Writing-to-Learn Assignments
in Simulation and Role-play Activities
This inquiry has validated the significant role of writing-to-learn activities in my larger pedagogy. As you can observe in my artifact analyses, writing activities are the best way for me to ensure that all of my students practiced the skills of historical empathy and imagination. Beyond my own assessment needs, in writing-to-learn activities “students understanding can grow and clarify through the process of writing.” (Bazerman et al. 2005, pg. 57) When properly structured, role-play writing activities are the most effective and safe avenues for students to demonstrate historical empathy and imagination. While active simulations engage students, writing-to-learn activities really require each student to thoughtfully assess their own understanding of an event or historical character.
The Tiffs Group Paper was an early point on my larger learning curve as a teacher. Without a rubric and detailed instructions, the writing-to-learn activity was not scaffolded properly. Each student should have spoke as a member of his or her earthling and Tiff group, but most did not understand what this role adoption entailed [See Artifact 3: Tiffs Paper, Student Work Analysis]. The unclear instructions and the lack of rubric created varied results. Some students did not work as a group; others did not adopt a defined role. The final question in the instructions, “How does it feel to be the imperializing force or the imperialized force?” was left largely unanswered by a majority of the students.
If students need to truly demonstrate historical imagination and empathy the teacher must create an extremely thorough and explicit assignment sheet and rubric. Such an approach can eliminate the fear that students develop over how their papers may be assessed. While many students may have completed creative role-play assignments in previous educational experiences, they do not necessarily understand how to adapt those skills for the context of the history classroom. In the case of the Tiffs Paper, there were elements of creativity in papers but confusion over how it needed to be tailored to the specific assignment.
Writing-to-Learn activities also require teachers to rank priorities. Since my inquiry assessed students’ ability to demonstrate historical empathy and imagination, I learned how to create the proper supports or clarifications that emphasized the importance of re-enactment, interpolation and interrogation. ‘Targeted writing strategies’ and ‘RAFT’ work allowed me to create and emphasize these priorities. The Tiffs Paper had little scaffolding and did not emphasize adopting a role. Instituting a RAFT form, “Role, Audience, Format, Topic”, in the Letters of Protest and the Trial of Socrates Papers, required students to focus on re-enactment and role-play (Holston & Santa, 1985). In both cases, the class filled out the RAFT form together, discussing how each category related to that specific assignment.
Additionally, I added targeted writing skills (TWS) that asked the students to focus on specific aspects of their writing (McCoy, 2003). Some of these TWS’s focused on simple writing skills like thesis writing and organization. Other TWS’s provided hints and strategies that could help students practice historical empathy and imagination. For example, I gave the following TWS’s for the Trial of Socrates Paper.
1) Speaking to Citizens of Ancient Athens so use FORMAL LANGUAGE
2) INTRODUCTION- Intriguing intro that pulls the audience in
3) THESIS- A 1-2 sentence thesis that explains what you will argue
4) ORGANIZATION- Use paragraphs! [See Artifact 6: Trial Paper, Introductions and Explanations]
In these TWS’s, there was only one skill that really focused on historical empathy and imagination, point one. Focusing on eliminating anachronistic language is a successful strategy to emphasize to students that they need to truly adopt a role different from their own.
In the two activities where I included RAFT or TWS, students were far more likely to practice successful re-enactment and historical empathy. In the Tiffs paper, of the three samples I analyzed, the students averaged a score of 2.3 out of five for the ability to re-enact a role and the ability to develop a perspective distinct from their own [See Artifact 3: Tiffs Paper, Student Work Analysis]. In contrast, the Letter of Protest assignment included RAFT guidance. With the RAFT guidance the entire classes group scores averaged 3.6 out of 5 for both re-enactment and for adopting a different perspective [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis, Full Group Quantitative analysis]. The Trial of Socrates included the most supports, with both RAFT and TWS’s. For the Trial of Socrates paper, the entire class’s averaged score came out to 4 for re-enactment and 3.8 for adopting a perspective [Artifact 6: Trial of Socrates Papers, Student Sample Analysis, Trial Paper Analysis Full Group].
The Tiffs Group Paper was an early point on my larger learning curve as a teacher. Without a rubric and detailed instructions, the writing-to-learn activity was not scaffolded properly. Each student should have spoke as a member of his or her earthling and Tiff group, but most did not understand what this role adoption entailed [See Artifact 3: Tiffs Paper, Student Work Analysis]. The unclear instructions and the lack of rubric created varied results. Some students did not work as a group; others did not adopt a defined role. The final question in the instructions, “How does it feel to be the imperializing force or the imperialized force?” was left largely unanswered by a majority of the students.
If students need to truly demonstrate historical imagination and empathy the teacher must create an extremely thorough and explicit assignment sheet and rubric. Such an approach can eliminate the fear that students develop over how their papers may be assessed. While many students may have completed creative role-play assignments in previous educational experiences, they do not necessarily understand how to adapt those skills for the context of the history classroom. In the case of the Tiffs Paper, there were elements of creativity in papers but confusion over how it needed to be tailored to the specific assignment.
