity to read
their published fictional narrative to the
class
-Once completed, they add it to the
fictional narrative basket
-Celebrate!
 14

Results:
To demonstrate the impact of PBW, two fictional stories were selected from four different
students--one is a sample from before PBW and the other is the product of PBW. The before
samples were composed during February or March 2021. These pieces were specifically selected
to showcase the difference in students’ writing during a similar time period.

Sample #1 Before

Sample #1 Product of PBW

Hey lightning hey lemon ready for the RACE… Whaat! Ya down-town tomrow aftrnoon you’ll be there
right. Um ya what about snowy. He will be there? “Nope” What!!! So not fair! Will watever “what do you
mean WATEVER! Ok fine I’ll go to the race!” Hey it’s me snowy. Um guys. Later snow lemon and I are
going on a “race” Cool can I come sorry but NOPE! Ok! I’ll watch It’s startting I’m going to win so you
dont have to try Ok you’re on!!! swift!!!! “Who is in the lead!! I am no I am. And it a t-t-tie! Whowh! But
just for the record I won NO you did not yes I did 500 Decads no I won no I won The end. I won no you
did not yes I did Okay fine only because I am tired of saing that okay okay! Not haha! I won no!
 15

Sample #2 Before

Sample #2 Product of PBW

 16

Sample #3 Before

Sample #3 Product of PBW

This is a story abowt hoses Budder Same Snowflag. MOM! Help! Same is stuk in the fenst agen. OW my
goodnose. A fence. “Ow hey guys” “what is up” “Nothin. I gust wanted to now where you where you
are.” “ow what do you whont to do.” “I am going.” “what I wnat to come.” “ok I wade” “love you to.”
“okay lets go.” ok “do you want Ice crem”. “Sure. Lets go get some Ice crem.” Lets not get Ice crem.
Okay Lets go home. Gallop gallop Jump. I am out of breth. Lets chill. Okay lest tro arond the feld. Can I
canter. Sher.
 17

Sample #4 Before

HI!!! I’m henry the dog and that is bob the cat. And we
live in texes. Skwal ruff ruff ruff ruff ruff ruff ruff
ruff!!!!!!! Sorry ok I’m back so sorry cat ruff ruff what
thats bob

Sample #4 Product of PBW

Once their was four animals all

hunry and thair names are bob, larry, Bill and gouerg. And Bob says
“lets fit each other and the winner tacks it all! I am in for a yummy treat!
Ahhh Oh no so scary said Geurg. Then lets clean up thes dreadful place.
Ew? Or ew? I mean yucky ew said larry ok all clear and pretty said larry.
Know lets fit. NOOO said goureg. What the heck said Bill what are you
guys talking about food said bob. Whairs the food siad Bill. you said bob
no said Bill yes said bob STOP said larry. Right we sood put asid are
differences said bob in a bad face. Sure said larry that he is a dinosaur
and I am a golden retriever dog ya sure NO are you citting right know.
Yes I guess said larry okay said bob SO STOP said bob okay said larry
STOP said gorge NO you tuck all the trees said gorge can we have food
said Bill we are tring to said larry “fine lets go find food together” said
bob yay said larry no yays said bob “let’s go” said larry I’m hungry said Bill we are working on it said
gorge crying no the trees wawawawawawawawa said gorge so mad okay lets go said bob we are in town
let stell said bob no said larry then what says bob I do not no I guess stell says larry if we get food i’m in
said Bill we know says Bob, gorge and larry we have food runnnnn bob says yum let go back no to risky
so yummy and so good. The end.
 18

Discussion of Results
To determine if the PBW framework made a positive impact on students’ writing, I
gathered writing samples from students’ writing binders that they use during their independent
writing time and collected the stories written during the PBW unit. Then, I did a side-by-side
comparison of the two samples. While analyzing students’ writing, I discovered that the types of
toys made available for playtime infiltrated students’ plots. This is true for all of the sample
stories I collected-- the characters and settings students wrote about coincided with the physical
props they used. This evidence aligns with Vygotsky’s (1978) idea, “The behaviour of a very
young child... is determined by the conditions in which the activity takes place” (96). In this
case, the types of toys available for play highly influence what students will write about, while
also helping students generate and maintain story ideas.
The students’ integration of the physical objects, mentor texts, and previous available
designs shows their imagination in action. As Vygotksy (2004) defines, “This creative activity,
based on the ability of our brain to combine elements, is called imagination” (p. 9). Presenting
students with physical objects creates a tangible opportunity for the (re)combination of the
abstract with the concrete.
As seen in samples one, two, and three before the implementation of the PBW
framework, students drew writing inspiration from previously read books. Specifically, the
characters, Pigeon, Piggy, and Gerald, come from a few of Mo Willems’ book series which have
been widely read in the classroom. While these samples show students’ imagination through
their recombination of existing designs, the opportunity to play while writing opened up their
imagination to new combinations they had not yet explored. As a result, the plot development of
the PBW samples abandoned familiar story structures and allowed for students' voices and
creative imagination to shine through.
Since play is a physical act, there is a noticeable increase in the amount of action
included in students’ later writing. Whether the characters are exploring, fighting, running, or
racing, action is embedded throughout each plot. Similarly, the props were influential in the
language students used. Since students were able to have conversations between characters while
playing, the amount of sustained dialogue increased significantly. Also, students' usage of
onomatopoeias and descriptive language increased. Throughout students’ writing, words such as,
ahhh, boom, crash, rawr, thunk, and gallop appear frequently. The external processing and
 19

speaking that takes place during play positively influences the events and words that students
incorporate in their writing.
Although the plot development and language usage was positively influenced by the
PBW framework, it is important to note that this type of framework should be taught in
conjunction with writing conventions. Oftentimes, students got so engrossed in the playing and
recording process that they forgot to include punctuation, making it hard to decipher the
trajectory of the plot at times.

