PerSpectives and provocations - Early Childhood Web viewPerSpectives and provocations. ... phrases from the written transcription that ... writing--a truth that may delight word-shy

November 2014 Volume 1, Number 1

Updating and Upgrading Early Elementary School Writing Experiences with

Storytelling and Technology

Dr. Lauren E. Burrow Dr. Shaunna SmithUniversity of Memphis Texas State [email protected]

Abstract

This article uses classroom-based examples to advocate for the use of digital storytelling as a

21st-century update to Vivian Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum in elementary grades

(K – 3). The article describes Paley’s traditional early childhood writing process and outlines how to

update and upgrade it with technology in order to better engage modern-day, young writers.

Discussions of how to leverage a technological pedagogical and content knowledge framework (or

TPACK) to assist educators in considering the benefits, capabilities, and limitations of digital

storytelling as related to the potential enhancement of young students' digital writing is also

presented.

PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 77

PerSpectives and provocations

This article employs a narrative summary of generative change (Ball, 2009) to tell the

evidence-based story of two educators’ increasing advocacy for considering the updating and

upgrading of preschool-based storytelling dictations and dramatization practices -- like Vivian

Paley’s (1981) storytelling and story acting curriculum – in order to encourage young writers in

early elementary (K-3) classrooms. Aided by the innovative and purposeful use of technology --

specifically digital storytelling – these educators have witnessed the benefits and successes of

transferring traditional storytelling and story acting practices from their typical preschool

classroom placements into early elementary classrooms. The ultimate effect has been pedagogy

that capitalizes on 21st technology to successfully meet the still developing writing needs of 21st

century learners.

Aretha Ball (2009) describes “generative change” as the “process of self-perpetuating

change wherein a teacher’s pedagogical practices are inspired and influenced by the instructional

approaches and theory that they are exposed to in professional development” (p. 6). In this

instance, the former classroom experiences and continued dialogue between Burrow (first

author/early childhood educator) and Smith (second author/technology instructor) act as the

professional development. As actors in the professional development, both authors facilitated

the knowledge gained, acted as the catalyst for changes in instructional planning, and acquired

knowledge by learning from, and about, students. As such, this article is not a traditional “how-

to” piece, but rather a “how could” piece that presents possibilities and perspectives while posing

wonderings about how writing can be approached with technology. Ultimately, we encourage

readers to undergo their own generative change by learning from our story in order to “produce

or originate new knowledge that is useful to them in pedagogical problem solving and in meeting

the education needs of their students” (Ball, 2009, p. 6).



This article will use classroom-based anecdotes to briefly describe the traditional

practices of preschool storytelling curriculum. Then, using selected student examples and

accompanying educator reflections, we will illustrate how to upgrade those practices in order to

encourage updated writing practices that leverage technological advances to publish and plan

students' best stories in a meaningful, multimodal way. Collected as part of normal class

routines over a multi-year period, the student-work samples are representative of a diverse range

of students (Kindergarten – 3rd grade) from multiple school types (including parochial, Gifted

and Talented, and Title 1 public schools). Discussions of how to use digital storytelling to satisfy

young writers’ content knowledge needs (i.e., the writing process, digital writing) will also be

presented and are based on our personal reflections and discussions with early childhood

teachers across the nation as we engaged in professional development. Ultimately, the

discussions in this article can equip educators to use TPACK (“technological pedagogical and

content knowledge”) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- a framework which essentially guides

educators to think about technology as a tool that can enhance the meaningful content they are

already teaching (Harris & Hoffer, 2009; Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- to decide “when” and

“why” to include the tools of digital storytelling with young students’ writing experiences.

Everyone has a story to tell (Paley, 1981; Rowe, 2008) and with the aid of technology and

modern storytelling processes, like digital storytelling, educators may be able to help young

students better prepare and present those stories in innovative ways for a changing world.

