Dakota Writing Project

by Krista Bruggeman, Lennox Public School

On a blustery day in November two small town girls from South Dakota—myself from Lennox, and my friend and fellow teacher-consultant Karen Rahn from Rutland, set out for a trip to Nashville, Tennessee. Our destination was not Opryland or the Country Music Hall of Fame, but instead the National Writing Project. We were both first-timers, virgins if you will, of the National Writing Project, and we had no idea what to expect. Would two South Dakota girls be worthy of this experience?

At the Marriot Convention Center, where the majority of the conference took place, there was a whirlwind of activity—excited chatter, hustle and bustle, tables of books and pamphlets, and plenty of eager teachers from all different places and backgrounds ready to get started. Karen and I went our separate ways in search of answers to our most important question—what could we do to help our writing project succeed? I am happy to report that all of my sessions—Developing Teacher-Consultants, Young Writer’s Projects and Rural Networking—provided valuable information, as well as new acquaintances! The great thing about educators is that you never have to worry about long bouts of awkward silence or strained conversation. No matter where a teacher is from, they have stories to tell, questions to ask and advice to give.

At the end of our first full day, Karen and I once again called a taxi to deliver us back to our motel. Throughout the day, when asked
where we were from, we often received the genuine surprised look and the comment of, “South Dakota, really?” The most priceless moment, however, came from out taxi driver. He casually asked where we were from, and when we replied, he turned around, flipped on the dome light, and checked us out like prize pigs at the local county fair. His first comment was, “I ain’t ever seen anyone from South Dakota before! I have to take a closer look!”

I assured him that we looked like everyone else, and that we did not have horns growing out of our heads. Taking the opportunity to get one over on him, I explained that the state of South Dakota does not often let us out due to decreasing population concerns, and that we wear tracking devices to ensure our return. After we finished teasing him a bit, he also inquired why we did not speak like the people in the movie Fargo. Once the geography lessons were finished, however, he was a fun, friendly guy who offered his services to us for the rest of the trip.

While I learned important information in my specific sessions, the general session, “Writing for a Change,” offered some of the most
fascinating information. For instance, there are currently 73,000 writing programs offered each year throughout the United States. In 2005 alone, over 3,000 teachers attended the summer institutes, meaning that 2.9% of the teaching force is touched by the National Writing Project in a single year. In the past five years, 48% more sites were added. An impact is being made by the National Writing Project in the field of education, and the message is being spread that writing is transformative, and the writing for real audiences makes communication much more powerful.

The most powerful speaker was Sheridan Blau. He was a passionate, funny and informative speaker that made everyone sit up and
take notice. He stated that the writing project transformed his career, and that he has found that writing is the best and most reliable tool for learning. Sharing writing and receiving that crucial feedback is a fundamental belief that he shared with our audience. He truly believes that writing cannot only make crucial changes for an individual, but for an entire community as well. Finally, he drove the point home of why the National Writing Project and all of the state projects are so fundamentally important: teachers are the best teachers of other teachers.

Overall, I found the experience to be extremely rewarding and informative. I returned to my classroom with renewed vigor to inspire more and better writing from my students, and to continue learning myself. Nashville was a fun place, and the people were incredibly hospitable. Don’t get me started on the food—it was fabulous, especially the seafood. While I did not have a lot of time to see the sights, I did experience some amazing rockabilly music in downtown Nashville. Also, I did make it over to the Opryland resort, newly decorated for Christmas, and it was beautiful to say the least. Two girls from South Dakota did survive Nashville, and more importantly, Nashville survived us! I am looking forward to next year’s adventure in New York City. I wonder what the cab drivers there will think?

Thoughts From NWP Meetings, Nashville, TN, November 2006

by Nancy Kampfe, Stevens School, Rapid City School District

I learned so many ways to improve our image and our status across the state that I almost don’t know where to begin. Key to this discussion is the question, How can we design our programs to maximize their impact and thereby set the stage for effective marketing of all DWP has to offer South Dakota’s teachers?

This program design with the marketing strategy built in is an intentional change in what we do to build impact and to market the Writing Project. Our reputation builds by what we do and how we do it. We were continually cautioned to avoid looking at numbers as the definition of “success” in Writing Project programs. The value of the program to those who participate is far more important because those people talk to other people, and interest in our programs will grow. Success depends on key people doing it the right way (following the NWP model), not on numbers. We were urged to always stick with the NWP Model – never to adapt ourselves so much that we lose site of our mission!

Summer Institutes are the mainstay of a writing project, and many sites have built in more ways to help TCs continue their affiliation with the WP and also continue their professional growth. One project sets up a Yahoo! Group for their SI participants, and the group continues after the Summer Institute. Other projects use the NWP blog during the SI, just as we do. Mississippi State WP uses the NWP blog in Summer Institute, requiring participants to post a draft of their professional piece to the blog within two weeks after the SI. Responses to/by writing group members are required about prompts that help them connect the piece to their own classroom practice.

