This document outlines a study on the use of writing circles with teacher candidates. Writing circles are a collaborative writing strategy that evolved from literature circles. The goals of the study were to explore how writing circles affected teacher candidates' perceptions of themselves as authors and writing collaboratively. A mixed methods pilot study was conducted with 28 elementary education majors enrolled in a language arts methods course. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected through pre/post surveys to examine changes in candidates' self-reported perceptions of authorship and attitudes about collaborative writing. The findings provide insights into how writing circles can help develop teacher candidates' skills and confidence as writers.

1. From Literature Study Groups to
Literature Circles to Writing Circles
Sherron Killingsworth Roberts, Professor of Language Arts and LIteracy
Norine Blanch, Doctoral Student
Nandita Gurjar, Doctoral Student
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA

2. Goals for today
• To outline the history of writing circles.
• To describe the process, products, and
perceptions of teacher candidates who
participated in writing circles.
• To share a mixed method pilot study which
qualitatively explored and quantitatively
measured the self-reported perceptions of
teacher candidates about authorship and
writing collaboratively.

3. The evolution of WRITING CIRCLES?
• Writing circles (Vopat, 2009) are a recent innovation on
the earlier beloved format of literature circles, based
on Social Learning Theory.
• Once known as literature study groups (Peterson &
Eeds, 1990), literature circles are small collaborative
reading groups that are populated by students who
choose the same book to read, discuss, and celebrate
(Daniels, 2002). Research reports that literature circles
raise the level of discourse even more than higher
order teacher questioning, and increase ownership and
collaboration skills (Commeyras & Sumner, 1996; Galda
& Beach, 2001).
• Evolving to…

4. WHAT ARE WRITING CIRCLES?

5. Why were writing circles introduced to teacher
candidates as a collaborative writing strategy?
The state of writing in the U.S. is a concern:
 NAEP writing (2002): only 22-26% of students (4,8,12) scored at the proficient
level; 72% of 4th graders, 69% of 8th graders, and 77% of 12th graders did not meet
NAEP writing proficiency goals
 NAEP writing (2011), reported 24% of 12th graders’ scored at a proficient writing
level, 52 % performed at the Basic level, leaving 21% below the basic level; an
alarming 73% did not meet NAEP writing proficiency goals at all (p.8).
 Through a meta analysis of research, collaborative writing is among the 11
elements of current writing instruction found to be effective for helping
adolescent students learn to write well and to use writing as a tool for learning
(Graham & Perin, 2007) Effect sizes for all studies comparing collaborative writing
with independent writing were positive and large (p.16) – Recommendation for
writing intervention
So:
 creating positive and effective writing teachers is best facilitated by engaging
teachers in authentic writing experiences (Graves, 1983, 1994; Murray, 2003)
 attempting to model the most recent pedagogical methods for teacher
candidates

6. Purpose The purpose of this
mixed method pilot
study is to qualitatively
explore and
quantitatively measure
the self-reported
perceptions of teacher
candidates about
authorship and writing
collaboratively.

7. Research Questions for Pilot Study
1. How do teacher candidates self-report their
perceptions of themselves as
authors/writers?
2. What shifts in attitudes about authorship
do teacher candidates self-report?
Methodological Design for Pilot Study
This is a mixed method design utilizing a post-pre
retrospective survey with a phenomenological lens
for the analysis of qualitative data, and using
nonparametric ranked data for the quantitative
component.
WHAT?

8. WHO?
Pilot study sample of convenience
28 teacher candidates
Undergraduate elementary majors
Enrolled in language arts methods course