Writing in the Early Years with Vivian Paley

In the 1980s, Vivian Paley, noted pre-school and kindergarten educator and early

childhood education researcher, allowed for children’s social writings with her “storytelling

curriculum” which included two basic components: storytelling and story acting. Known for its



ability to prompt, improve, and showcase a young student’s writing before they are even able to

write, Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum is widely used, in some variation, in most

high-quality toddler and preschool classrooms across the nation. Burton, Bacigalupa, Wright,

and Black (2008), Cooper (1993), and Sulzby (1996) detail how Paley’s storytelling curriculum

has found its way, in a variety of forms into a number of preschools that seek to provide literacy

activities that emphasize “authentic, oral language practices between educators and children”

(Gray, Mathes, Cooper, & Capo, 2007, p. 251). Often translated as “dictation and

dramatization,” the educator-dependent practice allows the youngest writers to share their stories

with their classroom of peers and families.

The first tenet – storytelling (or dictation) -- asks educators and students to enter a

“literacy apprenticeship” in which the educator acts as a scribe while the student dictates a story

about a topic of his or her own choosing. During this phase the educator can ask questions to

help the child clarify the meaning of their words and even offer assistance (Gray, et al., 2007).

The second tenet -- story acting (or dramatization) -- involves the acting out of the dictated

stories. During this phase the educator acts as the director and narrator, while the student-author

and his or her chosen peers act out the dictated story (the remaining students act as an audience)

(Gray, et al., 2007). Since the acting is an informal activity with the main purpose being to

“publish” or present/share the student’s ideas with their classmates, direction in dialogue and

staging can be interjected by the educator in order to guide, improve, or sustain the action. In

addition to mimicking the essential early childhood function of play, the use of dramatizations

(or story acting) can provide a motivation for young children to participate in the story dictation

process (Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement [CIERA], 1999, p. 363) in

the first place. Strickland and Morrow (2000) similarly advocate dramatization of dictated



stories since noticing, celebrating, and sharing writing with a variety of audiences in and out of

school is beneficial.

An effective pedagogy for encouraging the development of writing technique, the

educator-student dialogues and accompanying activities associated with Paley’s curriculum are

relatively simple practices. The true art of her storytelling curriculum does require a dedicated

amount of time from the educator, though. How, then, could technology -- specifically, digital

storytelling and writing-based software and applications -- allow early elementary (K – 3)

classroom educators to also engage in this beneficial, but time-consuming activity? As former

classroom educators and current tech-realists, we believe that writing-based technologies could

make possible a new pedagogy by which to address the advancing writing needs and skills of

elementary school-aged writers.

Cooper (2005) acknowledges that “each educator and classroom of children will put their

individual stamp on storytelling and story acting methodology” (p. 232). When I (Burrow)

transitioned to teaching in early elementary classrooms, as both a traditional educator and as a

visiting creative writing teaching artist, I therefore felt justified in updating the components of

Paley’s storytelling curriculum in order to improve literacy skills far beyond what was

traditionally thought possible for my young students. Updating of the curriculum allowed me to

capture the words and ideas of my students who were still too young to write (Kindergarten) or

whose length of writing was hampered by the daunting developmental task of legible

handwriting (grades 1 – 3).

Upgrading Storytelling Dictation for Traditional Use

In my elementary classrooms I was eager to take the successful practices of Paley’s

preschool-focused curriculum and update those principles for the benefits of my older students. I



quickly discovered that storytelling can enhance the pre-writing and drafting stages of the

writing process for those young writers in the early elementary school grades who have still not

found their voice, lack writing confidence, or are generally intimidated by the writing process.

I often inspired storytelling from new or struggling story writers by reading to them fun,

familiar adult-authored texts that exposed them to repetitive themes within children’s literature.

I then elicited students’ stories by prompting them to merely retell to me a familiar text. This use

of concrete models to inspire student writing often facilitated the pre-writing stage until these

students were more confident in constructing their own ideas and stories. Sometimes I

prompted new writers with examples of visual art or even their own student-created illustrations

in order to ease their writer’s block by giving them the chance to write a story about what was

happening within the visual representation of a snapshot in time (see Figures 1 and 2).

