Article+Two

Article Two: (Melissa B. Christine, Amy, Melissa P., Meghan, Clarice, Sarah, Pam, Nicole)

**Ranker (2009) Discussion**

 * I. RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY:**
 * In this case study, Ranker investigated the idea of "semiotic import" (p. 320) among three bilingual, first-grade students. Ranker references literature on semiotics and multimodality to position the framework for his study. Previous studies have applied a social semiotic framework to composing, but have not looked at the transfer of knowledge from other sign systems. Ranker's rationale included a "desire to extend and develop a social semiotic framework within an early composing context" (p. 324). He was interested in seeing how the participants in his study transferred the knowledge they gained from a variety of media (books, film, etc) to their own composing processes. Ranker wanted to "answer (his) pedagogical questions about how to support and extend students' work" (p. 325). Ranker also encouraged literacy educators to help students access and use the semiotics available to them so that a broad range of resources and multimodal practices are available to both emergent literacy students and second-language students (p. 320). **
 * Guiding questions for the research (p. 322): **
 * 1) What multimodal composing practices did the students import from previous composing events? **
 * 2) In what ways were these practices transformed or redesigned as they were imported into the focal composing event? **
 * 3) How did the imported and redesigned resources serve the students in accomplishing the official writing task? **


 * II. CRITIQUE OF RESEARCH METHODS**


 * What research method is used?** This is a qualitative case study. It is important to note that these three case studies comprise a larger, seven month case study conducted by the researcher.


 * Who are the participants?**Three first grade boys [Juan, Julio, and Robert], ages 6-7, whose families all immigrated from Puerto Rico; the boys speak both Spanish and English.

Ranker states that he was interested in how the students interacted and made meaning while they wrote together each day.
 * How were they selected?** This information is not explicitly stated; however, I (NN) would assume that the participants were purposefully selected.


 * What are the demographics?** 1st grade ESL classroom at an urban, public school. The researcher states that approximately a third of the students in the school are bilingual and are learning English as a second language. The teacher of the class is reputable and honors the native languages of her students. The teacher incorporates a writing workshop, and this is the setting in which the researcher is interested.

p. 323 "teachers, teacher educators, and researchers can use this case study as a heuristic for considering the composing processes of other students in other contexts". All three students had moved to the US from Puerto Rico (range: 2.5 to 3 years prior) and were familiar with various forms of media (movies, cartoons, comics, etc.).
 * How are internal and external validity addressed?** I (NN) wonder if there is an issue with internal validity because the method of selection is not explicitly stated. Does this matter in a case study?


 * Are qualitative methods clearly explained?** Yes (IMO); multiple forms of data on the students' composing processes were gathered and analyzed. Data included: audio and visual recordings of student work during writer's workshop (Coined by the researcher as the Literacy Event), audio and visual recordings of the teacher's lessons, descriptive/analytic field notes, photocopies of student writing samples, and informal discussions with both the teacher and students that were recorded.

Ranker used open coding and found three major categories: division of work, drawing cars, and using a book as a model. Each of these composing practices had a multimodal dimension and some sort of social component. The boys also imported all three of these practices from previous writing activities.
 * III. CRITIQUE OF DATA ANALYSIS**

Division of work: Students used the previously established practice of numbering and assigning pages. Ranker says there is a "low degree of transformation" happening here (p. 342).

Drawing cars: Interestingly, when the boys are drawing the cars and writing related text, the text is scattered throughout the page. However, when they compose the official task of the Titanic book, the text is only at the bottom. This is a seemingly unrelated task, but it helped them with their book and gave an example of their semiotic development.

Book as a model: They imported what they had seen their teacher do when modeling and what they had done in previous compositions. However, this time they changed the task and relied on the pictures to inform their writing. The boys discussed the images and used them to make collaborative decisions about their own book. Thus, they created their own "writing workshop" (p. 342).

Future research implications: p. 324: "Although there is much promise for exploring multimodality and the visual mode in studies of students learning English as a second/additional language (Kress, 2000), more research is needed on this topic."
 * IV. CRITIQUE OF DISCUSSION**

Ranker found 3 composing practices that the boys used (p. 339): 1) they physically/spatially divided their work into discrete parts that each was responsible for developing 2) they produced elaborate drawings of cars 3) they used sentence strips and ordering/sequencing methods

This case study extends the research work that supports the importance of social collaboration in bilingual students' composing by providing details about how young students use social collaboration to access and use multimodal composing practices (p. 345) from previous writing contexts to produce new, extended texts for "official" tasks. The researcher clearly states the relevance of the study and its implications for the classroom. It shows the importance of allowing students' "import, redesign, and semiotic weighing process as they engage in writing."

I found this article to have a lot of great theory and terminology that I found helpful and interesting. Also, the methods, student work, and table were great. I'm just not sure if the findings are an "aha" moment for early childhood teachers. Drawing and writing are 2 modes that typically go together. I think it would be more interesting if the modes were an interesting or novel combination. I appreciated the researcher pointing out how the drawing of the cars helped the boys with the Titanic assignment. I think most teachers would have redirected the boys back to the assignment thinking they were off-task. By allowing them to work through their process, they were able to go complete the importing and composing. Ranker's style is simple and straightforward. The structure of this paper is one I could use as a model or "mentor article" in my own similar study. I appreciated how his organization allowed for slight overlaps of information, which made the study easier to understand.
 * V. ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS (QUESTIONS/CONFUSIONS??)**