RM Winter 2017

• Ensure student interest . Student interest is critical in authentic literacy experiences. When students are corresponding with pen pals, there is more situational interest in reading, writing, and discussing literature (Gambrell et al., 2011; Nolen, 2007). This situational interest can deepen into general interest in reading and writing. Wollak and Koppenhaver (2011) found that students reported they enjoy writing when writing to an audience, expressing situational interest in their pen pals. A few of those students claimed to love writing after communicating with pen pals, when they hated it before the project. They developed a greater general interest in writing due to their participation in a pen pal project. • Throughout this project, both sets of students were interested in corresponding with each other. They enjoyed reading the novel, writing their responses, and reading notes from pen pals. This interest and enjoyment was often a strong motivator for third graders and for preservice teachers. Therefore, it is critical that you design projects that will spark and keep students’ interest. • Use technology as a tool . Technology can be an important component of authentic literacy correspondence. Research indicates technology can facilitate communication and improve student learning outcomes (Andes & Claffett, 2011; Boling, Castek, Zawlinski, Barton & Nierlich, 2008; Larson, 2009; Mills & Levido, 2011; Yearta, Stover & Sease, 2015), increase student motivation and enthusiasm towards writing (Couse & Chen, 2010; Mills & Levido, 2011), and increase student attention towards the task (Hitchcock & Noonan, 2000; Mechling, Gast, & Thompson, 2008). • While this project was feasible without it, the addition of the technology accelerated communication delivery, increased access to student work as it was all in one location, and interested third graders. It makes the project smoother. One potential risk of using technology is that it can impede learning by being distracting or too complicated. Therefore, we encourage you to thoughtfully make decisions about how technology will enhance your learning experience in ways that are appropriate for the task. • Provide opportunities for students to generalize learning . Pen pal are beneficial to student literacy development because they can lead to increases in the quality of students’ writing, conceptual understanding of the writing process, and overall self-efficacy and motivation (Parsons &Ward, 2011; Tompkins et al., 2014; Yearta et al., 2015). Pen pals positively influence the learning of preservice teachers as these experiences can bridge their learning about literacy in methods courses to actual experiences with children (Austin, 2000; Draper, Barksdale-Ladd, & Radencich 2000; Moore & Seeger, 2009; Stover, Yearta & Sease, 2014; Yearta et al., 2015). It provides them the opportunity to learn the essential reading and writing skills of elementary students. • In this project, the classroom teacher started with friendly letter format and how to respond to texts. She then gave students the opportunity to apply these skills on their own, and learn more about how to correspond with their pen pals. They were able to take specific strategies for the classroom and apply it to real-life. Likewise, the preservice teachers

also had the opportunity to generalize their learning across contexts. Content they learned in their course-work at Winthrop became real and they were able to apply what they had learned to authentic work and conversations with elementary school students. Experiences like these are invaluable. Conclusion Throughout the book study project, students at both the elementary and undergraduate levels learned from each other. Both groups participated in authentic experiences that allowed them to communicate with a very real, and motivated, audience. Preservice teachers read writing samples from third grade students, analyzed students’ connections to text and their writing, and made thoughtful decisions about how to best help their pen pals. This was a unique opportunity for them to apply what they have learned in their coursework. Third grade students learned how to make strong connections to texts, read for meaning, and communicate their opinions through writing. And we (university professors) remain committed to providing these experiences in our teacher preparation program. References

Reading Matters Research Matters

Andes, L., & Claggett, E. (2011). Wiki writers: Students and teachers making connections across communities. The Reading Teacher, 64 (5), 345-350.

Austin, P. (2000). Literary pen pals: Correspondence between university students and elementary students. Reading Horizons, 40 (4), 273-294.

Boling, E., Castek, J., Zawilinski, L., Barton, K., & Nierlich, T. (2008). Collaborative literacy: Blogs and Internet projects. The Reading Teacher, 61 , 504-506.

Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43 (1), 75-98.

Draper, M. C., Barksdale-Ladd, M. A., & Radencich, M. C. (2000). Reading and writing habits of preservice teachers. Reading Horizons, 40 (3), 186-203.

Duke, N. K., Purcell-Gates, V., Hall, L. A., & Tower, C. (2006). Authentic literacy activities for developing comprehension and writing. The Reading Teacher, 60 (4), 344-355.

Gambrell, L. B., Hughes, E. M., Calvert, L., Malloy, J. A., & Igo, B. (2011). Authentic reading, writing, and discussion. The Elementary School Journal, 112 (2), 234-258.

Hitchcock, C. H., & Noonan, M.J. (2000). Computer-assisted instruction of early academic skills. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20 (3), 145-159.

Jenkins, E. (2006). Toys Go Out . New York: Scholastic.

Larson, L.C. (2009). Reader response meets new literacies: Empowering readers in online learning communities. The Reading Teacher, 62, 638-648.

Mechling, L.C., Gast, D.L., & Thomspon, K.L. (2008). Comparison of the effects of smart board technology and flash card instruction on sight word recognition and observational learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 23 (1), 34-46.

| 36 | Reading Matters | Volume 16 • Winter 2016 | scira.org

CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS