This study examined first-grade students’ journal writing to determine how placing live zoo animals in classrooms for science education links to students’ emergent and early writing. Students were asked to write journal entries during the daily language arts period. Although no direct instruction in informational text writing was offered, teachers suggested that journal writing about the current science topic or the live animal was a possible topic. We found that students in classrooms with zoo animals from the Our Zoo To You project wrote significantly longer and more coherent texts about zoo animals when compared with students who learned about the animals in more traditional ways. Students in Zoo classrooms included significantly more science concepts and vocabulary in their writing. Unexpectedly, using directive writing prompts enhanced texts in classrooms without zoo animals but actually hindered both the quality and quantity of writing in Zoo classrooms.
Bruning R. and Schweiger BM ( 1997) Integrating science and literacy experiences to motivate student learning. In: Guthrie JT and Wigfield A (eds) Reading Engagement: Motivating Readers through Integrated Instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
2.
Bryk AS and Raudenbush SW ( 1988) Toward a more appropriate conceptualization of research on school effects: A three-level hierarchical linear model. American Educational Research Journal97: 65-108.
3.
Caswell LJ and Duke NK ( 1998) ‘Non-narrative as a catalyst for literacy development’ . Language Arts75: 108-117.
4.
Cooper G. ( 1998) Research into Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design. Sydney: University of New South Wales.
5.
Donovan CA and Smolkin LB ( 2006) Children’s understanding of genre and writing development . In: MacArthur CA, Graham S and Fitzgerald J (eds) Handbook of Writing Research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
6.
Dreher MJ ( 2000) Fostering reading for learning. In: Baker L, Dreher MJ and Guthrie JT (eds) Engaging Young Readers: Promoting Achievement and Motivation. New York, NY: Guilford.
7.
Duke NK ( 2000) ‘3.6 minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade’. Reading Research Quarterly35: 202-224.
8.
Duke NK ( 2003) Information Books in Early Childhood. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
9.
Dyson AH and Freedman SW ( 2003) Writing. In: Flood J, Lapp D, Squire JR and Jensen JM (eds) Handbook of Research on Teaching the English Language Arts. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Guillaume AM ( 1998) ‘Learning with texts in the primary grades’ . The Reading Teacher51: 476-486.
11.
Guthrie JT, Wigfield A., Barbosa P., Perencevich KC, Taboada A., Davis MH, Scafiddi NT and Tonks S. ( 2004) ‘Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction’. Journal of Educational Psychology96: 403-423.
12.
Hiebert EH ( 2005) QuickReads: A Research-Based Fluency Program Teacher’s Resource Manual. Parsippany, NJ: Modern Curriculum Press.
13.
Hiebert EH and Fisher CW ( 1990) ‘Whole language: Three themes for the future’ . Educational Leadership47: 62-64.
14.
Houghton-Mifflin (2000) Discovery works unit 1a: Kinds of living things. Orlando, FL: Houghton-Mifflin.
15.
Kamberelis G. ( 1998) ‘Relations between children’s literacy diets and genre development: You write what you read’. Literacy Teaching and Learning3: 7-53.
16.
Kamberelis G. ( 1999) ‘Genre development and learning: children writing stories, science reports and poems’. Research in the Teaching of English33: 403-460.
17.
Kamberelis G. and Bovino TD ( 1999) ‘Cultural artifacts as scaffolds for genre development’ . Reading Research Quarterly34: 138-170.
18.
Kletzien SB and Dreher MJ ( 2004) Informational Text in K-3 Classrooms: Helping Children to Read and Write. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
19.
Langer, JA ( 1983) Effects of Topic Knowledge on the Quality and Coherence of Informational Writing. Education Resources Information Center, http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED234418&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED234418 (Consulted November 2010).
20.
Lincoln Public Schools ( 2001) Animals and Habitats. Lincoln, NE: LPS.
21.
Moss B., Leone S. and Dippillo ML ( 1997) ‘Exploring the literature of fact: Linking reading and writing through information trade books’. Language Arts74: 418-429.
22.
National Science Teachers Association (1991 ) Guidelines for Responsible Use of Animals in the Classroom . Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
23.
Neuman SB, Copple C. and Bredekamp S. ( 1998) Learning to Read and Write: Developmentally Appropriate Practices for Young Children. Washington, DC: International Reading Association and National Association for the Education of Young Children.
24.
Newkirk T. ( 1989) More Than Stories: The Range of Children’s Writing . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann .
25.
Pappas CC ( 1991) ‘Young children’s strategies in learning the ‘Book language’ of information books’. Discourse Processes14: 208-225.
26.
Purcell-Gates V., McIntyre E. and Freppon PA ( 1995) ‘Learning written storybook language in school: A comparison of low-SES children in skills-based and whole language classrooms’ . American Educational Research Journal32: 659-685.
27.
Snidjers TAB and Bosker RJ ( 1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. London: Sage .
28.
Sweller J. and Levine M. ( 1982) ‘Effects of goal specificity on means-end analysis and learning’. Journal of Experimental. Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition8: 463-474.
29.
Trainin G., Wilson KM, Wickless M. and Brooks D. ( 2005) ‘Extraordinary animals and expository writing: Zoo in the classroom’. Journal of Science Education and Technology14: 299-304.
30.
Wickless M., Brooks DW, Abuloum A., Mancuso B., Heng-Moss TM and Mayo L. ( 2003) ‘Our zoo to you’. Science and Children41(1): 36-39.
31.
Wollman-Bonilla JE ( 2000) ‘Teaching science writing to first graders: genre learning and recontextualization’. Research in the Teaching of English35: 35-65.