Oftentimes, I found that allowing students to follow a template for their poetic writings would

then lead to a fountain of words just waiting to bubble over on to the page. Other times it just

took a prompt as simple as, “What did you paint a picture of?” and then requesting that the

young student record their response on the artwork. Additionally, I found that just being

available to discuss their writing at the onset of the writing time, often prompted reluctant writers

to actually put pen to paper. Finally, for my students who were still struggling with penmanship,

I often struck a compromise in which I would transcribe their dictation up to a certain point and

then ask them to take over the writing. The results of these updated storytelling practices was

lengthier papers and a general improvement in attitudes towards writing times.



“The Light Out Lantern” by Owen

The photograph and accompanying poem for “The Light Out Lantern” were both created by

Owen, a second grader. He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. His

writing was completed independently by following a class template for Senses Poetry writing.



Figure 2: “Rocks” by Alex

The photograph and accompanying poem for “Rocks” were both created by Alex, a first grader.

He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. Alex completed his free-

verse poem by selecting phrases from the written transcription that Burrow (author) transcribed

during their one-on-one conversation about his image.

Revision and proofreading happen naturally throughout the pre-writing and drafting

stages of storytelling as educators prompt students with simple verbal indicators that call

students’ attention to opportunities for revision (“Can you tell me more about the princess?

What was she wearing?”) and editing (“Do you want to say the boys are or the boys is?”).

Revision and editing also occurs as students publish when students have the opportunity to

witness the visualization of their writing on stage and receive “audience” (or peer) feedback. In



my classrooms, peers were very willing to point out when “You didn’t say the pirate ran away

from the bear!” Sometimes my students did not even realize what they meant to say until they

saw the theatrical publication of their story (Cooper, 2005, p. 246). I could then prompt the new

writer with, “Do you want to add that into your story?”

The process of storytelling can allow new, struggling, and even veteran student writers to

craft, explore, and share their personal stories with the added bonus of an adult expert’s model or

guidance. Combined with story acting, the entire process can provide a unique and compelling

visual to prompt students’ deeper understanding of their narrative and provide the provocation

for investigating authorial intent and story sequence (Cooper, 2005). As a result, story acting (or

dramatization) provides a motivation for young children to participate in the storytelling (or

dictation) process (CIERA, 1999, p. 363), thus perpetuating the presently championed “cycle-

version” of the writing process.

While the dialogues designed to prompt students to share their stories and encourage the

development of writing technique are fairly simple, the time required by these simple activities

may be a luxury most educators simply do not have. As a preschool teacher, parceling out

dictation times for each student was a week-long process that lasted at least an hour per day;

given the required focus on other subjects for my older elementary-school students, finding an

hour’s block of time in any given day was nearly impossible, though. For those who see merit in

Paley’s storytelling curriculum, Smith’s (2nd author) understanding of the capabilities of

technology integration may help transform this writing pedagogy into a digital storytelling

experience that meets the growing requirements of 21st-century learning. It is this natural

tailoring of the curriculum which ultimately allowed Smith to help me (Burrow) adapt Paley’s



ideas to best benefit and fit the writing needs of my older elementary school-aged students for

deeper and more complete literacy learning in a digital age.

Updating Paley for Technological Use

We contend that technological integration with Paley’s curriculum provides a modern

and comprehensive update that can increase elementary school-aged students’ writing

capabilities, capture their interests, record their stories, and meet their advancing needs as 21 st-

century learners. By having students work through the creation of a “written” work with digital

storytelling and writing-based software applications, it allows for the dictated stories of young

students to be captured with more ease, increased frequency, and innovative representation.

Digital storytelling also later allows for more public “dramatizations” with added creative,

visual, and multimodal publishing possibilities suitable for the modern age.

