<%BANNER%>

Intertextual Connections

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024950/00001

Material Information

Title: Intertextual Connections The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the Writing of Third Graders during Writing Workshop
Physical Description: 1 online resource (268 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Manak, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: curriculum, instruction, intertextuality, literature, reading, workshop, writing
Teaching and Learning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Curriculum and Instruction (ISC) thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Intertextual Connections: The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the Writing of Third Graders During Writing Workshop Teachers frequently read aloud as a part of writing instruction so that children's book authors can serve as mentors for students' writing. Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of the significance of reading aloud children's literature within writing workshop, the intertextual connections students construct between interactive read alouds and their writing within writing workshop has received little attention. This descriptive, naturalistic study conducted in a third-grade collaborative learning environment examined how interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced students' writing. Specifically, this study examined how the dialogue occurring among the teacher, students, and the children's book authors during the interactive read alouds influenced students' writing. Over six months, multiple data sources were collected including observational field notes, transcriptions, informal and semi-structured interviews, and student and teacher artifacts. The data sources were analyzed according to the process of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and by the constant comparative method. A grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader emerged from the data and addressed the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. This grounded theory was composed of seven conceptual categories which included: noticing, examining, guiding, explaining, understanding, mentoring, and crafting. The literary understanding socially constructed by the teacher, students, and children's book authors during the interactive read alouds significantly influenced students' writing. Within each sentence of their writing, students made intertextual connections to multiple texts. The content and ideas within students' writing were intertextually connected to a wide variety of texts they had previously experienced; however, the students consciously crafted their writing based on the socially constructed understanding of the purpose of author's craft which intertextually connected their writing to the interactive reading and examining of the mentor texts. The teacher facilitated the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality during the interactive read alouds by guiding the discussion and explicitly discussing the interconnected nature of reading and writing.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Manak.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Lamme, Linda L.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2010-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024950:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0024950/00001

Material Information

Title: Intertextual Connections The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the Writing of Third Graders during Writing Workshop
Physical Description: 1 online resource (268 p.)
Language: english
Creator: Manak, Jennifer
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2009

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords: curriculum, instruction, intertextuality, literature, reading, workshop, writing
Teaching and Learning -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Curriculum and Instruction (ISC) thesis, Ph.D.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract: Intertextual Connections: The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the Writing of Third Graders During Writing Workshop Teachers frequently read aloud as a part of writing instruction so that children's book authors can serve as mentors for students' writing. Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of the significance of reading aloud children's literature within writing workshop, the intertextual connections students construct between interactive read alouds and their writing within writing workshop has received little attention. This descriptive, naturalistic study conducted in a third-grade collaborative learning environment examined how interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced students' writing. Specifically, this study examined how the dialogue occurring among the teacher, students, and the children's book authors during the interactive read alouds influenced students' writing. Over six months, multiple data sources were collected including observational field notes, transcriptions, informal and semi-structured interviews, and student and teacher artifacts. The data sources were analyzed according to the process of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and by the constant comparative method. A grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader emerged from the data and addressed the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. This grounded theory was composed of seven conceptual categories which included: noticing, examining, guiding, explaining, understanding, mentoring, and crafting. The literary understanding socially constructed by the teacher, students, and children's book authors during the interactive read alouds significantly influenced students' writing. Within each sentence of their writing, students made intertextual connections to multiple texts. The content and ideas within students' writing were intertextually connected to a wide variety of texts they had previously experienced; however, the students consciously crafted their writing based on the socially constructed understanding of the purpose of author's craft which intertextually connected their writing to the interactive reading and examining of the mentor texts. The teacher facilitated the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality during the interactive read alouds by guiding the discussion and explicitly discussing the interconnected nature of reading and writing.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by Jennifer Manak.
Thesis: Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Florida, 2009.
Local: Adviser: Lamme, Linda L.
Electronic Access: RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2010-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2009
System ID: UFE0024950:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110216_AAAAHW INGEST_TIME 2011-02-16T21:38:17Z PACKAGE UFE0024950_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 111608 DFID F20110216_AABNIZ ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH manak_j_Page_098.jpg GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
59b20faec061ae848bfbfeaf6c1d8cd4
SHA-1
780d4ea14153f8fbf1e267d87ba34adb21cb2643
57369 F20110216_AABLUF manak_j_Page_244.pro
a3c576e8d2dca293235287f78e013682
8c1f9b5802e2e9fecf890c22b8fc24cc79fcf773
36711 F20110216_AABLUG manak_j_Page_092.QC.jpg
bacfb5d0112c1c9f8910116f03636039
221a9834165b7f0543780e5dc5a1e01190706ee0
25271604 F20110216_AABLUH manak_j_Page_208.tif
1f49862da9498f570d3feab364e393c2
