Running head: EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

The Effects of Small Group Instruction on Improving Informational Writing

Courtney J. Keefe
University of New England
April 18, 2016

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

2

The Effects of Small Group Instruction on Improving Informational Writing

Abstract
The workshop model is commonly used to teach elementary writing, but other engaging
methods of instruction can be used to directly target the needs of young writers. This Action
Research Project determined the effects of small group targeted instruction on improving
informational writing skills, and the increase of student attitudes towards writing. The study was
conducted in a third grade classroom of nine girls and seven boys. The teacher researcher
identified areas of informational writing weaknesses from an On-Demand prompt. Students
were assigned to small instructional groupings targeting the informational writing skills of
Structure, Development, and Language Conventions found to be deficient. Twenty minutes of
group instruction was given to each group, twice weekly, throughout the five week study.
Information about students attitudes towards writing was gathered through a Student Survey,
conducted at the beginning of the study, and observational notes taken during small group
instruction. The researcher saw an increase in group interaction and writing stamina as students
participated in small groups. A post On-Demand informational writing prompt was administered
at the end of the study and scored for comparable data. The teacher researcher determined that
small group instruction was a beneficial instructional strategy for improving the informational
writing skills of the students, as 50% made growth of one or more point columns on the
informational writing rubric. The increase in students attitudes towards writing, and the
evidence from the post On-Demand prompt, led the teacher researcher to determine that small
group instruction was a successful strategy for improving informational writing.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

3

Table of Contents
Introduction..5
Problem Statement...7
Research Questions..8
Hypothesis8
Literature Review.8
Standards and Assessments..9
Workshop Model...10
Mini-lesson11
Individual and peer rehearsal.11
Student writing...11
Conferring..12
Share..12
Student Engagement..12
Small Group/ Targeted Instruction14
Summary15
Methodology..16
Research Design16
Data Collection Plan..18
Sample Population.21
Data Analysis.22
Results23
Findings.24

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

4

Discussion..29
Limitations.32
Summary33
Further Research33
Action Plan.34
Conclusion.35
References..36
Appendices.38
Appendix A-Writing Workshop Planning Sheet...38
Appendix B-Planning for Small Group Instruction...39
Appendix C-Student Survey..40
Appendix D-Data Collection Table...41
Appendix E-Informational Rubric Class Overview...42

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

5

Informational writing, and methods of instruction, have become heavily emphasized with
the creation of performance based standards. In an effort to transition to these standards, and
improve the methods of instruction, many schools have adopted instructional programs with
rigorous expectations. School district RSU1 in mid-coast Maine has adopted many different
educational programs to improve instructional practices while transitioning to performance based
assessments. The adoption of the Lucy Calkins Writing Pathways program was one of the
chosen programs the district administrators determined would help strengthen writing
instruction, and increase performance levels throughout the district (Calkins, Ehrenworth, &
Lehman, 2012).
The Lucy Calkins program uses a workshop model of instruction in the genres of
narrative, informational, and opinion/persuasive writing in all grades. A different additional unit
of instruction is added to each grade totaling four major units of writing instruction each year.
All lessons begin with teacher modeling of the objective of the lesson, followed by extended
periods of time for writing. Each lesson has a mid-workshop teaching point where additional
modeling is demonstrated to extend the lesson objective. While students are writing
independently, the teacher conferences with individuals, supporting them in previously identified
areas of need. The writing lesson closes each day with a whole group debrief, and share. A
strength of the program is the emphasized time spent writing.
Before adopting the Lucy Calkins writing program there were inconsistent practices of
writing instruction throughout the district. The same emphasis on writing instruction was not
consistently adhered to in all schools within the district creating a disparity of writing instruction
and performance.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

6

Each of the towns in the district have very different populations. The communities are
largely lower and middle class families. The outlying towns of Phippsburg, Woolwich, and
Arrowsic have small rural populations, while Bath, the largest community in the district, has
almost an equal amount of students to the combined totals of the outlying towns. Phippsburg is a
rural fishing and lobster community. Woolwich and Arrowsic are small rural towns, with no
main industry. These two towns are located across the Kennebec River from Bath, Maine. Bath
is largely an iron working, and blue collar community.
The third grade students, who are participating in the study, are students of Woolwich
Central School. Students living in Arrowsic and Woolwich attend Woolwich Central School, a
Pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade elementary school of approximately 375 students. Each
kindergarten through eighth grade level has two classrooms. The school is the focal point of the
community as there is no main industry, and very few remaining farms. Many families stay in
the area and work in neighboring towns. A great number of students are children of former
alumni of the school.
Over the past decade the school population has changed to a largely lower income
community and many of the families in the school require subsidies to survive. Seeing an
increase in need, the staff and PTA created a backpack program to provide additional food
support to these families since there is no foodbank in the community. A weekly backpack goes
home to 14 families with nonperishable items and household supplies. The guidance counselor
created a Big Brother/Sister program after school made up of seventh and eighth graders
partnering with students in grades K-3. Of the students who participated in the informational
writing study, 3 students receive weekly backpacks, and 2 students participate in the weekly Big
Brothers/ Sisters afterschool program.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

7

Problem Statement
The On-Demand informational writing samples of the third grade students showed that
skills taught in lower grades had not transferred to current independent informational writing.
The pre-informational writing On-Demand prompts showed weaknesses in all three categories of
the rubric. Students in the third grade have been instructed in writing with the Lucy Calkins
program since kindergarten. Each unit of study begins with an On-Demand writing prompt as a
means of gathering baseline data in the targeted genre. The informational writing On-Demand
prompt asked students to write an informational piece about a topic in which the student has a
great amount of knowledge, or interest. The On-Demand prompts were scored using the Lucy
Calkins rubric where writing skills are divided into categories of structure, development, and
language conventions.
Since the rubric scored end of the year benchmarks, mastery was not an expectation when
scoring the On-Demand prompts. However students should have demonstrated, through usage,
previously taught foundational skills like beginning capitalization and ending punctuation for all
sentences. Four of the students wrote narrative pieces which brings into question whether or not
these students can identify different genres of writing. Half of the students scored in the first
grade column for areas of spelling and conventions. Of the 12 students who wrote informational
pieces, the areas of organization, lead sentences, development, and language conventions were
the weakest performing areas scoring in the mid-first grade level on the rubric. The category of
Overall under the heading of Structure on the rubric was an area of strength for the 12 students
who wrote informational pieces. Two-thirds of the students scored in the second grade range in
this category. Since the majority of students scored well below the end of the year second grade