Whereas, traditional storytelling dictations tend to focus on modeling concepts of print

with a pen to paper method that demonstrates to children that their spoken words can be written

down to create a published story, digital storytelling focuses on celebrating that child’s spoken

words or visual imagery selections as equitable stories worth sharing. Just as Vasquez (2014)

claims that new technologies and social media can be used as tools to accomplish critical literacy

work, digital storytelling can enable students to use their own voices to give an accurate,

authentic voice to their messages and ideas, thereby providing a suitable (and sometimes

superior) platform to students who are confident in their ideas and comfortable sharing them

verbally, but are still wary of entering the world of writing. Digital Storytelling capitalizes on

and celebrates their efforts while conditioning them to take greater risks and more frequent turns

at the “writer’s wheel.”



One way that I (Burrow), was able to effectively carry over the traditional approaches to

storytelling and story acting into digital realms was with Smith’s guidance on how to use digital

storytelling as a means to enable young children to narrate (dictate) their stories without waiting

on my availability. Storytelling in this medium can occur more frequently because not every

stage is completely dependent upon waiting for an adult scribe to have the free time to take

dictation; stories can happen in real-time as they are happening thereby never missing a moment

of student creativity. Additionally, narrated stories ensured more accurate representations of

students’ ideas by minimizing the natural deletions or substitutions that can occur when

educators transcribe. Using recording hardware and/or speech-to-text software, I was able to

review students’ digital stories, at my convenience, and suggest edits. It is our belief that, after

teacher modeling and with a rubric for guidance, supplemental input could also come from peers

and even the self-reflective young writer themselves.

Additionally, Smith also taught me (Burrow) how the digital story, itself, could become

an enhanced, multimodal dramatization/publication of young students’ written work (taking the

place of the traditional in-class story acting). The act of writing may be a solitary one, but the

impact and celebration of it should be shared. Digital storytelling provides an enhanced platform

for sharing student’s writing in ways that traditional classroom publications just cannot;

extending the intended social element of the traditional storytelling process beyond educator-

student conversations to foster student-student conversations that can speed up the development

phases of writing. Furthermore, like Vasquez (2014), we believe that other writing-based

software, applications, or social media (e.g., blogs, Prezi, discussion boards) can be combined

with digital storytelling to transform the way students and teachers think about text construction

and production.



In talking with other educators at many of our professional development and conference

presentations, we are confident that the elements of digital story can be especially beneficial to

students with special needs that may limit their handwriting or even speech capabilities.

Teachers of special needs students suggest encouraging students to produce visual essays in

which they select stock photos, choose accompanying music to convey tone, mood, setting, and

add action—all are multimodal acts that allow more students to feel like writers.

This digital transformation of Paley’s storytelling curriculum required me to commit to

spending classroom time, up front, on the upgraded traditional storytelling and story acting

writing process so that students had a model for stories worth sharing through the all-

encompassing digital storytelling process. So, while engaging in the storytelling process ignited

many of my students’ creative ideas, engaging in the digital storytelling process propelled my

students into action. Participation in this educational technology integration authentically

supports cognitive and psychosocial development by allowing students to translate their verbal

communication into visual communication, thus opening the proverbial door to multimodal

expression. I have seen digital storytelling artifacts successfully created by learners of all ages

that exemplify a range of stories, including personal narratives, informative reports, and/or

content-specific tales (Robin, 2008).

Theodosakis (2009) indicates that activities of this type have cognitive benefits that

encourage higher order thinking skills, such as visioning skills, research, problem solving, logic,

planning, and critical thinking. Most of my young students were more eager to engage in the

dynamic nature of digital storytelling to plan out their writing than were apt to write a traditional

outline. Once familiar with the technology, many of my students were able to leverage the visual



format of digital stories to display researched knowledge, well beyond what I have typically seen

students that age accomplish when writing traditional reports (see Figure 3).