51e27eed832077643445bd16481fce7e3b20341f
1510 F20110216_AABMRA manak_j_Page_163.txt
5bb0e3f701cd12c607bd284a9c5d59e4
5af747b4255588feafc9d8c6a9c3bfabfc5fd8be
108632 F20110216_AABLUI manak_j_Page_018.jpg
c8dbcba46a72a791c672115e69d8e9d1
c03f2e652708d686a6294ef810091bf7a1c2441c
44142 F20110216_AABMRB manak_j_Page_107.jpg
b7313480509ebe74a9d69b522718bd23
85a12a86aecf30b9cce645f76d27abed3b14200b
1051933 F20110216_AABLUJ manak_j_Page_131.jp2
7aa9a2da5252215ffaf3a5b6672cbaa0
022b309cb4dd53e6c7e0371f4ca4fd623a75d8e7
54392 F20110216_AABMRC manak_j_Page_087.pro
58604f8fcaa018e9194c59245c60cc27
600c4492277ab1f64fbb4ae47dc6671d3fa34bdf
2240 F20110216_AABLUK manak_j_Page_060.txt
c410e897555707c6a9cce8922bf0edfc
ce4f1f9a940493963ef2522f84641cf8153cdd5d
80542 F20110216_AABMRD manak_j_Page_119.jpg
458ad49ebb29874ba69ef5d02eed4931
04b8b956ac9ddbde619ef3f043fede9f685c963f
113252 F20110216_AABLHA manak_j_Page_244.jpg
0131f162895fb5f9115faf724122ae74
34ca8be5fe7dc4602a5ef19acd80ab45d5931840
111384 F20110216_AABLUL manak_j_Page_030.jpg
18dfdd1a47fcb84c1b5575eddf4176d0
16853b7838805bd5047314038bb90132fac4a0a6
83798 F20110216_AABMRE manak_j_Page_216.pro
8783ac8bebe6402cbc6e64fd546a5742
1f4ca0c77ad255e977e7aa853db28baae17439a2
1051970 F20110216_AABLHB manak_j_Page_128.jp2
4288c321abff5643916afecf91233214
9db935b6ddb8bb896ef42982d4d60d801f1dc586
F20110216_AABLUM manak_j_Page_222.tif
b99907571924bbb63d8e9e34e95f0ed4
622d844115dae97b9ad1a6ae555fb0ad53fe5089
1051966 F20110216_AABMRF manak_j_Page_115.jp2
c007ee35a52df9e9e31d48c1296e1ef1
113c2c9adc28f3877af0bb7db540c3ded6df19da
1051960 F20110216_AABLHC manak_j_Page_034.jp2
57f71e625fb72f42f4734b2932400958
f99b44a18183b77a6c049a03592ee56aa4ba8a88
34768 F20110216_AABLUN manak_j_Page_075.QC.jpg
6406da9069d1ed45141e693b58f44c73
c24ffb43e77fcd64a17f89ba3dfe79d698e20b00
28971 F20110216_AABMRG manak_j_Page_130.QC.jpg
898a67ae8f53aa811292521249e698d3
cd4e28716ce051f968357c013a29227f1b5c4fc7
1051974 F20110216_AABNOA manak_j_Page_068.jp2
52c9150fda2129d29f0f2e4388709b4c
ec43306517d7bb40b9c5cd33c35c0effbbd107e8
8516 F20110216_AABLHD manak_j_Page_080thm.jpg
6883585b7bff94345c8aa23aa0d64bca
7f1443d43dd250be05c56a0dee3e9cff2f2f0f62
88597 F20110216_AABLUO manak_j_Page_171.jpg
dafeb91f3aca2d4442fc0a6aa897cb21
82d87012bcbd5273632b5ad7274131173633f9f7
F20110216_AABMRH manak_j_Page_097.tif
4eadf9111b690ff349e78a1b0a69be9a
9f4a9a1d9d2f89b7a2e60cc588187e9c006508fe
1051975 F20110216_AABNOB manak_j_Page_072.jp2
69dc53e5f538fdaf0a545a1579be56c0
9760c4bc84eec222bfa1c3a50fe5080a52623d67
F20110216_AABLHE manak_j_Page_022.tif
df804aaa8b4f9fb2fec8c0d810a9c96f
9c4583ad72157acc50b294b05814dcf415b563e2
9416 F20110216_AABLUP manak_j_Page_179thm.jpg
2cc4e6aab36cec2a43dc68f67ed7cf4b
eb5e540d0adcebb4f1f75d02794c2e54831cb4ed
106556 F20110216_AABMRI manak_j_Page_046.jpg
6ec6b88f30110a4fef58c334bf9fd32c
1715a3bb7e422c2642a0270873fa661e37eb390d
1051982 F20110216_AABNOC manak_j_Page_076.jp2
0e9fe87a3e0e1befdd17fb89c0aed83c
675340bd79c36ad2a64e4f9df9f14b5d7dd44f10
F20110216_AABLHF manak_j_Page_037.tif
0a036fe01d14884625a3a0246294155f
4686220b40cd131e16a1431ee692953f6d4ce485
36292 F20110216_AABLUQ manak_j_Page_236.QC.jpg
2ee7dbe14b7bf75001c45dbdc0865c44
03cb6882a41957d0e01a22f445492c5a1c7e130b
8690 F20110216_AABMRJ manak_j_Page_138thm.jpg
34d85bf974fd0daba6b34b2a5f6527b2
f137949a28b5e5deccc0cddaf73c68e487a3c9bb
1051965 F20110216_AABNOD manak_j_Page_078.jp2
00522b75865980bb5933372a5f59604a
38bece515631971e9985f96c618004dd0208ec09
40189 F20110216_AABLHG manak_j_Page_249.jpg
d8a6d97403e0050bf56b66df067240ab
5892b45d213bf2b4b35471212d86574173716a93
2210 F20110216_AABLUR manak_j_Page_085.txt
b4583793b771be7116a53b6f6b2f8e89
a3fed572ee11a4d0e6c6483c36278c927d2114a5
1051944 F20110216_AABMRK manak_j_Page_080.jp2
2cd3223dc1778807ad8d0276aee0a168
b5922772386cb51f65ed7df7517e690d2567ff1a
F20110216_AABNOE manak_j_Page_079.jp2
2c144244b5fa53bd682a699193b8d313
93a050f04b1e35c21f5cfdce42493fa443717c5b
2301 F20110216_AABLHH manak_j_Page_027.txt
d8782e6a4db6854736b3cc7e1bc86d25
886f38ed1268711fcbae0680c1fad5b3ec7e31a0
1051930 F20110216_AABMEA manak_j_Page_018.jp2
d1acceb8306d38503b226c2c6f997628
b0f41d6353910fda4cd25d574a44cf47d76d42db
2316 F20110216_AABLUS manak_j_Page_252thm.jpg
23a0e814d16c6ef5fd9c3b53bd99afce
25310aebbba704ed43685c9a2147af1c070edc91
81 F20110216_AABMRL manak_j_Page_003.txt
b3c2035ab72600686b2735e12ff7b103
2975e6eb18aad04e7e6e8685a5d85036e3178f1d
1051973 F20110216_AABNOF manak_j_Page_082.jp2
38f1fdba0f310ce989b99509e26c020d
f11597e65f3b116fa526f136517aa16665233af4
113960 F20110216_AABLHI manak_j_Page_177.jpg
73333385d6291393b1124eec3e89284f
85585382d417035409569aea22177ddc5a37abb2
4486 F20110216_AABMEB manak_j_Page_024.pro
a8d6e9fcd05bfd1d146bdf98e001b907
4ca99291e3f9be0895f274ed36ba5980f07ff604
F20110216_AABLUT manak_j_Page_038.tif
60744470e090eedb28372a6f1b0c1efd
91c35978327ebcab12fd3a9d7dd81179b52bc9ad
57417 F20110216_AABMRM manak_j_Page_053.pro
5a6b4411301849589b2c262d11820c85
cde984da0b15b1884408bc483301e377a3e2d723
F20110216_AABNOG manak_j_Page_083.jp2
0051e153b4e5b4fa99dee417d0e4123e
061f81a918cd08f9541f7fc6b95e744545c37d59
56345 F20110216_AABMEC manak_j_Page_158.pro
7ab416fc77d1f5adc64e34ed3b56b9c9
b50e75dd7f2373ad81cc08c78ce5b4ccfa6a3008
110144 F20110216_AABLUU manak_j_Page_103.jpg
8547a8d4e810e5879adeda515927593c
ae66a0df922c30d01bd38e0a514908a1dc5ec8f5
34756 F20110216_AABMRN manak_j_Page_222.QC.jpg
6ba5e667380c44aa0e15e33ba92c3f84
4f2f946d799cc7527e1c09f940fe5ba51932547c
1051946 F20110216_AABNOH manak_j_Page_086.jp2
737dacd0c08950ed395ab0b953ecbe7e
95db5361a2d26d9338e975eef6ba1bcb2baa18bd
53210 F20110216_AABLHJ manak_j_Page_124.pro
e3203f3df710b0b8c2659cf319241f0c
a3effeaa1ab9e7308ba8def76019d74c931fcc36
9039 F20110216_AABMED manak_j_Page_098thm.jpg
2960e2cc46abe515b009863ab8cf2738
26de600b01e6c459326cbb9ac69538226a7e400e
1051978 F20110216_AABLUV manak_j_Page_020.jp2
ee7daf4be1284ec8181dee5ea7861e2f
5015a1c3bfd01e4ca4243d1fa0922b670d8d5973
F20110216_AABMRO manak_j_Page_083.tif
608c25da5a5081bbb2ffd3be159772bc
5f7a3ee7d4e20170bdbf89eff4fee554486829cb
970314 F20110216_AABNOI manak_j_Page_088.jp2
562ed571b82eb5b6434725a2da3f600a
e60c3b509997fb423f28de139e331a9884c61d2c
53131 F20110216_AABLHK manak_j_Page_227.pro
68c17a994714b2685a5407b1f9f3d5f3
c5d433f832ecc457b808a1a1a76dd1856ef7cbc2
9260 F20110216_AABMEE manak_j_Page_090thm.jpg
a5780b3acae4db98515294d6d94c39eb
5e89bafaf546cc7a6925fe43749d9543197c863e
111636 F20110216_AABMRP manak_j_Page_237.jpg
fcb5d334f5877202e165e29567445dd9
56cd1f89d7436a8517a4884e6ec49451e08ba44f
1051980 F20110216_AABNOJ manak_j_Page_089.jp2
c3c9f861d32822bc72263afa05db9c98
6214566337554be36b1d92b8ae7f117d1895fab5
2380 F20110216_AABLHL manak_j_Page_174.txt
01b372ac4cc95392f5467d0f6dff4bc0
a805acf7981dbc13fc8f9dcbecd8e1fa4aaa4a85
2167 F20110216_AABLUW manak_j_Page_239.txt
ccb8aa1cf1393b95510860bac823f83a
ba25360d56bb25ab56a928487b5623eb7a6df625
2223 F20110216_AABMRQ manak_j_Page_093.txt
da41d1f9a9ba972721a5a006d0efd5e0
38c8fea584b01dbf1470b7fc6ec9b23d3b465797
1051926 F20110216_AABNOK manak_j_Page_092.jp2
c35d94ee89e8dd9f01546fb19a8fd6c2
deef4f59e4d8d169397d0f986b50f247c1f6e523
2129 F20110216_AABLHM manak_j_Page_118.txt
de7e574ed1e4bf8714e1263d6242acf7
dc4394926fad1904a445f32f2b8e2f36042dca8c
109853 F20110216_AABMEF manak_j_Page_078.jpg
83c0b456d8a2a1e2d677c7aa368a047b
fd35753e003eeff6a229f6ddbe2c16f7efcb708c
F20110216_AABLUX manak_j_Page_015.tif
2e361b85b4068346ba16f9d682e637d0
9f4ce154a44f7f1e155dcfc256b82d1702225f7a
54128 F20110216_AABMRR manak_j_Page_212.pro
b4d2e721e05e8bc15191888b24e630ad
465fd3431b0ca5f4da2575076b53b79cc31d1b76
1051984 F20110216_AABNOL manak_j_Page_101.jp2
