November 2014 Volume 1, Number 1
Updating and Upgrading Early Elementary School Writing Experiences with
Storytelling and Technology
Dr. Lauren E. Burrow Dr. Shaunna SmithUniversity of Memphis Texas State [email protected]
Abstract
This article uses classroom-based examples to advocate for the use of digital storytelling as a
21st-century update to Vivian Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum in elementary grades
(K – 3). The article describes Paley’s traditional early childhood writing process and outlines how to
update and upgrade it with technology in order to better engage modern-day, young writers.
Discussions of how to leverage a technological pedagogical and content knowledge framework (or
TPACK) to assist educators in considering the benefits, capabilities, and limitations of digital
storytelling as related to the potential enhancement of young students' digital writing is also
presented.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 77
PerSpectives and provocations
This article employs a narrative summary of generative change (Ball, 2009) to tell the
evidence-based story of two educators’ increasing advocacy for considering the updating and
upgrading of preschool-based storytelling dictations and dramatization practices -- like Vivian
Paley’s (1981) storytelling and story acting curriculum – in order to encourage young writers in
early elementary (K-3) classrooms. Aided by the innovative and purposeful use of technology --
specifically digital storytelling – these educators have witnessed the benefits and successes of
transferring traditional storytelling and story acting practices from their typical preschool
classroom placements into early elementary classrooms. The ultimate effect has been pedagogy
that capitalizes on 21st technology to successfully meet the still developing writing needs of 21st
century learners.
Aretha Ball (2009) describes “generative change” as the “process of self-perpetuating
change wherein a teacher’s pedagogical practices are inspired and influenced by the instructional
approaches and theory that they are exposed to in professional development” (p. 6). In this
instance, the former classroom experiences and continued dialogue between Burrow (first
author/early childhood educator) and Smith (second author/technology instructor) act as the
professional development. As actors in the professional development, both authors facilitated
the knowledge gained, acted as the catalyst for changes in instructional planning, and acquired
knowledge by learning from, and about, students. As such, this article is not a traditional “how-
to” piece, but rather a “how could” piece that presents possibilities and perspectives while posing
wonderings about how writing can be approached with technology. Ultimately, we encourage
readers to undergo their own generative change by learning from our story in order to “produce
or originate new knowledge that is useful to them in pedagogical problem solving and in meeting
the education needs of their students” (Ball, 2009, p. 6).
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 78
PerSpectives and provocations
This article will use classroom-based anecdotes to briefly describe the traditional
practices of preschool storytelling curriculum. Then, using selected student examples and
accompanying educator reflections, we will illustrate how to upgrade those practices in order to
encourage updated writing practices that leverage technological advances to publish and plan
students' best stories in a meaningful, multimodal way. Collected as part of normal class
routines over a multi-year period, the student-work samples are representative of a diverse range
of students (Kindergarten – 3rd grade) from multiple school types (including parochial, Gifted
and Talented, and Title 1 public schools). Discussions of how to use digital storytelling to satisfy
young writers’ content knowledge needs (i.e., the writing process, digital writing) will also be
presented and are based on our personal reflections and discussions with early childhood
teachers across the nation as we engaged in professional development. Ultimately, the
discussions in this article can equip educators to use TPACK (“technological pedagogical and
content knowledge”) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- a framework which essentially guides
educators to think about technology as a tool that can enhance the meaningful content they are
already teaching (Harris & Hoffer, 2009; Mishra & Koehler, 2006) -- to decide “when” and
“why” to include the tools of digital storytelling with young students’ writing experiences.
Everyone has a story to tell (Paley, 1981; Rowe, 2008) and with the aid of technology and
modern storytelling processes, like digital storytelling, educators may be able to help young
students better prepare and present those stories in innovative ways for a changing world.