Insert Figure 3: “Avery the Caterpillar” by Nicole, Kindergarten

The screenshot represents a science inquiry report completed by Kindergartener, Nicole. Her

report was recorded using the free iPad app, Shadow Puppet Edu. Nicole and Burrow (1st

author) selected images together from Creative Commons Flickr and then uploaded them into

the app. Nicole’s narration reflects her own learned knowledge about how a caterpillar

becomes a butterfly and includes dialogue between her and Burrow. The presentation concludes

with a follow up to Nicole’s expressed interest in knowing more about the mechanics of

butterflies drinking. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her report.



So, if an educator is confident in the benefits of digital story for early elementary school writers,

how can they begin to integrate the technology into their own classroom?

TPACK: Framing Teacher Knowledge for the Integration of Digital Storytelling

Drawing upon Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK (Technological Pedagogical And

Content Knowledge) framework for understanding teacher knowledge allows us to transcend the

typical debate surrounding the integration of technology and writing, which tends to center on

whether to instruct students on how to write for technology or with technology and, instead,

allows educators to focus not on an either/or scenario but a when/why consideration. The use of

the TPACK Framework can assist teachers in framing their knowledge to integrate technology in

support of their pedagogy and content, which in turn allows them to take into account the

multiple purposes for young students’ writing experiences. TPACK is the means by which

educators can determine how to effectively and appropriately balance pedagogical truths from

the past with revelatory modern-day practices. When the TPACK framework is used

appropriately, an educator can plan for a multilayered learning experience that factors in

appropriate pedagogy (PK), relevant content (CK) and meaningfully integrates technology (TK).

TPACK mimics the same decision-making process that educators employ when they examine

traditional classroom activities to determine the pedagogy that best meet the needs of their

diverse learners. In the case of digital storytelling as part of elementary school writing activities

(Figure 4), this interconnected web of 21st-century educator knowledge ensures successful

implementation by focusing on all aspects of the plan.



Figure 4. TPACK Domains of Knowledge used in Teaching Elementary School Digital

Storytelling.

In this article the valuable pedagogy (PK) that was discussed was “storytelling and story

acting,” a practice that educators can use within older classrooms in order to successfully meet

the content needs (CK) of young writers (i.e., the writing process). Once educators can elicit

quality stories from young students, the attention can then be turned to acquiring and practicing

the technological know-how (TK) necessary to improve writing experiences. By considering the

TPACK of elementary school-aged digital writing, educators can be better informed as how to

update traditional writing methods (like an upgraded version of Paley’s storytelling curriculum)

to enable, shape, and share new writing opportunities for their students.


(CK)The Writing

Process

(PK)Paley’s

Storytelling & Story Acting

(TK)Digital

Storytelling

(PCK)Dictation & Dramatizati

on

(TCK)Verbal &

Visual Connection

(TPK)Directed

Learning & Guided

(TPACK


Tips for Successful Implementation of Digital Storytelling

Based on my (Burrow) own classroom successes and informed by Smith’s knowledge of

successful technology integration into multiple classroom types, the following can help other

educators successfully integrate digital storytelling into their classrooms. Since good writing is

a year-round endeavor in schools, educators will need to continuously identify if students’

writing is in need of an updated medium for “publication” or “process” and then provide the

developmentally appropriate instruction and technology accordingly.

I have seen digital storytelling be a creative, 21st-century vehicle through which my

young students were able to showcase the final versions of their handwritten work. In this

instance, digital storytelling can provide an unparalleled means by which student work can reach

audiences beyond the walls of the classroom. For example, I sometimes uploaded digital stories

to student-safe YouTube channels to send to other classrooms around the world or transferred

them to flash drives to share with family members at home. Additionally, digital storytelling

enabled my students to present their writing in a multimodal way. For example, I allowed the

use of stock photos and nontraditional artwork to alleviate the fears of those students who (like

me) often question their artistic abilities for illustration-purposes, while Smith explained to me

how student narrations could reclaim student ownership over the voice and intent of their

original writing piece (see Figure 5).