Some projects require that a new TC lead some kind of project in their school in the year following their attendance at Summer Institute. Then the TC goes to another school to do a demonstration as inservice. The third step in the professional growth process is for the TC to write an NCTE proposal to present nationally. Other writing projects pair a veteran TC with a new TC, asking them to lead some kind of presentation or workshop.

To make such a requirement work, we might also consider holding an in-service session for Administrators of TCs with TC and administrator attending together. The session models how to advocate for the Writing Project in the school and gives examples of how the TC learns in the Summer Institute. Administrator and TC are also given the opportunity to discuss how the TCs expertise can be used in school in-service. The Vermont WP holds a two-day Administrators Writing Workshop with TCs presenting demonstrations as a variation of a study group. This is another good way to build administrative support for the Writing Project model.

The Denver WP holds a Summer Institute for SI Alums for one week, held at the same time as the regular Summer Institute. The project director emails alums to ask their assistance in mentoring SI participants with demonstrations. The Connecticut WP holds an advanced institute called “Revisiting the Summer Institute,” a four-day workshop that they write into their annual grant so they can pay attending teachers $50 a day. The institute refreshes teachers on the NWP model, and helps them develop curriculum as well as preparing them to do professional development work for the project.

The Kennesaw Mountain WP in West Virginia holds an Advanced Summer Institute that brings together teachers who have already completed an SI and who want to work on professional writing projects of their own. Affiliates who did their initial NWP work with another site are also welcome to attend the KMWP advanced program. Again, large numbers are not needed; only an interest in writing to share their expertise with the profession is required.

One Michigan WP holds a Three-Day Reunion Retreat in first week of August. The TC pays the cost of the retreat, usually held at some camping site, or possibly at a church camp. Day one, participants reconnect in a variety of ways, one being to write a letter to themselves: where I am, what I plan to do this year. The Project Director mails the letter to TCs in January when the doldrums hit, so they can revitalize themselves. On the second day, a guest author is invited. The TC’s administrator is invited on the final day; a mini-writing marathon is done, along with a “sharing celebration” so the administrator also gets to see what the SI helps teachers write. This writing celebration is held during the August reunion to help new TCs to bond with other TCs rather than only continuing the close-knit bond formed with SI participants during SI. What a wonderful way to begin a new school term!

Programs held throughout the school year are another way to provide continuing professional development for TCs, and these programs can also be a way to get non-Writing Project teachers interested in what we do. The Vermont WP offers “Saturday Special” workshops at the university site. They charge teachers $20 to attend—this is for TCs and those who have never been to SI. They provide breakfast snacks and lunch along with a variety of demonstrations about writing. They never hold a Saturday Special in September as teachers are too busy to attend, and they make a glitzy brochure to advertise the programs.

The Chicago WP holds Saturday Seminars, charging teachers $20 to attend, giving a $5 discount if you bring another teacher from your school. They run three concurrent sessions for one and a half hours, followed by a break, followed by three more one and one-half hour sessions. They have the same strands on each Saturday. (We could substitute any other grade level for the ones here). They advertise the program in advance and put pdf flyers on their website.

Saturday sessions would provide new as well as continuing TCs with professional development opportunities, either in attending or presenting sessions for other teachers.

The Upper Peninsula WP in Michigan also holds Saturday Sessions, from 9 am to noon, four times per semester. Participants write to a prompt, share student work, and do some problem-solving of classroom issues. These sessions are advertised beforehand in local newspapers. Dividing their state into sections (focused around where TCs live) helped the UPWP decide where to hold the sessions each time.

We might also consider dividing our state because we are so far apart from east to west. Holding the sessions in a different place each time would also open up opportunities for more teachers and for more TCs to help provide professional development to their colleagues.

Mississippi State WP formed six continuity areas for their mid-week sessions held at night. A TC leads the group, with the agenda decided by the group assembled or by the TC. Participants earn Continuing Education credit.

Northwest Inland WP in Idaho forms One Book One Community groups. With a bookstore willing to do it, the group can meet one night at the bookstore to look for a book to teach a literary element in your classroom. The bookstore gives a free book to each TC who attends and brings another person along.

It may be time for us in the DWP to take the Institute to the teachers, as the Oregon WP does. Oregon’s Satellite Institutes began as Open Institutes. Now they are four weeks in length and teachers get a stipend. Oregon holds three Satellite Institutes in sites around their state. One director of the OWP is in residence at the Satellite Institute for the first week to complete the necessary paperwork and for quality control in getting the institute off and running. Oregon holds pays a $1000 stipend to participants, and the two most enthusiastic TCs in the SI become co-directors of the next Satellite Institute. The Oregon WP got a Project Outreach grant to move their Summer Institute from LaGrande to Pendleton. Maine WP holds an Embedded Institute online during the school year, an idea that might also work across our miles here in South Dakota.

