“We’re going to finish up our list forour story map,” Paige Furgersonexplains to her kindergarten stu-

dents. “Let’s read what we have so far.”As Ali points to the words written on the

paper attached to the easel, her classmates readalong with her: “Trees, 3 bowls, 3 spoons, 3chairs, house, 3 beds, 3 bears.”

“I know that there are some other thingsthat we need. Can you think about the storyof ‘Goldilocks and the Three Bears’? Whatelse do we need to write on our list?” MissFurgerson asks.

Brody suggests, “A window.”Joey requests, “Three bathrooms. One for

each bear.”Katelin volunteers, “Goldilocks.”“Oh, you know what?” Furgerson says. “I

think we really do need her. Did you hear whatKatelin said, that we needed Goldilocks?”

“Goldilocks,” the children repeat in unison.“Goldilocks,” Furgerson replies. “We

need a Goldilocks. We’re almost out of room

Interactive writing in aprimary classroom

Interactive writing provides ameans for teachers to engage ineffective literacy instruction, notthrough isolated skills lessons, butwithin the framework of constructingtexts filled with personal andcollective meaning.

Kathryn Button____________________________________Margaret J. JohnsonPaige Furgerson

right here.” Furgerson points to the bottom ofthe list of items needed for the class story map.“So where should we write Goldilocks?” Afterthe children decide that a new column needs tobe started, they help Furgerson hear the soundsin the word Goldilocks and proceed to writethe word.

“Let’s say the word together, slowly,”Furgerson reminds the children.

“Goldilocks. O, I hear an o,” Adam states.“I hear a d,” Quang suggests.“A g, a g,” repeats Katelin.After observing her children and listening

to them encode Goldilocks, Furgerson ex-plains. “There is an o and a d and a g. The g isat the beginning, Katelin. You come up andwrite the g, and then we’ll let Adam write theo that he heard. Do you know what? This is aperson’s name, Goldilocks. Do you know whatkind of a g we have to use?

Rosa replies, “A capital.”“Acapital g because it’s somebody’s name.”

Furgerson then leads the class forward in theirtask. “That’s a good capital g. Now, Adam, youcome up and write the o. Class, let’s say the wordagain to see if we hear any other sounds. Helpme.”

This scene took place in a kindergartenclassroom at Ramirez Elementary School inLubbock, Texas, USA. Of the 17 students inthe class, 2 were Asian, 8 Hispanic, 6 non-Hispanic White, and one African American.Fifteen of the children received free or re-duced-price lunch, and 6 had attended a pre-kindergarten program. The teacher, PaigeFurgerson, and the children spent their days

446 The Reading Teacher Vol. 49, No. 6 March 1996 ©1996 International Reading Association (pp. 446–454)

engaged in a variety of literacy activities, in-cluding interactive writing lessons like the onedescribed above.

Roots of interactive writingInteractive writing has its roots in the lan-

guage experience approach developed byAshton-Warner (1963) in which children dic-tated a text and the teacher acted as scribe. Thetext was then used as reading material for theyoungsters. McKenzie (1985), working withBritish teachers, developed a process shecalled “shared writing” in which the teacherand children collaborated on a text to be writ-ten. The focus of the writing could come froma children’s literature selection, an event ex-perienced by the children in the class, or a top-ic under study in social studies or science. InMcKenzie’s model, the teacher served asscribe and usually used chart paper to create atext that then served as the students’ readingtext. As the charts accumulated, they were dis-played around the room, surrounding the chil-dren with meaningful print.

Interactive writing, a form of shared writ-ing, is part of the early literacy lesson frame-work (see Figure 1) developed by educators at The Ohio State University (Pinnell &McCarrier, 1994) to provide rich, educativeexperiences for young children, particularlythose considered to be educationally at risk.The framework draws on the concept of emer-gent literacy, a term coined by Clay (1966),and is explicated by other early childhood ed-ucators (see Strickland & Morrow, 1989; Teale& Sulzby, 1986).

