WINTER 2024 EDITION | Page 14

6

14

by Dr. Tonya Heavin

\

Journey to Co-journaling in a Pre-Service Literacy Course

Mary Jo Fresch

\

Students have mastered new ways to show written communication using less and less words. For example, SMH, FR, RN, ICYMI. If you are familiar with the code you can decipher the key points to what is being said: shaking my head, for real, right now, in case you missed it (100+ Text Abbreviations, 2024). However, the use of the ever-changing abbreviations is impacting how students communicate in more formal settings. Sokhanvar, Salehi, and Sokhanvar (2021) noted communication skills, critical thinking, and self-confidence as imperative skills necessary for future endeavors, coachable through the use of authentic assessments. An effort to strengthen written communication and promote self-reflection in an elementary education preservice literacy course has led to three different approaches to the use of authentic assessments: Independent Daily Journals, Letters to Self, and Co-journaling; all with varying successes and challenges.

The first strategy used to encourage students to practice personal writing involved Independent Daily Journals. At the start of each class session students were given three minutes of free write time. Based on the students’ perception of the writing time the pros and cons found with the Independent Daily Journals were in reality the same. Students were able to write about any topic they desired. There was no limitation based on a perceived subject or a necessary knowledge base in order to be successful. The journals were private and never collected by the instructor. This allowed for more honesty for the students who knew what they were writing was not going to be viewed by others. However, these same pros were actually cons as well. As noted in a study by Aitken and Graham (2023), the “relationship between choice and motivation is complex” (p. 227). Many students expressed they did not know what to write about. A free write was too open-ended for them to feel successful with writing. Some college students favor the chance to have choice in what they write about, while there are others who worry about what the instructor may be looking for (Aitken & Graham, 2023). Privacy also became a con. Most students appreciated the opportunity to write or at least attempted to write something for three minutes, while others did not write at all or when they wrote they asked “Are you going to see this?” That is often a red flag for an instructor in education.

The second method utilized to inspire students with personal writing involved having students write a letter to themselves. On the first day of classes students were provided with a prompt related to how they felt about teaching reading at this point of their academic careers. After writing the letter to themselves students sealed their letter in an envelope and turned them in. At the conclusion of the semester students received their sealed letters. The significance of the letter to self was to allow students to recognize and reflect on their growth throughout the semester. The one predominant concern for this activity was the fact the instructor had no concept of the growth perceptions of the students unless students elected to share, nor was the instructor able to address any of the initial concerns students may have had.

In a study focused on the demand for increased student-active learning, it was found traditional teaching with a teacher-centered approach is still the primary strategy used in higher education (Borte, Nesje & Lillejord, 2023). Recognizing the pitfalls of the Daily Independent Journals and the Letters to Self, and the desire to have a more student-active learning approach, the idea of co-journaling emerged. This was not a new idea but not one yet considered in the higher education setting at this point. Co-journaling had been used with first graders as a way to encourage beginning writers in the areas of sentence structure, grammar, capital letters, punctuation, basic letter writing skills, and how to communicate using the written word. It was successful with first graders, why not try it with college students? At the beginning of the semester students were given a journal consisting of notebook paper in a three-prong folder. During the first day of class students were assigned with the same prompt used in the Letters to Self activity. However, instead of writing to themselves they wrote to the instructor. After completion, the journals were collected. The instructor then read through and responded to each student. Throughout the semester the journals were returned to the students for new prompts and responses provided in a letter format. Research conducted by Chan and Lee (2021) discovered the parallels between student value of reflections and the comfort level of the writing environment, which included the supportiveness of the instructor and their peers. The back-and-forth discourse throughout the semester allowed the instructor to have a better understanding of where students were with the presented content, as well as provided the students with a way to practice written communication and self-reflection. Co-journaling was also successful with the students who exhibited a tendency to be more shy or quiet. Where they may not be willing to speak up during a class discussion, they were more likely to write about their thoughts. There were two main cons noted with the co-journaling activity. Not all students felt secure in their writing abilities so some responses were a bit stilted. The second con was time. Co-journaling can be very time consuming for the instructor. The number of students in the class and the amount of writing they complete can make it challenging to provide fair, productive feedback to each student in a timely manner.

Five key points have emerged through the journey to co-journaling.