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

8

benchmark for informational writing, instructional practices, and an understanding of the genre
of information writing is a concern.
Research Questions
The study determined if small group instruction could directly target informational
writing skills in the areas of structure, development, and language conventions through the
lesson objectives of the Lucy Calkins Writing Pathways program. The researcher questioned
whether all students were able to identify the differences between informational and narrative
writing. Additionally, the researcher questioned what affects small group instruction had on
increasing students attitudes towards writing.
Hypothesis
Previous years of instruction in writing have all used the workshop model outlined in the
Lucy Calkins Writing Program. The third grade students in this study have been instructed using
this method since kindergarten. The desired outcome of this study was that students receiving
small group instruction, targeting specific areas of need, based on formative On-Demand
informational writing prompts, would make more progress toward the end of year informational
writing benchmarks, indicated on the Lucy Calkins third grade writing rubric.
Literature Review
This literature review examined the instructional practices of the workshop model
compared to small group instruction, combined with methods of student engagement to have a
positive effect on writing achievement. The workshop model of instruction, the foundational
framework of the Lucy Calkins writing program, while widely used, is not the only instructional,
and motivational framework that can positively affect student writing achievement. The
literature reviewed looked more closely at instructional practices and methods of student

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

9

engagement that, combined with the Lucy Calkins writing program, would improve student
writing.
Standards and Assessments
Greater demands of writing instruction and student performance are being placed on
schools. National, state, and local school district performance-based writing assessments are
common practice in most schools, with many changes being made through legislative agendas,
prescribed curricula, and mandated testing requirements (Kissel & Miller, 2015). The mandated
changes place school systems and educators under greater pressure to examine the instruction
currently used for writing, and make changes to increase student performance.
Writing instruction has not always been an instructional priority, but with the creation of
the Common Core State Standards, schools are recognizing the need for improved writing
instruction. The importance of writing is recognized in the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) where the genres of narrative, informational/expository, and persuasive writing are
emphasized in grades K-12 (National Governors Association [NGA] 2010a). As a result of the
CCSS, student performance and writing instruction is receiving greater attention. Data from the
National Center for Educational Statistics (2012) revealed that less than a third of students in the
United States have mastered the skills necessary for proficient, or grade-level appropriate
writing on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (Harris, Graham, Friedlander, &
Laud, 2013, p. 539). The CCSS weighs reading and writing instruction equally under the
literacy standards. Recognizing that writing skills are essential for students to demonstrate their
knowledge, many schools are adopting writing programs to improve instructional practices.
Harris, Graham, Friedlander, & Laud (2013) stated that failure to acquire strong writing abilities
restricts opportunities for both postsecondary education and employment.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

10

Lucy Calkins, and numerous co-authors, have written genre specific books of study
aligned to the Common Core State Standards with on-demand writing assessments in each area
of study. Each book represents about six weeks of study that takes students through several
cycles of planning, drafting, revising, and publishing writing with the given genre. Writing
Pathways: Performance Assessments and Learning Progressions, K-5 outlines the assessment
system used in the Lucy Calkins writing program (Calkins, 2013). The assessment guide
provides learning progressions for each type of writing, student checklists, exemplars of student
work, and grade specific rubrics.
The Calkins writing program begins with each grade level administering on-demand
prompts in the areas of narrative, informational, and opinion. The data collected from scoring
these on-demands is used as a formative benchmark of writing performance for each student.
The most important thing about the learning progressions and performance assessments is
that they enable teachers and students to grasp where students are in their writing
development, so that you can figure out ways to help them move toward the next step.
(Calkins, 2013, p. 6)
Workshop Model
The Lucy Calkins writing program follows the workshop model of instruction.
Researchers Jasmine and Weiner (2007) verified that the workshop model is an interactive
approach to teaching writing in which students learn and practice the importance of rehearsal,
drafting/ revising, and editing their own work. Common elements of the workshop model
include the whole class mini-lesson, group rehearsal of writing, peer discussion, extended time
writing, and sharing of writing (Carroll & Feng, 2010, p.7). The students are closely monitored

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

11

by the teacher after the mini-lesson concludes. Students receive additional instruction from
individual conferences, and small group mini-lessons as the need arises.
Mini-lesson. The mini-lesson is a brief beginning of each writing lesson, typically 5 to
10 minutes. During this time the teacher is modeling the focal point of the lesson, which is often
improving one aspect of the writing process. The teacher reads from exemplary texts used to
demonstrate the focal point of the lesson. After reading aloud, the teacher explicitly models the
skill, often on chart paper, discussing the writing process as the composition takes place (Jasmine
& Weiner, 2007, p. 132). Effective mini-lessons are short and focused.
Individual and peer rehearsal. The heart of the Lucy Calkins workshop approach to
writing is that students should be given opportunities to discover, refine, and compose stories on
topics of their own choosing. Individual or peer rehearsal is an important part of the discovery
process. Students are encouraged to gather ideas in a writers notebook, sketch across pages to
plan their writing, and consult other peers advice as much as possible (Feinberg, 2007). The
workshop model gives students opportunities to work in collaborative partnerships. Read (2005)
further shared that student partners provide feedback to each other on writing content as well as
writing structure, development, and language conventions.
Student writing. Writing is important. The Calkins approach to literacy, both reading
and writing, stems from a pedagogical belief that children are deliverers of information and
should be given an extended period of time to share their voice (Calkins, 2013). Students
demonstrate their knowledge, creativity, and ideas through writing. Students develop their skills
through extended periods of writing time each day. This is the longest portion of the writers
workshop, where students may be rehearsing, drafting, revising, or editing. Students choose
topics to write about, which is an empowering part of the workshop model. Calkins