In the early literacy framework, the use ofquality literature (Huck & Kerstetter, 1987)scaffolds the development and integration ofall literacy processes (reading, writing, speak-ing, listening, thinking). Three to five tradebooks, which represent various genres, areread aloud to children each day. Prior to theconstruction of the students’ list for their storymap of “Goldilocks and the Three Bears,”Miss Furgerson had read aloud Galdone’s(1972) version several times. The repeatedreadings helped students reconstruct the storyline and recall characters and story sequence,the information necessary to generate theirlists and construct the actual map. Often thefocus of the daily interactive writing lesson

was an extension of a book read aloud to theclass.

Clay (1991) explained that children are ac-tive constructors of their own language and lit-eracy. Their competence grows as they gaininner control over constructing meaning fromprint. This growth does not take place withoutenvironmental support. Rather, with support-ive instruction, children develop in languageand literacy competence (Vygotsky, 1962).The early literacy framework is a balancedprogram of instruction and independent explo-ration. Interactive writing provides opportuni-ties for teachers to engage in instructionprecisely at the point of student need.

Interactive writing differs from shared writ-ing in two important ways. First, children takean active role in the writing process by actuallyholding the pen and doing the writing. Second,the teacher’s role changes as she scaffolds andexplicates the children’s emerging knowledgeabout print (Button, 1992). Through question-ing and direct instruction, the teacher focusesthe children’s attention on the conventions ofprint such as spaces between words, left-to-rightand top-to-bottom directionality, capital letters,and punctuation. Clay (1979) reminds teachersto utilize the child’s strengths and not to do forthe child “anything that she can teach him to dofor himself” (p. 4).

Interactive writing in practiceTo guide the interactive writing process

and make children’s knowledge about print ex-plicit, the teacher might ask questions such asthese:

“How many words are there in our sen-tence?”

“Where do we begin writing?”

Interactive writing in a primary classroom 447

Interactive writing providesopportunities for teachers to engage ininstruction precisely at the point ofstudent need.

448 The Reading Teacher Vol. 49, No. 6 March 1996

Figure 1The Ohio State University Early Literacy Learning Initiative

A framework for early literacy lessons

Element Values

1. Reading aloud to children Motivates children to read (shows purpose).1. (rereading favorite selections) Provides an adult demonstration.

Develops sense of story.Develops knowledge of written language syntax and of how

texts are structured.Increases vocabulary and linguistic repertoire.Supports intertextual ties through enjoyment and shared

knowledge; creates community of readers.

2. Shared reading Demonstrates early strategies.2. Rereading big books Builds sense of story and ability to predict.2. Rereading retellings Demonstrates process of reading.2 . Rereading alternative texts Provides social support from the group.2. Rereading the products of Provides opportunity to participate, behave like a reader.2. interactive writing

3. Guided reading Provides opportunity to problem solve while reading for meaning.Provides opportunity to use strategies on extended text.Challenges the reader and creates context for successful

processing on novel texts.Provides opportunity for teacher guidance, demonstration,

and explanation.

4. Independent reading Children read on their own or with partners from a wide range of materials.

5. Shared writing Children compose messages and stories; teacher supports process as scribe.

Demonstrates how writing works.

6. Interactive writing Demonstrates concepts of print, early strategies, and how words work.

Provides opportunities to hear sounds in words and connect with letters.

Helps children understand “building up” and “breaking down” processes in reading and writing.

Provides opportunities to plan and construct texts.

7. Guided writing and writers’ Demonstrates the process of writing.7. workshop Provides opportunity for explicit teaching of various aspects of 7. Teacher guides the process and writing.7. provides instruction Gives students the guidance they need to learn writing processes

and produce high-quality products.

8. Independent writing Provides opportunity for independence.8 . Individual retellings Provides chance to write for different purposes.8. Labeling Increases writers’ ability to use different forms.8 . “Speech balloons” Builds ability to write words and use punctuation.8 . Books and other pieces Fosters creativity and the ability to compose.

9. Letters, words, and how they work Helps children learn to use visual aspects of print.

Extensions and themes: Drama, murals, story maps, innovations on text, surveys, science experi-ments, and others.• Provides opportunities to interpret texts in different ways.• Provides a way of revisiting a story.• Fosters collaboration and enjoyment.• Creates a community of readers.• Provides efficient instruction through integration of content areas. (continued)

“After writing one word, what do we haveto remember to do? Why?”

