INTRODUCTION 

Group conferences are only one part of the writing process. If properly introduced and incorporated, conferring in groups becomes a most beneficial tool to improve student writing. In the group conference, students should be positive, constructive, and specific-behaviors which middle school students do not normally practice. This group conference method does as much to develop these behavioral skills as it does to develop good writing. My papers will present how to set up a framework for group conferences that will enhance the observation/editing skills of the responder/listener, as well as build confidence in the student/writer – to essentially get beyond the “Gee, I really liked that story” response. The method I use is based on my UNH writing program background. I will describe the approach as I have used and adapted it.

Group conferences consist of a group of three peers and the teacher (especially in the beginning) sharing their written pieces following a certain procedure, involving POINTING and QUESTIONING with specific goals in mind. Members of a group conference are not charged with evaluating the piece of writing shared, rather with giving the writer feedback on how they were affected.

Writing is a very personal act: sharing it is a threatening experience for many people (Elbow. 1973). Confidence in one’s writing ability is rare, especially in middle school students. Group conferences (any conferences in my class) have one main goal under which two sub-goals fall. Hopefully, my students know these by head (they should, I repeat them enough!) The main goal is to make the writer feel positive about the parts of his/her piece that work. Under this goal come two more specific goals. First, the writer should want to write. She/he should feel confident that at least part of the rough draft is worthwhile and that it offers a starting point for revision. Secondly, the conference should provide ideas for revision. A successful conference builds confidence in the student writers’ ability to improve. (Student writers do, however, have the option to abandon their piece and work on a new idea).

I have found the group conference method works very well when time is spent ‘training” the class one step at a time, making sure everyone is adept at each step before moving onto the next. The first four to six weeks of

each year, I model the ingredients of the group conference to the class as a whole. The main ingredients are POINTING and QUESTIONS. The first part of this paper will deal with methods and rationale for training the class to be adept at conferring with their peers. The second part of the paper will deal with how and when to use the conference to its utmost advantage.

POINTING

Definition: POINTING in my class means positive, specific feedback. POINTING is always the first feedback students in my class expect to receive.

Within the first day or two of school, I introduce and define POINTING. I share short pieces of writing (student or professional) that are “attention grabbing” with many details. Before reading, I tell the students to be aware of parts they like in the piece, parts that stick out in their minds as they listen, parts they remember. These prompts are written on the board.

What part jumps out at you?

What parts do you remember?

What parts do you like?

Could you picture any part in your mind?

Were there any “movies” created in your mind? (Elbow, 1973)

Also the constant reminder: POINTING = POSITIVE and SPECIFIC

After I read the piece to the class, everyone gets a chance to POINT. I have everyone POINT because in a group conference all participants are expected to contribute. I commend any positive, specific comment. Students are very hesitant at first. I remind them that everyone will POINT at least once. These beginning POINTING sessions are much like practice sessions for a sports team. As an example, during baseball practice everyone gets a chance to field the ball. In this manner, the players improve their fielding. The more each student practices POINTING, the better they become at finding the strong parts of the piece for them. The better each student is at POINTING, the better the class will function as a workshop of writers. The practice in the beginning is worth the time. I tell the students we are working toward having as many writing teachers as there are students (Calkins, 1986). The teacher in my class is in no way the sole audience for student writing.

I often have to probe the responders to get them to be more specific. I explain, even before the discussion, that I will do just that in order to help them become better POINTERS. For example, comments from novice POINTERS are often like these. “I like the detail” “I liked the beginning”, “I liked the whole thing”, “Good word choice”, “I like the story line (plot)”, etc. Some of these comments are what the students think I want to hear. I do not negate these general comments, rather I nudge them along politely until they become beneficial POINTS. I reply positively asking if there was a particular part they remember; “OK, what do you remember about the beginning?” “What words (details) worked for you?” I often refer to the suggested POINTING comments written on the board.