Writing in the Early Years with Vivian Paley
In the 1980s, Vivian Paley, noted pre-school and kindergarten educator and early
childhood education researcher, allowed for children’s social writings with her “storytelling
curriculum” which included two basic components: storytelling and story acting. Known for its
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 79
PerSpectives and provocations
ability to prompt, improve, and showcase a young student’s writing before they are even able to
write, Paley’s storytelling and story acting curriculum is widely used, in some variation, in most
high-quality toddler and preschool classrooms across the nation. Burton, Bacigalupa, Wright,
and Black (2008), Cooper (1993), and Sulzby (1996) detail how Paley’s storytelling curriculum
has found its way, in a variety of forms into a number of preschools that seek to provide literacy
activities that emphasize “authentic, oral language practices between educators and children”
(Gray, Mathes, Cooper, & Capo, 2007, p. 251). Often translated as “dictation and
dramatization,” the educator-dependent practice allows the youngest writers to share their stories
with their classroom of peers and families.
The first tenet – storytelling (or dictation) -- asks educators and students to enter a
“literacy apprenticeship” in which the educator acts as a scribe while the student dictates a story
about a topic of his or her own choosing. During this phase the educator can ask questions to
help the child clarify the meaning of their words and even offer assistance (Gray, et al., 2007).
The second tenet -- story acting (or dramatization) -- involves the acting out of the dictated
stories. During this phase the educator acts as the director and narrator, while the student-author
and his or her chosen peers act out the dictated story (the remaining students act as an audience)
(Gray, et al., 2007). Since the acting is an informal activity with the main purpose being to
“publish” or present/share the student’s ideas with their classmates, direction in dialogue and
staging can be interjected by the educator in order to guide, improve, or sustain the action. In
addition to mimicking the essential early childhood function of play, the use of dramatizations
(or story acting) can provide a motivation for young children to participate in the story dictation
process (Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement [CIERA], 1999, p. 363) in
the first place. Strickland and Morrow (2000) similarly advocate dramatization of dictated
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 80
PerSpectives and provocations
stories since noticing, celebrating, and sharing writing with a variety of audiences in and out of
school is beneficial.
An effective pedagogy for encouraging the development of writing technique, the
educator-student dialogues and accompanying activities associated with Paley’s curriculum are
relatively simple practices. The true art of her storytelling curriculum does require a dedicated
amount of time from the educator, though. How, then, could technology -- specifically, digital
storytelling and writing-based software and applications -- allow early elementary (K – 3)
classroom educators to also engage in this beneficial, but time-consuming activity? As former
classroom educators and current tech-realists, we believe that writing-based technologies could
make possible a new pedagogy by which to address the advancing writing needs and skills of
elementary school-aged writers.
Cooper (2005) acknowledges that “each educator and classroom of children will put their
individual stamp on storytelling and story acting methodology” (p. 232). When I (Burrow)
transitioned to teaching in early elementary classrooms, as both a traditional educator and as a
visiting creative writing teaching artist, I therefore felt justified in updating the components of
Paley’s storytelling curriculum in order to improve literacy skills far beyond what was
traditionally thought possible for my young students. Updating of the curriculum allowed me to
capture the words and ideas of my students who were still too young to write (Kindergarten) or
whose length of writing was hampered by the daunting developmental task of legible
handwriting (grades 1 – 3).
Upgrading Storytelling Dictation for Traditional Use
In my elementary classrooms I was eager to take the successful practices of Paley’s
preschool-focused curriculum and update those principles for the benefits of my older students. I
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 81
PerSpectives and provocations
quickly discovered that storytelling can enhance the pre-writing and drafting stages of the
writing process for those young writers in the early elementary school grades who have still not
found their voice, lack writing confidence, or are generally intimidated by the writing process.
I often inspired storytelling from new or struggling story writers by reading to them fun,
familiar adult-authored texts that exposed them to repetitive themes within children’s literature.
I then elicited students’ stories by prompting them to merely retell to me a familiar text. This use
of concrete models to inspire student writing often facilitated the pre-writing stage until these
students were more confident in constructing their own ideas and stories. Sometimes I
prompted new writers with examples of visual art or even their own student-created illustrations
in order to ease their writer’s block by giving them the chance to write a story about what was
happening within the visual representation of a snapshot in time (see Figures 1 and 2).