“What word are we writing next?”“Say the word slowly. What sounds do

you hear?”“Can you write the letter that stands for

that sound?”“Can you find the letter on our alphabet

chart that we need to write?”“What comes at the end of the sentence?”“Would that make sense?”“Does that look right?”“Would you point and read what we have

written so far?”These questions and the instruction they

represent vary according to the knowledge andneeds of the children (see Figure 2). For chil-dren beginning the process, the teacher mayneed to attend more to letter formation. At timesthe teacher may show a child a model or assistthe child with the formation of the needed letter.As children gain competence, attention mayshift to punctuation, capitalization, prefixes,suffixes, and phonetic structures such as di-graphs, consonant blends, and vowel patterns.

An interactive writing lesson need not belengthy. On the first day of kindergarten,Furgerson and her students engaged in interac-tive writing for 15 minutes. As the year pro-gressed, lessons lasted from 20 to 30 minutes.The power of the lesson lies not in the lengthof the text constructed but in the quality of theinteraction. Typically the children are seatedon a carpet facing an easel holding unlinedchart paper, a marking pen, correction tape,

and a pointer. The teacher usually sits withineasy reach of the easel, facing the children.Teachers have found interactive writing to besuccessful with classes that range in size from15 to 32 children.

The environment the teacher creates dur-ing this process should support risk taking.Children are encouraged to take an active rolein negotiating the text. The teacher assumesthat the children are in the process of learningabout print and that some of their responseswill be approximations. The teacher explainsto the children that because they and other peo-ple will be reading the story, it is important thatthe words be conventionally constructed. Theteacher uses correction tape to mask precon-ventional attempts (the child’s approxima-tions) and helps the child to write the word,letter, or punctuation mark conventionally.Teacher sensitivity is needed to value theknowledge reflected in the attempt yet also toteach the standard conventions of print usedin books such as the ones the children read.

For example, during the construction of aclass big book about the incubation of eggs, aclassroom experience that occurred late in theschool year, the children decided to write thesentence: “When the chicks get bigger, we willsend the chicks to the farm.” After everyonerepeated the sentence aloud, Furgerson askedthe class what word needed to be written first.They agreed that the first word should bewhen. Rosa stepped up to the easel and wrotewen. Furgerson said, “It does sound like w-e-n,but we need an h before the e.” She then cov-

Interactive writing in a primary classroom 449

Figure 1The Ohio State University Early Literacy Learning Initiative (cont’d.)

Documentation of progress• Provides information to guide daily teaching.• Provides a way to track the progress of individual children.• Provides a basis for reporting to parents.• Helps a school staff assess the effectiveness of the instructional program.

Home and community involvement• Brings reading and writing materials and new learning into children’s homes.• Gives children more opportunities to show their families what they are learning.• Increases reading and writing opportunities for children.• Demonstrates value and respect for children’s homes.

Oral language is the foundation for all elements of the framework.

The Ohio State University, July 1995. Copyright 1995, OSU Early Literacy Learning Initiative. Used with permission.

ered the letters en with a piece of correctiontape and asked Rosa to write an h and then theen that she initially had written. During thewriting of the word the Simon wrote teh. Forsome of the children the was a known word,but Simon could not yet spell it conventional-ly. Xuchen responded, “You have the right let-ters but in the the h comes before the e.” Oneof the children tore off a piece of correctiontape and handed it to Simon to place over theletters eh. He then wrote he. Jane askedFurgerson, “What did it say?” After the teacherpronounced teh, Jane commented that it didn’tmake sense. The children agreed that thelooked right and that teh neither made sensenor looked like a word they knew. This infor-mation confirmed for Furgerson that some ofher students knew that what they wrote neededto make sense (semantics).