Limitations:
Affordances of Cooperative Play
While the previously highlighted research in the literature review discussed the
affordances of play in the general sense, it was my intention to analyze the affordances of
cooperative play and writing as a social practice (Myhill, 2010) to produce additional available
designs. Ideally, this dimension of PBW would have been analyzed using student data, however,
the world-wide COVID-19 pandemic prevented students from playing cooperatively, and
hindered my ability to gather this evidence. However, I still believe that this component of PBW
is important to include and is an area of further study. Using past observations and along with
previous research, there is a logical connection between cooperative play-- defined as playing
alongside peers with shared materials-- and the combining of available designs. Cooperative play
could potentially assist students in merging their stories to create a collective story. In this way,
students might make connections across available designs that may lead to the creation of more
designs for each participant.

Conclusion
At the conclusion of this study, students continued to use the toys during their
independent writing time to support their story making. Some students used the same toys and
created sequel stories, while others exchanged their toys for different ones to create a new
storyline altogether. In either case, it was obvious that the introduction of play-based writing was
welcomed by students and positively influenced their writing experience. Thus, it is time to
reintroduce play into the primary classrooms as a way to foster available designs and imagination
when writing fictional narrative stories.
 20

References

Adams, M.J., Fillmore, L.W., Goldenberg, C., Oakhill, J., Paige, D.D., Rasinski, T., & Shanahan,
T. (2020). Comparing reading research to program design: An examination of teachers
college units of study. Student Achievement Partners.

Biordi, L., & Gardner, N. (2014). Play and write: An early literacy approach. Practically
Primary 19(1), 6-9.

Christie, J. F. (1990). Dramatic play: A context for meaningful engagement. Reading Teacher,
43(8), 542–545.

Clark, B. (2014). Should we let the pigeon stay up late? Educational Leadership, 71(7),
73–76.

Culham, R. (2014). Teaching writing is hard enough: Stop doing dumb things. Reading Today,
31(5), 29-30.

Gallagher, K. (2014). Making the most of mentor texts. Educational Leadership, 71(7), 28–33.

Hall, N., & Robinson, A. (2013). Exploring writing and play in the early years. [2nd ed]. David
Fulton Publishers. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Hassett, D.D., & Wood, C.L. (2017). Imagination and the semiotics processes of creativity and
design. In F. Serafini & E. Gee (Eds.) Re-imagining multiliteracies: Looking back,
moving forward. (pp. 175-186). Teachers College Press.

Kerr, K. R., & Vasudevan, L. (2017). Writing instruction and mentor text habits of mind: A
review of writing with mentors: How to reach every writer in the room using
current, Engaging mentor texts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(2),
229–231. https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.wisc.edu/10.1002/jaal.684

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington D.C.: Author.
http://corestandards.org/

Myhill, D. (2010). Learning to write. In R. Fisher, S. Jones & S. Larkin. (2010).

Using talk to support writing (pp. 1–19). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://
www.doi.org/10.4135/9781446251829.n1
 21

Potier, C., Friedrich, N., & Peterson, S.S. (2019). Play(ful) pedagogical practices for creative
collaborative literacy. Reading Teacher, 73(1), 17-27.
https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.wisc.edu/10.1002/trtr/1795

Ray, K.W. (2006). Exploring inquiry as a teaching stance in the writing workshop. Language
Arts, 83(3), 238-247.

Ray, K. W., & Glover, M. (2008). Already ready: Nurturing writers in preschool and
kindergarten. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ray, K.W. (1999). Wondrous words: Writers and writing in the elementary classroom. Urbana,
IL: NCTE.

Roskos, K., & Christie, J. (2011). The play-literacy nexus and the importance of
evidence-based techniques in the classroom. American Journal of Play, 4(2), 204–224.

Shubitz, Stacey, (2016). Craft moves: lesson sets for teaching writing with mentor texts.
Portland, MN: Stenhouse Publishers.

Thompson. S. & Reed. D. K. (2019, January 22). Using mentor texts to learn from the best and
improve students’ writing . Iowa Reading Research Center. https://iowareadingresearch.
org/blog/mentor-texts-student-writing

Tsao, Y.-L. (2008). Using guided play to enhance children’s conversation, creativity and
competence in literacy. Education, 128(3), 515-520.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

In M. Cole., V. Jolm-Steiner., S. Scribner.., & E. Souberman., (Eds.). Cambridge,
Massachusetts; London, England: Harvard University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4

Vygotsky, L.S. (2004). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East
European Psychology, 42(1), 7-79.

Wohlwend, Karen E. (2013). Literacy playshop : new literacies, popular media, and play in the
early childhood classroom. Teachers College Press.
 22

Appendix A
Below are images taken throughout the fictional narrative PBW unit of study to document the
process.

The mentor texts made available to students.

Author interview with Maribeth Boelts to discuss her writing process.

 23

The writing corner with toys, props and puppets, writing sheets, and other necessary writing
materials.

Inspiration for PBW sample #1.

 24

Inspiration for PBW sample #2.

Inspiration for PBW sample #3.

 25

Inspiration for PBW sample #4.

Sample student #4 using his selected toys to assist with his writing..
 26

Another student using her toys to assist in her story writing.

Some of the published fictional narratives that students authored and illustrated.