I give students daily opportunities to practice POINTING just before they start their own writing time. This activity has the tremendous side effect of generating insightful discussions concerning the qualities of good writing. Students notice that their peers POINT to particular qualities and these are discussed. As students become better at POINTING, we discuss what types of qualities are being POINTED too. As a class, we develop a list of “ingredients” that go into good writing. Often students POINT to “showing” details. I use this fact to demonstrate the difference between showing the reader and telling the reader. For example, I often share a piece of descriptive writing called “The Swim” written by an eighth grade girl. The piece is full of details that put the reader “there” on the beach with her, “the sand squishing between my toes as the sea breeze lifts my hair. Students often comment that they felt as if there were “there”. We discuss how that is accomplished by the writer. Then, I share a piece about swimming that goes like this: “Swimming is my favorite activity. I love to swim, especially in the summer when it is hot…” The difference is obvious. I encourage students to think of their own piece and try to incorporate showing details when they can.

Students that are trained well at POINTING become perceptive, discriminating listeners and readers. They avoid judging a whole piece of writing as good or bad. Instead, they look for potential in what they read and write. Students who have gained experience in POINTING, have continued being discriminating writers. Colleagues have commented that they have noticed a difference in students who have had experience in

POINTING. They are able to discriminate parts of a piece of writing that “work,” while others cannot.

RATIONALE FOR POINTING

Why positive and specific comments only? Why positive feedback? Moat writers are very insecure about their writing. How many of you reading this paper would feel comfortable sharing a rough draft you had written with a group of three of your peers? Would you feel better if you knew the first comments from them would be about parts of your piece they liked? I like to think of the rough draft as a pile of rocks. Hidden among the rocks there are often gems. People trained to look for gems can help the owner of the rocks see worth in the pile. Often the writer/owners are so involved, they can see no gems. I have seen so many “lights” go on in the student’s eyes as they realize their piece has parts that their peers actually thought were good; parts that stuck out in someone’s mind. Truthful positive comments on writing have the effect of easing the defensiveness often associated with sharing something as personal as writing.

Why specific? Specific comments help the writer gain confidence the responder as well as showing them the “gems” in their writing (Moffett, 1976). While sharing my own writing, I have experienced general comments from a peer like, “that’s good, I like that.” I have been left with an unsure feeling. Did the responder really like the piece or were they just saying that? I search body language to sound out the truth in the statement. I have also experienced a responder saying exactly what worked for them in the piece. Then I have gotten the palpable feeling of pride. Especially, and this often happens, if the responder hits on a part of the piece I know is good, or at least I thought might be, because I had spent time on that section. My confidence in the responder increased and I wanted to hear more from them. This can be a truly powerful experience, especially when it happens between middle school students. I have seen student/writers have the look on their face that says, “Hey, you noticed that part too. You’re right. That did turn out well, didn’t it? You must know what you are talking about. What else do you have to say about my piece?”

Feedback from peers that is truthful, positive, and specific has a powerful impact on the writer, especially in the middle school where peer influence runs so deep. This group conference method capitalizes on the peer influence in a positive way.

One striking example I recall involves Heather whose journal is quoted in the beginning of this piece. She had written a very telling: grocery-List type” of piece about riding BMX bicycles with her brother and his friend.

“I remember when I was about nine years old. There was a school that had lots of jumps for bikes. My brother and our friend David and I were told not to go to that school, but we did. They were having fun jumping these ramps. I just watched them. I then started to jump them. I then heard my brother say faster and I went faster then I couldn’t believe it. I then found myself up in the air and my heart beating hard. When I landed my bike was on top of me and I got a couple of scrapes. I then went home. My step-sister was there and I started to cry. She fixed me all up. When my dad came home he had asked what I had been up to and I told him what happened and I apologized for what I had done. After a week I had a scar left behind”.

She brought this piece to group conference. Of the three student/writers in the group, she had the lowest writing ability. Lulian, one of the classes’ strongest writers, was there as well. Lilian’s piece was a descriptive piece about finding a lizard and finally setting it free because of a moral issue. I try to mix the ability levels of each group for reasons I will deal with more later on. She shared her piece and received POINTING comments from her three peers and me.