Texts for interactive writing representmany forms of writing. Children might want tocreate a list of characters from a story as partof the process of forming a story map. Surveyquestions might be used as a basis for interac-tive writing. For example, after reading thebooks written by their visiting author, Rafe

Martin, the children created a survey chart todisplay their favorite book title. Childrenmight retell a story they have read or write analternative text. After students read The FarmConcert (Cowley, 1990), they wrote their ownvariant entitled “The Classroom Concert.”Children might compose an invitation to aclass party or write a letter to pen pals in an-other city. Recipes, a review of a trip, classnews, and many other forms of communica-tion can also serve as topics for interactivewriting.

What interactive writing looks likein one classroom

At the beginning of the school year,Furgerson used informal assessments, includ-ing Clay’s Observation Survey (Clay, 1993a),to determine the strengths and knowledge ofher students. She found about half her childrencould write their names. Only two of the chil-dren could name all the letters of the alphabet.All of the children could identify the front ofa book, distinguish between illustrations andprint, and indicate where they would begin toread. They all knew print carried a message.

450 The Reading Teacher Vol. 49, No. 6 March 1996

Figure 2Interactive writing expectations and guidelines in primary classrooms over a school year

Beginning of the year Later in the year

Establish routineNegotiate simple text (a label)Construction of text may be completed in one

day (news)Repeat orally word or line to be written

The teacher willModel hearing sounds in wordsModel sound/symbol relationshipsSupport letter recognition (using alphabet chart

or chart listing class members’ names)Model and question for Concepts About Print

(CAP): spacing, left-to-right directionality,top-to-bottom directionality, word-by-wordmatching during shared reading

Link words to be written with names of childrenin the class

The teacher mayWrite more of the textWrite challenging parts of word/textAssist with letter formation

Routine establishedNegotiate a more complex textConstruction of text continues over several daysCount the words to be written before starting to

write

Students willHear dominant sounds in wordsRepresent sounds with symbols (letters)Write letters without copyHave control of core wordsBegin linking known words to unknown wordsLeave spaces between wordsUse familiar chunks (-ed; -ing)Control word-by-word matching during shared

readingPunctuate sentences on the runWrite text with little supportMake generalizations about print

On the first day of kindergarten, Furgersonbegan with an interactive writing experiencebased on the focus book of their first thematicunit. After reading Galdone’s (1975) TheGingerbread Boy, the class took a walking tourof the school to find gingerbread boys hiddenin certain spots throughout the building. Whenthey returned to the classroom, they created alist of the spots where the gingerbread boyswere found. After explaining the purpose ofthe writing, Furgerson asked the students whatword they wanted to write first on their list.

They decided to begin with the word lab.She asked the children where they should startwriting. One child stepped forward to point tothe upper left-hand corner of the chart paper.Furgerson asked the students to say the wordaloud—lab—listening for the sounds theyheard. Some of the students heard a b andsome an l. At this initial point in the process,Furgerson took the responsibility of seriatingthe sounds. “Yes,” she told the children, “wedo hear a b and an l. When we write the wordlab, the l comes first.”

Furgerson knew Larry could write hisname. “Larry,” she said, “you come and writethe l. You have an l in your name.” After Larrywrote the letter l, the children said the wordagain, listening for additional sounds. Brodyheard the sound represented by the letter b.While Brody came up to write the b, Furgersonexplained to the class that Brody’s name beganwith a b. Before he wrote the b, however, sheexplained that the letter a came before the b al-though it was hard to hear. Brody wrote the aand then the b.

Furgerson then called another child tocome up to the chart and, using the pointer,point under the word they had just written forthe class to read. She then asked where elsethey found gingerbread boys. They followed asimilar process with other items on their list.Furgerson chose to write three words at thissitting and to add to the list on subsequentdays. Interactive writing was a daily event inher classroom.

Furgerson built on the knowledge studentshad about the sounds represented by letters intheir names. She used everything the childrenappeared to know at the time of the lesson andthen, through demonstration and explanation,extended their knowledge by providing the let-ters representing unfamiliar sounds. Clay

(1993b) states, “At the beginning of the schoolyear what the child can write is a good indica-tor of what the child knows in detail aboutwritten language” (p. 11). As the children fin-ished writing a word, a list, or a sentence, theyread it. One child pointed under each word tohelp the others to track the print while read-ing. This process demonstrates in a powerfuland immediate way the reciprocal nature ofreading and writing.