f91c79b5a096507428c2081bb267e05a
93a9e2aa2815efa770437176b9e8280916f0c875
8346 F20110216_AABLHN manak_j_Page_109thm.jpg
2b2decb292db89a3190890525addef69
38e8900e62b060ea32cc476d69c37f52d41c2a5f
112865 F20110216_AABMEG manak_j_Page_265.jpg
6a36c4e4547fae765151f4622b484095
0ecfcce7835d1a6056c980d440ec5b4e5aafce09
3070 F20110216_AABLUY manak_j_Page_224.txt
e3e49aa69e7addf6240333ca375566de
7ed555ebc36bf6efbb23e03e60bff718f3a89280
2841 F20110216_AABNBA manak_j_Page_129.txt
d49e39e4205b2992db5cc59786bfd65f
59dd243b2c024e5f21920d2020f52b1701f88037
F20110216_AABNOM manak_j_Page_105.jp2
4a2e024b094f1fe1e9f3ca5622ef80eb
6d2717149d619a9142d8ba16de261baaab47333a
1051949 F20110216_AABLHO manak_j_Page_231.jp2
95b92b75b6091d27f4a8b0c048602e02
f6d4d2901516d54912c4e2d28d88b67c26144fb2
135248 F20110216_AABMEH manak_j_Page_216.jpg
82c5e89333e3c8e95ac3bd529fd11237
fef3d2071b21ea0a75d8ba3c7898cd0cf0e95b4f
8627 F20110216_AABLUZ manak_j_Page_100thm.jpg
f1dc7940030acff29f00855c654037de
c9d9237f8f9d35deb0ab0b1a4980e1a33ce218c2
F20110216_AABMRS manak_j_Page_160.tif
b5ee48d93e2bc60de3fc60606d6dd661
ed0cd1beca95b1fe434e52b5a640c98aea4a24c5
466264 F20110216_AABNON manak_j_Page_107.jp2
d91151af8d317b67c6fcb71377f915ff
e21afd3ad114a86ea399bba9a5fa70ebf80dff33
1051979 F20110216_AABLHP manak_j_Page_215.jp2
7d85d8a12ff5e58248a8fc23ec948abd
97e68bee1a4adbe4817eb044d0319a6ee0b095bb
F20110216_AABMEI manak_j_Page_142.tif
aa1b780e063144460e860cf8088a14b2
33ca0180ee477d13bfb8b70dc4672a897b9760ca
2617 F20110216_AABNBB manak_j_Page_131.txt
d3de6415e1eec6c4b5ca081dcbbad8a0
4cd4bd28fa811caa10309e2eebcc6f43813bc62f
57297 F20110216_AABMRT manak_j_Page_166.pro
a300b6097e76fb5d073f361fea56f583
cc0aa038795e5b7d0581f7c15a9df01204e72cd2
36909 F20110216_AABLHQ manak_j_Page_225.QC.jpg
fc4891a2ab7b16b5b168129c2a06a566
c88157f97407773185f772fa87f77bb31b841bca
2244 F20110216_AABMEJ manak_j_Page_244.txt
743a25764415cc2b48ae5ed0c887590a
774321debf759132e432b22b949680db85eef453
2253 F20110216_AABNBC manak_j_Page_132.txt
6bcfe013777d64e76c81865918ae9722
91aea496c804f30882c2e66897b55a8d6148dd17
37433 F20110216_AABMRU manak_j_Page_174.QC.jpg
f54f71766e530a94805f743027cb567d
0df648dc1a1dd5877f7bdd1e9a7be815c99e4aac
1051968 F20110216_AABNOO manak_j_Page_112.jp2
01eac7f7705ddc36bc39d9cb95b78cb9
0263fd8149c20a734f6a60ac24f57e6f60f48017
34931 F20110216_AABLHR manak_j_Page_020.QC.jpg
6df016c6e58d1fe9465df07050cbae45
7defd76e6bfb47efca293ee9285f3c08d650eea0
2224 F20110216_AABMEK manak_j_Page_034.txt
78b022eb4d61b9943f0515e100b25ff3
4ba7a84018556f6861cfb7bdfc53a209e65c4418
2776 F20110216_AABNBD manak_j_Page_140.txt
772d1ed68f4ebceb096e23abe53cea28
fc96d4160fac8c24d1c0637a67ede09ebb8d850f
32536 F20110216_AABMRV manak_j_Page_250.QC.jpg
fbdb74803cd888f00788ae77755ad183
79c15c9d7caf18c2bb0fbfdae48734262e4acb4c
F20110216_AABNOP manak_j_Page_113.jp2
322db8d634d24e8a4c6df24f2df1d64d
f835fd4592bea7ab3eaea8f3419a44a5d0f044fd
110882 F20110216_AABLHS manak_j_Page_202.jpg
84a1bce8f881ac7de116b41370106836
5869d6ea1a56d483973dc7399d7442e87683ba68
9088 F20110216_AABMEL manak_j_Page_091thm.jpg
b693d0a42e14aadb5aaefb8ef7902c24
0128499f4f73fff835f216050af2f17c5ce4c0c3
2234 F20110216_AABNBE manak_j_Page_141.txt
24810241aa5a5a97ebbbcd6584e201b2
70531db4c3a034f4432ead675b325b33501d7bfb
6485 F20110216_AABMRW manak_j_Page_006thm.jpg
efb4faa9648707fce94654dd01190bbb
358054a2bdbcb33259a72ebf4fc490ef9437667a
1051957 F20110216_AABNOQ manak_j_Page_116.jp2
33f225a9ab10c4e00aea46c6630a4b5b
54fd6ee15dca40aceb2cfaf35e989395aa77a75b
8727 F20110216_AABLHT manak_j_Page_019thm.jpg
dae73e2c84af44e532cabee34a80c0b9
827904b9aba95b4db38aad6c28fd51573adf2227
10029 F20110216_AABMEM manak_j_Page_260thm.jpg
34a701ec1af860cf7a52b5a770ee053f
f972de9dbce4a11bf32fe02318b5d135bf6fd17e
2204 F20110216_AABNBF manak_j_Page_143.txt
a30e6a47637a0e164eaf6dcf7767ae93
692a9922b06b83f5dbec2f191564b242537be104
F20110216_AABMRX manak_j_Page_105.tif
142695561fd7357d5cae467a796ceb21
45b76db4bb700f630edf01ed52c30a712e5205e1
1051958 F20110216_AABNOR manak_j_Page_121.jp2
d66ba77520533e63eb447875eb011a7f
3d7428318e9b75bf40e5499e3dcd6a4c8ee930ff
36587 F20110216_AABLHU manak_j_Page_204.pro
4f86c872ab0b37e8f36b00e5f710ee10
7b50cafb737759f7af2c52f0b0f09ccd90bab519
37908 F20110216_AABMEN manak_j_Page_083.QC.jpg
d413dea7c898ad2700ec5f44433b46ef
b0b6fc3e5587638531d407a1179cd14ecb6f9200
3220 F20110216_AABNBG manak_j_Page_146.txt
45acd2267e6a9dfae99debd9d83b7d73
a20393a57bb25dc13cd6ab7e9a801977cb44c772
54752 F20110216_AABMRY manak_j_Page_056.pro
090955a0864c4f6f0dbbbe2ed1ef2a39
26d3e748fc8d48f39c0d58e1e3c3b0c9943d745f
F20110216_AABNOS manak_j_Page_123.jp2
135e235a5320e76bc31d4233e8d2a657
cee2f0e9c1dc075f2dd1bdd84508a7779d1b7526
135287 F20110216_AABLHV manak_j_Page_224.jpg
53f3c75c89f70c84d5faa3d6f25325fb
f309bb6364ac771af1af93975fd3a3bd3ecbc7e2
54994 F20110216_AABMEO manak_j_Page_096.pro
28e8fa5099e92fa0f367a0d8437cdff7
61a0901e1a6684020ec9dd8b0fdec20b3eafee0b
1972 F20110216_AABNBH manak_j_Page_147.txt
d764ea50b79742cc1e78331d076f8052
623638825538fd253779f86e66bbe4aee6109f55
F20110216_AABMRZ manak_j_Page_107.tif
c2a13c7ea5aa4d346a2ab4c38b9c5824
a2e08d444841ceb423da524f46502374b40acd34
1051983 F20110216_AABNOT manak_j_Page_126.jp2
0d0317f586aee038882adf3f619ad254
6c010003ff30e63740129823d2f6053bc10a13db
5016 F20110216_AABLHW manak_j_Page_077thm.jpg
5f2d2151dc9146e62e6a26385d215c32
0f16e3b556d6870d138ca7d504a7fa17ae8b41c6
53723 F20110216_AABMEP manak_j_Page_228.pro
3acf7c8927c1907b1ac5a5c96f4181ad
180a31c505682b92d70fdbe85b0b6a09b74f4f98
3692 F20110216_AABNBI manak_j_Page_148.txt
d3268071687a7176ccf24f574fb709a2
f8326e37a0aa2bda1cd86890273c81605581e54a
928885 F20110216_AABNOU manak_j_Page_127.jp2
6249cebb02610112c4fe343d37caa70a
37579e8c2df9c7596887e6196993353fadcecd93
1341 F20110216_AABLHX manak_j_Page_187.txt
1954d8b929200224c85f264cbc157ff3
c4c4a2c043cab5589abf92e913c0f204cca5093d
8422 F20110216_AABMEQ manak_j_Page_063thm.jpg
3fb4880310189e00a901d7eb39c2b8d6
f7d41b30046988358c6cbf7e247ca55c048c3810
2278 F20110216_AABNBJ manak_j_Page_150.txt
f864cf67a80e5e331b2116f412edb9c5
8205ec007551e1012b7fe07bc7919b8cbf17d7e3
F20110216_AABNOV manak_j_Page_133.jp2
7623d33a1485ea63c5fc7d35c847343c
3592fe5ace6ddc5498d1a6b6d2d3745082622d16
56428 F20110216_AABLHY manak_j_Page_042.pro
f5978193e94d893148e38f1b92e693b5
ca0fd3282e6892990cbf0c9f276903caf6544e70
100759 F20110216_AABMER manak_j_Page_201.jpg
fb72cffa03dd135ede0974b9a48fea8e
b2ebfe43a0909b7950ace5fd8d7ccfa2f51f346c
2237 F20110216_AABNBK manak_j_Page_153.txt
58b738570dffc6086a6eae5d90c6e972
67e1fbfecca66ca7d76f3d67d63bae733122c5fd
1051947 F20110216_AABNOW manak_j_Page_137.jp2
0b210ef0a8d23ddc48f5cc74645d8b28
bb3381ef840d5cb4f30283c24427985bb209865e
8615 F20110216_AABLHZ manak_j_Page_115thm.jpg
0471470b1040b77ed146b66573155df1
63da376b3905d723215c001f7f0a95fc2d5044cb
37635 F20110216_AABMES manak_j_Page_211.QC.jpg
60bdbfc22d4c55c8c7812f9b4daae916
15017bb6e8cdb224fc5cf395b6fbc7262d30f37f
2285 F20110216_AABNBL manak_j_Page_155.txt
0ca20ed107b52738dbe58a283df58c7e
c27a38457e12e816dbe4b2922b47fad088d18d45
1051963 F20110216_AABNOX manak_j_Page_139.jp2
82c9fb253dac718bf6948ad41294b3cd
7de729314c0bb37622dbc7c1f4093c30e8a94686
113685 F20110216_AABMET manak_j_Page_085.jpg
c8458e81ec104308072c76480007c4a5
d3b007dcd9dc54162bd771984e43e12ea5ce8b96
2260 F20110216_AABNBM manak_j_Page_157.txt
521ed6523f8186e76edfb2840e86c430
67389b445cbf9b6266b959e64f97a15003d5577e
1051935 F20110216_AABNOY manak_j_Page_140.jp2
9ac15920715f00ff058a54339d7fce9c
d45916ff493bd6f57ca7b1021d18e34b4ce8fdad
F20110216_AABMEU manak_j_Page_123.tif
995d6cfeac80390fc7d000b926314d23
8af13b2fddc0e5d061d86b4133ef7ce996072fca
