Second Grade is Important: Literacy Instruction and Learning of Young Children in a High-Poverty School

Journal of Literacy Research, Winter 2003/2004 by Barone, Diane

The majority of the primary teachers in this school had several years of teaching experience. They felt confident in their abilities to establish a classroom, maintain discipline, and teach to the needs of their students. Unlike other high poverty schools, the primary teachers in this building were not new to teaching.

Data Collection

Throughout the study, I observed the students; interviewed the students, their teachers, and the principal; and collected work samples. A doctoral student who was experienced in taking field notes observed in each room to secure reliability in the observational notes and to guard against any bias on my part. We simultaneously took field notes in the same classroom until our notes were over 90% similar in reporting the teaching and learning that occurred, and then we observed in different classrooms each week. We also debriefed on tentative findings and the doctoral student helped to construct a synthesis of the findings. Following are more specific descriptions of the data collection process.

Observation. The children were observed weekly, usually during the time set aside for literacy instruction. During kindergarten, the focal children were observed during an entire morning or afternoon session. In the first and second grades, the morning was protected for literacy instruction, and observation happened during that time block. At the beginning and end of first grade and second grade, a whole day of instruction was observed. In this way, I could see how literacy instruction was embedded in other content-based instruction. For each child, I created a literacy profile based on these observations and grounded in the work of Bear and Barone (1998), Clay (2001), Morris (1993), and Sulzby (1985). These profiles were compiled by teasing out from field notes, interviews, and student work any evidence of a child's literacy accomplishments. The profiles, as well as all field notes, were shared with the teachers for accuracy. The teachers often contributed additional information that helped to refine my understanding of the literacy development of individual children.

Interviews. The teachers were formally interviewed twice per year for an hour. At the beginning of the year, I asked them about their goals and how they viewed each of the focal children as literacy learners. At the end of year, interviews focused on the whole year, what they thought went well, and what had proved problematic in their literacy instruction and the learning of their students. I also had informal chats with the teachers during each of my visits to their rooms. I tape-recorded and transcribed end-of-the-year interviews. Other interviews were not tape-recorded, and notes about their content were made retrospectively.

At the end of second grade, I interviewed each child about his or her reflections about experiences in reading and writing during the year. These interviews occurred in May, typically lasted about five minutes, and were tape-recorded and later transcribed.