Oftentimes, I found that allowing students to follow a template for their poetic writings would
then lead to a fountain of words just waiting to bubble over on to the page. Other times it just
took a prompt as simple as, “What did you paint a picture of?” and then requesting that the
young student record their response on the artwork. Additionally, I found that just being
available to discuss their writing at the onset of the writing time, often prompted reluctant writers
to actually put pen to paper. Finally, for my students who were still struggling with penmanship,
I often struck a compromise in which I would transcribe their dictation up to a certain point and
then ask them to take over the writing. The results of these updated storytelling practices was
lengthier papers and a general improvement in attitudes towards writing times.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 82
PerSpectives and provocations
“The Light Out Lantern” by Owen
The photograph and accompanying poem for “The Light Out Lantern” were both created by
Owen, a second grader. He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. His
writing was completed independently by following a class template for Senses Poetry writing.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 83
PerSpectives and provocations
Figure 2: “Rocks” by Alex
The photograph and accompanying poem for “Rocks” were both created by Alex, a first grader.
He took the picture during a class field trip to a Japanese Gardens. Alex completed his free-
verse poem by selecting phrases from the written transcription that Burrow (author) transcribed
during their one-on-one conversation about his image.
Revision and proofreading happen naturally throughout the pre-writing and drafting
stages of storytelling as educators prompt students with simple verbal indicators that call
students’ attention to opportunities for revision (“Can you tell me more about the princess?
What was she wearing?”) and editing (“Do you want to say the boys are or the boys is?”).
Revision and editing also occurs as students publish when students have the opportunity to
witness the visualization of their writing on stage and receive “audience” (or peer) feedback. In
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 84
PerSpectives and provocations
my classrooms, peers were very willing to point out when “You didn’t say the pirate ran away
from the bear!” Sometimes my students did not even realize what they meant to say until they
saw the theatrical publication of their story (Cooper, 2005, p. 246). I could then prompt the new
writer with, “Do you want to add that into your story?”
The process of storytelling can allow new, struggling, and even veteran student writers to
craft, explore, and share their personal stories with the added bonus of an adult expert’s model or
guidance. Combined with story acting, the entire process can provide a unique and compelling
visual to prompt students’ deeper understanding of their narrative and provide the provocation
for investigating authorial intent and story sequence (Cooper, 2005). As a result, story acting (or
dramatization) provides a motivation for young children to participate in the storytelling (or
dictation) process (CIERA, 1999, p. 363), thus perpetuating the presently championed “cycle-
version” of the writing process.
While the dialogues designed to prompt students to share their stories and encourage the
development of writing technique are fairly simple, the time required by these simple activities
may be a luxury most educators simply do not have. As a preschool teacher, parceling out
dictation times for each student was a week-long process that lasted at least an hour per day;
given the required focus on other subjects for my older elementary-school students, finding an
hour’s block of time in any given day was nearly impossible, though. For those who see merit in
Paley’s storytelling curriculum, Smith’s (2nd author) understanding of the capabilities of
technology integration may help transform this writing pedagogy into a digital storytelling
experience that meets the growing requirements of 21st-century learning. It is this natural
tailoring of the curriculum which ultimately allowed Smith to help me (Burrow) adapt Paley’s
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 85
PerSpectives and provocations
ideas to best benefit and fit the writing needs of my older elementary school-aged students for
deeper and more complete literacy learning in a digital age.
Updating Paley for Technological Use
We contend that technological integration with Paley’s curriculum provides a modern
and comprehensive update that can increase elementary school-aged students’ writing
capabilities, capture their interests, record their stories, and meet their advancing needs as 21 st-
century learners. By having students work through the creation of a “written” work with digital
storytelling and writing-based software applications, it allows for the dictated stories of young
students to be captured with more ease, increased frequency, and innovative representation.
Digital storytelling also later allows for more public “dramatizations” with added creative,
visual, and multimodal publishing possibilities suitable for the modern age.