2882 F20110216_AABNBN manak_j_Page_164.txt
65cbf55022f7bbff6da468b03e9047da
3985ccbab6a1db06bae3c1a328429bbae5283dcf
1051937 F20110216_AABNOZ manak_j_Page_142.jp2
3dbc3bcd495e54ee3c7af17467ac8456
07d3265f7ca943625a0fd415e599676c38f344a4
2373 F20110216_AABMEV manak_j_Page_067.txt
0b4e7bcd6ec72e27440e1affa4a7be6c
c3b9acb00c3674a580f7990be4af05cf42e6fcdd
2183 F20110216_AABNBO manak_j_Page_167.txt
183f07c29fbcd98a8fbc69cade61e821
4c46b88ae8a6a8701f8e20057ecd1be7116ab23b
F20110216_AABMEW manak_j_Page_007.tif
6f87ee0d41decdef2832a7974c64c57f
770e59fefd6bab33be534bc2aba549b0f7ecc958
1371 F20110216_AABNBP manak_j_Page_170.txt
1fe8fd6487490a5bf9c6a54f16fa6693
488ac3b7e705f840cafc51e9dca4f4822694fa3b
F20110216_AABMEX manak_j_Page_206.tif
e08dd296eec89734f462967d18d52208
2a2f73ded5bed54f3c936c383349a2246b56aaf2
F20110216_AABMXA manak_j_Page_088.tif
d820b0babe6cd0d4f8a1080e1bbd19b5
e7fe523c951ec4fa24a76e8d6578bf9e7227ebd8
1449 F20110216_AABNBQ manak_j_Page_171.txt
4e42be411bfaa293656475776735b04d
0805a86fb3e12f72bddc64ee13215b681622a8b6
112720 F20110216_AABMEY manak_j_Page_091.jpg
7be98b89243a80a41f7abbc4db2df974
c7608acde429fa548dd16121b324bb130366e602
F20110216_AABMXB manak_j_Page_094.tif
6806a34fb5f97aebb26dc481de96cca6
5fbdb487228c16edcda117370438a01ddd4196da
1981 F20110216_AABNBR manak_j_Page_173.txt
a4780c7d81d34d92d2068850f384e520
a22dbd5efef9871c6d12bc10969386f5874327d1
F20110216_AABMEZ manak_j_Page_108.jp2
4189fdebea055266a7a0e224c224898e
b8f1c3a7c84f788d46c3d437ae029f038f33b59e
1053954 F20110216_AABMXC manak_j_Page_095.tif
596caa3c2e3a34b054d310035f37ecf9
37cee098ab95d9c76113b2b02a2c871e45cb16d5
2231 F20110216_AABNBS manak_j_Page_175.txt
9a6b89c7ec40e03811f68814f14df345
5a8c1838a3447d535cc2539dc8515ec6cdb86373
F20110216_AABMXD manak_j_Page_096.tif
d3fa4171a3edf231609cedafa7014d2a
8cf979411ce878d4b4e7310988acea3f2f6ef4a5
2302 F20110216_AABNBT manak_j_Page_178.txt
2ae8bd05c756ba13637c16dd848a5da2
80dd1e7d4c5ad037c7c7ce7f6c0e0b74523b1ca5
F20110216_AABMXE manak_j_Page_098.tif
5008b5251abddb5f6bea94a0c701abc7
ca469726220323b20daa19b515db58c08221e081
2293 F20110216_AABNBU manak_j_Page_179.txt
16ef5207b02d7e9e1ff0ff949a8386be
14e3eb53105ea35aab01c7813f414f9e371e847d
F20110216_AABLNA manak_j_Page_237.tif
8f8d58f8f6218d83e1e654b4630a16cd
9763d918506cc76929a9c5e704d063763e1010c4
F20110216_AABMXF manak_j_Page_100.tif
22968746b532e900825f2cab9e6f8eed
eb9c485ed776adcc5c8a44df554d1efcd378db0f
1418 F20110216_AABNBV manak_j_Page_180.txt
4482a062d5649fcf7398110a56746999
b6cc8d2d66ca3bf3d47655476fbd5832f3f634f7
7558 F20110216_AABLNB manak_j_Page_255thm.jpg
461f9c5c92f4fb7b6dbd239108d10a33
7e9400d6a5a46fbccc34a0113e9082f0f85ee404
F20110216_AABMXG manak_j_Page_101.tif
381d654eb5fed445d4fb9bd7cf025ed6
5e648ac3a1922c79c285644d870823fa0c3a83c2
2207 F20110216_AABNBW manak_j_Page_183.txt
bbf41c81729af9af1ee039edb743357a
b446a0d4e38d08f7256118619c5445dbb92cc10e
8358 F20110216_AABLNC manak_j_Page_256.QC.jpg
2d43f3b527e8dcdce4d5c98ca1886f0c
338e2ca23bd5c4dfbd475e0e4148ffa2f94773d6
F20110216_AABMXH manak_j_Page_102.tif
ed5c139717c3578d90f7eab1c06c94ee
e057b8c67333a5f93b3fca34ab78ee9aef95533d
4154 F20110216_AABNBX manak_j_Page_188.txt
a1e6849c14f911960074553bc836cbaa
19f232d423535d88819b35322b65c03aceaf7130
2174 F20110216_AABLND manak_j_Page_025.txt
cf2301bbfb2e3939ac355de217fd2f2f
c69d967f738a9f20a00f0e75d01c21395eb30308
F20110216_AABMXI manak_j_Page_104.tif
0e23fd9c95b9fe58e41029daf1cdea25
67e65921f1f81d86337d9a650df2f1abf188f586
2112 F20110216_AABNBY manak_j_Page_191.txt
33699fd5d8f164d78f599ef9a7f9771e
fbc0a46c19b433dd30b79dd8ac31235bb9ac2159
9209 F20110216_AABLNE manak_j_Page_093thm.jpg
dd51b8b8d7a72eaa2e30135327663cde
34169f11448b916f1cefece6234b818c35d0ab6c
F20110216_AABMXJ manak_j_Page_108.tif
463d23e13040e3ce2634c8a62970e5c1
55e8be692a0d5a44faf027e36a602fbfb5ffdddb
2192 F20110216_AABNBZ manak_j_Page_192.txt
9c5285a83b166ea9aef10e154076aa8c
61d954a86d09bec9c1e87db750a1451798d301be
113152 F20110216_AABLNF manak_j_Page_232.jpg
9859bfad085414f4e7e87ea5eb30f878
6f2f8f751d570245e862da22d494715be20a4cab
F20110216_AABMXK manak_j_Page_110.tif
1a3637200c278e2c637665fbea7b1347
01eb537d9474b4d3237c5fab802f339ff5e5bb9c
111190 F20110216_AABLNG manak_j_Page_037.jpg
ab29676fbebd25a467c63eff832347f1
d1e2e54caf8ff964671aa2ca9db1d8ba4ce87496
57460 F20110216_AABMKA manak_j_Page_132.pro
b6bfa564d6284d47b0944efeed392acd
3e78ec02280855ebabafb332763505c65582f33e
F20110216_AABMXL manak_j_Page_114.tif
06f208f023b19029a3ce7d6bd7d8cb0a
7b908ad4e1f139fe5feef73bab871b8e237d93c5
2184 F20110216_AABLNH manak_j_Page_036.txt
1d7ad7a59ad7b1a07968719926fd0def
bc47b43331b1a8565a55a811a15b161f9bf6b53f
2185 F20110216_AABMKB manak_j_Page_217.txt
8283a4abefc75a900f20a07a1cb5453f
028f1112ca73cab685245e6787e77a521d1ba6c2
F20110216_AABMXM manak_j_Page_115.tif
b7f44a5f779e4f83e0a8bdbd61027afe
342574abb888d8a0dcf58f17d7a0407b6585b68d
8314 F20110216_AABLNI manak_j_Page_025thm.jpg
859e1c13bde0aa3e17aedef1d2621ac0
48104181b6eb2f66c5c1808689dc32e399eb02af
59155 F20110216_AABMKC manak_j_Page_071.pro
d9d9beac4ef8ed4d7bb205cdc85c4fe5
4d8612f6e32435c4a22dd47f9d1ced9ff639535c
F20110216_AABMXN manak_j_Page_116.tif
d801de235bd9ed1c876d8942953d808d
bd9a2ad497d1c7f501837d0dbfed14382261c9c7
110352 F20110216_AABLNJ manak_j_Page_063.jpg
e0f82a843955a626a39e5c72af56503b
a26f8b656520b293aaacb882d7d4197edd6435c3
34289 F20110216_AABMKD manak_j_Page_028.QC.jpg
a1e5b961fc473bb77edcac3ba32e610d
3c5a671e908c642fd86cda3daa8c0aad9f8fcc86
F20110216_AABMXO manak_j_Page_122.tif
a3ea96c487a3e97d04466fab2a250303
b77446f669df67158e91281d707cc45f84fccf31
117912 F20110216_AABLNK manak_j_Page_072.jpg
a50d6298b92c0248ce3872e2c67d9239
007a930a4840d3c8dc1cf6a9e2b2774d710f3e93
1051954 F20110216_AABMKE manak_j_Page_172.jp2
a06cfe65ef332c94184f7fdd9d92daba
cc929ef2944656cc9c0ea89432c946b65bfadfd4
55464 F20110216_AABLAA manak_j_Page_041.pro
07fd91697b31bd8ed824cfde5476b3e3
adcb21073721891ce712f650ea446d138cb0addd
F20110216_AABMXP manak_j_Page_126.tif
acffa9d57c87edd3452e095b00a5cad4
99785f4198ea9481f8cdfbd8ff55d19bba67c5b0
7698 F20110216_AABLNL manak_j_Page_163thm.jpg
e7bef466daaed26300e61b97e72efcd6
c23547b5bfd0ba07d42b1a4e110e4a3573cbefc5
2062 F20110216_AABMKF manak_j_Page_222.txt
ab35bb4f8f066841552ca622733dd2e6
b50d0a641054215cf3a03501a23a7b098b53d536
35211 F20110216_AABLAB manak_j_Page_079.QC.jpg
08fb38a773d711c4a32e7877c3523c7d
cb553a5191b460a3f66d3dc253a3b36b93a48c14
F20110216_AABMXQ manak_j_Page_127.tif
5283977d834e06e9a3d7c954ca885b78
7c2795a4640726f85401cafbca22da5f9119b2e6
33161 F20110216_AABLNM manak_j_Page_265.QC.jpg
c66cc7fe99e6d1857112a7f6a96c4e57
6b87734c8e12e702da63ea950ed394e5e8203fa2
114105 F20110216_AABMKG manak_j_Page_175.jpg
f5acca0cb5c7fa4a7de01c2172378228
f5d9b6d0cc1e4e142b4852bb91280684ca33be57
F20110216_AABMXR manak_j_Page_128.tif
270c227b8ecec8e8062d7dee6030b537
7cbbd301d5c2b5b0cfe48457fafe1933fac740c2
F20110216_AABLNN manak_j_Page_014.txt
fc983a9e58fa816130ee7b0aec3909e3
27bd2746d6cde01326aae1469f46f3cf81d5dcb4
1051898 F20110216_AABMKH manak_j_Page_155.jp2
9567d3672631d3963f0ec2f75f6630eb
dd631b1cc90f58d33c02617e53941c41642f5664
107024 F20110216_AABNHA manak_j_Page_020.jpg
5b834bfb2252e2de8c2753f08f999efa
2d4855f0e75934ef8e259a4e4c3c762813287e9e
1051972 F20110216_AABLAC manak_j_Page_014.jp2
c24075699d23e63c97de7663105d2e26
01eb51f920682edafc3112be766f0b35891f6d99
F20110216_AABMXS manak_j_Page_133.tif
98c47f605f26c9a0c24e3b1ad6d4919d
3472096583688777f1fcb27adff103f905dc4280
F20110216_AABLNO manak_j_Page_022.jp2
11b14444c94c4e13559f86908dc9e7c1
7458c5f8126b0373af6d1f91e1f8f1da39146be5
8991 F20110216_AABMKI manak_j_Page_139thm.jpg
fa0bbc6e2d009f8004900a52e1295007