Later in the year, the children were thor-oughly familiar with the routine of interactivewriting and much more sophisticated in theirknowledge about the conventions of print. Theywere able to analyze the phonological featuresof the message to be written (hear sounds inwords), sequence the sounds heard, representthe sounds they heard with letters, and discernmany different patterns. The children were alsoaware that their purpose for writing dictated thetype of writing they would undertake. When theclass decided to reply to their Ohio pen pals,they knew their letter would begin with the line,“Dear Miss Patacca’s Class,” and what fol-lowed would be written from left to right acrossthe page.

In the spring the children decided to retellthe story of Michael Rosen’s (1989) We’reGoing on a Bear Hunt. They had spent sever-al days listening to repeated readings of thebook. Using interactive writing, they had madelists of the characters and the different settingsfrom the story, which then served as referencesfor an elaborate story map. To accompany themap, the children spent several days writing aretelling of the story.

Furgerson and the children negotiated thefirst line of the retelling. Borrowing in partfrom the text of the story, they decided to

Interactive writing in a primary classroom 451

On the first day of kindergarten,Furgerson began with an interactivewriting experience based on the focusbook of their first thematic unit.

write: “The children walked through the forest,stumble trip, stumble trip.” They repeated thesentence several times to fix the messageclearly in their minds and to give them some-thing against which to monitor their writing.Furgerson then asked the children to count thewords as they said the sentence. She askedthem what word they would write first. At thispoint in the school year, the was a known wordfor all the children in the room. MissFurgerson asked the children what they neededto remember. Most knew that they start writingin the upper left-hand corner of the page, beginthe first word of the sentence with a capital let-ter, and leave a “hand space” between thewords.

After writing and reading the, the childrentold Furgerson that the next word they neededto work on was children. This was not a knownword for most of them. Following a routinewell established at this point, the students saidthe word together slowly, yet naturally, think-ing about the order of the sounds in the spo-ken word. One child commented that the wordhad two parts—chil and dren. Furgersonturned the child’s observation into a teachingmoment, explaining that, indeed, children hadtwo syllables and showing the class how toclap as they said the word, one clap for eachsyllable. Capitalizing further on the observa-tion, she told the students they would be lis-tening for the sounds in the first syllable. Theyheard the first sound easily and all knew the di-graph ch. Furgerson asked Chaz to come up tothe easel and write the first two letters whilethe class said the first syllable again, listeningfor additional sounds.

Rosa said she heard an i like in him. At thispoint, most of the children were beginning toconnect known words and new words. Rosacame up, took the marker from Chaz, andwrote the i. As Rosa repeated the word aloudwhile writing, she said she also could hear an l.Furgerson said, “You are right. You may writethe l.” She then asked the children to say theword again, listening for the sounds in the lastsyllable. Quang said he heard a tr. Furgersonsaid, “Yes. It does sound like a tr, but in thisword it is a dr. TR and dr do sound almostalike.” Quang came up to the easel and wrotethe dr. After saying the word one more time,Joshua said he heard an n. Furgerson said,“Yes, you are right, there is an n. But beforethe n, there is an e which is harder to hear.Would you like to come up and write en forus?”

Throughout the school year the childrenalso had 20 to 30 minutes every day to writeindependently either in their journals or at thewriting center. This gave students time to usethe knowledge gained from interactive writ-ing instruction and time to take further risksas writers. They made independent choicesabout what to write about and how to organizetheir texts. They were encouraged to use in-vented spelling, copy from environmentalprint, and make use of their growing core ofknown words. Furgerson’s observations ofwhat the students wrote and how they wroteindependently informed her teaching for futureinteractive writing sessions.

Literacy assessmentAssessment in the early literacy frame-

work is ongoing as the teacher documents thechildren’s growth over time. Furgerson used achecklist she developed to monitor the growthchildren exhibited through their journal writ-ing. Although the children varied in their con-trol of the conventions of print, they allthought of themselves as readers and writers.Although the focus of Furgerson’s curriculumwas not to teach her children to read but to im-merse them in meaningful print-rich activities,most of them were reading by spring of theirkindergarten year.