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

12

constructivist views are rooted in the belief that students have a voice, and should be encouraged
to express it writing stories that matter (Feinberg, 2007, p. 1).
Conferring. The teacher uses the writing time to observe the class, taking opportunities
to conference with students as a way of extending the lesson. This is especially important for
students struggling to apply the newly taught skill. Additionally, struggling, or reluctant writers
benefit from direct instruction. Students are encouraged to take an active role in these
conferences. The teacher and other participating students listen, respond, ask questions, and help
one another in the writing process. Kissel and Miller (2015) supported this by saying, Power
lurks in other aspects of the workshop-in the power children gain in their writing identities, or
the power children yield when they realize their role in the work shop can influence peers (p.
84). Students benefit from the sharing and questioning that takes place during the teacherstudent conference. Conferencing is critical to teaching writing, but is also a way to motivate
writing. The teachers interest in the topic and the childs learning, as expressed during the
conference, can motivate even the most reluctant writer (Harward, et al., 2014, p. 213).
Share. Sharing is the final component of the writers workshop. Calkins described the
sharing component of the workshop as a mini-celebration where students are encouraged to share
their favorite sentence, or proudest achievement (2013). A child, often referred to as the
author, shares their writing, possibly in an Authors Chair, while the entire class listens. The
Authors Chair is a form of group conferencing, where students listen and respond to their peers.
This time builds confidence, audience awareness through feedback from peers, and sets a
purpose for writing (Jasmine & Weiner, 2007, p. 133).
Student Engagement

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

13

Research suggests that students write with confidence and increased independence when
engaged in meaningful writing opportunities. Students who are given multiple means of choice
are often more engaged. A tenet of the Lucy Calkins writing program is student choice of
writing topics. Teachers should empower young writers to determine their own topics for
writing. Most children are able to generate ideas, but for reluctant writers, teachers may need to
help. Prompting students with specific suggestions to narrow their focus helps them generate
ideas (Kissel & Miller, 2015).
The research of Kissel and Miller (2015) substantiated the component of student
collaboration as an engaging method for developing student writers. Collaboration is an
engaging, and necessary component of writing development. Writing is not always a silent
process. Students need to be encouraged to confer with other students throughout the writing
process (Kissel & Miller, 2015).
Sampson (2015) presented a methodology for fostering student engagement through
engaging activities. A teaching method called Creative Problem-Solving (CPS) is a powerful
strategy that can foster student engagement and motivation to learn. The more students are
engaged in the classroom, the more willing they are to actively participate and contribute to an
effective learning environment (Samson, 2015, p. 154). CPS is a teaching method that
encourages self-directed learning. Motivation and engagement can be created in a broader
spectrum beyond a single subject area while using CPS. Students who are motivated by choice
have an increased commitment to their learning.
The research of Olthouse (2012) demonstrated how students develop a relationship with
writing when engaged in a meaningful relationship. Students express varying emotions about
writing. Some experience positive emotions of joy, calm, and pride, while others approach

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

14

writing very negatively. Frustration, insecurity, and nervousness are common emotions that
negatively impact students writing development (Olthouse, 2012, p. 74). Teachers can
demonstrate their own frustrations about writing while modeling during the mini-lesson. Sharing
this experience helps students make connections about their own struggles during writing.
Students who make connections to other peoples experiences, and are supported throughout the
writing process, develop positive attitudes towards writing.
Small Group/ Targeted Instruction
Sampson demonstrated through CPS how students build confidence while working
collaboratively in small groups (2015). Building student confidence, as well as skill, should be a
priority for teachers of any age group. Many students feel most supported when working in
small groups. Students can be grouped to target instruction for specific needs. The interaction of
other group members encourages participation making the small group meaningful and
motivating. Students working in small group support one another, as well as hold each other
accountable, while working on a common goal (Samson, 2015, p. 157).
Similarly, Weiss (2013) explained how using instructional frameworks in small groups
builds positive learner behaviors. A response to intervention (RTI) framework, frequently used
in reading instruction, can be just as effective for writing intervention. In small group writing
instruction, students will often need to work on skills not mastered through previous instruction.
A typical RTI framework supports students struggling in specific areas with targeted instruction.
When using an RTI framework in the classroom, rules for small group work should be
established. Students struggling in particular areas may be resistant to additional instruction, and
need additional praise and feedback when learning new information. Establishing rules for small
groups is just as important as establishing classroom rules and procedures. Simple rules such as

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

15

be (a) follow directions, (b) stay on-task, and (c) come prepared to work are appropriate for small
group instruction (Weiss, 2013, p. 295). Students struggling with new skills might resist
additional instruction because of previous failures, or lack of confidence in their writing abilities
which is why establishing rules for small group participation is important.
A popular framework used to engage students while teaching small groups is the learning
center. King-Sears (2007) presented methods for scheduling small group instruction while using
learning centers. One of her methods was organizing centers as a way to engage students in
meaningful learning at differentiated levels. King-Sears (2007) stated that teachers need to
explicitly instruct and guide students through learning activities before independence at centers is
expected. When students learn how to work independently on meaningful tasks at centers,
teachers can provide small group instruction using the response to intervention framework
(King-Sears, 2007, p. 405).
Summary
The priority of writing instruction, and various method used to instruct, largely brought
on by the implementation of the CCSS, is threaded throughout the literature reviewed. While the
workshop model of instruction popularized by the Lucy Calkins writing program is an effective
means of instruction, other methods, demonstrated through the research, can be used to target
more specific needs of student writers. Teachers can support students working on writing skills
in organization, development, and language conventions through small group instruction and
engaging interaction with their peers. Based on the review of the literature, the researcher
concluded that following the informational writing lessons of the Lucy Calkins writing program,
while engaging students in small group instruction targeting specific needs found on writing
prompts improved informational writing.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