9a46c1980610975f2c00ef7877c2ffb2c99f7e88
112210 F20110216_AABNHB manak_j_Page_022.jpg
6e77e355202fa62fddd2290914dc9a9d
52af507c89da6c05b3f2bc3ab75382d616dacb1a
8019 F20110216_AABLAD manak_j_Page_068thm.jpg
431049c3a05a101998956d435b5c061f
120f8ee32af79a1696b618f1bd2e4fd897f9cf4b
F20110216_AABMXT manak_j_Page_141.tif
dbfc118a0334a2f1c9b6820b2c8b1b64
5299e904ef522eeccdc0da6ebb5316318d24ea53
37280 F20110216_AABMKJ manak_j_Page_056.QC.jpg
eb468fc2c537afc536bf966ed715b1aa
6f5adf28cac1a351f375570ac822b57d626c17ec
3827 F20110216_AABNHC manak_j_Page_024.QC.jpg
99a82eba2d6ffe1888f26723a7622892
5e3fa3c8527961ae7cf7b92ceac7a7fb69e9911e
56770 F20110216_AABLAE manak_j_Page_061.pro
b51126ffd18947bea3576f63155bd468
2c521dec5ef63780c4bbe7c267221c38edca2876
F20110216_AABMXU manak_j_Page_144.tif
9f4331c0078e5284fc67d8d27beda887
b539f38152ba26decf2e11961c31e055ec31f9cd
F20110216_AABLNP manak_j_Page_140.tif
9dcc967b0bfa99c03ee8a3cd2263f71b
6c17084db5c61281fbb1ac1cf6115d5242ad46eb
2007 F20110216_AABMKK manak_j_Page_235.txt
1cda3aa8fe7afa8feb6b685b1b64537b
8ce70b648b92fced80f017c48dccff060bba430c
112445 F20110216_AABNHD manak_j_Page_026.jpg
84df0ccd0717d6a897045f2971cefaf4
3f50a5acb29259501c6cb6ccbd0bc0cde535f63a
F20110216_AABLAF manak_j_Page_245.tif
21e01f453e37918c9ff84af4e2da4374
c9c7bf41de41a2530123b0bd3a0107fb3950e066
F20110216_AABMXV manak_j_Page_146.tif
6f2b78f54336b0ee64630d6d6f90be7f
ee9b1a6ad1fcb105a15fab299170b6ae2959a82b
2450 F20110216_AABLNQ manak_j_Page_149.txt
bb433b77f8c61cbc54f540d6d9e2f568
23c4a3d066573e703058d9cb1fa003ed3b1e507d
117738 F20110216_AABNHE manak_j_Page_027.jpg
b3d1561e4b69f2c5a9a37c69fc69c7d5
bc202a505f927b4b75137ce532780f8df4c301b4
1051986 F20110216_AABLAG manak_j_Page_195.jp2
083e348fe0db37bd688cee972369dd96
d7d82f2398540c9cd7d4ba1311dc717bec4794b8
F20110216_AABMXW manak_j_Page_150.tif
5443ee0ad72ba75b8c3d476e6b63e647
8c997e286bcf1089124bacd5a35841895e37cb08
F20110216_AABLNR manak_j_Page_149.tif
cdad59f50039499ccaa555fc755c2091
589542146d710299afc178ddf44dc66e78e396d1
55532 F20110216_AABMKL manak_j_Page_242.pro
65d36106bad88de45295815da5ae2311
6b043db8a3fa02af844157c0138e4f91a8dee52a
37194 F20110216_AABNHF manak_j_Page_027.QC.jpg
42a13302ace500611e3c5f2dcde91ce4
0ed74dd116d73c9269e61b388daef18e68ef63ba
F20110216_AABLAH manak_j_Page_027.jp2
28749584033fd7d7234bfac15db90238
8535aa1c05027b630f7c2090fb98710e0ed31b37
F20110216_AABMXX manak_j_Page_154.tif
1fc14952d535dad57d1ae7acfcef8b55
0ebe43048908a16b06c2529ed2dd98208f7b1a1d
2181 F20110216_AABLNS manak_j_Page_133.txt
9f3da91ebe3f0725077aa8ae01b7a04f
7b16d53d088e774178647fd458986022a1882fab
99473 F20110216_AABMKM manak_j_Page_250.jpg
3570c1862ce2f24562b0b5203884d956
d1369a2b13eae67364f8a01b0a2ba57052e735d2
109459 F20110216_AABNHG manak_j_Page_029.jpg
8b5f9c8967e73a4546e2ecb132d10d47
4e575682f314f668be3411fda5c155ce6d5eff1b
43796 F20110216_AABLAI manak_j_Page_200.pro
c60b3b2653b35fa2596e71c23dd233fa
a0a3cc905f1371c831e2e38afaae3f33913ad049
1051908 F20110216_AABLNT manak_j_Page_166.jp2
686a29da10df6f3dc3b1543645681af6
85e3748574cc99aa731aa8b4f6777c391a169d8a
891064 F20110216_AABMKN manak_j_Page_204.jp2
eff42a03857dd107af81089d1b88ae81
4844d1c277bf922b5f3c788ff05fafbc337d62d1
37708 F20110216_AABLAJ manak_j_Page_166.QC.jpg
f0f1ac20458916eefb1fdc2d7fc56689
5efa1380a9351005ad3b801e7830d3cda3f652d1
F20110216_AABMXY manak_j_Page_155.tif
b1c0414f07381c87d5678fc2dd95228b
d40a42c1a5e6d2318f3bc3ec0c714f556b463433
F20110216_AABLNU manak_j_Page_235.tif
dca661b7fe69b1c0fcbe8b4e920d2a47
9908c0618f141259be7ef17063a42f5729c3304a
92686 F20110216_AABMKO manak_j_Page_095.jpg
a1f31b9ebe06751a96574f0f2813efad
a90ec5003b71d30ff606433367021f007f647c7f
35539 F20110216_AABNHH manak_j_Page_029.QC.jpg
ac1c751220a16c58042e92c2ecf0883b
49d2775531264b5647e59901fce75ce3bad53fc9
28306 F20110216_AABLAK manak_j_Page_171.QC.jpg
4333954d78960fe381a45f5498441283
38f6768f95d965003d0a34df88eb83c850a03297
F20110216_AABMXZ manak_j_Page_158.tif
783f7c6bdb1634c72efb8ba242a6b38a
77bffd2465686184effe0438f28ff7f8e6fe6b05
F20110216_AABLNV manak_j_Page_210.tif
b84a89f8cc4dfdec36daef25c2c8ccac
26ea9416b96b23e8349de41a09e8fa91490e0a8d
F20110216_AABMKP manak_j_Page_242.txt
d077078f1821559258bf98949552254a
b1465ff2738ee02a1e4b7642a67414a82e460387
35525 F20110216_AABNHI manak_j_Page_030.QC.jpg
d9790e8d687282918ca71c5bf9f6401d
ff6efccca71eb5f3dfea373e4d3da6ef583c5308
1051981 F20110216_AABLAL manak_j_Page_150.jp2
468a0856667b19211e377883e0643c77
bed952bfedb06ec5b37a93c19830af963aa88e28
2092 F20110216_AABLNW manak_j_Page_215.txt
35c2ca9c5cc22b6bad7a0536368bc385
b360d37ee2d5986eb042d7bc987c16d203bd659f
283434 F20110216_AABMKQ manak_j_Page_001.jp2
e5400f2c3ef5f9d4fb695f1f81239f6d
7262113a22bdd5cc486c47e04d3fb78a7e0168bb
34069 F20110216_AABNHJ manak_j_Page_032.QC.jpg
de1926ba5cd65a4c8decf91b7923a3ec
272627c36a0d472876ed22c980c174d914a141af
1051985 F20110216_AABLAM manak_j_Page_203.jp2
5c20ff3107f547771a5a6744e4265502
d161446892acde6423b3101a66bbbc780bb6d5f3
108048 F20110216_AABLNX manak_j_Page_052.jpg
1bcd1c9c6d7a2b2d1591c3dc5fbaa346
2e972c0cab441805e968269090c7b4687d231e43
56278 F20110216_AABMKR manak_j_Page_232.pro
a2d5ee44725f189b9022553e53116c48
e01fa5a0c70562ca2eac1a6da99b9bc4c9a11687
37605 F20110216_AABNHK manak_j_Page_035.QC.jpg
ab23c2fbf68981d9f8eab66d2f355bd1
1f4b72bf729b9544d2a5ad5a26530cd25e56b4d8
1051939 F20110216_AABLAN manak_j_Page_222.jp2
f6c5ff606e18fafd3919e7dd26d062b5
ffc0f2ad1e75558b66ca48bf74164c6c14e6ba7a
56431 F20110216_AABLNY manak_j_Page_085.pro
b403b18ed7874d085ff6a1709b9f453c
1eb07346f44302c178fe0caf5272b8949484e808
1090326 F20110216_AABMKS manak_j.pdf
a428237f284b790ce012b2dac5598b3e
00ad59a6755e0e0930bd91410d865b492f2b285c
116897 F20110216_AABNHL manak_j_Page_038.jpg
11c48e51f16713996262d2344b0300c9
4e101e829226bbbad5261f8afb3ba304209c9272
F20110216_AABLAO manak_j_Page_173.tif
359aaca669892b14ac93aada372db2b7
2e2ff86e317ae7ca3ac69aecf426aa70b98a2f11
1051976 F20110216_AABLNZ manak_j_Page_114.jp2
9489a3e32a98e600d70d4cfc5fe51ae2
96a99e70f78bf629a810927181a8422611d71cfa
35681 F20110216_AABMKT manak_j_Page_131.QC.jpg
9190ac7f7c18af21d1055646652d62e9
ce52cd549cc104827340a905e091cda001973a7e
38329 F20110216_AABNHM manak_j_Page_038.QC.jpg
27d3501f1732c2e85962f558b0a41783
ed1d781531c5cb82c4cec87ccc5b4d6552d72cba
F20110216_AABLAP manak_j_Page_158.jp2
734941afc34b32acde0ee41b45a492bb
2568fe5694735728f83017b8e81f0902f349c595
3933 F20110216_AABMKU manak_j_Page_259.txt
888a4573fd26758d40d8763d32dc35ca
bf988e5f2448fc003372349128086b43d577a20b
104727 F20110216_AABNHN manak_j_Page_039.jpg
a0b692ffb994c38e32167c0230a4a28e
88170b4af5ff9382578cd526fbd695b5886c30b8
F20110216_AABLAQ manak_j_Page_109.tif
a4e1bb059e4bbdf94e8069b52004ba9f
f2d9d93a80dc05981bda4174317df4fcd41b3f4e
F20110216_AABMKV manak_j_Page_099.tif
59922db9e59a4233b71b5d2994c6b52f
6a74c7be6ce821e98966807d501d5e2291a949f7
111999 F20110216_AABNHO manak_j_Page_042.jpg
9e0f94238147dc3d91e2e37a8f578dea
b468cc3970f0d719fe5a57bca506688c931816f4
34611 F20110216_AABLAR manak_j_Page_156.QC.jpg
be143617d11af1c4917d7adbe4226ffb
1deaf46293712b138868dc5a7b294daaef412bfc
107921 F20110216_AABMKW manak_j_Page_186.jpg
f1b6d8e6f4829e5ef7c9c4a35e224c02
5f9f7e481877f8227c7006d13e56ce50e8bfa40b
107655 F20110216_AABNHP manak_j_Page_043.jpg
38c64797247eb43e9fee6d3acce9f9cd
108a5e33dc8f6cf16369671d613074c0a5034de1
105985 F20110216_AABLAS manak_j_Page_209.jpg
fd57cb5b2076c1d6dc3214826bc5388a
8e1ac3d2067936595d3bc5233476380020cc5fb0
1051953 F20110216_AABMKX manak_j_Page_025.jp2
4b0e38c465749642bfad5f3a841b7c37
e1702457c9b8377aa7e0f1401e38f38f94d21230
38001 F20110216_AABNHQ manak_j_Page_044.QC.jpg
ba1041597b3e2957544fdfa115026153
40d462ea12a0e31d21eabf51c4a62728557446db