All these ideas demand time to come to fruition. Long-range planning and thinking into the future are needed as we think of more and better ways to help our TCs continue to develop professionally and to bring the Writing Project message to more teachers in South Dakota. If we take baby steps, go back, review and reflect, try and try again, I know we will be thrilled with the results.

by Krista Bruggeman, Lennox Public School

During my time at the National Writing Project in Nashville, Tennessee, I attended an informative and worthwhile session entitled,
“The Invitational Summer Institute: Developing Teacher-Consultants from Interviews to In-service” (apparently the name “Start to Finish: Creating Teacher-Consultants” was already taken). One of the most worthwhile parts of attending the National Writing Project Annual Meeting was meeting teachers from all over the United States who had a common goal, furthering their own writing projects and promoting writing across the curriculum, and just as important, shared common concerns with our own writing project. Teachers and leaders wanted support and information not only to keep their writing projects going but also to increase attendance and keep the momentum in high gear. One answer to this quandary is to create a pool of teacher-consultants each year.

We looked at overall formats from two different summer institutes that have been very successful in recruitment of teacher-consultants and making their name essentially a common word among teachers in their states and areas. The basic premise is promotion and recruitment. The key to this begins with implementing more professional writing during the institute and creating more professional development leaders. By drawing future leaders from the pool of summer institute participants, you can effectively organize a group and train them to succeed as future leaders for the following year and years to come.

Summer institutes begin with a screening process—for many institutes, including ours, that means a formal application and a
writing sample. The session leaders suggested going one step further by actually having a face-to-face interview with the applicants. Not only would this ensure that ever important element of diversity, but also ensure that the applicants are serious not only about their own writing but teaching writing to their students. A serious level of commitment should be demonstrated, and this interview is an excellent chance to stress to the applicant that their participation is expected to continue long after the summer institute is completed—through word of mouth, attending meetings throughout the year, and being available as a teacher-consultant.

The pre-institute, or boot camp as it was called by our leaders, is the next step in the process. Participants at the session, including myself from the Dakota Writing Project, agreed that this was a crucial time to develop trust and ease into writing. However, there are things that were recommended that perhaps many of us we’re not stressing enough. The leaders suggested that the boot camp last as perhaps longer than a day, for instance a weekend, and that several teacher demonstrations, given by former institute participants, take place during that time.

Not only should the participants participate in the demo, but they should be given a thorough breakdown of the process—in other words, how the lesson was developed, how it impacted students, and how it can be adapted. This prepares the participants to develop their own demo thoroughly, and also opens the doors for discussion over shared concerns in the classroom. Lastly, the participants should peruse and choose no less than two professional textbooks to discuss during the institute.

When the actual institute begins, participants should bring with them a list of concerns they have about teaching in their own classrooms. They should also have written a response letter that includes specific questions or concerns they might have concerning the demonstrations. The teacher-consultants who taught the lesson should also respond back to the participants. A list of shared concerns should be discussed in the early days of the institute—the days can be split into personal writing along with professional development. Large general issues should be then condensed into specific, concrete ideas and concerns that should be reflected on by the participants through writing and then shared discussion.

From the beginning, participants should create a portfolio of their work, both professional and personal. They should include reflections of the writing at the end of the portfolio that includes an explanation of how it spans the continuum. The institute itself should be led by two co-directors as well as two coaches, along with teacher-consultants. When the participants present a demo, they should be sure to model it after the boot camp demos. All participants should write a reflection that includes questions once again regarding the demo as well as any comments and concerns, and the demonstrating teacher should respond. Also, emphasis on professional writing should take place throughout. More than one theme can be experimented with, and a final finished product does not need to come at the end of the institute—instead, more of a work in progress.

This brings us to the final key for writing project success. Once again, the learning and progress doesn’t end in the summer. Various workshops, professional writing retreats and meetings should be set up throughout the school year to encourage further professional writing and training for the new teacher-consultants, selected at the end of the summer institute. They need to feel as if they are a part of something bigger than a workshop. These new teacher consultants become part of your public relations work when they pass the word on at their own schools and communities. Also, form committees to create a brochure that advertises the institute, constantly updated year to year to keep it fresh. Create a letter that goes out to administrators and heads of departments to get the word out that writing matters, and we’re here to help you teach writing more effectively.