16

Methodology
The On-Demand informational writing assessments of the third grade students at
Woolwich Central School showed that previously taught writing skills were not transferring to
their independent writing practices. The third grade students had been instructed in writing with
the Lucy Calkins writing program using a workshop model of instruction since kindergarten. A
majority of the students scored below the end of second grade benchmark in the categories of
structure, development, and language conventions as found on the Lucy Calkins scoring rubric.
The qualitative research approach found small group instruction to be more beneficial in
targeting specific areas of need than the previously used workshop model of instruction. The
desired outcome of this study was that students receiving small group instruction would show
greater improvement toward the end of third grade benchmark on their independent
informational On-Demand assessments in the areas of structure, development, and language
conventions.
Research Design
The five week Single System Research design used the Lucy Calkins informational
writing objectives as the focal point of each fifty minute lesson four days a week. Students were
given a brief lesson modeling the writing objective of the day, taking no longer than ten minutes.
After the completion of the mini-lesson, students began writing while small group instruction
started. Four groupings of students were created based on identified areas of need from the
preliminary On-Demand writing assessment. Each group met with the teacher for direction
instruction twice weekly for fifteen minutes a session. The teacher researcher wrote weekly
goals using the Weekly Workshop Planning Sheet (Appendix A). Specific lesson objectives were
laid out on the Planning for Small-Group Instruction sheet (Appendix B), which was also used to

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

17

collect anecdotal notes during the small group meetings. Table 1 outlines the scheduled rotations
and the pre-determined areas of focus of the weekly groupings.
Table 1.
Student Grouping and Area of Focus
Group Description
Group A
2 boys, 3 girl
Two of the girls are included
in the Gifted and Talented
program.

Weekly Schedule
Monday, Friday

Lesson Objectives
Structure- overall topic
development, transitions,
paragraphing

Group B
1 boy, 2 girls
All members of Group B
have IEPs with in class
writing support as a
modification.

Wednesday, Thursday

Genre identification
Development
Language conventions
Writing engagement

Group C
3 boys, 2 girls
One boy in Group C has an
IEP with in class writing
support as a modification.
Both of the girls are receiving
RTI support in reading, and
one of them is being referred
for special education testing.

Wednesday, Thursday

Sustained writing
engagement
Language conventions

Group D
Monday, Friday
Development- topic
1 boy, 2 girls
elaboration
One boy and one girl in
Language conventions
Group D are members of the
Gifted and Talented program.
The other boy receives RTI
support for reading.
Note. IEP is Individual Education Plan, and RTI is Response to Intervention
The independent writing time was divided into separate simultaneously working
components. Students either worked in a small group with the teacher, wrote independently,

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

18

received additional conferencing support from the educational technician in the room, or worked
at a literacy station. The educational technician delivered support to students with IEP
modifications when they were not receiving small group instruction.
Three literacy centers functioned as writing opportunities for students who needed
engaging options to work independently. Students who needed to orally rehearse writing ideas
before drafting were able to use the iTalk app to record their thoughts. These recording were
saved under the students name to be accessed later. Another independent working option was
spelling, which was a language convention component of the Lucy Calkins writing rubric.
Students were able to use the thesaurus and dictionary in their spelling journal to edit their
writing. Students were also able to work on weekly spelling objectives. The final option was
Daily Oral Language (DOL) which students completed each day for additional grammar,
spelling, and language convention practice. The literacy center options were available during
each writing lesson. The literacy centers were available to students who did not receive small
group instruction once independent writing practice was completed. Given the varying abilities
of sustained writing practices among the students, the literacy centers were occupied by some
students more routinely than others.
The independent writing and literacy center time was 30-40 minutes long. Each small
group met for 15 minutes. In between each small group a mid-teaching point, a component of
the Lucy Calkins program, was delivered. This worked as a check-in with students before the
second small group began. Each lesson ended with a brief sharing opportunity.
Data Collection Plan
The initial data collected from the students was an informational On-Demand writing
assessment. Of the 16 students who completed the performance assessment, the majority of

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

19

them scored below the end of second grade benchmark on the Lucy Calkins informational rubric.
The students were scored using the third grade rubric, and while mastery was not an expectation,
transference of previously taught skills was not evident in the writing samples. The teacher
researcher presumed that students receiving instruction from the Lucy Calkins program would
have acquired the skills of the previous years, and been able to demonstrate these skills through
On-Demand prompts. On-Demand prompts are given at the beginning and end of each unit of
study in every grade level. Since the students who participated in the study received Lucy
Calkins writing instruction since kindergarten, On-Demand prompts have been a part of their
school experiences for the past three years.
The rubrics show 1-4 grade level spans so that scoring can be adjusted accordingly to
show the current level of skill in each area. More specific delineations of skill are scored within
each of the three categories on the rubric. The comprehensive rubric provides teachers with
specific information used to inform instruction. This is the initial source of information gathered
for student-teacher grouping and conferencing.
Data was collected over a five week period as outlined in the data collection matrix. The
teacher, as an active participant, triangulated evidence for the action research project from the
preliminary On-Demand writing assessments, a student survey (Appendix C), observational
notes taken during small group instruction and literacy centers, and the post-informational OnDemand assessment. The student survey was used to collect information about individual
students attitudes toward writing. This information was compared to notes gathered during
small group instruction and class participation to gain insight on individual students engagement
and writing performance. Observational notes were gathered after each small group instructional

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

20

session. The teacher researcher, as an active participant, used the notes to determine if small
group instruction increased student writing engagement and performance.
Table 2.
Triangulation Matrix
Research
Questions
The effects of
small group
instruction on
improving
informational
writing?

D.S. 1
Preliminary OnDemand writing
assessment

D.S. 2

D.S. 3

D.S. 4

Student Survey

Observations
(Teacher
researcher as
active
participant)

On-Demand
postinformational
writing
assessment

The effects of
literacy centers
on student
engagement?

