I once spent part of a sabbatical leave at the University of New Hampshire in the United States, where I was privileged to take a course from Don Graves. Don was just finishing a longitudinal study into children's writing (Graves, 1983), and he shared insights from the investigation with the class on a regular basis. I still consult my notes for the pithy remarks Don made about the writer's craft and our role as teachers in fostering children's composing. “Look after the writer and the writing will take care of itself,” he told us, borrowing a saying from Mary Ellen Giacobbe, a Grade 1 teacher involved in the study. There were variations on well-traveled advice to writers as well: “Show, don't tell,” “Write about one thing,” and “Write about what you know.”

As I thought about the topic for my first ROL column, Don's admonition to write about what you know surfaced. “WIER!” I said. “That's as Canadian as Saskatoons, seal-flipper pie, and Ookpik.” I have no involvement with WIER -- that's Writers in Electronic Residence, pronounced wire -- but the program has gained a solid reputation since its inception for nurturing young writers.

You will get an idea of the resources offered at WIER from the examples and screen shots provided here, but I invite you to use the hyperlinks to explore the site on your own as well. Besides providing a description of the site in this column, I also share insights into the program through excerpts from interviews with WIER's founder and participants, and examine research into WIER. I believe the latter focus is especially important because little research has been conducted into Web-based learning. This comment may seem unusual given the large number of articles available about the World Wide Web, but I differentiate between reports that describe site development and research into Web site use.

As Trevor Owen, WIER's founding father, says, “The Writers in Electronic Residence program is pretty much what it sounds like.” It uses Internet technologies, specifically computer conferencing, to bring professional writers into the classroom to share their expertise with students at all grade levels, from elementary through high school, across Canada. Students post original compositions, poems, short stories, and other forms of writing, which are read and commented on by highly regarded professional writers. Moreover, students post their commentaries on the works of other students. The advice given is used to revise the pieces, which, in turn, fosters writing growth. In this way, the program serves as a catalyst for learning, usually in existing, face-to-face classroom contexts. Trevor notes that revision, per se, is not the main goal; rather, it is to consider the value of revision in writing. He uses the term “considered response” to describe this idea, which draws on the existence of the classroom context as well as the presence of “known others.”

The program began as a small-scale lighthouse project, but today, schools from Newfoundland to British Columbia are participants. Although WIER currently is restricted to Canadian schools, the program is being piloted in three projects in the United States.

Although many individuals contributed greatly to WIER, both in the incubation period and more recently as it expanded throughout Canada, Trevor dreamed a dream that came true. He visualized a useful idea, and then he went on to nurture it. Many interesting ideas that use the World Wide Web quickly come to fruition, but more fade quickly. Sometimes the problem is a lack of funding -- in WIER's fortunate case, a range of sponsors was found, including a major university, corporations, and governmental and nongovernmental agencies -- but on other occasions the project's champion moves on to new challenges. For his efforts Trevor has been given several honours, including the Marshall McLuhan Distinguished Teacher Award. Today, Trevor serves as head of English at Lester B. Pearson Collegiate Institute in Toronto, and his students are part of WIER. As well, he shares his expertise through journal articles and books.

The ultimate value of WIER depends on the professional writers who respond to the student-participants' writing. As Lucy Calkins (1986) reminds us, student writers must have high input into their composing process, but there also must be high teacher input -- and the WIER professional writers in residence are indeed teachers.

There are three panels of writers involved in the program, supporting the work of students in elementary, middle, and high schools. (Biographies for all of the WIER professional writers are linked from http://www.wier.ca/~wier/wierbiomain.html And these are professional, and distinguished, Canadian writers -- they make their living through writing, and they are paid by WIER for their work in the program. The largest panel serves high schools because that is the level currently attracting the most participants, and it is WIER's longest running program. Classes -- ususally six in a group -- form “electronic literary salons” that typically reflect a variety of geographical regions; two or three salons are then grouped into “conferences.” One writer is hired for every six classes; thus, a typical conference of three salons may expect to work with three writers over a 12-week period.