Writing-to-Learn activities also require teachers to rank priorities. Since my inquiry assessed students’ ability to demonstrate historical empathy and imagination, I learned how to create the proper supports or clarifications that emphasized the importance of re-enactment, interpolation and interrogation. ‘Targeted writing strategies’ and ‘RAFT’ work allowed me to create and emphasize these priorities. The Tiffs Paper had little scaffolding and did not emphasize adopting a role. Instituting a RAFT form, “Role, Audience, Format, Topic”, in the Letters of Protest and the Trial of Socrates Papers, required students to focus on re-enactment and role-play (Holston & Santa, 1985). In both cases, the class filled out the RAFT form together, discussing how each category related to that specific assignment.
Additionally, I added targeted writing skills (TWS) that asked the students to focus on specific aspects of their writing (McCoy, 2003). Some of these TWS’s focused on simple writing skills like thesis writing and organization. Other TWS’s provided hints and strategies that could help students practice historical empathy and imagination. For example, I gave the following TWS’s for the Trial of Socrates Paper.
1) Speaking to Citizens of Ancient Athens so use FORMAL LANGUAGE
2) INTRODUCTION- Intriguing intro that pulls the audience in
3) THESIS- A 1-2 sentence thesis that explains what you will argue
4) ORGANIZATION- Use paragraphs! [See Artifact 6: Trial Paper, Introductions and Explanations]
In these TWS’s, there was only one skill that really focused on historical empathy and imagination, point one. Focusing on eliminating anachronistic language is a successful strategy to emphasize to students that they need to truly adopt a role different from their own.
In the two activities where I included RAFT or TWS, students were far more likely to practice successful re-enactment and historical empathy. In the Tiffs paper, of the three samples I analyzed, the students averaged a score of 2.3 out of five for the ability to re-enact a role and the ability to develop a perspective distinct from their own [See Artifact 3: Tiffs Paper, Student Work Analysis]. In contrast, the Letter of Protest assignment included RAFT guidance. With the RAFT guidance the entire classes group scores averaged 3.6 out of 5 for both re-enactment and for adopting a different perspective [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis, Full Group Quantitative analysis]. The Trial of Socrates included the most supports, with both RAFT and TWS’s. For the Trial of Socrates paper, the entire class’s averaged score came out to 4 for re-enactment and 3.8 for adopting a perspective [Artifact 6: Trial of Socrates Papers, Student Sample Analysis, Trial Paper Analysis Full Group].
Accessing Funds of Knowledge
Beyond the importance of utilizing specific writing strategies, the artifact analyses demonstrate that through simulation and role-play activities students have a chance to access their funds of knowledge. Moll et al. define the term, funds of knowledge, as “the historically accumulated and culturally developed bodies of knowledge and skills essential for household or individual functioning and well-being” (as cited in Lopez, 2013). In the process of practicing historical empathy and imagination, students occasionally have the opportunity to tap into their funds of knowledge developed outside of the classroom.
For example, in the letter of protest assignment, one student had the chance to incorporate her own language and understanding of Spanish Catholicism in her creative writing assignment. All the students were asked to adopt the role of a European writing a letter of protest concerning the slave trade to the King of Spain. Maria, a quiet and sometimes disconnected student, flourished in this assignment [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis].
In her letter, Maria referenced the influence of Catholicism on her character’s perspective. The ex slave-trader attempted to appeal to the King of Spain’s religious duty, “You a practicing catholic should know what sins should and shouldn’t be committed, this is one of them…Think closely and pray on it.”[See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis] The sources never indicated the Catholic influence on Spain so Maria clearly incorporated her own background knowledge. Additionally, Maria creatively integrated Spanish words in the letter including “Adios Mi Rey” and “Sinceramente” [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis] Maria accessed her own funds of knowledge without it interfering with her ability to practice historical empathy or imagination. She clearly adopted a perspective distinct from her own because she attempted to understand why a person would willingly participate in the slave trade. But at the same time, she accessed her own funds of knowledge by referencing Catholicism and using Spanish language words. She also identified when it was appropriate to use these funds of knowledge without compromising her established historical character.
Creative writing assignments that ask students to role-play provide significant space for students to bring in their outside knowledge. Mathew, an extremely high achieving student, consistently took advantage of this creative space. For example, in the letter of protest assignment, Mathew created a detailed persona and character that clearly required previous knowledge of British history [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis].
Mathew’s work consistently demonstrated an ability to bring in outside knowledge and vocabulary.
But this brings me to a larger issue present in all of my artifacts; role-play writing activities still tend to favor traditionally successful students. Mathew and Ariel both come from middle class, white families with strong academic backgrounds. Both of their work is featured heavily in my analyses as ‘successful’ examples (Letter of Protest, WWI Letters, Aquinas Classwork).