9. Survey Reflection for Writing Circle
After a semester of participating in a new pedagogical strategy entitled writing circles (Vopat, 2009), would you mind if I pick your
brain about your collaborative writing experience? If you choose to volunteer to respond, be assured that your individual answers
will not be identified, and only aggregate data will be reported. Many thanks!
1. How would you rank yourself as an author BEFORE this semester began? Circle one.
5-strong 3-avg 1-weak
2. How would you rank yourself as an author at the END of the semester? Circle one.
5-strong 3-avg 1-weak
3. Please comment on participating in writing circles at the BEGINNING of the semester: What were your perceptions then?
Does anything stand out to you?
4. Now, looking back, what was the best thing about joining a writing circle?
5. What was the least favorite thing about being a member of a writing circle?
6. How did the experience of writing collaboratively affect your attitude? Your skill?
ATTITUDE? _____ Positively SKILL? _____ Positively
_____ Neutral _____ Neutral
_____ Negatively _____ Negatively
PLEASE COMMENT:
7. What have you learned from the process of writing circles?
8. What will you take from this experience into your future classroom? Or not?
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION What is your major? ___ ELEM _____ EXED
Check one: ______ < 25
______ 26-35
______ 36-45
______ 46- 55
______ 56+
Any prior experience as a writer/author? ____ In what ways?________
To reveal the qualitative
and quantitative
findings, it is important
to understand the story
of writing circles.

10. Essential Elements of Writing Circles
Students/teacher Candidates:
Name the group
Choose a writing topic
Share/respond
Reflect in WC notebook
Collaborate to revise/edit/publish
Teacher/professor:
 Conducts minilessons + mentor texts

11. Invigorating experimentation
• My students faces
grinned widely when they
noticed literature circles
on the syllabus,
• because they had been
exposed to this format in
earlier coursework.
• However, when I
explained the concept of
collaborative writing
through writing circles,
some faces looked a bit
nervous. One group even
named themselves the
Worry Warts.
• This presentation
attempts to tell the story
of teacher candidates
evolving as writers
through a new strategy
called writing circles.

12. ? Generating ideas & forming groups
(Roberts) or
? Forming groups & generating ideas
(Vopat, 2009)
• As a whole, the class generated a list of 10-
12 possible ideas, & volunteers who were
passionate about one of the topics formed
groups.
• Then, we proceeded to see if we had enough
people to form a viable group of about 5-7
members.

13. Getting started in Writing Circles
• Vopat did, however, think of practical components
that I would have overlooked:
• 1. We need a NAME!
• 2. We need a folder with pockets for each group!
• 3. Discuss why you chose this group…

14. Some helps along the way…
• Affinity exercise with
post-its
• Move to web,
mindmap, bubblemap,
outline
• Avoid intro & concl at
first
• Launch in the body,
assigning parts.

15. The Story of Writing Circles:
minilessons
• Generating a stmt of the problem—Find the focus.
• Writing-go-round!
• Transitions & guiding sentences
• Effectively using subtitles
• Erradicating Empty Words
• Adding details that breath life into the topic
• Setting up googledocs
• Using accurate language aligned throughout
• Titles* echo, echo, echo…
• Writing a compelling intro
• Creating a strong finish
• Writing a cover letter
• APA style references

16. Schedule for writing circles:
• 5-10 min of minilesson
• 10-20 min of application & planning
• Teacher walking & facilitating process
• It’s about the process!!
• It’s not about product, yet!
The following literature review reveals support for: social learning
and development, writing process, writing circles, collaboration &
collaborative writing, workplace writing, writing improvement, and
situated motivation

17. Researched Support for Writing Circles
Why? – shed fear of blank page, build fluency, develop confidence, learn content, explore
text structures (Vopat, p.2)
Immediate response from an audience with no waiting for
teacher comments; affirm the social aspect of writing, the
human interaction and solitary inscription together
(Gere,1987).
Learners expect & enjoy being listened to; builds confidence,
fluency, joy, and delight; takes writing to the next level; is low
risk, friendly and supportive (Vopat, p.6).
Low risk writing is not necessarily low guilt. It means the
pressure is off; each kid can be successful and take writing risks
without fear of penalty or failure (Vopat, p.69).
Connect with one
Writing circles help learners become better writers through a recurrent workshop
structure that defines an ongoing supportive audience, honors and develops writing
voice, encourages experimentation and collaboration, and rehabilitates the writing
wounded through low risk writing experiences (p.6).