34895 F20110216_AABLAT manak_j_Page_021.QC.jpg
6ced4ec3aa1501519e0fcd98ad12fe94
b1b70a19b46174d13453d3ad9e754ecd9f65df21
47116 F20110216_AABMKY manak_j_Page_130.pro
c517e7339aaa6c2c268a11d0ea96bbaf
a722d0b53379a71f90180ff2e84fa80e92f5a180
69748 F20110216_AABNHR manak_j_Page_047.jpg
3d1762bd81e90d37b1c7deaef7cff7f4
b71b6bbc9cee261beac5cd93f287ccf0378292d9
34103 F20110216_AABLAU manak_j_Page_209.QC.jpg
d2926b39b77915294d86a3eeab20a1a4
dd6dd7242e0671c97dfca917081234ab6e28419d
110407 F20110216_AABMKZ manak_j_Page_193.jpg
80a4d947618d661f0e30ed2b50c16deb
2cbd37b4bcd870b23877ecde545344bf477e6844
113848 F20110216_AABNHS manak_j_Page_049.jpg
ed9254c49d486c353bb0a02c3462f394
b4918d265800d0458d5e0eb669832da8136d5478
2236 F20110216_AABLAV manak_j_Page_026.txt
8592df1702994ab598a003ca65e07826
f9b3676eabc1eec3a69d9f9477a5641ba7402770
107225 F20110216_AABNHT manak_j_Page_050.jpg
584e12b4a3b4a8c8d3fa53c3648e4f54
090815914851a2a23fd0715168ea41af69661e59
53088 F20110216_AABLAW manak_j_Page_094.pro
06649d18a473d3038f65e6a313da922f
fd77d6fc43f2d5a4030230922f42a806204fe029
112457 F20110216_AABNHU manak_j_Page_051.jpg
0ec4bf676c571f79f7449074230354e9
bde8dad3286f05218e86d5a02798f9428726c25b
2189 F20110216_AABLAX manak_j_Page_086.txt
73cc0b7c9d093bc2794e9c4a129ce109
02171f7be42a03ba4b7e3b1c40362927ada7e5ab
F20110216_AABLTA manak_j_Page_134.tif
4c3bb667057d689931efe23841d4892a
29405f347683383955bca605be45131cd61719f0
105339 F20110216_AABNHV manak_j_Page_054.jpg
20c688defc8322acabb71d2aed4d72d7
8ac492c2f4646c2af93fa18fb9422686cdf49939
6302 F20110216_AABLAY manak_j_Page_127thm.jpg
79f5f47b92491c73712c2ca2efb80a2d
85a35f1c261cede34f4bad1b293b0a7349617ecf
9220 F20110216_AABLTB manak_j_Page_199thm.jpg
e268f547f67af60ea5c5dabc891864f4
1d50f14c494957d2741792eef3353fcf0a77f09a
106221 F20110216_AABNHW manak_j_Page_055.jpg
b34adfb31326b56e51e5cad1c6ec4a81
337cf17d447ff47884bc3fa32be4807e386bbc78
9112 F20110216_AABLAZ manak_j_Page_244thm.jpg
23231d61b0a74d5627db452356408032
234705a211b72ddde295d07b411028b03ab4a2c4
35598 F20110216_AABLTC manak_j_Page_263.QC.jpg
15945aedc2131d44801f287b03e92dba
6a279089c55c18483abbae6cb8da69f518e93c93
35892 F20110216_AABNHX manak_j_Page_058.QC.jpg
8caeb69ce0922960de22325394b626e4
1be818e81440c22979ad2a557669cb80721b22a7
8718 F20110216_AABLTD manak_j_Page_126thm.jpg
635876c5800b26f81c30108ba21ee09e
ad019f01bed1c2ce0280c6cadc4afe27d7e45137
114260 F20110216_AABNHY manak_j_Page_060.jpg
9ae43d69b7f63deceabf056523ce4a2d
cb2eec3db4538443a2759768f7cab666b8c4c9f5
F20110216_AABLTE manak_j_Page_131.tif
4e2346a0b6f83c8929d166dfad82d9a4
2aba4cd2ed50e699b512d197ba7587135743a49d
36263 F20110216_AABNHZ manak_j_Page_062.QC.jpg
699671417a859b484d149ebc672a777a
ae70f69bdd7721cf846ba86bde91d6f0898a2010
111342 F20110216_AABLTF manak_j_Page_248.jpg
11b4b5a6439b82fc984db6c8734d43fa
5d196df6b32cf3ce75fde267b17508d4d0f1ded9
F20110216_AABLTG manak_j_Page_013.tif
638face44612972cb8663197a5daf520
e297c5b79afc1a63ecda1704865a212fc8e8ca4d
F20110216_AABLTH manak_j_Page_199.txt
547030a247ca9f3f4c89c79fcab8fdb3
60435d9e374cffa0232e6c8b70030bd8fbebc25a
112615 F20110216_AABMQA manak_j_Page_168.jpg
b44e7d679866ca513196f92aa7096e6e
93b4df35966c573d40e9fd789e1ff20788c4ae5c
8751 F20110216_AABLTI manak_j_Page_045thm.jpg
da80b83fa22bb6ad8569822d2574e37c
50d42e668eed39cc32baeacd56c4c31e6cd9c91a
8728 F20110216_AABMQB manak_j_Page_241thm.jpg
b20ccc68f277f29ad1f49f5c79cf6450
cbd9b8ebf8b1f8b1dd7b7255c9f3df4a91106095
8877 F20110216_AABLTJ manak_j_Page_203thm.jpg
b872582ff9b10b32bda3077611877a64
5b34ff979fcec1897d345129084678d43b4bb8ee
8521 F20110216_AABMQC manak_j_Page_081thm.jpg
44782df7fe178b8e7781b68934c6490a
44f8dd9a0bb39443c8685ee6ea660ca0e7124f64
39031 F20110216_AABLTK manak_j_Page_238.QC.jpg
96bb74ece7fa2c4e53720996218d1236
caffddf5a21e33a0969d29b7a7cf55a1a7c4bc07
700386 F20110216_AABMQD manak_j_Page_234.jp2
090cf76c4f8701f2f8ea2e19bd567f4a
d9fb37f37683723cfdc40152698ab0cdf4b68dee
8936 F20110216_AABLGA manak_j_Page_144thm.jpg
31672d75765aada35a894a8e92d4463e
524ef63d0db6ef8a0151e9aa089356dfbb24bbcc
37079 F20110216_AABLTL manak_j_Page_137.QC.jpg
98d12c03a14df768fcde959eecc94965
1f8dd5dae8943ad35c179fcd824f72e8aae5c252
113259 F20110216_AABMQE manak_j_Page_064.jpg
45e6a53fa3e3a6aeba82c8c875b23ec1
f29c7d31c108da74ab3f1b98b32d78021de473fb
2170 F20110216_AABLGB manak_j_Page_069.txt
159f84fa89ddcaa86d0fde08f68e765a
44449faa0442a90b8269ec3f1fea94bd01fed4ff
106604 F20110216_AABLTM manak_j_Page_075.jpg
675917fcf9d9551f81a94bb63ad630c2
8d19e1863a300a7591efb2e6552929607792bc24
53299 F20110216_AABMQF manak_j_Page_100.pro
cb2a075651afdea59738648e28101598
5d75205667f37f261765922dae5b760c72701654
F20110216_AABLGC manak_j_Page_018.tif
11b6fd641a74418902c3899a6602c54b
01d3f693e1f8797256059cb7f7bd32f34c58baac
802 F20110216_AABLTN manak_j_Page_107.txt
ca4000cfefd612e6b88912e82c09f836
c576cd23ec3c65038f722a431e530711efe236a3
2577 F20110216_AABMQG manak_j_Page_109.txt
1147657adfdc5a0f6399295cca608ba4
d548ea2fb3e6b01e1d285990d4c8e9eb6027173b
43065 F20110216_AABNNA manak_j_Page_260.QC.jpg
51408fe75c96a42d14712214866568b8
0eff5b2a14c656fe9e352b6351f23c33f34ea4d0
2153 F20110216_AABLGD manak_j_Page_066.txt
fdfc2863ad301c52036412407fd31800
701c34dc7d0f84c6344ce092c072039c7665be43
86618 F20110216_AABLTO manak_j_Page_180.jpg
12d3c292ed891f09a8c0f89ca054045c
758444a7b92d645f616097baf0296af4a1343627
133697 F20110216_AABMQH manak_j_Page_023.jpg
6c2401965de6d25e302a5ab0261df7fe
f2f1d9a67b9d65ba7eb6bc2f17bfc59db7c2ffbd
32216 F20110216_AABNNB manak_j_Page_262.QC.jpg
d04f631ac56fc6ff6f8407f4f24762da
2c53b66eb1f95e1d4df0f72764b1ec526c1838c4
55310 F20110216_AABLGE manak_j_Page_073.pro
894412b3d8392b86de01f239b6793a62
05afd69514309979a12b922d760ee3f77926a693
116389 F20110216_AABLTP manak_j_Page_110.jpg
14db80bffbdd31e77e3d80894a12205a
12c7b23cc6ce238f9618f697a9c92347b0f27b1d
2107 F20110216_AABMQI manak_j_Page_045.txt
4dc7393960438f0972e455081ec682bb
a7f9e56d447bb9259ad6489309a6b70543b13d44
33038 F20110216_AABNNC manak_j_Page_264.QC.jpg
f514fdfbbaf9dce32bf0152bd6ca661a
7f093dfb801406bedfbc0abe13e19d0f26da4ba9
2082 F20110216_AABLGF manak_j_Page_004.txt
3477a1851689a061d4272644e3f669bb
b1df6b1f96e785e0c1ac20102d39322f11831a2a
2221 F20110216_AABLTQ manak_j_Page_037.txt
44173c2a2df7b1caf34d647216e9972b
50700fdb872129279fbac6eed8854dea95087648
35243 F20110216_AABMQJ manak_j_Page_100.QC.jpg
28b2c74bc2a0e76c3a1973fbee5a76ec
50437fe0566bbf4cb10aa1881c20965b58e39efb
25047 F20110216_AABNND manak_j_Page_267.QC.jpg
2b244d978e43c338231457fa5572d484
551805f686894b33243d46fbed37a9c332065a67
80736 F20110216_AABLGG manak_j_Page_267.jpg
c201c2b8c52c07e1da0a411e4da7fd93
b1a02b04574ffe3eeb8c0daf240a30734b25187e
111361 F20110216_AABLTR manak_j_Page_105.jpg
2e8e01915b7f0e88a52054917abb20ed
4dbeac86b4863decae3ce96f76a63eccd896464a
F20110216_AABMQK manak_j_Page_016.tif
f5b729469886f72fd94e7c1020daf913
dff01e543aae3778e82b079f776366ac2b9b4d0c
25205 F20110216_AABNNE manak_j_Page_268.QC.jpg
98f4a78f25db334cf346b244186c15f5
a14cea3a12d128929a6f2ead294aba632b36267c
52699 F20110216_AABLGH manak_j_Page_028.pro
f52a0f703e57a3aff4c7d4ae854ddbba
f228282d7d386a36115b4ce3ca2b074196a971d1
110112 F20110216_AABMDA manak_j_Page_101.jpg
e176de31741ec68f7b80d05e0a2ae15e
b0aa164e2947b946ed83cf2e0b57c1edee76f6ba
55747 F20110216_AABLTS manak_j_Page_030.pro
e89de682c7a492d10c06a54ee2609454
7911e978af12d7d0a488c0f1c44d748bb8baf979
7734 F20110216_AABMQL manak_j_Page_147thm.jpg
a15e0aee6a5864a5c7a6308ac36da881
82fc81bd65eb71ece929cb07d5f17c62aa356058
28777 F20110216_AABNNF manak_j_Page_002.jp2
706e06221cec2d840a2f8904e53ed120
3f0ed08ed5af58e1c09a3b3f66a8bb3a72221025
F20110216_AABMDB manak_j_Page_189.jp2