The backgrounds of the writers in residence are rich and varied, and in some cases, quirky. The introduction to Guillermo Verdecchia's biography at the site tells us that he “was born in Argentina and educated in Canada. He has sold shoes and cameras, waited tables, tended bar, taught English in France, and appeared naked onstage. He is now a (reasonably respectable and fully clothed) writer of drama, fiction, and film, as well as a director and actor.” It is clear that Guillermo is a writer who has paid his dues. This devotion to the writer's craft has paid off in the awards and critical praise his work has received.

Other respondents have what might be considered more traditional backgrounds as teachers, editors, reviewers, professors, and columnists. What makes the group cohesive is a passion for writing -- whether narratives, plays, short stories, poetry, essays, biographies, editorials, and film scripts. Every respondent in the elementary section has written for children, and several have won national recognition or awards. Many WIER respondents maintain contact with teachers and children by visiting schools on Young Authors' Days, giving readings, and conducting writing workshops.

Teacher-student interactions intrigue me, so I asked Carolyn about the differences in working with young writers in person as compared to the online experience. “It's completely different,” she said, “because you don't have the body language -- everything that takes place in the classroom is absent except for the work.” She went on to mention that some students' personalities do come though, but only if they “write in that manner.” Continuing, Carolyn pointed out that “There's no clue, in fact, whether or not it's even a male or female author.... And what grade they're in is only evident in some cases if you want to go back and check which particular school....” At this point in the conversation, Carolyn revealed an aspect of the program I'd been unaware of. I asked about students' goals in posting pieces and their reaction to comments. Carolyn responded by pointing out that “they don't want to know if you like their hairdo, for example; they want to know whether their work is worth it -- whether it's getting across to you, whether it's moving you, whether it's reaching. Of course, it's not only the Wired Writers who are looking at their work; it's also their peers. Because everyone who's posted on the Web reads everything that's on the Web. So they're also getting response from other writers.” I discovered that a requirement of the project meant that participants had to post their writing for other students to read, as well as respond to two or three creative works.

Another area of interest was the nature of response. When asked about guidelines, Carolyn said, “You're totally trusted as a professional writer to say exactly what you want, so there's nothing they tell you to say or not to say. Some writers will comment on grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Some won't. It just depends on what your own leanings are. Some writers feel very strongly that we are there as creative writers, not as grammar teachers, and that students will find their own grammar teachers at school, hopefully. We're there to talk about style and content. Not necessarily 'content' per se, but how to present content as well as you can.”

A key tenet guiding Carolyn's manner of responding is to be supportive, which she noted, “I do in a classroom.” Using support as a base, Carolyn is able to move to the substance of a piece, and sometimes her comments are substantive. She can't respond in depth to every piece, but she may write a page or go through a poem line by line. As I listened to Carolyn, I thought back to my days as a high school student, where response to writing typically produced papers that hemorrhaged red ink.

Because Carolyn is a professional author I wondered about her opinion of the writing quality produced by participants. She observed that some students were in the program because it was a course requirement, and their pieces tended to be submitted in response to assignments. However, referring to pieces that showed spark, she said, “It's staggering sometimes. It's amazing!” Carolyn went on to discuss the characteristics of the high-quality writing she had seen, and indicated that she believed some pieces were publishable. There also was distress in her voice when she talked about content, where students' concerns were evident in their pieces: “Interestingly enough, as each year goes by, I notice different concerns and different -- in fact, worrying -- concerns that come up amongst students. There's often a number of stories in some years about physical and sexual concerns.”

“They write about what they know,” I commented.

“Oh yes, completely. There's also lots of stuff that comes up around eating disorders and violence. In fact, in this particular last year, I've noticed a lot of stories about violence.”

Although Carolyn and other WIER respondents typically do not meet students, they sometimes correspond interactively, in real time, in electronic salons. In one such conversation, three high school students from Newfoundland decided they wanted to know Carolyn better, and began by asking her age. When she responded, one wrote back, “Oh, I thought you were 16 or 17.” As Carolyn put it, “I was thrilled!” The dialogue continued with questions and responses about what the students were doing at school and how they would spend the weekend.

How do teachers who participate with their students in the WIER program perceive its value? One way to gauge response is to visit the Teachers/Schools links, where teachers who are or were involved with the program describe their experiences. The comments reveal how the WIER teacher-participants were transformed as educators because of involvement with the program. Sheila Pinchin from Maple, Ontario, observed that she, once again, became a writer by taking up “the old pen (well keyboard).” Myrna Hynes, a high school teacher from McMasterville, Quebec, remembered how her students' response strategies changed. Prior to WIER they tended to respond to the writing of others with “their 'red pens',” but she noted that after receiving “much deeper feedback” from professional writers, they began to respond to peers in a similar way. Several teachers mentioned the publishing opportunities WIER provided, and how making one's writing public stimulated quality.

