The Reader in the Writer: The links between the study of literature and writing development at Key Stage 2

This handsomely produced and thought-provoking study poses important questions about the teaching of reading and writing, including the often assumed relationship between them, and provides evidence for the significance of often undervalued practice. With writing at KS2 a major national focus and the introduction of the National Literacy Strategy often leading to practices the very opposite of those advocated here, this is also timely. Much teaching of the NLS would be enriched by the methods described here; although, in the two years since the research took place, there have been very positive developments in the teaching of writing through the NLS, particularly in explicit attention to language features in shared and guided writing. The research study focused on four questions with Year 5 classes in five schools during the year 1998-99:¥ What do children take from their reading of literary texts, and how do we know? ¥ How far do certain classroom practices support children in learning about writing from literary texts? ¥ Are the experiences which help children to develop as writers the same as those which help them to develop as readers? ¥ What kinds of literary texts are particularly supportive to children learning to write? The study is particularly inspiring in the detail of the approaches to reading. It has not always seemed a self-evident truth that to develop writing and writers, teachers and children draw on reading. And, as importantly, that talk and listening have anything to do with writing. The study shows that they are not separable; the learning from one informs the learning of the other. Here, writing arises out of a rich compound of talk, listening and reading that is always rooted in thinking and meaning. Drama also assumes a key role, with links to children's increased ability to recast the narration. Developing a language ear is a major emphasis, with children 'reading through the ears' as teachers perform texts aloud and they themselves listen to their own writing. Effective teachers here also encourage children to publish their work through reading it aloud rather than just putting it on display. We can understand that here too texts, children's own texts, are measured by the writers and the listeners against their aural understanding which is being grown through those readings and dramatisations. The study shows again the need for children to sound like writers: to be apprentice musicians learning to orchestrate their narratives, to make their pens create and recreate the compositions that they have heard and continue to hear in their heads. The additional ingredient is 'high quality texts', in this case Fire, Bed and Bone and The Green Children, a retelling of a folk-tale, used with all the classes. The research highlights the impact of 'emotionally powerful texts' along with other important conclusions. Texts have to be worth children spending time on. These teachers resist that early misperceived view of the NLS that you could only read bits of texts and do bitty work. They work for extended periods of time on whole texts; and they use a range of methods, including drama, to engage the pupils in the meanings and life of those texts. They also provide further evidence for the important role of folk tales in pupils' 'narrative education' and point to the lessons about links between speech and writing embedded in these stories. The writing samples show clearly the effectiveness of the work and the experiences and the assessments show the gains made in writing by these children. It is an approach that works. For the authors of the study what matters too is that it is based on thought and feeling and personal growth. The 'growth of feeling' is noted and valued in these young writers. Not the kind of thing encapsulated in spare NLS objectives or SATs criteria. In many ways this seems to be the antithesis of the Literacy Hour approach and in that first year of implementation it would generally have felt like it too. In Scholes' words about the teaching of reading, quoted in this book, there is 'too much in it of art or craft to yield entirely - or even largely - to methodization'. This study sees development beyond 'formal lessons'. There is still much to be learnt from this study and to be embedded in literacy practice. It would be very good to have more common appreciation of the power of texts, the importance of high quality and whole texts, and the absolutely essential part that talk and listening, discussion and drama have to play in developing as a writer. The timing of this research indicates that teachers had not yet explored the ways that shared writing, especially modelling and demonstrating, are extensions of that drama work they have done. Guided writing too is only briefly referred to. Since 1998, teachers have begun to 'grow' the NLS too and there is an increasing amount of high quality, confident writing from primary children of all ages which has a debt to further teaching approaches not strongly represented here. These children too are fully engaged in the circle of reading and writing. They write as a reader and read as a writer. Explicitly shown the writer's craft and shown how to make these techniques work for them, successful writing is suddenly a much less secret affair. Their explanations of what is so enjoyable about their favourite authors sound like comments from a fellow writer. They have developed their ear and also their eye for language. This is a book which teachers of literacy should know. It is wise and thoughtful, inspiring and committed and rooted in life and literature and learning. I look forward to a sequel which continues to dig away at these questions and follows the developments in the research group for this book, both teachers and children, two years on and more.