Whereas, traditional storytelling dictations tend to focus on modeling concepts of print
with a pen to paper method that demonstrates to children that their spoken words can be written
down to create a published story, digital storytelling focuses on celebrating that child’s spoken
words or visual imagery selections as equitable stories worth sharing. Just as Vasquez (2014)
claims that new technologies and social media can be used as tools to accomplish critical literacy
work, digital storytelling can enable students to use their own voices to give an accurate,
authentic voice to their messages and ideas, thereby providing a suitable (and sometimes
superior) platform to students who are confident in their ideas and comfortable sharing them
verbally, but are still wary of entering the world of writing. Digital Storytelling capitalizes on
and celebrates their efforts while conditioning them to take greater risks and more frequent turns
at the “writer’s wheel.”
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 86
PerSpectives and provocations
One way that I (Burrow), was able to effectively carry over the traditional approaches to
storytelling and story acting into digital realms was with Smith’s guidance on how to use digital
storytelling as a means to enable young children to narrate (dictate) their stories without waiting
on my availability. Storytelling in this medium can occur more frequently because not every
stage is completely dependent upon waiting for an adult scribe to have the free time to take
dictation; stories can happen in real-time as they are happening thereby never missing a moment
of student creativity. Additionally, narrated stories ensured more accurate representations of
students’ ideas by minimizing the natural deletions or substitutions that can occur when
educators transcribe. Using recording hardware and/or speech-to-text software, I was able to
review students’ digital stories, at my convenience, and suggest edits. It is our belief that, after
teacher modeling and with a rubric for guidance, supplemental input could also come from peers
and even the self-reflective young writer themselves.
Additionally, Smith also taught me (Burrow) how the digital story, itself, could become
an enhanced, multimodal dramatization/publication of young students’ written work (taking the
place of the traditional in-class story acting). The act of writing may be a solitary one, but the
impact and celebration of it should be shared. Digital storytelling provides an enhanced platform
for sharing student’s writing in ways that traditional classroom publications just cannot;
extending the intended social element of the traditional storytelling process beyond educator-
student conversations to foster student-student conversations that can speed up the development
phases of writing. Furthermore, like Vasquez (2014), we believe that other writing-based
software, applications, or social media (e.g., blogs, Prezi, discussion boards) can be combined
with digital storytelling to transform the way students and teachers think about text construction
and production.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 87
PerSpectives and provocations
In talking with other educators at many of our professional development and conference
presentations, we are confident that the elements of digital story can be especially beneficial to
students with special needs that may limit their handwriting or even speech capabilities.
Teachers of special needs students suggest encouraging students to produce visual essays in
which they select stock photos, choose accompanying music to convey tone, mood, setting, and
add action—all are multimodal acts that allow more students to feel like writers.
This digital transformation of Paley’s storytelling curriculum required me to commit to
spending classroom time, up front, on the upgraded traditional storytelling and story acting
writing process so that students had a model for stories worth sharing through the all-
encompassing digital storytelling process. So, while engaging in the storytelling process ignited
many of my students’ creative ideas, engaging in the digital storytelling process propelled my
students into action. Participation in this educational technology integration authentically
supports cognitive and psychosocial development by allowing students to translate their verbal
communication into visual communication, thus opening the proverbial door to multimodal
expression. I have seen digital storytelling artifacts successfully created by learners of all ages
that exemplify a range of stories, including personal narratives, informative reports, and/or
content-specific tales (Robin, 2008).
Theodosakis (2009) indicates that activities of this type have cognitive benefits that
encourage higher order thinking skills, such as visioning skills, research, problem solving, logic,
planning, and critical thinking. Most of my young students were more eager to engage in the
dynamic nature of digital storytelling to plan out their writing than were apt to write a traditional
outline. Once familiar with the technology, many of my students were able to leverage the visual
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 88
PerSpectives and provocations
format of digital stories to display researched knowledge, well beyond what I have typically seen
students that age accomplish when writing traditional reports (see Figure 3).
Insert Figure 3: “Avery the Caterpillar” by Nicole, Kindergarten
The screenshot represents a science inquiry report completed by Kindergartener, Nicole. Her
report was recorded using the free iPad app, Shadow Puppet Edu. Nicole and Burrow (1st
author) selected images together from Creative Commons Flickr and then uploaded them into
the app. Nicole’s narration reflects her own learned knowledge about how a caterpillar
becomes a butterfly and includes dialogue between her and Burrow. The presentation concludes
with a follow up to Nicole’s expressed interest in knowing more about the mechanics of
butterflies drinking. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her report.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 89
PerSpectives and provocations
So, if an educator is confident in the benefits of digital story for early elementary school writers,
how can they begin to integrate the technology into their own classroom?