Student Survey

Observations
(Teacher
researcher as
active
participant)

On-Demand
postinformational
writing
assessment

The effects of
Preliminary Onsmall group
Demand writing
instruction to
assessment
increase
attitudes towards
writing?
Note. D.S. is Data Source

Student Survey

Observations
(Teacher
researcher as
active
participant)

On-Demand
postinformational
writing
assessment

The scores on the pre- and post- On-Demand informational writing assessments acted as
one set of comparable data. The teacher researcher used the rating scale on the rubric to show
measurable growth.
The Student Survey was scored on a 4-point scale. The four choices for each question
were given point values 1-4 in ascending order from left to right across the table. This allowed
the teacher researcher to compile numerical data rating student attitudes towards writing from the
Student Survey.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

21

The teacher researcher, as an active participant, also gathered anecdotal notes from the
small group interactions weekly. The notes were used to gather data about student engagement
in the writing process, as well as information about the small groups progress.
Sample Population
The 19 students in the third grade classroom consist of 11 girls and 9 boys. Two of the
students diagnosed with Downs Syndrome received writing instruction outside of the classroom
were not included in the study. Of the 17 remaining students, 4 had Individual Education Plans
(IEPs) with in-class writing support provided by an educational technician, and 4 received
reading intervention services outside of the classroom for 30 minutes a day. One of the students
who received RTI support was also referred for special education testing. Four of the
participating students were included in the district Gifted and Talented program.
The students were placed into small groups based on common areas of weakness
identified on the pre-On-Demand performance assessment. The teacher researcher divided the
17 students into 4 groups who met twice weekly. The students wrote about informational topics
of their own choosing while they worked in the small groups.
The five students in Group A were the strongest writers. They wrote for a longer
sustained period of time, and wrote lengthier pieces. These students needed additional support in
the categories of structure and development. While the students wrote longer pre-On-Demand
pieces, each of them needed more elaboration of their topic, as well as instruction for
organization, and paragraphing.
The students in Group B showed areas of weakness in all areas on the informational
rubric. Writing engagement and differentiated support strategies was a large focus of the small
group instruction while working on identifying topics of interest to write about, and identifying

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

22

known facts. All three of the students who worked in Group B had IEPs with additional in-class
writing support. The students continued to receive support from the educational technician in the
classroom when not receiving small group instruction.
The five students assigned to Group C show some strengths in structure and
development, but significant weaknesses in language conventions. The students who worked in
Group C reviewed the Daily Oral Language (DOL) while they participated in the small group
instead of a literacy center. Accountability for writing sentences with initial capital letters and
ending punctuation was an expectation while working in the small group. Two of the group C
members had IEP writing modifications, and two others received RTI support outside of the
class. The fifth member of the group was diagnosed with Attention Deficit Disorder.
Three students were assigned to Group D. These students scored in the mid-second grade
level on the informational rubric. The students worked to increase writing skills in the areas of
structure, and development. In addition to increasing the writing skills, these students also
worked on writing for longer sustained periods of time.
Data Analysis
Information about each student participating in the action research was collected from
On-Demand writing prompts, observational notes, and a student survey. Students were assigned
a letter for identification purposes to maintain confidentiality. Student data displayed on a Data
Collection Table (Appendix D) was used to compare pre- and post- On-Demand writing scores to
a growth target. The growth target was determined by the difference between the students
baseline cumulative score and the cumulative score of the third grade informational writing
standard found on the Lucy Calkins rubric which is 27 points. Students growth target was half

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

23

of the difference between their baseline On-Demand score and the third grade cumulative score.
The On-Demand scores displayed on the Data Collection Table are cumulative totals.
The data collected is a valid measure of information as both On-Demand performance
assessments followed the same instructions for students to follow, and the teacher researcher to
measure. To help ensure reliability, the teacher researcher had a colleague double score a
random sampling of 6 students writing assessments to compare for scored accuracy.
Information about the whole class is displayed on the Informational Rubric Class
Overview (Appendix E) which identifies overall areas of strength and weakness. This
information was collected at the beginning of the research study. An additional overview was
completed at the end of the study for comparison.
The teacher researcher determined if small group instruction improved attitudes towards
writing and student engagement by comparing the two performance assessments.
Results
Small group instruction was the instructional strategy used to conduct the action research
for improving information writing for a select group of third grade students. The teacher
researcher used the lesson objectives of the Lucy Calkins Information Writing Program. Lessons
were started with whole class mini lessons followed by targeted small group instruction. Small
group instructional goals were determined by the scores of the pre On-Demand informational
writing prompts. The students met with the teacher researcher twice weekly for 15-20 minutes
each session. The research was conducted to determine if small group instruction would improve
informational scores and student engagement.
The teacher researcher collected data about student attitudes towards writing from a
Student Survey (Appendix C). Over the course of the study the teacher researcher collected

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

24

anecdotal information from small group discussion notes, observation, and student journal
entries. Comparative data was collected at the end of the study from the post On-Demand
informational writing prompt. The pre and post On-Demand writing prompts were scored using
the Lucy Calkins informational scoring rubric. The student pre and post scores were recorded on
a Data Collection Table (Appendix D).
Findings
The teacher researcher designed small group instruction to target the weakest areas of
informational writing determined after the pre On-Demand writing prompt. Students were
grouped by common need. The teacher researcher delivered small group instruction twice
weekly to four groups. Students who were not meeting with the teacher wrote independently, or
worked on other skills through writing centers. Small group instruction targeted informational
writing skills and student engagement in writing. The results of the Student Survey (Appendix
C) measuring attitudes towards writing are displayed in Table 1.
Table 1.
Data collected from the student surveys.
Survey Statement
I can decide on my own what
topics of information I
already know to write about.

Choice 1
Never

Choice 2
Sometimes
50%

Choice 3
Usually
50%

Choice 4
Always

I can write on my own

putting my thoughts in my
journal.

I struggle to
write my
thoughts.

I can write for a

short time.
12%

I need time to think

before I write.
88%

I can put my
thoughts in my
journal right away.

I can share information about

a topic when talking to
someone.