a296eadbdd78511947189723d816e935
51b4d009eea9b9797dd5662734c5c9e67588d8ed
112755 F20110216_AABLTT manak_j_Page_034.jpg
6dd2d0ed51617986e3464573705cb90a
60945ec3d397b2b84185a3a2cb39efb856860a64
F20110216_AABMQM manak_j_Page_074.tif
bb82be1862fd2dfb51fb8df4ba8f5e53
3be4f75ae835654a5633393e9a0317bc071dd936
114383 F20110216_AABNNG manak_j_Page_005.jp2
0c6c9d5773613f954efac6e306e15f53
2a33e5eba3eede1df1fe4b131a4d1cf1f6807707
F20110216_AABLGI manak_j_Page_135.tif
ea24eec8c17436be4345d6eb9abd8796
503272e66bc9c3bd9b303e7fa72839614432e4e8
9204 F20110216_AABMDC manak_j_Page_217thm.jpg
0a97669c0c3159df9b0681818ecdae78
a5f8ecdb396e732c8f485b35329674b3f9db973f
2362 F20110216_AABLTU manak_j_Page_248.txt
a4117134f154bb188e2847483f0de8c9
6148e97f4941d86ac7a6dd8a5d46bf353e3e4358
8873 F20110216_AABMQN manak_j_Page_210thm.jpg
24ac87d9a96a5fc94d427682afa87cf2
e9facc918d9aff13a1f7e970c4a2715d13b3b59e
F20110216_AABNNH manak_j_Page_007.jp2
935b33d1b365e597c8297fb1789f5839
b93a71443c2104aea6299b30b3acd75aeb5907b1
34596 F20110216_AABLGJ manak_j_Page_099.QC.jpg
df45fb5a1f3ef8c075c04d393b4d0f18
36f2745942e930b116c1e9c025849a47eefa6ad7
35853 F20110216_AABMDD manak_j_Page_126.QC.jpg
7c25c7b448bfe0236763ce3f84c48be6
31c43136dd3b507e626cb77beb3d09ad0d000b73
103666 F20110216_AABMQO manak_j_Page_068.jpg
f9ad8c945c023b66be9c1ac2b75fb4a1
c1d2060202ddab7b4e3ed751b0d38c7abbf47e51
670183 F20110216_AABNNI manak_j_Page_009.jp2
a91acdf92cc734cdc9bcd19498c635e1
4dcee5c2e2e519613eb5a4fe49f5ef0239184be3
1927 F20110216_AABLGK manak_j_Page_247.txt
6e883356b4190e796f2390626aa3acff
ed8390275647c3f604a0e7d6ff1190a54c8b5097
F20110216_AABLTV manak_j_Page_118.tif
20421943915f84c6d72d76978d7f76cb
414a036795d19556ccaf6c84be3891110b39ded8
2177 F20110216_AABMQP manak_j_Page_103.txt
3217eac2b04058032e1f958991dc7f42
f1e4374e11dc3efe2d008f4aef3e54cb7bb4c3fd
F20110216_AABNNJ manak_j_Page_010.jp2
8632019283bab10f17cfcbb494b8db46
346c7cf557e8d2a9f4b146639bbfb54574ba20d6
836705 F20110216_AABLGL manak_j_Page_268.jp2
33b3b5613b1d552e0f216c7ceb206dd0
81c44f2a68a0a2adafaeaa4227e000aaace402cc
109322 F20110216_AABMDE manak_j_Page_087.jpg
630bb15121c2aa051aec0c02113e9efe
4650cecf78e404a4dc49242d649eaf8c52660d54
36804 F20110216_AABLTW manak_j_Page_193.QC.jpg
ad96bf8221b9c70a03ecc617ff69a8d7
ebdb0f9cd29aec8b6703a0b7e96a3b48c305f7bf
113981 F20110216_AABMQQ manak_j_Page_142.jpg
8e0dc9512fb47a4e26cccb87b153c86e
cd3595b6f979f07ec71728f0b32769288fce47b7
646193 F20110216_AABNNK manak_j_Page_013.jp2
e366fed6321e367865c309c928b66800
c9920c6f8acfcbed624bf2da63f968d391bab3e5
1810 F20110216_AABLGM manak_j_Page_218.txt
7d4cbac7381ad39208ff8f3d13c9d103
3c0078c6c89703a7201a9653f17eecae675f5cb5
51346 F20110216_AABMDF manak_j_Page_048.pro
3afbd8ed0e3d7a8e6211f493b937f557
d026fc6099deb27b4aa168f98a4a91a87a7689a0
F20110216_AABLTX manak_j_Page_213.tif
374f0f959c3b369cf2f35b40f7851a07
5fc6f7717799c45c117e5bc5eae2d141f84159a2
1051905 F20110216_AABNNL manak_j_Page_016.jp2
a253bbefec5fd46d05715a94af90edd2
76d83d374ba53d9c2946b95eb1bc399877629f65
36406 F20110216_AABLGN manak_j_Page_178.QC.jpg
ab0fa7cc92f84011eb6e84f9ed9474ea
ed8450066c40d7ae67617abdeddd89e532b517dd
110730 F20110216_AABMDG manak_j_Page_242.jpg
2605e40fa6f6d4b869983a7c30660286
69fa8105903f66fc49e8abb642c3a3da5b6ea96e
8871 F20110216_AABLTY manak_j_Page_246thm.jpg
51915192016c9c79cb37683961b477df
226e88b3282d394ac41fc0393515e2a09641675a
37649 F20110216_AABMQR manak_j_Page_090.QC.jpg
92bbc32ab680f3cfb277c0f4ccb779ad
4737716fad59e13863c57508a6dfbb3bf616cb6d
F20110216_AABNNM manak_j_Page_017.jp2
43e5b5086b17ff4cb9a996b4e7d3eb02
88afac645c88c86c695e14defb43bd7033fa1c61
74733 F20110216_AABLGO manak_j_Page_172.pro
023e3105ce3ecc57d4d555ba8f0696f2
4b15b50307b9f9d8430cc4a887164df6b6b53e31
59611 F20110216_AABMDH manak_j_Page_123.pro
d9b865ed5842cdf98244e13769a4915d
d1a0ea1ce03d1eca17089f85b7a2ce359716d991
8752 F20110216_AABLTZ manak_j_Page_087thm.jpg
f46e71bb4532b14a34d8c41ef8fa3345
9b668e0996c650410ae5f7fc30dd6fd82819f933
2119 F20110216_AABNAA manak_j_Page_046.txt
f7c5ae6a8d0b801871eaeb526ad5aee7
758a090fad8756cc67eb84946109323af45771af
8351 F20110216_AABMQS manak_j_Page_007thm.jpg
da0aff93412b6da86cb89be499878840
230069b6756ff062fe3677f38ba7dd27935f42da
3148 F20110216_AABLGP manak_j_Page_205.txt
4a83eb278b7f3c9a34d5b14416810675
29269fb30d99a4d3e96bc7ac217c0a81f561569e
91870 F20110216_AABMDI manak_j_Page_188.pro
7c6ca01bd1a626e311d291f2238a4fc1
da0979b38aad58c8c4ee63301a175a0039ed8197
2265 F20110216_AABNAB manak_j_Page_049.txt
b54c20194aec598b4179e06ba3fd82ea
b5d2ee78af700bdc21b058183f4695ea6911ec91
9025 F20110216_AABMQT manak_j_Page_086thm.jpg
39784ac18546b10b7dfc16da3e48bd69
eb3a4121566406b5eec636ec20346939cbdeb70a
105712 F20110216_AABNNN manak_j_Page_024.jp2
9cb570307bb59011b099eeb1481bec9c
91b037aa9d33f3eed984f784927bdb6abf1b08ce
2241 F20110216_AABLGQ manak_j_Page_166.txt
f46827eb6290c0d3c30541cf2151cee5
ff442fd96ea5c341c7e947f7f4400e0e6f8e4eee
1051938 F20110216_AABMDJ manak_j_Page_090.jp2
1f42c2432b56e9fba6d0f179f9951928
0a4e6df99717c7e278954d3badaa810f5e60031b
F20110216_AABNAC manak_j_Page_051.txt
f81509742d5356eccd145d0c8452b64f
8934026073aa887d972cecf3c88e68bc293b58e0
1051955 F20110216_AABMQU manak_j_Page_228.jp2
e74c887b78f41aa45cbe5fe89904dee4
a47619b8500b7b5e1034f1f349bd672b0ce01091
1051969 F20110216_AABNNO manak_j_Page_026.jp2
cfffd52ceeeb003c1e6bc5a834932cc1
e8ca7d5310230b1fbf70aaa6829f5d0ae37bd1bd
43650 F20110216_AABLGR manak_j_Page_201.pro
203e4777b77b3e5655db61418d859a27
a2f0de76362466794f4975eef08596ac93dc7fc2
53087 F20110216_AABMDK manak_j_Page_233.pro
b4925e1f18e85f8fe02d3a3ee080e944
4c6804a8e3d20593069be5ebe0f00dbdf16cd39f
2166 F20110216_AABNAD manak_j_Page_052.txt
c51f36ae98ba2114e14c9f6f147cc7d9
61f1f5fbab90f3a97194e7c680b28e547ebd5454
38057 F20110216_AABMQV manak_j_Page_060.QC.jpg
6924d10101a370c962d7eb326b9570c4
929b442c42bb6ce436099a0fb5ccee5a33cdcf8c
1051977 F20110216_AABNNP manak_j_Page_029.jp2
c77580f9d329a3eae616ceba160c5f16
f4eaf494f6936471393e05fbbe517764c1396dd0
1051941 F20110216_AABLGS manak_j_Page_229.jp2
f746cf4bf59b5331ca2fc234616aabd0
2fd5885b3b0fdb9a94b6dff3ffe3f405ca88fb32
F20110216_AABMDL manak_j_Page_090.tif
dfbbc53d04a96264448bd671b667a81e
7ff75c3453aa64d82c470b2df332020ff16a21d1
F20110216_AABNAE manak_j_Page_053.txt
a74c23a1b692afae19069b18281c57c8
261ab18c3a6e5e2894149a375af6161329b33266
700224 F20110216_AABMQW manak_j_Page_077.jp2
04aad7584f6726ac09df9285fa0b5cbc
4af4806dda37dd78323906facf87b0ab8007cdc1
F20110216_AABNNQ manak_j_Page_033.jp2
8ef5465ee2db40894e7955460a637f50
bf79072f9d15554e52d295885a7e69b23c299eb3
10882 F20110216_AABLGT manak_j_Page_256.pro
710d546a8c4668229c57269dd9ed42e7
8cb7c74257a0938081523158e270292d4cea757c
8799 F20110216_AABMDM manak_j_Page_027thm.jpg
60330a600559c28c30368c660f273ab3
45c317fa9a367b1d92d7164704724da7906b9336
2085 F20110216_AABNAF manak_j_Page_055.txt
3c5a7b34322a7d3b45c5aaf7d837083c
f64e339a8a983d59834c353ceb43c51b42bec086
32524 F20110216_AABMQX manak_j_Page_039.QC.jpg
d9955d07d8f6ab23afd3e692163db4d7
378271916cff52377291ec3d99a998ddf39f79c5
1051971 F20110216_AABNNR manak_j_Page_035.jp2
99302db32cebe3767517a70e49a5d04c
5d71e5b8755f09265e21f8f45c322b14675dd729
7237 F20110216_AABLGU manak_j_Page_219thm.jpg
868c3d94623d90fe6539ec425c141621
33b1e046db1136ca250c9f20b1233be8e876b3f9
109711 F20110216_AABMDN manak_j_Page_113.jpg
e81199877af9eda9c805ee913fc1b327
c2f20e87d5906ef1f2ccc3c491b0da3abe5459e5
2124 F20110216_AABNAG manak_j_Page_057.txt
833c07c40cafc544979f56b3109c34b6
8953f73f2b7ee7c21c82a614cd5e1397d84cb754
2064 F20110216_AABMQY manak_j_Page_040.txt
f60972d9a47f544c4a67e0fd3b3e3cf5
7755a87f9196212e7891e33a46ade523c71c6ce6