Image 5: “My Puppet” by Triston, preschool

The screenshot represents an original creative story completed by preschooler, Triston. His

story was inspired by his discovery of a plethora of super hero-related images on Creative

Commons Flickr. Burrow (1st author) assisted him in uploading the images into the free iPad

app, Shadow Puppet Edu. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear his story.



Likewise, digital animation allowed my stage-shy students to control and present the

“dramatization” of their work without having to perform live (see Figure 6). This activity also

enabled the student-authors to view their performances for self-critique (an activity that is

difficult to accomplish when students are in the midst of traditional dramatizations). By writing

for technology, my students were able to engage in a publishing experience that was both

enjoyable and reflective of their technology-filled worlds.

Figure 6. “Dog Bite by Coley”

The screenshot represents the digital dramatization of a joke told by Kindergartener, Coley.

Coley dramatized her joke by narrating it into the free iPad add, Sock Puppet. The

accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her joke.

Beyond being a means of multimodal publication, digital storytelling and writing-based

software and applications updated the ways in which my young students were able to work on

the process of creating a story. As suggested by the National Writing Project report by DeVoss,

Eideman-Aadahl, and Hicks (2010) internet searches, blogging networks, Google Docs, social

networking sites, and digital storytelling can help students plan, revise, and edit their stories. By



writing with technology, my students engaged in the development stages of the writing process

in a more globally social manner. I often gave time for my students to post their ideas and

outlines on secure student blogs for feedback and discussion from students in older grades – a

mutually-beneficial activity that encouraged my young writers and strengthened the older

writers. Giving my students control over images, voice (narration), and pacing/timing provided

real reasons for writing and real reasons for sharing the writing. My students were excited to add

the “bells and whistles” to their stories, but knew I would not allow them to do so if they did not

first craft a quality story worth enhancing.

Based on classroom experiences and ongoing discussions, we have determined that

considerations should be made to ensure a students’ productive and quality interaction with the

technology experience, including:

Consistency. It is imperative to emphasize the student’s original story concept

throughout every phase of the digital storytelling process. As the technology is integrated,

student learning outcomes and the overall writing goals must remain center stage. Digital

storytelling software will limit the length of young writers’ writing--a truth that may delight

word-shy students and challenge verbose ones. As a result, mini-lessons in word choice,

conciseness, or idea focus may be warranted. The limitations of the technology should never

limit the student’s original story concept, though.

Patience. There are many technology-related factors that have potential to cause

difficulties for both educators and students. The best approach is to always have a back-up plan

(such as alternative writing prompts and activities) for dealing with a lack of technology or

dealing with unreliable technology. Imparting a patient outlook onto the students is yet another



way project-based learning activities, such as this, can prepare even young children with the

reality of technology’s limitations.

Safety. In order for students to feel free to be creative enough to write their best story, a

safe environment must be provided. I had discussions with my classes about how to provide

constructive criticism in order to help them develop important social skills while also assisting

them to develop a keen awareness of self-assessment in relation to others’ comments

(emphasizing that the criticism is “about your work, not you!”). This is especially important in

elementary school settings as these students are still developing their voices and learning to

accept criticism for not being “perfect.” As an educator, this truth translated into my commitment

to assess projects like these based on the process involved in the creation and helping parents

resist the urge to expect a Hollywood blockbuster.

An iterative creative process. As with other design processes, digital storytelling is not

a linear model and students may cycle back to redo a section of the project in order to achieve

the intended vision. Based on my (Burrow) classroom experiences, Smith outlines a 4-phase

process:

(1) Planning. Comparable to Paley’s storytelling stage, it can be carried out as part of in-

class or virtual writer’s workshops through the use of in-class discussions or micro-

blogs and class discussion board postings as students work with the educator to write

the script and create the storyboard.

(2) Creating. It adds a “rehearsal” component that is not required in Paley’s storytelling

curriculum as students harness their visual and auditory voice to locate and/or create

appropriate images (photographs, video clips, drawings, etc.) and audio (soundtrack,

recorded voice, sound effects, etc.). Since this process is not linear, some of my



students actually started with image acquisition as a way of prompting written

content.