18. Historical Grounding:
Research on Writing Process
Donald Murray (1982), 70% of the time should be devoted to
prewriting, including:
 Choosing a topic (Graves, 1976; Chandler-Olcott and
Mahar),
 jotting ideas in a notebook (Fletcher,1996);
 considering purpose (Halliday, 1975), audience and genre
(Langer,1985; Hilyard, 1983).
Graves (2003) calls these activities of generating, gathering
ideas to be “rehearsal activities”
Graves (1983, 1984) Creating authors is best facilitated by
participating in authentic writing experiences; creating positive
and effective writing teachers is best facilitated by engaging
teachers in authentic writing experiences

19. Theoretical Grounding in Social
Learning
Vygotsky
Zone of Proximal Development
Bandura
 Learn new info and
behavior by watching
others.
 People are intrinsically
motivated to imitate when filled with
personal pride, satisfaction, and a sense of
accomplishment.
 An individual’s self-perception of writing
ability is a decisive factor in their
subsequent writing growth (Vopat, 2009,
p.19).
 When people interact with others,
they more naturally absorb and
strengthen their knowledge than they
otherwise might if they were learning
on their own (Bailey, 2014, p. 18).
 Social interaction plays a role in the
development of cognition and
learning.

20. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of
adolescents in middle and high schools
 Graham and Perin (2007) posit that in order to motivate a mass of more
proficient writers and communicators, collaboration is a vital key reform idea
to better prepare America’s youth for the realities of a changing workplace. If
students are to learn, they must write (p.2).
 National Commission on Writing: If students are to learn, they must write (p.2).
 Writing well is not just an option for young people; it is a necessity (p.3).
 “Silent majority” of students lack writing proficiency, but don’t receive
additional help (p.3).
 Defined as: the use of instructional arrangements in which adolescents work
together to plan draft, revise, and edit their compositions.
 Teaching adolescents strategies for planning, revising, and editing their
compositions has shown a dramatic effect on the quality of students’ writing.
We must explicitly teach steps to prewrite, revise, and edit (Graham, 2006).
 The effect sizes for all studies comparing collaborative writing with
independent writing were positive and large (p.16).
 When students help each other with one or more aspects of writing it has a
strong positive impact on quality (p.16).

21. NCTE. (2004). NCTE beliefs about the teaching of writing. Retrieved from:
http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/writingbeliefs
 Everyone has the capacity to write, writers can be taught, and teacher can help students
become better writers – what teachers do makes a difference in how much students are
capable of achieving as writers, lifetime professional development, teachers of writing
should be well-versed in composition theory and research.
 People learn to write by writing – practice – a lot! Writers learn from each session with
their hands on a keyboard or around a pencil as they draft, rethink, revise, and draft again
 Writing instruction must include ample in-class and out-of-class opportunities and should
include writing for variety of purposes and audiences.
 Writing is a process – writing instruction must also take into account that a good deal of
workplace writing and other writing takes place in collaborative situations. Writers
must learn to work effectively with one another.
 Writing is a tool for thinking – the act of writing generates ideas.
 Writing grows out of many different purposes – developing social networks, engaging in
civic discourse, communicating professionally and academically, building relationships
with others, engaging in aesthetic experiences – teachers create opportunities for
students to be indifferent kinds of writing situations, where the relationships and agendas
are varied.
 Literate practices are embedded in complicated social relationships – in workplace and
academic settings, writers write because someone in authority tells them to – power
relationships are built into the writing situation.

22. Vopat, J. (2009). Writing circles: Kids revolutionize workshop
 Provide a structure for a neglected part of what kids need to become better writers:
independent small group collaboration to motivate and support student-directed
writing (p.8).
 Frees up the teacher to participate, minilesson and conference-- students can write
everyday, but need specific supportive responses. Teachers can’t conference one-on-one
everyday, but kids can with each other.
 Keys to successful writing circle collaboration: kids feel comfortable writing, sharing
and discussing; clear guidelines in place; predictable structure; kids understand
responsibilities; mechanisms and strategies to help kids reach consensus (p.10).
 Writing circles are seed beds where writing ideas germinate and quality writing grows
(p.18).
 Writing circles welcome all kids at their level of writing ability, celebrate that writing
and help them take their skill to the next level.
 Writing circles build confidence and is really a reparative activity where students will
succeed for the first time ever (p.19).
 Writing circles become publishing circles when their purpose shifts from generating
drafts to preparing a more fully developed final piece: agent, illustrator, reviewer,
editor, and author.