1.Improved understanding of students’ abilities to communicate with writing. Through co-journaling the instructor has a sharpened awareness for how students are able to convey thoughts in written form.

2.Students are allowed to practice expressing themselves. If we want our students to become stronger writers we need to allow them opportunities to write.

3.Growth is evident and located in one central location-the journal. Students, as well as the instructor, can review previous entries to see how viewpoints, mindsets, and writing skills have changed throughout the course.

4.A low-stakes approach for students and instructor to hold a conversation about educational topics. Many students have wonderful ideas or questions they wish to ask but may feel uncomfortable with sharing verbally in the classroom. Providing a safe space for them to share ideas can open their minds to many possibilities.

5.Students learn how to find their voice. Through co-journaling students are not able to depend on other classmates to keep the discussion going. In finding their voice they learn what they think and how to express it.

There are a few ways to improve the co-journaling process: use of a rubric and a robust collection of prompts. The co-journaling rubric displays three key areas for students to focus on: letter format, response to prompt, and conventions. Students are required to write a letter which includes the traditional format of the date, a greeting, the body, a closing, and the signature. For the response to the prompt, the expectation is students respond with at least five sentences and be able to demonstrate their understanding of the topic. The same conventions expected from first graders: capitalization, grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, are expected from preservice teachers. Regardless of age, conventions are important, and as such, the expectation is there are no mistakes within their writing. The main purpose for supplying the rubric is to remind students of what is required. Research by Shillings, Roebertsen, Savelberg, and Dolmans (2023) into strategies used by higher education instructors found offering required criteria to be more beneficial for students especially in the area of providing feedback. By the end of the semester many students had left the writing in a letter format and had written bullet point notes instead. While that is a form of written communication, it was not the goal of the co-journaling. Supplying students with the required components found on the rubric should extend communication between the students and instructor as to expectations. Another future adjustment is to design a running document of possible relevant prompts based on the needs of each class and the content being presented.

The journey to co-journaling has been an adventure in trial and error. While the Independent Daily Journals and Letter to Self were worthwhile endeavors in the approach to inspiring personal writing growth, they were not meeting the desired goals for the students or the instructor. Co-journaling has provided a more robust occasion for students to practice true written communication with the goal of sharing ideas in a professional capacity as well as ultimately allowing the instructor to gather information about students in an extraordinary way.

Students have mastered new ways to show written communication using less and less words. For example, SMH, FR, RN, ICYMI. If you are familiar with the code you can decipher the key points to what is being said: shaking my head, for real, right now, in case you missed it (100+ Text Abbreviations, 2024). However, the use of the ever-changing abbreviations is impacting how students communicate in more formal settings. Sokhanvar, Salehi, and Sokhanvar (2021) noted communication skills, critical thinking, and self-confidence as imperative skills necessary for future endeavors, coachable through the use of authentic assessments. An effort to strengthen written communication and promote self-reflection in an elementary education preservice literacy course has led to three different approaches to the use of authentic assessments: Independent Daily Journals, Letters to Self, and Co-journaling; all with varying successes and challenges.

The first strategy used to encourage students to practice personal writing involved Independent Daily Journals. At the start of each class session students were given three minutes of free write time. Based on the students’ perception of the writing time the pros and cons found with the Independent Daily Journals were in reality the same. Students were able to write about any topic they desired. There was no limitation based on a perceived subject or a necessary knowledge base in order to be successful. The journals were private and never collected by the instructor. This allowed for more honesty for the students who knew what they were writing was not going to be viewed by others. However, these same pros were actually cons as well. As noted in a study by Aitken and Graham (2023), the “relationship between choice and motivation is complex” (p. 227). Many students expressed they did not know what to write about. A free write was too open-ended for them to feel successful with writing. Some college students favor the chance to have choice in what they write about, while there are others who worry about what the instructor may be looking for (Aitken & Graham, 2023). Privacy also became a con. Most students appreciated the opportunity to write or at least attempted to write something for three minutes, while others did not write at all or when they wrote they asked “Are you going to see this?” That is often a red flag for an instructor in education.

The second method utilized to inspire students with personal writing involved having students write a letter to themselves. On the first day of classes students were provided with a prompt related to how they felt about teaching reading at this point of their academic careers. After writing the letter to themselves students sealed their letter in an envelope and turned them in. At the conclusion of the semester students received their sealed letters. The significance of the letter to self was to allow students to recognize and reflect on their growth throughout the semester. The one predominant concern for this activity was the fact the instructor had no concept of the growth perceptions of the students unless students elected to share, nor was the instructor able to address any of the initial concerns students may have had.