Because of his long experience with the program, I asked Trevor Owen his perception of how the WIER experience changed teachers. He mentioned that generally teachers shifted away from a focus on methods and worked more toward building a practice of writing. As well, teachers moved from understanding the notion of mentorship as a kind of “expert/novice pursuit of production and toward accepting one's experiences as one's expertise, pursued in an arena of shared interest.” He related this transformation to ideas such as Vygotsky's scaffolding and Schon's reflection in action.

Interviews with Two WIER Teachers

To learn about their thoughts and feelings concerning WIER, I interviewed two teachers, one in person and the other through e-mail. They taught at two different levels, elementary and high school. Peers, parents, and administrators consider their writing programs exemplary. There was a similarity in their responses to questions, and their opinions about the values and challenges of the WIER program were consonant with those expressed by contributors to the Teachers/Schools pages of the WIER site. At both levels, the stimulus effect was pronounced -- that is, elementary and high school students wanted to write and write well because their work would be made public. The idea of authenticity is especially relevant when applied to composing because students in many public schools are accustomed to an audience of one: the teacher.

The second valued trait of the WIER program was the quality of feedback. Susan (a pseudonym), the high school teacher, appreciated the congruence of the professional writer's responses with her goals in fostering students' composing abilities. She noted, “The writer zeroed in on things that I thought were important, so the comments seemed to give credence to what I was doing.” Continuing, she remarked that “my students took such serious note of things the writer said, but they often didn't realize I said these same things. Hey, I'm not complaining!” Karen, the elementary teacher, was equally grateful for the support. She noted that the children took the professional writer's advice seriously, even though it was similar to the sometimes unheeded coaching she offered in conferences.

When I asked the teachers about the types of responses students received, their answers mirrored what Carolyn Smart had told me, as well as what the research on WIER has revealed. Susan appreciated the focus on content and style, mentioning that she was prepared to deal with skills. “Their expertise is just too valuable,” she said. “It can't be taken up with structural things. The other day the writer showed a student how a narrative might be shaped into a poem. I couldn't do that.” Karen thought that the professional writer's comments carried much weight, observing how Emily Hearn, noted author of children's books and the respondent for her class, always started off with a positive comment. Building on this foundation, she then nudged the young authors to think about their writing. I read some of Emily's comments, which will be discussed more fully in the next section, and I was impressed with her use of questions. “Ask questions that teach,” Don Graves had told us. Emily hadn't been in Don's class with me, but she obviously understood the value of this approach to nurturing young writers.

Susan and Karen appreciated the manner in which the professional writers reacted to the students' work. Equally important, they found the WIER program meshed well with the way they normally taught writing; thus, there was mutual support. Finally, the teachers found WIER user friendly, and it took them little time to learn how to use the accompanying computer program. Karen did have a problem in that computers in her school were available only in a laboratory which was not always accessible to the young writers, but this challenge was resolved through creative scheduling. These responses are consistent with those reported by other teachers involved in the program (Owston & Wideman, 1998).

I was unable to interview students for this column, but it is possible to gather a sense of their thoughts about WIER from the Web pages set aside for student alumni. Although many of the comments are brief, they make clear that students enjoyed the program. Moreover, most of the students continued writing after their WIER experience. Tara McFarlane, now a university student, writes that she is trying to finish a book, while Amy Blackwell indicates that she joined the Young Writers Club at her high school. Tara relates her experience as follows: “WIER made a profound impact on me. It allowed me to value my writing as well as other's. The whole idea about computer mediated communication and how education and technology can benefit each other. Working on the Internet with WIER has actually made me focus more on what I would like to do in the future.” Elizabeth McColl, also a university student and WIER participant in 1993-94, makes a poignant comment about response by saying, “Through WIER I learned how to take negative criticism to my pencil and not to my heart.” What a profound comment from such a young writer.