Unfortunately, examples like Maria’s are less common. Students with funds of knowledge outside of the traditional white, middle class experience have had less of an opportunity to share their funds of knowledge. The comparison between Ariel’s work and Mitchell’s work in the Aquinas Artifact Analysis highlights this discrepancy. Ariel did not need scaffolds to create a response that was thoughtful and significantly ecclesiastical for her adopted role as St. Thomas Aquinas. In contrast, Mitchell, although able to demonstrate critical thinking through interpolation, did not significantly adopt a formal religious voice that imitated Aquinas’s devotion to the Christian god [See Artifact Analysis 7: Aquinas Classwork, Student Sample Analysis].
This trend was also present in the Trial of Socrates papers and the Letter of Protest assignment. Lucy’s letter of protest paper was far less developed than her peers. A former ELL student from China, Lucy struggled to adopt a role because of her still limited language skills. She also had less of a connection to the material than Mathew or Maria. [See Artifact Analysis 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis]. Similarly, Tamara’s Trial of Socrates Paper did not demonstrate high levels of historical imagination or empathy [See Artifact Analysis 6: Letters of Protest, Student Sample Analysis]. Like Mitchell and Lucy, she may have needed more scaffolds in place so she could understand the expectations.
This highlights an area of improvement in my own teaching practice. There are multiple explanations for this problem, and a few possible routes that may correct the problem in the future. A majority of the world history curriculum is Eurocentric. The curriculum itself could benefit from more non-western themes and topics so students with varying funds of knowledge have a chance to participate. There also could be a differentiation and scaffolding approach. Mitchell was more than capable of creating a thoughtful response, but unlike Ariel, he may have been unaware of the level of role-play that I wanted him to undertake. Ultimately, my practice could benefit from including both solutions.
For example, in the letter of protest assignment, one student had the chance to incorporate her own language and understanding of Spanish Catholicism in her creative writing assignment. All the students were asked to adopt the role of a European writing a letter of protest concerning the slave trade to the King of Spain. Maria, a quiet and sometimes disconnected student, flourished in this assignment [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis].
In her letter, Maria referenced the influence of Catholicism on her character’s perspective. The ex slave-trader attempted to appeal to the King of Spain’s religious duty, “You a practicing catholic should know what sins should and shouldn’t be committed, this is one of them…Think closely and pray on it.”[See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis] The sources never indicated the Catholic influence on Spain so Maria clearly incorporated her own background knowledge. Additionally, Maria creatively integrated Spanish words in the letter including “Adios Mi Rey” and “Sinceramente” [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis] Maria accessed her own funds of knowledge without it interfering with her ability to practice historical empathy or imagination. She clearly adopted a perspective distinct from her own because she attempted to understand why a person would willingly participate in the slave trade. But at the same time, she accessed her own funds of knowledge by referencing Catholicism and using Spanish language words. She also identified when it was appropriate to use these funds of knowledge without compromising her established historical character.
Creative writing assignments that ask students to role-play provide significant space for students to bring in their outside knowledge. Mathew, an extremely high achieving student, consistently took advantage of this creative space. For example, in the letter of protest assignment, Mathew created a detailed persona and character that clearly required previous knowledge of British history [See Artifact 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis].
Mathew’s work consistently demonstrated an ability to bring in outside knowledge and vocabulary.
But this brings me to a larger issue present in all of my artifacts; role-play writing activities still tend to favor traditionally successful students. Mathew and Ariel both come from middle class, white families with strong academic backgrounds. Both of their work is featured heavily in my analyses as ‘successful’ examples (Letter of Protest, WWI Letters, Aquinas Classwork).
Unfortunately, examples like Maria’s are less common. Students with funds of knowledge outside of the traditional white, middle class experience have had less of an opportunity to share their funds of knowledge. The comparison between Ariel’s work and Mitchell’s work in the Aquinas Artifact Analysis highlights this discrepancy. Ariel did not need scaffolds to create a response that was thoughtful and significantly ecclesiastical for her adopted role as St. Thomas Aquinas. In contrast, Mitchell, although able to demonstrate critical thinking through interpolation, did not significantly adopt a formal religious voice that imitated Aquinas’s devotion to the Christian god [See Artifact Analysis 7: Aquinas Classwork, Student Sample Analysis].
This trend was also present in the Trial of Socrates papers and the Letter of Protest assignment. Lucy’s letter of protest paper was far less developed than her peers. A former ELL student from China, Lucy struggled to adopt a role because of her still limited language skills. She also had less of a connection to the material than Mathew or Maria. [See Artifact Analysis 4: Letter of Protest, Student Sample Analysis]. Similarly, Tamara’s Trial of Socrates Paper did not demonstrate high levels of historical imagination or empathy [See Artifact Analysis 6: Letters of Protest, Student Sample Analysis]. Like Mitchell and Lucy, she may have needed more scaffolds in place so she could understand the expectations.
This highlights an area of improvement in my own teaching practice. There are multiple explanations for this problem, and a few possible routes that may correct the problem in the future. A majority of the world history curriculum is Eurocentric. The curriculum itself could benefit from more non-western themes and topics so students with varying funds of knowledge have a chance to participate. There also could be a differentiation and scaffolding approach. Mitchell was more than capable of creating a thoughtful response, but unlike Ariel, he may have been unaware of the level of role-play that I wanted him to undertake. Ultimately, my practice could benefit from including both solutions.