To document the growth her studentsmade during the year and to provide informa-tion for next year’s first-grade teacher,Furgerson and a class of trained undergradu-

452 The Reading Teacher Vol. 49, No. 6 March 1996

Although the focus of Furgerson’scurriculum was not to teach herchildren to read, but to immerse them in meaningful print rich activities, mostof them were reading by spring of their kindergarten year.

ate language/literacy students administered theObservation Survey (Clay, 1993a) in May toall of the children. She analyzed the children’sscores on each of the six tasks assessed andthen compared the May scores with theSeptember scores.

The children exhibited growth in all areasmeasured by the Observation Survey. In thespring of the year, 13 of 17 children were ableto read with 90% or better accuracy books likeThe Chick and the Duckling (Ginsburg, 1972)and Mary Wore Her Red Dress and HenryWore His Green Sneakers (Peek, 1985). Thesebooks have illustrations that provide moder-ate support for the reader and stories that tellabout familiar objects. The stories contain var-ied, often repetitive, simple sentence patternsthat include action such as, “‘I am taking awalk,’ said the Duckling.” (See Peterson,1991, for characteristics of texts to support be-ginning readers.)

The children improved the most in theirability to hear sounds in words as measuredby the Dictation Task. In this task, children areasked to record a dictated sentence containinga possible 37 phonemes. Each child’s attemptis scored by counting the number of letters(graphemes) written by the child that representthe sounds (phonemes) analyzed by the child.In the fall the children had a mean dictationscore of 9.8 (maximum score = 37). The chil-dren represented primarily initial consonants.In the spring, the children’s mean dictationscore was 29 (almost three times higher than inthe fall). The children’s ability to hear soundsin words, practiced daily during interactivewriting, enabled them to represent initial andfinal sounds heard in each word. In addition,they could accurately spell high-frequencywords like the, is, and it. This growth in theDictation Task is particularly significant giv-en the importance of phonemic awareness asa predictor of success in learning to read (seeAdams, 1990).

On the Writing Vocabulary Task of theObservation Survey children were asked towrite as many words as they could in a 10-minute period. In the fall, the children’s scoresranged from 0 to 20 with a mean score of 4.8.Many children were able to write their firstname and names of family members like momand dad. In the spring, the Writing Vocabularyscores ranged from 1 to 56 words written in a

10-minute period with a mean score of 23.9. Inaddition to writing names of family membersand friends, the children wrote high-frequen-cy words like on, the, in, go, and to and fa-vorite words like pizza and dog.

Meeting individual students’ needsFurgerson used information from the

Observation Survey, anecdotal notes, and writ-ing checklists to help her meet the needs of eachof her students. Valerie’s fall ObservationSurvey summary indicated that she could rec-ognize 14 of 54 letters, no high-frequencywords, and 7 out of 24 concepts about print;could represent no phonemes on the DictationTask; and could write no words during theWriting Vocabulary Task. During the interactivewriting lesson, Furgerson built on Valerie’sstrengths, asking her to write the l and a whenthey were needed in words the class was writ-ing, as these were 2 of the 14 letters Valerieknew. Valerie delighted everyone one day whenshe announced that the particular sentence theclass was writing needed a question mark at theend. She quickly became in charge of questionmarks. As the year progressed, Furgerson alsoworked individually with Valerie at the teachertable during center time and guided her duringjournal writing. At the end of kindergartenValerie recognized 46 of the 54 letters, no high-frequency words, and 14 of the 24 conceptsabout print; she could represent 3 phonemes onthe Dictation Task, and on the Writing Vocabu-lary Task she could write her name. Furgersonstated that Valerie’s spring scores exhibitedgrowth even though the growth was atypical forchildren her age. Valerie also showed markedgrowth in other areas such as art and oral lan-guage. Even with the most supportive literacyframework, some children require more inten-sive instruction. Valerie would be a prime can-didate for Reading Recovery (see Pinnell, Fried,& Estice, 1990).