Julian: “I like the part where you said your heart started beating hard.” Other Student: “I liked the part when you felt yourself up in the air.” Teacher: “I liked those parts too, where you felt yourself going through the air, and your head started beating hard. Those details helped show me what it was like for you to go over the jump”.

Heather was flabbergasted. Prior to the group conference (her first) she was making sarcastic, exaggerated comments about her piece: very uncharacteristic behavior for this quiet girl. She was very uncomfortable about sharing her writing. While the group pointed she kept smiling and incredulously saying “really?” She was then very ready to listen to any questions or suggestions from the group.

POINTING from peers had an extreme effect on her. The gain in confidence was immediately noticed in her eyes and words. The next day in her journal she wrote about her group conference experience. She had learned that people liked her piece! As I mentioned earlier, this experience was the beginning of a new, more confident Heather in English class.

Positive comments from peers have a tremendous confidence building effect. I ask you, the reader, to think of a time you have tried anything new or difficult. Has it helped you most to find out what you did wrong first, or what you were doing right? It is easy to pick out wrong parts in students’ written work. The trick is to see the potential lying dormant and nurture it.

QUESTIONS

Definition: Questions are actually statements using “I” about parts of a piece that may be confusing or need expansion. QUESTIONS, I feel, should be delayed for the first four to six weeks of school depending on the students’ confidence in their writing ability. I hold students back from asking any questions about their peers’ writing in the beginning of the year This is hard at times because some students want to jump at asking questions. I squelch any questions or attacks on student writing. I ask students to have patience, saying we are going slowly and we will build up to that stage.

Before QUESTIONS are modeled these following events should have occurred. POINTING has been modeled. Most students should be able to POINT successfully to two or more parts in an average piece of student writing. Each student should have had at least two group conferences with only POINTING comments made.

I have found QUESTIONS are harder to model than POINTING. Students do not become good at this task as easily. The time spent practicing QUESTIONS results in high quality, successful conferences. If each student can POINT well and ask a good perceptive QUESTION or two, the class has as many good conference partners as students. A true writing workshop atmosphere exists.

I emphasize that students should ask QUESTIONS that come from themselves. By that, I mean they should, as responders, form the question as something they want to know more about, rather than something the

writer has done wrong. They practice by asking their QUESTIONS always using “I”. This actually transforms the QUESTION into a statement. Some of these statements are:

“I didn’t understand what happened (at a particular part).” “I was confused when….”

“I wanted to hear more about…”

‘‘I’m unsure about what your mean.”

I try to have students couch the traditional: who, what, where, when, why, how, questions into “I” QUESTIONS.

Before a piece is read in group conference (and after), I ask students to be aware of their reactions and to think of themselves as human seismograph machines measuring their bodies’ emotional changes. If they find their foreheads wrinkling at a certain pad in the piece, that would be a good place to ask a question. Or, I’ll ask if there was a place where they had just a sketchy mental picture and wanted more. I get students in the habit of first being aware or their reactions and second to jot them down very briefly as they happen. This way, they don’t forget the part to which they wanted to POINT, and they don’t miss much of the piece. Students need to practice jotting down very brief notes to themselves about places to POINT to and to ask QUESTIONS. These issues are practiced much like good note taking skills are.

QUESTIONS (statements) coming from “I” are often not perceived by the writer as attacks on the piece. This is a very crucial point to make especially considering we are working with two very sensitive matters here:

adolescents and writing. If no attack is perceived, then the usual defenses are not triggered. To ensure this, I insist that questions be positive and begin with “I”. For example:

Student:      “You should have put in more details about where you were when this.

Teacher: “How could you re-phrase that statement using “I”? Student: “I wanted to hear more about where you were when….

QUESTIONS are modeled in the same manner as POINTING. The difference being that, in the beginning, it is more effective to use pieces of

lower quality as examples. I try to pick pieces that are what I call very telling pieces. Pieces that leave the reader emotionally dry, telling of events that happen but giving no details to let the reader inside the story. Emotions are left out. Like the second “Swim” example shared earlier.