I can talk
much easier
than write.
25%

I can write after

I talk to
someone.
25%

I occasionally need
to talk before I
write.
25%

I can write about my

topic without talking
to someone.
25%

I prefer to work in writing

with

The teacher
25%

A small group

A partner
37.5%

By myself
37.5%

I can usually write on my

own for this length of time.

0-10 minutes
6%

10-20 minutes
26%

20-30 minutes
56%

I never have enough

time to write.
12%

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

25
How do you feel about
writing?

I avoid
writing.

I write if I have
to.
12.5%

Some types of
writing are fun.
50%

I love to write!
37.5%

The data displayed in Figures 1 through 4 is the accumulated data from the pre and post
On-Demand informational writing prompts. The data is separated into the three scoring
categories on the Lucy Calkins informational rubric. The informational rubric is scored on a first
through fourth grade continuum. Students can also score halfway between each grade depending
on the points earned on the rubric. Data displayed in the figures have the point values per grade
across the top of each figure. The number of students who scored in each point column is
displayed above the bar.
Figure 1.

Pre On-Demand Structure Scores

1

1.5

2.5

3.5

4
7

6
22

44

3
11

3
11

5
1

4
11

4
1

students earning Scores

Categories Scored under structure

Data displayed in Figure 1 shows the pre On-Demand scores in the category of Structure.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

26

Figure 2.

Post On-Demand Structure Scores

1

1.5

2.5

3.5

4
9
8

students earning scores

4
3

3
2

11 1

222

2 2

O ve r a l l

111

Le a d

Tr a n s i t i o n s

E n d i n g O r g a n i za t i o n

Categories scored under structure

Data displayed in Figure 2 shows the post On-Demand scores in the category of Structure.
Figure 3.

Pre and Post On-Demand Development Scores

1

1.5

2.5

3.5

7
6
5

4
3

3
2
1

Ela bo r a tio n

2
1

2
1

C r a ft

Ela bor ation

C r a ft

Data displayed in Figure 3 shows the pre and post On-Demand scores in the category of
Development.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

27

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

28

Figure 4.

Pre and Post On-Demand Language Convention Scores

1

1.5

2.5

4
7

6
5

4
3
2

3
2 2

S pe lling

2
1

Pu n c t u a t i o n

1 1

S pelling

Pu n c t u a ti o n

Data displayed in Figure 4 shows the pre and post scores in the category of Language
Conventions.
Individual student pre and post scores were collected on the Data Collection Table
(Appendix D). The displayed data compared the pre and post On-Demand writing prompts to
determine if students met their growth target. The individual student data is displayed on Table
2.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

29

Table 2.
Individual student scores for pre and post On-Demand writing prompts
Student
Baseline OnGrowth
Individual
Post OnGrowth Met
Demand
Target
Growth
Demand
(Yes or No)
Score
Target
Score
A
9
27
9
19
Y
B
19
27
4
29.5
Y
C
11
27
8
9.5
N
D
16
27
5.5
9
N
E
14.5
27
6.25
20.5
Y
F
18.5
27
4.25
16.5
N
G
23.5
27
1.75
26.5
Y
H
18.5
27
4.25
22
N
I
29
27
Met
30
Y
J
11
27
8
13.5
N
K
13.5
27
6.75
15.5
N
L
21.5
27
2.75
21.5
N
M
10.5
27
8.25
20.5
Y
N
*
27
*
*
*
O
**
27
**
**
**
P
11
27
8
13.5
N
Q
18
27
4.5
29.5
Y
R
18
27
4.5
25
Y
Note. Met=Student met the target on the pre-intervention On-Demand; *Removed due to
absences, **Removed after moving.
The teacher researcher examined the individual growth data to look for overall change in
the scores earned after the research was conducted. The data was organized in categories of loss
of overall score, no change in score in the point column, increase of 1 point category on the
rubric, and increase of more than 1 point category on the rubric. The total percentages of the 4
categories is displayed in Table 3. The teacher researcher found the 4 students who wrote the
wrong genre on the pre On-Demand all wrote informational post On-Demands. Two of those
students made no change in their scoring column, and the other two students met their growth
target.
Table 3.
Post On-Demand percentages grouped by change in scores.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

30

Loss in overall score

on the rubric
12.5%

No change in the
point column on the
rubric
37.5%

Increase of 1 point
column on the rubric
25%

Increase of more than

1 point column on the
rubric
25%

Discussion
During the five week study students participated in a blend of whole class instruction,
targeted small group instruction, and independent writing. The teacher researcher used OnDemand informational writing prompts administered in the fall to determine the instructional
groupings for the small group. The teacher began the research by administering the Student
Survey (Appendix C) measuring attitudes toward writing and student engagement. The results of
the survey are outlined in Table 1. A few of the categories revealed almost unanimous results.
All but two of the students responded that they needed thinking time before writing.
Interestingly, none of the students indicated on the survey that they preferred to work in small
groups during writing, although notes gathered through small group interaction found students to
be engaged while meeting with their groups each week. Most students indicated on the survey
that they preferred working alone or with a partner rather than a small group. Writing
partnerships have been used in previous writing units across the grades so this was not surprising
data. The teacher witnessed an increase in peer interaction during group meetings noting that
student sharing and questioning became a common element of the group meetings.
The teacher researcher examined the data displayed on the data displayed in Table 2 for
signs of writing growth. Of the 16 students who participated in the study, 12 made gains on their
post On-Demand informational writing prompt, and 8 of those scores increased in point columns
on the informational scoring rubric. The researcher also examined the data for signs of no
change, or loss in score. Six of the students remained in the same scoring column on the