It is possible to access selected writings from students at all grade levels, along with responses from other students and professional writers, through a link to The WIER Taps. It is an interesting exercise to observe the changing topics and interests of the authors as you move up the grade levels. The large number of poems, at all grade levels, surprised me.

Calum, a second grader from British Columbia, opened with some personal details about his family and his interest in roller blading. He then offered the following poem:

This student gets to the point. Emily Hearn, the respondent, supported his effort in the following way:

In her response to Calum, Emily teaches by identifying the part of his poem that touched her. Writers must think about their creations, and Emily is helping Calum develop this critical skill of self-reflection. I noticed something in Emily's response that is typical of many of the Wired Writers' comments: they use rich vocabulary in talking to the young authors. I asked one of the teachers in the WIER program about this sophisticated vocabulary, and she told me children appreciated being talked to as “real writers.” If the vocabulary wasn't understood, they sought help from peers or adults.

As students mature, serious topics such as racism are probed, as seen in a narrative entitled “A Lesson Called Racism” by Jamie, an intermediate-level Ontario student. As do many respondents, Sylvia McNicoll began by supporting Jamie's writing, pointing out her unique perspective on the issue; however, she also nudges her. Jamie responds to Sylvia, explaining where she found her inspiration.

Interestingly, Jamie did not revise the story, which is the author's prerogative. In all cases, authors retain ownership of their writing. However, even though the piece wasn't revised, another student responded to the story, offering specific praise about how the piece touched him, the effective use of emotionally charged words, and his favourite character. This response prompted Jamie to write back saying, “Thanks so much for responding to my story. Your insight was well appreciated. I must say, you have a very eloquent vocabulary. Your thoughts that my story was based on truth is correct. I witnessed a similar situation occurring not too long ago, and it made me extremely angry. Melanie is also my favourite character. I believe that friends like her can make a wrong situation right.”

At the high school level, powerful poems tell of fathers who have lost jobs, about death, desires, friendships, and other personal subjects. Jessica, a high school student from a Toronto suburb, wrote “Model Behaviour,” a poem about life on the catwalk, which offers her views about the price models pay.

The correspondence about this poem is fascinating. Even before Gerry Shikatani, the electronic writer in residence had an opportunity to respond, Nicole, a student at another high school, wrote,

This is a very powerful poem about a very serious topic. Throughout the poem you show the irony of how many models try to achieve the perfect image and status but fail miserably. There really is no perfect image and you convey this clearly through your writing.

The second stanza is very poignant, especially the last line.... Your poem is very touching and it really makes me stop and think. I hope that I will get a chance to read more of your work.

Eventually, Gerry was able to respond, and his suggestions, although supportive, speak to a section of the poem that needed strengthening. Notice that Gerry doesn't put words in Jessica's mouth; rather, he nudges her with the seeming knowledge that she is capable of better writing.

Gerry's comment clearly stimulated thinking and rewriting, and Jessica did revise her poem. But she also claimed ownership over it, retaining the last line.

Jessica accepted the challenge along with the advice. Using Gerry's comments, she responded by pointing out the changes and asking for further direction. A new version of “Model Behaviour” was sent as well:

As they strut their waif-like cages
Down polished, alluring catwalks
They encourage you to buy their looks;
Turn the glossy pages in magazines.

It doesn't matter
That their empty stomachs are spaces in which they long to fill.
To attain these ‘perfect’ physiques requires immense self-control:
Their bodies become feeble with abuse.

No one seems to look past their paper-thin skin,
Enveloping willowy frames.
The public can't see through the swirls of cigarette smoke,
Nor do they notice track marks on gangly limbs.

Mesmerized with each turn of the page they step closer to the edge of vogue.
Their healthy bodies deteriorating, girls yearn to achieve greatness.
Naive minds buy into the convincing messages.
Their heads surrounded by porcelain; untouched plates.

Become beautiful: Promote the illusion.

Not all pieces of writing go through the drafting process in the rich manner in which Jessica's poem developed, but these exchanges show how a skilled coach can nurture a young author. Moreover, when the type of expertise that Gerry possesses is combined with the talents of the classroom teacher, the impact on the writer is intensified.