TPACK: Framing Teacher Knowledge for the Integration of Digital Storytelling
Drawing upon Mishra and Koehler’s (2006) TPACK (Technological Pedagogical And
Content Knowledge) framework for understanding teacher knowledge allows us to transcend the
typical debate surrounding the integration of technology and writing, which tends to center on
whether to instruct students on how to write for technology or with technology and, instead,
allows educators to focus not on an either/or scenario but a when/why consideration. The use of
the TPACK Framework can assist teachers in framing their knowledge to integrate technology in
support of their pedagogy and content, which in turn allows them to take into account the
multiple purposes for young students’ writing experiences. TPACK is the means by which
educators can determine how to effectively and appropriately balance pedagogical truths from
the past with revelatory modern-day practices. When the TPACK framework is used
appropriately, an educator can plan for a multilayered learning experience that factors in
appropriate pedagogy (PK), relevant content (CK) and meaningfully integrates technology (TK).
TPACK mimics the same decision-making process that educators employ when they examine
traditional classroom activities to determine the pedagogy that best meet the needs of their
diverse learners. In the case of digital storytelling as part of elementary school writing activities
(Figure 4), this interconnected web of 21st-century educator knowledge ensures successful
implementation by focusing on all aspects of the plan.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 90
PerSpectives and provocations
Figure 4. TPACK Domains of Knowledge used in Teaching Elementary School Digital
Storytelling.
In this article the valuable pedagogy (PK) that was discussed was “storytelling and story
acting,” a practice that educators can use within older classrooms in order to successfully meet
the content needs (CK) of young writers (i.e., the writing process). Once educators can elicit
quality stories from young students, the attention can then be turned to acquiring and practicing
the technological know-how (TK) necessary to improve writing experiences. By considering the
TPACK of elementary school-aged digital writing, educators can be better informed as how to
update traditional writing methods (like an upgraded version of Paley’s storytelling curriculum)
to enable, shape, and share new writing opportunities for their students.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 91
(CK)The Writing
Process
(PK)Paley’s
Storytelling & Story Acting
(TK)Digital
Storytelling
(PCK)Dictation & Dramatizati
on
(TCK)Verbal &
Visual Connection
(TPK)Directed
Learning & Guided
(TPACK
PerSpectives and provocations
Tips for Successful Implementation of Digital Storytelling
Based on my (Burrow) own classroom successes and informed by Smith’s knowledge of
successful technology integration into multiple classroom types, the following can help other
educators successfully integrate digital storytelling into their classrooms. Since good writing is
a year-round endeavor in schools, educators will need to continuously identify if students’
writing is in need of an updated medium for “publication” or “process” and then provide the
developmentally appropriate instruction and technology accordingly.
I have seen digital storytelling be a creative, 21st-century vehicle through which my
young students were able to showcase the final versions of their handwritten work. In this
instance, digital storytelling can provide an unparalleled means by which student work can reach
audiences beyond the walls of the classroom. For example, I sometimes uploaded digital stories
to student-safe YouTube channels to send to other classrooms around the world or transferred
them to flash drives to share with family members at home. Additionally, digital storytelling
enabled my students to present their writing in a multimodal way. For example, I allowed the
use of stock photos and nontraditional artwork to alleviate the fears of those students who (like
me) often question their artistic abilities for illustration-purposes, while Smith explained to me
how student narrations could reclaim student ownership over the voice and intent of their
original writing piece (see Figure 5).