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

31

informational rubric, but made slight gains in their overall scores. Two of the students who
participated showed a loss in overall score and decreased by 1 column on the scoring rubric. The
post On-Demand results show that 50% of the students made gains and increased to a higher
point column on the informational rubric.
Prior to the study the only unit of study the students had completed was narrative writing.
One of the questions the researcher wanted to answer was if students understood the differences
between narrative and informational writing. Of the 16 students who participated in the study 4
had written narratives for their pre informational prompt. The post On-Demand prompts of these
four students were written in the correct genre which showed an improvement in the
understanding of genre for 25% of the students in the study.
The teacher researcher examined the data displayed in Figures 1-4 to look for growth
patterns representative of the students who participated in the study. The figures compare the pre
and post On-Demand scores of the students for the three categories of the Lucy Calkins
Informational Rubric. The students were scored on Structure, Development, and Language
Conventions with subcategories for each. Direct instruction in small groups targeted the areas of
Structure and Development, while review of Language Conventions was primarily targeted
through the learning centers the students participated in outside of the small groups.
The most noticeable growth was observed in the category of Structure. The category is
divided into 5 subcategories: Overall, Lead, Transitions, Ending, and Organization. The most
noted growth was in the Overall subcategory. In the pre On-Demand prompt 2 students scored in
the 2.5 point column or higher. The post On-Demand showed 10 students scoring in the 2.5
point column or higher. This reflects the Overall increase in development of informational
writing. The next highest gain was in the subcategory of Organization where 5 students showed

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

32

pre On-Demand scores of 2.5 or higher, and 10 students scored 2.5 or higher in the post OnDemand. Both of these subcategories reveal significant growth over the course of the study. The
subcategories of Lead and Transitions also showed overall gains in the point columns of 2.5 or
higher. The only subcategory where growth was not made was Endings. This subcategory show
a decline in overall student performance. Field guides were used in small group instruction as
exemplary models for organization of informational material. Students showed a significant
increase in overall organization of written material including the use of headings within the
writing. Many students wrote the final prompt similarly to the field guide exemplars used, but
neglected to write a summary. While the field guide structure helped students see organizational
models to guide their writing, the structure did not set a sufficient example for concluding
paragraphs.
Significant gains were also noted between the pre and post On-Demand scores in the
category of Development. This category is divided into two subcategories: Elaboration and
Craft. Development, as an area of informational writing, was an instructional focus for all small
groups. The subcategory of Elaboration showed 2 students scoring in the point column of 2.5 or
higher in the pre On-Demand. The post On-Demand showed 8 students performing in the 2.5 or
higher point columns. A noteworthy change was in the subcategory of Craft. The pre OnDemand prompt showed 7 students scoring in the Grade 1 point column on the rubric. The post
On-Demand had one student in the Grade 1 point column. The pre On-Demand prompt had no
students scoring in the 2.5 point column or higher, where the post On-Demand prompts showed 8
students scoring 2.5 or higher. The teacher researcher believes that small group instruction was a
determining factor for the increase.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

33

The category of Language Conventions was the weakest area of change between the two
prompts. Much of the review of language conventions took place outside of small group
instruction. The teacher researcher would point out areas in need of change within each students
writing, but the revisions were made during independent centers. Where there were
improvements in the subcategories of Spelling and Punctuation, the degree of change was not as
great as the other categories on the rubric. The teacher researcher believes that students would
need small group instructional time to address these categories as well.
Limitations
While most of the action research was conducted as planned, several complications could
be viewed as limitations in the study. Writing instruction is normally scheduled five days a week
for 45-60 minutes a day. During the course of the action research the small groups met 4 days a
week due to an uncontrollable scheduling change. While the researcher knew of this change
before the study started, an additional day of instruction each week would have been beneficial.
During the course of the study research was not conducted on two additional days, one due to the
teacher researchers illness, and the other for a snow day cancellation. The small group
instruction missed on these two days was not able to be rescheduled.
One of the supports in place in the classroom was provided by an educational technician
who assisted students who have IEP writing modifications. During the course of the study the
elementary special education teacher for the building reassigned the educational technician who
supported the class to another area of the building. A new educational technician came into to
support the students in the room, but this person was unfamiliar to the students making the
working relationship challenging. By the end of the 5 week study the students working with the
new individual had adjusted.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

34

The teacher researcher observed that some students had difficulty sustaining their
attention when not working in a small group. While most students, not meeting in a small group,
could sustain independent writing for 20-30 minutes, a few became challenging distractions. On
two separate days one student had to be removed from the classroom by the principal because of
inappropriate behavior during writing instruction. The oppositional defiance of this student
resulted in lost instructional time for all students.
Two students were removed from the action research data presented. Student N was
removed due to many absences during the course of the study. Student O was also removed from
the study. Student O moved to another school at the beginning of the fourth week of the action
research study. The teacher researcher determined that neither of the students had sufficient data
to be included in the results.
Summary
The teacher researcher hypothesized that students receiving small group instruction,
targeting specific areas of need, based on formative On-Demand informational writing prompts,
would make more progress toward the end of year informational writing benchmarks, indicated
on the Lucy Calkins third grade writing rubric through this study. The data presented shows that
small group instruction does improve informational writing specifically in the areas of Structure
and Development. This data confirmed that small group instruction helped students make
informational writing gains towards the third grade standards. Evidence gathered through small
group anecdotal notes, and researcher observation also showed that small group instruction
improves students attitudes towards writing.
Further Research

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

35

As a result of this study the teacher researcher learned that small group instructional
practices do help students improve their informational writing. The observations of the teacher
also confirmed that students were engaged in writing when actively participating in small groups.
The resulting increase in student engagement may warrant continued use of the small groups as a
planning and conferring strategy. During the action research each small group remained the
same, but rotating groups may prove to be worthwhile for strengthening other areas of
informational writing. The teacher researcher plans to continue the small group instructional
practices in the genres of opinion and fairy tale narrative writing. The teacher researcher will
recommend these practices to the other third grade teacher in the school. Data collected in a
second study of the other genres will be compared to these findings to determine is small group
instruction should replace the workshop model of instruction in future years.
Action Plan
While both third grade teachers in the building use the same writing program, planning is
usually done individually. The teacher researcher recommends co-planning units of writing with
the other third grade teacher. Students with similar needs from the two third grade classrooms
could be taught together offering a wider range of instructional groupings. The opportunity to
work with students from another classroom would also be an engaging opportunity improving
attitudes towards writing.
Instructional practices are a common topic of discussion in the Professional Learning
Community within the school. PLC groups meet in two capacities within the building. PLC
grade spans, such as grades 3-5, meet weekly, while vertical groupings K-8 meet once each
quarter. The findings of this action research project will be presented to the 3-5 level teachers at
a weekly PLC meeting. As each grade level in the school teaches the same writing program, the