The second half of Heather’ group conference is a good example of how QUESTIONS work. As Heather’s journal indicated (quoted above) she was surprised by the POINTING comments and very open to further feedback. The group’s QUESTIONS dealt mainly with wanting to hear more about her jumping adventure.

Julian:         “I wanted to hear more about what happened at the jump.”

Other Student: “I wanted to hear more about what the jump looked like.”

Teacher:      “I wanted to hear more about how you felt as you realized you were going to crash.”

(I had given Heather basically the same feedback in individual conferences! 

Heather verbally gave the group all the details asked for. I summarized, making sure Heather jotted down the QUESTIONS and her ideas for revision. In a case like this (which is typical) I ask the group if the verbal additions would help strengthen the piece if written into it (Hauser, 1986). The group agreed that the information made the piece work even better.

Heather wrote two revised drafts and a five page final draft that included details like:

“The school was large and was made of stone. Everywhere you looked there was either a trash can or a water fountain. We had to go all the way around the school to the back to find the dirt ramps. Looking straight ahead there were a few trees and lots of bumps that looked like hills formed together. We started with little bumps and worked our way up to the five foot jump.” And  “Before I knew it, I was up in the air and my heart was beating hard. When I landed, I

was sliding down the path and my bike on top of me. As I kept sliding, the expression on my brother’s face caught my eye. After I stopped sliding, I stared into my brother’s eyes. I felt his concern for me inside

him. I started to wince in pain. I began trying to slip out from underneath my bike. My brother helped by taking the bike off me.”

WHEN TO HAVE A GROUP CONFERENCE

I wait until students have been working on rough drafts for approximately two weeks in the beginning of the year. I try to have at least two individual conferences with them. Also, as I mentioned earlier, most students should be competent at POINTING.

GROUP CHEMISTRY

I have tried group conferences using both assigned groups and by using whatever group of students is ready at the time. Both has pros and cons. Assigning groups allows for control of combinations, while having unassigned groups offers spontaneity, perhaps utilizing time more efficiently. I start the year with assigned groups until the class is comfortable with each other and the writing environment. I mix ability levels, and gender. Mixed levels provide great opportunity for modeling. As in the earlier example involving Heather, lower ability students receive effective feedback from peers. I have had the experience, with Heather and others, of conferring with a student and asking certain questions, or saying that I wanted to hear more about a particular part and not much revision resulted. Yet the same student has gotten basically the same feedback on the piece, only this time from a peer in a group conference, and the student has been very motivated to revise. The higher ability students hold up excellent models for others. This is a main reason why the group conference method is so effective and seems to support the theory that peers at the Middle School level are often more important than parents (Thorton, 1983).

Occasionally, I have had students who are very reluctant to share their piece, This is one of the very reasons for insuring that the first response is always a POINT. There is comfort in knowing that. Also, the beginning of the year is a very slow break-in period where students start sharing one sentence from their piece the first week with no comments, then two sentences the next week and so on. The first few group conferences are POINTING conferences only. They are designed to break the ice for sharing and to build confidence. Sometimes a student becomes reluctant to share especially after a particularly good piece has been shared in the group. I ask the student not to compare themselves to others but to compare themselves to themselves. I also remind them that their piece will receive positive and specific comments and I remind others in the group of this. I say, “We would like to hear what you have written so far.” If a writer does not want to share, I invite him/her to go back to work on the piece and be prepared to share next time. In the next conference, the reluctant writer is asked to share first.

I find students usually reach beyond what they think are their capabilities, and surprise themselves. Each year, a handful of students are mainstreamed from the Resource Room into my class. More often than not, these students are the most hesitant to participate in group conferences until they experience their first POINTING comments from their new peers. The reaction is often one of shocked pleasure at hearing positive feedback to their writing. The group conference is frequently a turning point for these students. They strive to repeat and improve the experience.