In a study focused on the demand for increased student-active learning, it was found traditional teaching with a teacher-centered approach is still the primary strategy used in higher education (Borte, Nesje & Lillejord, 2023). Recognizing the pitfalls of the Daily Independent Journals and the Letters to Self, and the desire to have a more student-active learning approach, the idea of co-journaling emerged. This was not a new idea but not one yet considered in the higher education setting at this point. Co-journaling had been used with first graders as a way to encourage beginning writers in the areas of sentence structure, grammar, capital letters, punctuation, basic letter writing skills, and how to communicate using the written word. It was successful with first graders, why not try it with college students? At the beginning of the semester students were given a journal consisting of notebook paper in a three-prong folder. During the first day of class students were assigned with the same prompt used in the Letters to Self activity. However, instead of writing to themselves they wrote to the instructor. After completion, the journals were collected. The instructor then read through and responded to each student. Throughout the semester the journals were returned to the students for new prompts and responses provided in a letter format. Research conducted by Chan and Lee (2021) discovered the parallels between student value of reflections and the comfort level of the writing environment, which included the supportiveness of the instructor and their peers. The back-and-forth discourse throughout the semester allowed the instructor to have a better understanding of where students were with the presented content, as well as provided the students with a way to practice written communication and self-reflection. Co-journaling was also successful with the students who exhibited a tendency to be more shy or quiet. Where they may not be willing to speak up during a class discussion, they were more likely to write about their thoughts. There were two main cons noted with the co-journaling activity. Not all students felt secure in their writing abilities so some responses were a bit stilted. The second con was time. Co-journaling can be very time consuming for the instructor. The number of students in the class and the amount of writing they complete can make it challenging to provide fair, productive feedback to each student in a timely manner.

Five key points have emerged through the journey to co-journaling.

1.Improved understanding of students’ abilities to communicate with writing. Through co-journaling the instructor has a sharpened awareness for how students are able to convey thoughts in written form.

2.Students are allowed to practice expressing themselves. If we want our students to become stronger writers we need to allow them opportunities to write.

3.Growth is evident and located in one central location-the journal. Students, as well as the instructor, can review previous entries to see how viewpoints, mindsets, and writing skills have changed throughout the course.

4.A low-stakes approach for students and instructor to hold a conversation about educational topics. Many students have wonderful ideas or questions they wish to ask but may feel uncomfortable with sharing verbally in the classroom. Providing a safe space for them to share ideas can open their minds to many possibilities.

5.Students learn how to find their voice. Through co-journaling students are not able to depend on other classmates to keep the discussion going. In finding their voice they learn what they think and how to express it.

There are a few ways to improve the co-journaling process: use of a rubric and a robust collection of prompts. The co-journaling rubric displays three key areas for students to focus on: letter format, response to prompt, and conventions. Students are required to write a letter which includes the traditional format of the date, a greeting, the body, a closing, and the signature. For the response to the prompt, the expectation is students respond with at least five sentences and be able to demonstrate their understanding of the topic. The same conventions expected from first graders: capitalization, grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, are expected from preservice teachers. Regardless of age, conventions are important, and as such, the expectation is there are no mistakes within their writing. The main purpose for supplying the rubric is to remind students of what is required. Research by Shillings, Roebertsen, Savelberg, and Dolmans (2023) into strategies used by higher education instructors found offering required criteria to be more beneficial for students especially in the area of providing feedback. By the end of the semester many students had left the writing in a letter format and had written bullet point notes instead. While that is a form of written communication, it was not the goal of the co-journaling. Supplying students with the required components found on the rubric should extend communication between the students and instructor as to expectations. Another future adjustment is to design a running document of possible relevant prompts based on the needs of each class and the content being presented.

The journey to co-journaling has been an adventure in trial and error. While the Independent Daily Journals and Letter to Self were worthwhile endeavors in the approach to inspiring personal writing growth, they were not meeting the desired goals for the students or the instructor. Co-journaling has provided a more robust occasion for students to practice true written communication with the goal of sharing ideas in a professional capacity as well as ultimately allowing the instructor to gather information about students in an extraordinary way.