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

36

information learned from this action research is worthy of consideration for future use beyond
the third grade classroom where the research was conducted. The findings will be shared in the
vertical PLC grouping at a quarterly meeting.
Conclusion
Various methods of instruction are common in writers workshop. Many writing
programs suggest using a workshop model of instruction where students are guided through
writing lessons and gradually given more time to write independently. Literature supporting
writers workshop is widely documented. The teacher researcher examined literature about small
group instructional practices and methods of engaging students during writing instruction in
addition to literature on writers workshop. Research was conducted to see if small group
instruction would have a significant impact on the informational writing development of a group
of third grade students. Students met twice weekly in small groups focusing on common areas of
need in informational writing development. After five weeks of study the informational writing
skills of the third grade students showed improvement. Attitudes towards writing and
participation in small groups also increased during the study. While workshop model instruction
is a valuable instructional method, small group instruction significantly impacted the student
attitudes, length of independent sustained writing, and skills demonstrated in informational
writing.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

37

References
Calkins, L., (2013). A guide to the common core writing workshop: Intermediate grades,
Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann.
Calkins, L., Cruz, M. C. (2013). The art of information writing, Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann.
Calkins, L., (2013). Writing pathways: Performance assessments and learning progressions,
Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann.
Carroll, S., & Feng, J. (2010). Writers workshop vs. writing prompts: The effect on first
graders writing ability and attitude towards writing. Online Submission. ED533063
Feinberg, B. (2007). The Lucy Calkins project: Parsing a self-proclaimed literacy guru.
Education Next, 7(3), 27-31. Online Submission. EJ767499
Harris, K., Graham, S., Friedlander, B., & Laud, L., (2013). Bring powerful writing strategies
into your classroom! The Reading Teacher, 66(7), 538-542. doi: 10.1002/TRTR.1156
Harward, S., Peterson, N., Korth, B., Wimmer, J., Wilcox, B., Morrison, T. G., & Pierce, L.
(2014). Writing instruction in elementary classrooms: Why teachers engage or do not
engage students in writing. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53(3), 205-224. doi: 10
/1080/19388071.2014.896959
Jasmine, J., & Weiner, W. (2007). The effects of writing workshop on abilities of first grade
students to become confident and independent writers. Early Childhood Education
Journal, 35(2), 131-139. doi: 10.1007/s10643-007-0186-3
King-Sears, M. E. (2005). Scheduling for reading and writing small-group instruction using
learning center designs. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(4), 401-405. doi: 10.1080
/10573560500180558
Kissel, B. T., & Miller, E. T. (2015) Reclaiming power in the writers workshop defending

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

38

curricula, countering narratives, and changing identities in prekindergarten

classrooms. Reading Teacher, 69(1), 77-86. doi: 10.1002/trtr.1379
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School
Officers. (2010a). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy
In history/ social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors.
Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org
Olthouse, J. M. (2012). Talented young writers relationships with writing. Journal for the
Education of the Gifted, 35(1), 66-80. doi: 10.1177/0162353211432039
Read, S. (2005). First and Second Graders Writing Informational Text. Reading Teacher, 59(1),
36-44. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.1.4
Samson, P. L. (2015). Fostering student engagement: Creative problem-solving in small group
facilitations. Collected Essays On Learning And Teaching, 8, 153-164. Online
Submission. EJ1069715
Weiss, S. L. (2013). Learning-related behaviors: Small group reading instruction in the
general education classroom. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(5), 294-302. doi: 10
.1177/1053451212472231

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

39

Appendix A

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

40

Appendix B

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

41

Appendix C
Student Survey
Name__________________________________________ Date__________________________
Choose a response for each statement that best matches your feelings about writing. Mark you
choice with an X.
1. I can decide on my own what topics of information I already know to write about.
I never know what to

I sometimes have a

I can usually decide

I always have a topic

write about.

topic to write about.

on a topic to write

to write about.

about.
2. I can write on my own putting my thoughts in my journal.
I struggle to put my

I can write for a short

I need time to think

I can put my thoughts

thoughts in my

time in my journal

before I write in my

in my journal right

journal.

about my thoughts.

journal.

away.

3. I can share my information about a topic when talking to someone.

I can talk about my

I can write on my

I occasionally need to

I can write about my

topic much easier

own after I talk about

talk about my topic

topic without talking

than I can write

my topic with

before I write.

to someone.

about my topic.

someone.

4. I prefer to work in writing with

The teacher
A small group
A partner
5. I can usually write on my own for this length of time.

By myself

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

42

0-10 minutes

10-20 minutes

20-30 minutes

I never have enough

time to write.

6. My favorite genre of writing is (Choose any ones you enjoy.)

Narrative

Informational

Opinion

Poetry

Some types of

I love to write!

7. How do you feel about writing?

I avoid writing.

I write if I have to.

writing are fun.

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

43

Appendix D
Data Collection Table
Student

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R

Baseline OnDemand
Score

Growth
Target
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27
27

Individual
Growth
Target

Post OnDemand
Score

Growth Met
(Yes or No)

EFFECTS OF SMALL GROUP INSTRUCTION

44

Appendix E
Informational Rubric Class Overview
Structure
Grade level
indicators of
performance
Overall
Lead
Transitions
Ending
Organization
Total points
per column

1.5

2.5

3.5

3.5

3.5

Development
Grade level
indicators of
performance
Elaboration
Craft
Total points
per column

1.5

2.5

Language Conventions
Grade level
indicators of
performance
Spelling
Punctuation
Total points
per column

1.5

2.5