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 92
PerSpectives and provocations
Image 5: “My Puppet” by Triston, preschool
The screenshot represents an original creative story completed by preschooler, Triston. His
story was inspired by his discovery of a plethora of super hero-related images on Creative
Commons Flickr. Burrow (1st author) assisted him in uploading the images into the free iPad
app, Shadow Puppet Edu. The accompanying link allows readers to see and hear his story.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 93
PerSpectives and provocations
Likewise, digital animation allowed my stage-shy students to control and present the
“dramatization” of their work without having to perform live (see Figure 6). This activity also
enabled the student-authors to view their performances for self-critique (an activity that is
difficult to accomplish when students are in the midst of traditional dramatizations). By writing
for technology, my students were able to engage in a publishing experience that was both
enjoyable and reflective of their technology-filled worlds.
Figure 6. “Dog Bite by Coley”
The screenshot represents the digital dramatization of a joke told by Kindergartener, Coley.
Coley dramatized her joke by narrating it into the free iPad add, Sock Puppet. The
accompanying link allows readers to see and hear her joke.
Beyond being a means of multimodal publication, digital storytelling and writing-based
software and applications updated the ways in which my young students were able to work on
the process of creating a story. As suggested by the National Writing Project report by DeVoss,
Eideman-Aadahl, and Hicks (2010) internet searches, blogging networks, Google Docs, social
networking sites, and digital storytelling can help students plan, revise, and edit their stories. By
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 94
PerSpectives and provocations
writing with technology, my students engaged in the development stages of the writing process
in a more globally social manner. I often gave time for my students to post their ideas and
outlines on secure student blogs for feedback and discussion from students in older grades – a
mutually-beneficial activity that encouraged my young writers and strengthened the older
writers. Giving my students control over images, voice (narration), and pacing/timing provided
real reasons for writing and real reasons for sharing the writing. My students were excited to add
the “bells and whistles” to their stories, but knew I would not allow them to do so if they did not
first craft a quality story worth enhancing.
Based on classroom experiences and ongoing discussions, we have determined that
considerations should be made to ensure a students’ productive and quality interaction with the
technology experience, including:
Consistency. It is imperative to emphasize the student’s original story concept
throughout every phase of the digital storytelling process. As the technology is integrated,
student learning outcomes and the overall writing goals must remain center stage. Digital
storytelling software will limit the length of young writers’ writing--a truth that may delight
word-shy students and challenge verbose ones. As a result, mini-lessons in word choice,
conciseness, or idea focus may be warranted. The limitations of the technology should never
limit the student’s original story concept, though.
Patience. There are many technology-related factors that have potential to cause
difficulties for both educators and students. The best approach is to always have a back-up plan
(such as alternative writing prompts and activities) for dealing with a lack of technology or
dealing with unreliable technology. Imparting a patient outlook onto the students is yet another
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 95
PerSpectives and provocations
way project-based learning activities, such as this, can prepare even young children with the
reality of technology’s limitations.
Safety. In order for students to feel free to be creative enough to write their best story, a
safe environment must be provided. I had discussions with my classes about how to provide
constructive criticism in order to help them develop important social skills while also assisting
them to develop a keen awareness of self-assessment in relation to others’ comments
(emphasizing that the criticism is “about your work, not you!”). This is especially important in
elementary school settings as these students are still developing their voices and learning to
accept criticism for not being “perfect.” As an educator, this truth translated into my commitment
to assess projects like these based on the process involved in the creation and helping parents
resist the urge to expect a Hollywood blockbuster.
An iterative creative process. As with other design processes, digital storytelling is not
a linear model and students may cycle back to redo a section of the project in order to achieve
the intended vision. Based on my (Burrow) classroom experiences, Smith outlines a 4-phase
process:
(1) Planning. Comparable to Paley’s storytelling stage, it can be carried out as part of in-
class or virtual writer’s workshops through the use of in-class discussions or micro-
blogs and class discussion board postings as students work with the educator to write
the script and create the storyboard.
(2) Creating. It adds a “rehearsal” component that is not required in Paley’s storytelling
curriculum as students harness their visual and auditory voice to locate and/or create
appropriate images (photographs, video clips, drawings, etc.) and audio (soundtrack,
recorded voice, sound effects, etc.). Since this process is not linear, some of my
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 96
PerSpectives and provocations
students actually started with image acquisition as a way of prompting written
content.
(3) Editing. Software (such as PhotoStory for Windows or iMovie for Mac) can be used
to combine images while being mindful of pacing and economy. DeVoss, et. al.