A lot of excellent ideas were presented at this session, and I am excited to meet with our Dakota Writing Project Board to implement
these changes. While I learned a lot of new things we can do to improve our institute, I was also satisfied to know that we are doing many things right and that our concerns are not unique. Our combination of ambition, creativity and genuine belief that writing is the key to shaping the future for students will make our institute a success.

by Karen Rahn, Rutland Public School

A desire for change is what brought me to the Dakota Writing Project in the summer of 2006. I wanted to change how I taught writing, not because I had complaints or because someone in an upper office mandated it, but because I personally felt that I needed a change: an energy boost. I got that boost from DWP, and like a Writing Project junkie, I went to the NWP convention in Nashville looking for more of the same.

Meeting up again with fellow Writing Project participants from the summer was a grand thing. There was a positive energy in the air as I went into the sessions for the day.

The first session that I attended was “Inquiring into Teacher Demonstrations,” which was presented by the Northern California and Hudson Valley Writing Projects. As a Writing Project newbie, I found this session to be interesting because it talked about how other summer sessions are handled. It was evident that the overall model of “teachers teaching teachers” was the cornerstone of all institutes, but the way that the demonstrations are handled vary from site to site. The NCWP group talked about the importance of the coaching, and looking at student work in a global way. They spend quite a bit of time coaching teachers to look at student writing through a framework of “features,” writing down what the student can do. Much like the work we did with protocols this summer, the shared perspective with another colleague offered rich insight into the lessons.

The HVWP group took this idea a bit further by applying it to the demonstrations themselves. They felt that the demonstrations had become a form of “show and tell” of best work and left little room for true growth for the instructor. They changed the name of the demonstrations to “Teacher Inquiry Workshops” and shifted the focus to what could be learned through inquiry about a lesson. This format placed a greater emphasis on the post coaching and reflections with the presenter from the whole group. All participants wrote personal letters to the presenter, evaluating the lesson. The next day, the presenter was given time to come back to the group and share concerns and ideas which were addressed in the letters. This moved the lesson toward more scaffolding and percolating of ideas. This step made the post reflection a bigger part of an inquiry process, and therefore gave the whole lesson more depth.

Both groups spoke of the importance of face-to-face coaching sessions both before and after the lesson. They felt the best coaching sessions would have two teachers and a site director involved and would last approximately an hour. In this coaching session, focus would be placed on reciprocal learning, authentic questions, and looking at student work as part of the inquiry process.

At the end of this three-hour session, I felt reassured, knowing that sites were working to constantly monitor their own effectiveness as writing project institutes. I also felt saturated and ready for a lunch break. It was great to meet with other DWP’ers and debrief over an elegant lunch buffet at the Marriott restaurant. Yum!

After lunch I went to the Willis Center to attend a session on “Using Youth Writing Programs as Professional Development,” which began with a glimmer of promise, but quickly fizzled for me. It was evident that this session was focusing on writing with ELL students, which is a hot topic in much of our country, but as yet does not directly affect me in my small, rural school. The best parts of this session were being introduced to “Wiki Sticks” which we used to make shape poems, and looking at examples of student work coming from youth writing projects.

Someday, I will probably look back at information from this session, stored away in my “I’ve-heard-about-this-somewhere-before” portion of my brain, and realize that The Marshall Plan is a grant that I need to look into as I am working to increase diversity in my classroom while accommodating ELL students. In this case, “Writing for a Change” is a path still waiting to be taken.

Friday morning began with an old-fashioned, revival-style meetin’ feeling as the general session of the NWP Convention convened. At first it felt like a juxtaposition, mixing great writing intellectuals with the Minnie Pearl holler of “Howwwdeee!” but after a bit, I realized that it was no different than the Writing Project’s ideal of teachers teaching teachers: a down -home approach to obtaining lofty goals. Using statistics to buoy up our purpose in the political arena is a necessary thing, and quite impressive on a fraternal level as well. The statistics also showed that “Writing for a Change” is a positive change in the overall education of our students. During this general meeting I felt that I got a good overall view of what the Writing Project is accomplishing nationally. It felt good to see how far-reaching the project is, and how carefully the Project monitors itself to stay on that path.

The Friday afternoon session on Successful Site Networking was one in which I felt like I was in over my head. This site was definitely aimed at those people that are heading programs and keeping the big picture on path. It was at this point that I definitely felt like the lone leaf in the forest. When they talked of lobbying our state legislature for sums of money upward of a million dollars for individual writing projects, I felt like I was in a science fiction movie. I was out of my league. I am not a businessperson; I couldn’t even sell Girl Scout Cookies, so I found myself tuning out. I hope that we have good people with business sense that can go to bat for our program and keep the project afloat, but I doubt it will be me.

Saturday was spent at the NCTE site and then sightseeing, followed by my trip home on Sunday. This, you would think, would be the end of the NWP experience, but no! I had the most enjoyable trip from Nashville to Chicago talking with Cathie English of the Nebraska Writing Project! She really got me thinking about how I teach my research writing and also reaffirmed my decision to change directions in my freshman composition class. It was an unexpected and rich ending to the convention. I would like the opportunity to go again next year!