23. Situated Motivation
 Choice of topic permitted.
 More persistent and sustained effort.
 The ideas and comments
of peers that encourage
the learner to explore
ideas further.
 More willing to emulate peers
 Obligation to meet the group’s timelines
and collaborative goals.
 Feedback that comes from within the group is typically more powerfully received than
the teacher/manager’s suggestions for improving manuscripts.

24. Collaborative writing practices and writing support technologies
Rachel Rimmershaw
 Collaboration is a widely seen practice in the workplace – “collaborative
activities in pursuit of common goals” (p.1).
 Collaborative writing can be seen as a social process (p.1).
 The term collaborative writing does not define a commonly-accepted
practice. It could be two or more people working on one paper, many
authors’ names on one piece of writing, many individual pieces of writing
with collaboration of ideas through the writing process.

25. Empirical Study on Collaborative Writing: What Do Co-authors Do, Use, and Like?
SYLVIE NOËL & JEAN-MARC ROBERT
• Writing is a long and complex task and many authors try to shorten the
production time, lighten their workload, or improve the final result by
pooling resources (p.63).
• Noel & Robert found that respondents thought a group’s effort resulted in a
better document than when they worked individually (p.64).
• Ede & Lundsford (1990), Group writing includes any writing done in collaboration
with one or more persons with approx. 87% of the documents produced had at
least two authors (p.64).
• ADVANTAGES: Getting several viewpoints, using different expertise, reducing
errors, and obtaining a better, more accurate text (p.65).
• DISADVANTAGES: Integrating everyone’s writing into a single style, longer
time to accomplish, dividing the tasks equitably, and a diffusion of responsibility
(p.65).
• Sharples et al. (1991), longitudinal partitioning, the work is divided into
sequential stages, and each stage is allocated to a different person or sub-group.
• In parallel partitioning, the document is divided into sections, and
each person or sub-group works on a different section in parallel to
the others

26. Perkins-Gough, D. (2010). MetLife survey: Collaboration
improves job satisfaction. Educational Leadership, 67.
 Increased teacher collaboration has the potential to improve school climate and
teacher career satisfaction – writing circles in teacher candidate training is
beneficial for demonstrating the power of this innovation to improve writing and
prepare teacher candidates for collaboration in the workplace setting
 The new generation of teachers will expect even more collaboration – teachers
with <5 years of teaching experience are more likely than those with >20 yrs. of
experience to say their success is linked to that of their colleagues (67% compared
to 47%).
 67% of teachers believe that increased collaboration among teachers and school
leaders would greatly improve student achievement.
SO… If collaboration/collaborative writing is important for student
writing improvement and collaboration in the workplace improves
performance, teacher candidates should experience collaborative
writing so they understand the power of this innovation and the
process of implementing writing circles in their own future
classrooms. The following qualitative findings help us to understand
teacher perceptions of this collaborative writing practice.

27. Research Questions for Pilot Study
1. How do teacher candidates self-report
their perceptions of
themselves as authors/writers?
2. What shifts in attitudes about
authorship do teacher
candidates self-report?

28. EXPLORING
Self-reported Growth as Authors
How do teacher candidates
self-report their
perceptions of themselves
as authors/writers?

29. RELATIONSHIPS
Qualitative Themes
IDEAS
FEEDBACK
IMPROVEMENT

30. Value of Collaboration: Themes 1 & 4
• Ideas/Feedback
“The best thing about joining a writing circle was having other
students to turn to for suggestions and ideas. Having 4 heads to
work is better than one. I was introduced to suggestions I would
have never come up with on my own.”
"The best thing was being able to bounce ideas off of other
people and receive immediate feedback on my writing from my
peers.”
“You get feedback on your own writing as well as have others
build on your ideas to make one big one.“
“The best thing was definitely being able to share ideas.”
“We bounced ideas off each other and blended our ideas
together to make it work- such as the title.”
“…… opened my eyes to new ideas and different points of view.”
"I was able to come up with ideas to share with my group and
receive positive feedback and working with these ideas to make
them the best possible.”
“Getting to collaborate with others, listening to ideas and
sharing.”
"Getting other people's insights”
“Having the opportunity to write with my peers and build upon
our piece by sharing ideas.”
“One thing I really enjoyed was how our poem started to come
together. Every class meeting, we had some new ideas to add or
delete.”
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Perception of the value of
collaboration
Ideas improving
writing/final
product
Relationships Feedback