GROUP CONFERENCE PROCEDURE

I call three students to the back of the room to a cluster of four desks I have set aside as the group conference section. The students bring the piece they have chosen for the conference, as well as pen and a piece of paper to jot down POINTING comments and QUESTIONS they may have as they listen to the pieces being shared. I hand each student a GROUP CONFERENCE SHEET (refer to sample). The sheet is for the student-writer to record comments (feedback) from members of the group. I also ask students to verbalize what our goals are for the conference. I do this until I know everyone involved has these goals firmly implanted in his/her mind. A poster on the wall contains the goals I mentioned earlier. Then we begin. I have a clip board with me on which I list the members of the conference as well as my POINTING comments and QUESTIONS. I record particularly memorable or useful comments made by students to each other. After a piece is shared, I ask students to take a minute to record any POINTING comments or QUESTIONS they have in mind but didn’t get a chance to jot down during the reading. The group members each verbalize their POINTING comments to the writer first. Then any QUESTIONS the group may have are asked and answered by the writer. The writer also gets a chance to ask any questions they have for the group

about their piece. I make sure the writer has written down all the feedback from the group, as well as the areas to work on.

Writers often have a very clear picture in their mind of their topic. The writer’s verbal “filling in” to questions asked is a big tool to capitalize on for revision. When the questions come from a peer and the writer answers to a peer the dialogue is verbal revision. I nudge this talk along until the writer sees it as revision material. Follow up is very important. Sometimes the writer doesn’t return to the piece during the same class period and the heat of revision may cool. I have found it very helpful for writer and teacher to have the information written down and readily accessible. This verbal “filling in” is a major reason for having students read their own piece out loud in group conference (Hauser, 1976). Often student writers will stop as they are reading and say, “Oh year, I forgot to mention….” This becomes a great revision opportunity that comes directly from the student/writer at a very teachable moment.

The group conference is also a prime way to instill a sense of audience. My hope is that student/writers will eventually have the group audience in mind as they write, or reread, their piece and anticipate possible POINTS and QUESTIONS. This hope seems to be confirmed as I notice a steady increase in the quality of rough drafts brought to group conference during the year. I also decrease my role with the goal of turning the group conference completely over to the students.

EXPECTATIONS FOR THE CLASS

The writing class performs best when students realize they each have a role to play. I spend a lot of time discussing the cooperative effort needed for a successful class. Expectations are discussed and then written on poster board for all to see. The main goal of writing time is to write. When a group conference is in session, the rest of the class is expected to be writing. They may talk to a peer if they’re stuck. No “social talk” is expected. I frequently talk with my classes about what we will be doing in class and how the activity will work best. As the year progresses, the benefits of group conferences become very evident to the students. Each year, I have my students evaluate my class. When asked what helped their writing the most, over 90% of my students answered the group conference. I point out

that the best conferences occur in a quiet classroom. A successful group conference indicates whole class cooperation.

WAITING FOR A GROUP CONFERENCE

Students waiting for a group conference need to have additional work available. I allow my students to work on a reserve piece of writing during waiting times. Other options are to read from their book, which they are to have with them for each class, or browse through the class library (paperbacks, poetry, published student writing, etc.)

CONCLUSION

This group conference method has been the single most influential part of the writing process in my class. The conference channels the very powerful current of peer pressure, that runs so deep in the middle school, into most beneficial results. My students learn to cooperate, to trust, to share, to help, and to listen to others.

Dr. Jim Beane has done research on self-concept that indicates school success is 49% self-concept. To a large extent people perform as well as they believe they can. People learn how well they can do by past success (Middle School Conference, 1985). The group conference points out successes in student writing from an insightful audience that is held in highest esteem.

The middle school years are the most vulnerable, fragile, volatile time of life. Every facet of self-concept is in reorganization (Thornburg, 1983). Considering the combination of puberty and the sensitivity of writing, the group conference method has produced very favorable results. The structure provides security. The POINTING building confidence. The QUESTIONS provide insightful feedback, presented in a sensitive manner from a most literary audience. Often results are an enhanced self-concept and an improved writing ability. As Heather’s example demonstrates, her intelligence did not change overnight. However, a positive change did occur in her view of herself as a person and as a writer.