(3) Editing. Software (such as PhotoStory for Windows or iMovie for Mac) can be used

to combine images while being mindful of pacing and economy. DeVoss, et. al.

(2010) gives evidence that the use of digital storytelling actually enhanced the

essential but potentially laborious revision phase of the writing process because it

gave students reason and desire to engage in the activity, of their own accord (p. 38).

(4) Presentation. Comparable to Paley’s story acting stage, students’ final creations and

efforts are celebrated by sharing the stories online with parents and the school

community or by hosting a school-wide red carpet Academy Award Night to screen

student work. The presentation phase should be prefaced with an explanation to the

audience about the emphasis on process and the accomplishment associated with

students’ developing writing skills.

Digital Writing: Updating Storytelling for 21-st Century Learning

This article discussed and offered examples of how to help young students write well and

how to use technology for and with their writing. Ultimately, we suggest that educators consider

the TPACK framework as a means of justifying the choice of when and why to effectively use

technology to enhance young students’ writing experiences. If elementary school educators are

willing to upgrade and update the traditional writing practices of Paley with technology

integration, then they can retain the valuable literary experiences of storytelling curriculum while

simultaneously meeting the advancing needs and challenges of 21st-century writing. Focused

instruction in early writing skills answers a vital call to give children the means by which to use



imagination and play to comprehend, work through, share, and celebrate the world that they will

someday be asked to excel in. Storytelling gives voices to children, but digital storytelling may

be better able to help them plan and produce that voice for their technology-focused worlds.

References

Ball, A. (2009). Toward a theory of generative change: In culturally and linguistically complex

classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1). Retrieved from

http://aer.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/46/1/45

Burton, M., Bacigalupa, C., Wright, C., & Black, T. (2008). Windows into Children’s thinking:

A guide to storytelling and dramatization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4),

363.

Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA). (1999). Emergent

Literacy: A Polyphony of Perspectives. University of Michigan School of Education: D.

B. Yaden, D. W. Rowe, & L. MacGillivray.

Cooper, P. (1993). When stories come to school: Telling, writing, and performing stories in the

early childhood classroom. Teachers & Writers Collaborative: New York.

Cooper, P. M. (2005). Literacy learning and pedagogical purpose in Vivian Paley's 'storytelling

curriculum'. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 5(3), 229.

DeVoss, D.N., Eidman-Aadahl, E., & Hicks, T. (2010). Because digital writing matters:

Improving student writing in online and multimedia environments. National Writing

Project. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gray, L., Mathes, B., Cooper, P., & Capo, K. (2007). One authentic early literacy practice and

three standardized tests: Can a storytelling curriculum measure up? Journal of Early

Childhood Teacher Education, 28(3), 251.



Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-

based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology

and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information

Technology in Teacher Education (SITE).

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new

framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108, 1017-1054. Retrieved

from: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishra-koehler-

tcr2006.pdf

Paley, V.G.(1981) Wally’s Stories. Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press

Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century

classroom. Theory Into Practice. 47. pp. 220-228.

Rowe, D. W. (2008). The social construction of intentionality: Two-year-olds’ and adults’

participation at a preschool writing center. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(4).

Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (2000). Beginning Reading and Writing. Teachers College

Press. Teachers College, Columbia University: New York and London.

Sulzby, E. (1996). Roles of oral and written language as children approach conventional literacy.

In C. Pontecorvo, M. Orsolini, B. Burge, & L. Resnick (Eds.), Children's early text

construction (pp.25–46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Theodosakis, N. (2004). The director in the classroom. San Diego, CA: Tech4Learning.

Vasquez, V. (2014). Reader’s commentary: Critical literacy and technology. Council

Chronicle(23),3.



Documents

PerSpectives and provocations - Early Childhood Web viewPerSpectives and provocations. ... phrases from the written transcription that ... writing--a truth that may delight word-shy