31. Theme 2: Improving Writing/Final
Product
• "The best thing was definitely being able to share ideas and
work together as a group to improve our writing.“
• "I think the best thing about joining a writing circle was
seeing the final product put together after the efforts of all
members.“
• "I think it has helped me a great deal to work with others.
Our project turned out great.“
• "Collaboration of ideas. Together, we produced a great
product.“
• "I loved working with my group and felt like my writing
improved."

32. The Value of Collaboration: Theme 3
• Relationships
"I made a lot of new friends".
“Working with wonderful, intelligent
women.”
“I met new people………...”
“We got to really know our classmates and
begin working with each other.“
“Having the opportunity to write with my
peers and build upon our piece by sharing
ideas.”
“Working together as a group and learning
new strategies.”
“Getting to collaborate with others,
listening to ideas and sharing.”
"I loved working with my group".
"The best thing about joining a writing
circle was a positive outlook on group work
and now I have a great appreciation for all
my group members and all their hard
work.“
"Being able to share your work and get
feedback from a group“
“ I liked interacting with people in the
class.”
25
20
15
10
5
0
Collaboration experience
positive neutral negative

33. Descriptive Statistics
N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum
Percentiles
25th 50th (Median) 75th
Self perception
before wc
28 3.11 1.031 1 5 3.00 3.00 3.00
Self perception
after wc
28 4.21 .957 3 5 3.00 5.00 5.00
Ranks
N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks
Self perception after wc - Self perception before
wc
Negative Ranks 0a .00 .00
Positive Ranks 17b 9.00 153.00
Ties 11c
Total 28
a. Self perception after wc < Self perception before wc
b. Self perception after wc > Self perception before wc
c. Self perception after wc = Self perception before wc
Test Statisticsa
Self perception after wc - Self
perception before wc
Z -3.879b
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000
a. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test
b. Based on negative ranks.
Quantitative Results –Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test
The results indicate that none of the teacher candidates
had a higher score pre writing circle experience (i.e. pre-test>
post-test). The majority (i.e. 17 teacher candidates)
had a higher self-reported perception of authorship post
writing circle experience and 11 of them saw no change in
their score. These changes in perception of authorship led
to a statistically significant difference (p<.05, z=3.88), an
increase from pre writing circle perceptions of authorship
(mean = 3.11 ) to post writing circle perception of
authorship (mean = 4.21 ). Writing circles accounted for
25% of the variance in scores as calculated by the effect
size of .52, which is a large effect.

34. Results: Improvement in Self-Rank
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Self-reported rank as an author after writing circle
weak average good strong

35. Lessons Learned: Writing Circles
• Did teacher candidates
report that they are likely
to use writing circles in
their future classrooms?
• "I have learned more about
the steps of the actual writing
process through authentic
hands on experience in the
writing circles".
• "I learned how beneficial it can
be for my future students to
have time set aside for them
to write collaboratively in
writing circles. Through
working with other students,
they are given the opportunity
to share their ideas and
examine new ones“
• I will implement writing circles
in my class to build writing
ability and confidence in my
students.

36. Looking back; looking forward
• Looking back at the historical
context of the writing process
(Graves, 1983) and of collaborative
literacy experiences from literature
study groups can bring educators to
today’s innovation known as
writing circles.
• Considering that this is a new social
learning format, no qualitative or
quantitative studies of
implementation with either
students or preservice teachers
have yet to be published;
therefore, the data, while limited,
provides valuable insights into this
new strategy for developing
authors through collaborative
writing around a particular interest
and topic of the participants’
choosing.
• Certainly, Vopat (2009) relied on
the historical forerunners of
writing circles.
• His intentions in creating and
implementing this timely
innovative strategy of writing
circles was
– to enhance the writing
process,
– spur writing growth,
– utilize collaboration as
motivation, and
– rely on the authenticity and
stimulation of publishing in real
venues.