(2010) gives evidence that the use of digital storytelling actually enhanced the
essential but potentially laborious revision phase of the writing process because it
gave students reason and desire to engage in the activity, of their own accord (p. 38).
(4) Presentation. Comparable to Paley’s story acting stage, students’ final creations and
efforts are celebrated by sharing the stories online with parents and the school
community or by hosting a school-wide red carpet Academy Award Night to screen
student work. The presentation phase should be prefaced with an explanation to the
audience about the emphasis on process and the accomplishment associated with
students’ developing writing skills.
Digital Writing: Updating Storytelling for 21-st Century Learning
This article discussed and offered examples of how to help young students write well and
how to use technology for and with their writing. Ultimately, we suggest that educators consider
the TPACK framework as a means of justifying the choice of when and why to effectively use
technology to enhance young students’ writing experiences. If elementary school educators are
willing to upgrade and update the traditional writing practices of Paley with technology
integration, then they can retain the valuable literary experiences of storytelling curriculum while
simultaneously meeting the advancing needs and challenges of 21st-century writing. Focused
instruction in early writing skills answers a vital call to give children the means by which to use
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 97
PerSpectives and provocations
imagination and play to comprehend, work through, share, and celebrate the world that they will
someday be asked to excel in. Storytelling gives voices to children, but digital storytelling may
be better able to help them plan and produce that voice for their technology-focused worlds.
References
Ball, A. (2009). Toward a theory of generative change: In culturally and linguistically complex
classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1). Retrieved from
http://aer.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/46/1/45
Burton, M., Bacigalupa, C., Wright, C., & Black, T. (2008). Windows into Children’s thinking:
A guide to storytelling and dramatization. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4),
363.
Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement (CIERA). (1999). Emergent
Literacy: A Polyphony of Perspectives. University of Michigan School of Education: D.
B. Yaden, D. W. Rowe, & L. MacGillivray.
Cooper, P. (1993). When stories come to school: Telling, writing, and performing stories in the
early childhood classroom. Teachers & Writers Collaborative: New York.
Cooper, P. M. (2005). Literacy learning and pedagogical purpose in Vivian Paley's 'storytelling
curriculum'. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 5(3), 229.
DeVoss, D.N., Eidman-Aadahl, E., & Hicks, T. (2010). Because digital writing matters:
Improving student writing in online and multimedia environments. National Writing
Project. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Gray, L., Mathes, B., Cooper, P., & Capo, K. (2007). One authentic early literacy practice and
three standardized tests: Can a storytelling curriculum measure up? Journal of Early
Childhood Teacher Education, 28(3), 251.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 98
PerSpectives and provocations
Harris, J., & Hoffer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-
based TPACK development. In C. D. Maddux, (Ed.). Research highlights in technology
and teacher education 2009 (pp. 99-108). Chesapeake, VA: Society for Information
Technology in Teacher Education (SITE).
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A new
framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record 108, 1017-1054. Retrieved
from: http://punya.educ.msu.edu/publications/journal_articles/mishra-koehler-
tcr2006.pdf
Paley, V.G.(1981) Wally’s Stories. Cambridge MA. Harvard University Press
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century
classroom. Theory Into Practice. 47. pp. 220-228.
Rowe, D. W. (2008). The social construction of intentionality: Two-year-olds’ and adults’
participation at a preschool writing center. Research in the Teaching of English, 42(4).
Strickland, D.S., & Morrow, L.M. (2000). Beginning Reading and Writing. Teachers College
Press. Teachers College, Columbia University: New York and London.
Sulzby, E. (1996). Roles of oral and written language as children approach conventional literacy.
In C. Pontecorvo, M. Orsolini, B. Burge, & L. Resnick (Eds.), Children's early text
construction (pp.25–46). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Theodosakis, N. (2004). The director in the classroom. San Diego, CA: Tech4Learning.
Vasquez, V. (2014). Reader’s commentary: Critical literacy and technology. Council
Chronicle(23),3.
PerSpectives and provocations | Volume 4, Number 1, 2014 Burrow 99
PerSpectives and provocations