Concluding remarksInteractive writing provides an authentic

means for instruction in phonics and other lin-guistic patterns within the context of meaning-ful text. Children learn the conventions ofspelling, syntax, and semantics as they engagein the construction of letters, lists, and stories.Interactive writing is a tool that puts readingand learning about conventions into a dynam-

Interactive writing in a primary classroom 453

ic relationship. As children attend to meaning-ful text, they develop their knowledge of theconventions embedded in that text. As theygain more knowledge of conventions, they areable to construct and interpret more sophisti-cated messages.

Interactive writing is an important part ofthe early literacy lesson framework (see Figure1) because it provides so many opportunities toteach directly about language conventions,sense of story, types of writing, and conceptsabout print. These teaching moments do notfollow a specified sequence but evolve fromthe teacher’s understanding of the students’needs. The early literacy lesson frameworkblends independent problem solving, sharedliteracy experiences, and teacher instructionwithin a literacy-rich classroom.

Too often teachers feel they must choosebetween using holistic literacy experiencesand teaching basic skills. In interactive writingsessions, teachers do both at the same time.Interactive writing provides a means for teach-ers to engage in effective literacy instruction,not through isolated skills lessons, but withinthe framework of constructing texts filled withpersonal and collective meaning.

Button teaches early literacy courses andJohnson teaches language and literacy cours-es at Texas Tech University. Furgerson teacheskindergarten in the Lubbock IndependentSchool District. Button may be contacted atTexas Tech University, Box 41071, Lubbock,TX 79409-1071, USA.

ReferencesAdams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and

learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Ashton-Warner, S. (1963). Teacher. New York: Simon &

Schuster.

Button, K.A. (1992). A longitudinal case study examinationof the theoretical and practical changes made by threeurban kindergarten teachers during participation inearly literacy training. Unpublished doctoral disserta-tion, The Ohio State University, Columbus.

Clay, M.M. (1966). Emergent reading behavior. Unpub-lished doctoral dissertation, University of Aukland, NewZealand.

Clay, M.M. (1979). The early detection of reading difficul-ties: A diagnostic survey with recovery procedures.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction ofinner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1993a). An observation survey of early liter-acy achievement. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Clay, M.M. (1993b). Reading Recovery: A guidebook forteachers in training. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Huck, C.S., & Kerstetter, K.J. (1987). Developing readers.In B. Cullinan (Ed.), Children’s literature in the readingprogram (pp. 30-40). Newark, DE: International Read-ing Association.

McKenzie, M.G., (1985). Shared writing: Apprenticeshipin writing. Language Matters, 1-2, 1-5.

Peterson, B. (1991). Selecting books for beginning read-ers. In D.E. DeFord, C.A. Lyons, & G.S. Pinnell (Eds.),Bridges to literacy: Learning from Reading Recovery(pp. 119-147). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Pinnell, G.S., Fried, M.D., & Estice, R.M. (1990). ReadingRecovery: Learning how to make a difference. TheReading Teacher, 43, 282–295.

Pinnell, G.S., & McCarrier, A. (1994). Interactive writing: Atransition tool for assisting children in learning to readand write. In E. Hiebert & B. Taylor (Eds.), Gettingreading right from the start: Effective early literacy in-terventions (pp. 149-170). Needham, MA: Allyn &Bacon.

Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (1989). Emerging litera-cy: Young children learn to read and write. Newark,DE: International Reading Association.

Teale, W.H., & Sulzby, E. (Eds.). (1986). Emergent litera-cy: Writing and reading. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.

Children’s books citedCowley, J. (1990). The farm concert. Bothell, WA: The

Wright Group.Galdone, P. (1972). The three bears. New York: Clarion.Galdone, P. (1975). The gingerbread boy. New York:

Clarion.Ginsburg, M. (1972). The chick and the duckling. New

York: Macmillan.Peek, M. (1985). Mary wore her red dress and Henry wore

his green sneakers. New York: Clarion.Rosen, M. (1989). We’re going on a bear hunt. New York:

McElderry.

454 The Reading Teacher Vol. 49, No. 6 March 1996