37. ANY
QUESTIONS?
Writing circles:
From literature
study groups to
literature circles
to writing
circles…
to authorship

38. References
Bailey, P. J. (2014). Veteran elementary teachers collaborating in professional learning
communities: a phenomenological study. Educational Doctoral Theses, Paper 172. Retrieved
from: http://hdl.handle.net/2047/d20004962
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice Hall.
Bernhardson, S. (2011). We are currently preparing students for jobs that don’t yet
exist… Retrieved from: ctworkingmoms.com
Bogard,J.M., & McMackin, M.C. (2012). Combining traditional and new literacies in a
21st century writing workshop. The Reading Teacher, 65(5), pp. 313-323. DOI:
10.1002/TRTR01048.
Commeyras, M., & Sumner G. (1996). Literature discussions based on student-posed
questions. The Reading Teacher, 50, 262-265.
Daniels, H. (2002). Literature circles: Voice and choice in book clubs and reading
groups. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
Ede, L. S., & Lunsford, A. A. (1990). Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives
on collaborative writing. LA Arts & Disciplines. Carbondale, IL: SIU Press.
Edmonds, W.A., & Kennedy, T.D. (2013). An applied reference guide to research
designs: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Berleley, CA: Sage Publications.
Galda, L., & Beach, R. (2001). Response to literature as a cultural activity. Reading
Research Quarterly, 36, 64-73.
Graham, S., & Perin,D. (2006). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing
of adolescents in middle and high school. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellence in
Education.

39. IES (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers. What
Works Clearninghouse. Retrieved from: http://ies.ed.gov.
Kim, H., & K.S. Eklundh (2001). Reviewing Practices in Collaborative Writing.
Computer Supported Cooperative Work. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 10,
pp. 247- 259.
Lee, A., & Boud, D. (2003). Writing groups, change and academic identity:
Research development as a local practice. Studies in Higher Education, 28, 18.7-200.
Murray, D. (2003). A writer teaches writing. 2nd ed. Boston,MA:
Wadsworth Publishing.
Myhill, D., & Jones, S. (2009). How talk becomes text: Investigating the concept of
oral rehearsal in early years’ classrooms. British Journal of Educational Studies, 57(3), 265-
284. Doi:10.111/j.1467-8527.2009.00438.x
National Commission on Writing (2002).
Noel, S., & Robert, J.M. (2004). Empirical Study on Collaborative Writing: What
Do Co- authors Do, Use, and Like? Computer Supported Cooperative Work 13: 63–89.
Paris, S.G., & Turner, J.C. (2014?). Situated motivation. In Student motivation
cognition and learning. Google Books. Retrieved from: books.google.ca.
Peterson, R., & Eeds, M. (1990/2007). Grand conversations: Literature groups in
action. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Pintrich, P. R., Donald R. Brown, D. R., & Weinstein, C. E. (1994). Student
motivation, cognition, and learning : Essays in honor of Wilbert J. McKeachie. pp. 213- 228.
Hillsdale, N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum.

40. Posner, I.R. & R.M. Baecker (1993). How People Write Together.
Readings in Groupware and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work: Assisting
Human-Human Collaboration. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 239-250
Reed, C.J., McCarthy, & Briley, B. (2002). Sharing assumptions and
negotiating boundaries. College Teaching, 50, 22-26.
Rimmershaw, R. (1992). Collaborative writing practices and writing
support technologies. Instructional Science. Volume 21 (1-3), pp 15-28.
Tompkins, G. (2012). Teaching writing: Balancing process and
products. Fresno, CA: Pearson.
Vopat, J. (2009). Writing circles: Kids revolutionize
workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
U. S. Department of Education (2008).
Zinsseer, W. (2010). The life changing message of On Writing Well is:
Simplify your language and thereby find your humanity. Retrieved from:
williamzinsseer.com