In the introduction to this column I expressed concern about the small number of Web-based learning programs carried out into Web-based learning. As mentioned, reports on lighthouse projects are common, but careful research frequently is lacking. There are already descriptive reports on WIER, but a team of professors at York University is carrying out studies into all aspects of the program. A brief summary of one project conducted by Herb Wideman, Ron Owston, and Stan Shapson indicates that the writing of students enrolled in the program did improve, and they attribute gains to the interventions of the professional writers. Note that the analyses took place using submissions to WIER, so the interventions were directed at specific pieces of writing. No attempt in the study was made to assess overall improvement, which would have meant going into the classrooms and accessing multiple writing samples. Thus, this narrowly defined study should not be seen indicative that the credit belongs to the professional writers, thereby diminishing the impact of classroom teachers.

A study conducted by Ron Owston and Herb Wideman (1998) examined teachers' perceptions of WIER and a second telelearning network program. With respect to WIER, teachers in 11 participating schools were interviewed, and a qualitative coding and analysis of the data were carried out. Three main categories were identified:

Teaching training for the WIER program is not carried out on site or in person; instead, teachers are given training materials and 2 weeks of orientation activities. Although some of the 11 teachers interviewed had experienced technical challenges and others were initially overwhelmed by the new knowledge they had to absorb, the majority were pleased with the ease of participation. If there was a major concern, it focused on the time required to post students' writing and to download pieces submitted to salons by other students. It seems as though teachers were frustrated by these time constraints that took away from other, equally valuable, activities.

In spite of these challenges, the teachers, with one exception, were unanimous in their praise of WIER, and they appeared to feel that the trade-offs were worth the effort because the end result was valuable. The main perceived value was the motivating influence the WIER program had on young authors, and the study findings revealed that the effect was consistent across grade levels. Teachers even reported that some previously indifferent writers seemed to care more about their pieces because of involvement with WIER. Although the words were not used by the teachers in the study, the notion of “authentic writing” comes to mind. These students knew their writing would be made public, both to WIER respondents and to peers across Canada.

The second major value was the quality of responses from the professional authors. Teachers demonstrated little jealousy of these writers; instead, they celebrated the expertise brought to the process. Many mentioned they read the responses and learned from them. Thus, WIER might be perceived as a vehicle for teacher education. A frequently-made comment about the responses related to the positive nature of the feedback. Invariably, the professional writers would tell young authors how the pieces touched them. As with Emily Hearn, the students' stories often promoted stories from the professionals. Although the praise frequently was the initiating aspect of the dialogue, it was used as an opening for critique and suggestions for improvement. As with the student cited earlier, many learned that criticism and suggestions were directed at the pencil and not the heart.

A seldom investigated topic in computer-based learning is pedagogical congruence. Entire computer packages, such as integrated learning systems, are mandated by school districts with little regard to how the curriculum and instructional practices embedded in the package match those of the teachers. The Writers in Electronic Residence program is not mandated, and its process-writing orientation seemed to match that of the teachers who participated. The very practices that constituted teachers' daily writing instruction -- for example, constructive criticism -- appeared congruent with WIER respondents' practices. Many of the teachers thought that WIER validated their practices. The credibility of a prophet in his or her own land is well known. In a few instances, teachers credited WIER with transforming their practices, much as Trevor Owen pointed out. Their comments to students became deeper, and some teachers even became writers, or as the teacher mentioned earlier, became writers again.

The WIER program offers unique opportunities to teachers and young authors. The Internet is ideally suited to digital dialogues, and it difficult to imagine how students could receive such high-quality response through another medium. It might be possible for students in urban areas to interact with professional writers, but Canada is a large country in geographical terms. Writers in Electronic Residence permits students in isolated areas the same access to professional expertise as those in densely populated areas, and it links student writers with peers. Respected and talented professional writers who care about nurturing young authors exist in every country, and I see WIER as a model that could be emulated elsewhere.

Calkins, L. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Back

Graves, D. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Back

Owston, R., & Wideman, H. (1998). Teacher factors that contribute to implementation success in telelearning networks (Tech. Rep. 98-3). Toronto, ON: York University Centre for the Study of Computers in Education.
Back (1st citation)
Back (2nd citation)

To print this article, click with your cursor in the text block where it displays, and then use your browser's print command.

Citation: Miller, L. (2000, July). Wired writers: Canada's Writers in Electronic Residence program. Reading Online, 4(1). Available: http://www.readingonline.org/international/miller1/