1051961 F20110216_AABNNS manak_j_Page_038.jp2
4f1dda47476ac4959401f2e22739c0f6
59dcd3a0a33095ab7995f20d687095dd4aa6df94
56837 F20110216_AABLGV manak_j_Page_034.pro
797cca134f159b311e253ca98598cfe6
f1d1547b258f0672d9bd0317111b2172851d68af
F20110216_AABMDO manak_j_Page_063.jp2
b8021ad89800e3216908b1463aca9ddb
63641bde17c78dabfbb7c9c0d469cdcccc66dd62
F20110216_AABNAH manak_j_Page_064.txt
e7dffb31b3ae6dd77721d941a0ecc767
b9820df2dfb9ced8a51c1901df85082bfcf1e254
8823 F20110216_AABMQZ manak_j_Page_041thm.jpg
f3460f39c72b7e261588b69b845cc2cf
598e9e6a5740c4698417f5cd4d7ad4d824c26899
F20110216_AABNNT manak_j_Page_040.jp2
3934395d59b6047a8d4d5ed77d248370
1984b6e3e7c5164c1af1f589cc490b2aec49dac2
100743 F20110216_AABLGW manak_j_Page_247.jpg
40f942f6033774af3ed2254da25b910b
96fb218f70fd724932330ed38fffae024a37e130
2136 F20110216_AABMDP manak_j_Page_018.txt
a863e924aa1d86f69df67e564b027076
39d9b62f1fa33c44c4ab817fea7b8c4445e99f28
2259 F20110216_AABNAI manak_j_Page_065.txt
d36b9bc41fbaf332f4f0eb0c2f6d0c20
9df12664380ae19dfe38f7f62d0b1012f7c6ff33
F20110216_AABNNU manak_j_Page_043.jp2
87c5b6e02a22a9bbe0df412de89f286e
205d868f621e7c377e2402df914ec2b8946f977f
106317 F20110216_AABLGX manak_j_Page_014.jpg
5eddc15dd98c4199321ca375c714b216
7f97d856019fee9533f923d9fc3d3f696da01ef6
38747 F20110216_AABLZA manak_j_Page_053.QC.jpg
d5783befcaedba4a70b1a9eec8eedbb1
0748d57c364d3e6fbe0ef53993a041bb4077c94a
F20110216_AABMDQ manak_j_Page_102.jp2
5eb9e51a0a3028e85edff63fefeae4da
baa4978dcca4a0ba8127119d77fc3d3507188894
2349 F20110216_AABNAJ manak_j_Page_071.txt
f17ea7284563462ba1968933022e792f
4428426d2408d58d7fe94f2851014cfbd12e388c
F20110216_AABNNV manak_j_Page_053.jp2
7a0e1b2e997336495e7738daa9ede66e
7c04dd3f070b30cf2c4fbb5e7c8a8f677915291f
33345 F20110216_AABLGY manak_j_Page_047.pro
ff07932885faa3af9893d884d1af2989
6611b6b63e932c3fd8fc5464a026792c9b613aba
26047 F20110216_AABLZB manak_j_Page_197.QC.jpg
4047a12b49a4666c928d4861cb7a3dcb
48d31d6e8b1f61ca4a61b2a3314177d672ea8603
40121 F20110216_AABMDR manak_j_Page_179.QC.jpg
a2d1fbaa5b0ed28ad05ae04ba92ca5fa
abdb8350920da281128b5f33aae6c17ef170b173
2341 F20110216_AABNAK manak_j_Page_072.txt
0a8589c8de4cbb3f5f871f262b9d0a2c
8d23f53113ccc61567069abe70f7e548b75ca02c
F20110216_AABNNW manak_j_Page_054.jp2
1f4c486c1cf7df3997c8de96f10619b2
482f736d643395b9cb9988af9756abfa5f5bdd7f
F20110216_AABLGZ manak_j_Page_259.tif
7e0ad71082c568d7e5f6de83eeb80411
30262f6372e75120931424c4dcbb22c04e23b7e0
1051931 F20110216_AABLZC manak_j_Page_120.jp2
4dd006d4dd5a3920332e046917d03e5f
e4d67b137b1100ead7526a5d292c3de3f0735927
F20110216_AABMDS manak_j_Page_148.tif
22371936a16c1768b99bd988e208f5f1
73f48ec669716474096d7b1cca72b986698c5716
1213 F20110216_AABNAL manak_j_Page_077.txt
f0fb36631ca97490df318c9d50001185
fe1379f2400d3805a65f3c1cf7f7c81326feeb01
F20110216_AABNNX manak_j_Page_059.jp2
aea9b3c810cd160dbff4899308cc4ebf
c215c209b524164ae5356b760d4eb7eb1d7977ea
F20110216_AABLZD manak_j_Page_225thm.jpg
b238926b7c8aa8411c7faa36ada08ade
0e2655eb958f975ac9f58ef1f825a2168b71eaaa
52961 F20110216_AABMDT manak_j_Page_136.pro
18617bad994d58b60c2485f7fc57b674
95d704aab0e78a54320bea1d89d43337e8740435
2188 F20110216_AABNAM manak_j_Page_078.txt
f7722fcf7ce6ccb88569c615eed5cbac
1ca937fa07bd92e9610d496bc92c3eacb07ff23d
F20110216_AABNNY manak_j_Page_062.jp2
7402344d4a6d066bf35bbc03a60cbe06
564930a5af833ed934da12352890ddf2c4c89b1c
F20110216_AABLZE manak_j_Page_151.jp2
79b2bbf2c9bc03b3b315522aa2c0ff05
e2fa5b721d5a65c10e7b3afd6be684e15965fd08
6767 F20110216_AABMDU manak_j_Page_251thm.jpg
71cea0a685f618a4b46fdbc1863d2060
c70dbf62a86bb36c377b83ba85c2f6862e719ff9
2121 F20110216_AABNAN manak_j_Page_081.txt
c801f616a5a7a6bab7c1efa936ba9abf
3fa845bb27dcafe0bd64409e3a04dd1cde430417
1051952 F20110216_AABNNZ manak_j_Page_067.jp2
e2086988c614f56134ee26f81edf502e
dcf889686040a4ecbc3922bbc93b2ffe7637819c
8869 F20110216_AABLZF manak_j_Page_079thm.jpg
10cc981b1d9a0b6213edd59c85dc497e
a8fc01c6118f5b0355ae05ce51f77d6cba95a34e
179 F20110216_AABMDV manak_j_Page_024.txt
c7d5061abe947cd760fbb6eede6087e5
e015bb45678c0733af5f9738a1a242da7c47ad95
F20110216_AABNAO manak_j_Page_082.txt
9754cdf7cc451e38f3a35f5a8b78c017
43e0b93b2429d82ad5e88cb6d1c1524e9e7525e8
82761 F20110216_AABLZG manak_j_Page_261.jpg
5d6dc8d1b464ce0d70f48aa9df7356bf
a85fb346b638b01ae8741b38b9c0c28af258cada
8293 F20110216_AABMDW manak_j_Page_188thm.jpg
078fcb79d99ebf32b9c388edd03f4f89
579c9ad214be14b6b3c343309b8f06662069aa99
2645 F20110216_AABNAP manak_j_Page_084.txt
92da2081ed0b98155113f9f10ff9997d
f4e0db2785c001498b25b9166295b0a733f0ab6e
F20110216_AABLZH manak_j_Page_093.jp2
5c0199fffee14e205bf098790f68b2d6
73a3833adabd3125129e3fce8bf8295d97f50b13
1985 F20110216_AABMDX manak_j_Page_250.txt
616db134bd6e43597b0405f013eb6a9a
03184ce821448d36542da7e99f8deb3ab255aeed
429353 F20110216_AABMWA UFE0024950_00001.xml FULL
03c6d987431d4c4ed202b6bcce6efd4f
027b83b9e33d905c132a671cd2bf0e11ded68905
1748 F20110216_AABNAQ manak_j_Page_088.txt
92ba8530c0755cdac9381df7365f2004
f66a5aacd688a3063ffe0d8f547dbe10a6ad3fcd
105703 F20110216_AABLZI manak_j_Page_028.jpg
da9d455ad8bc465301e0c896af3bacc9
4808ccb8dea3b629304e730796218e0f43f1e97c
57201 F20110216_AABMDY manak_j_Page_049.pro
463797beb16b5107bf495b99ea78e186
926e612c4ab7b5cd7bc54aa7817d44322550a582
2261 F20110216_AABNAR manak_j_Page_089.txt
5b83a69fb3be873df72354d04ac2e356
3286fbce6b20410de1cfd083b06b506da3a833cc
54866 F20110216_AABLZJ manak_j_Page_141.pro
1b9b815174c908698b93878806ee87bb
0ea76aeaa740a779a39b9c85e9f89891ebab3c8b
F20110216_AABMDZ manak_j_Page_178.tif
8762b6fe031596ffb46fd9d6d13dc8e2
d4790af20ddb680cba7b3f995ef43f0716d0d0a6
2164 F20110216_AABNAS manak_j_Page_096.txt
ef9d43ee3ed1cd5cbb182c7979e3479e
1a006b3433d1464be3bd85e79139b274d5d39406
F20110216_AABLZK manak_j_Page_139.tif
1894915ad0bbd266ab780229d37ca908
05ddb2780c8ecbd178d70f220bdf8eba80768b69
F20110216_AABMWD manak_j_Page_002.tif
ddec3b8c9d85a33ccf5f2da975952927
36c7b2a68039634e3ab047adc8ecbf72c265089f
2190 F20110216_AABNAT manak_j_Page_114.txt
93a70c0b8fff52fd0826707945a37232
4900ca2c84f6de5b41a21d1ac4cf815c700a0ee7
114068 F20110216_AABLZL manak_j_Page_243.jpg
33d0efea28d7bff8464afc5c3f833acf
4375d56926030fade34e2980928a2745df8a2a78
F20110216_AABMWE manak_j_Page_008.tif
d52b0e42b196a65ec167225f8836afb8
9fdeb61a653bd07d2d2d20553a5624fab33d7297
2840 F20110216_AABNAU manak_j_Page_120.txt
e182c101ca26f4b6a124fda7fb345991
7892f8a7f9cfc2d34b341e351c753bf23c53fab9
36343 F20110216_AABLMA manak_j_Page_154.QC.jpg
4f647e2d373d4dc99f75392dd3c2e5d6
263f2f18327f8cf1ea51679bdf3f3074b04d314d
35895 F20110216_AABLZM manak_j_Page_057.QC.jpg
8548bafd6c5c9ccb10606ba122f0a184
62ded9ab82ff7372106f25a3b2cac018c8b48269
F20110216_AABMWF manak_j_Page_014.tif
1536dbde0f7f2f6510175c716c53ea44
c98b6041a1acce0424c75e83a68013b5af6978e9
1868 F20110216_AABNAV manak_j_Page_122.txt
e364a33e35fafac86ac095ce10aa1d71
db61072617ee0ae246c561274b90130be126a9ab
12676 F20110216_AABLMB manak_j_Page_249.QC.jpg
79e9c79a6804c6a4e77524c501aeb6ec
062bf15f6f1dbf5af4778d3b81899656d32be53b
56293 F20110216_AABLZN manak_j_Page_143.pro
12e7d7d0860a760f22f2c8720deaa9be
476eaa4619365f6438e693d62c195aa0c654daf4
F20110216_AABMWG manak_j_Page_017.tif
9de04acf9a818f1056f5cd5005897a3c
6ca903cdab7d3c93b9cc8b92061429e8dea94f70
2414 F20110216_AABNAW manak_j_Page_123.txt
6bd6e0d8b68ed6b229be20e25258f93c
6f369c7daea8540f9bd06a5c537b9f88513c7754
53906 F20110216_AABLMC manak_j_Page_081.pro
8aba8216f8bf211ccd1bd93966cdde50
dbccafb5534fa589ca570de3fc7b4b9674599698
6941 F20110216_AABNTA manak_j_Page_214thm.jpg
bbc710838c296c510005dd077eafe8e7
85f3d12788625a574eb58ccd5cda968ac02440e6
35953 F20110216_AABLZO manak_j_Page_171.pro
069401e37ad5045c6c68e6c5914ed312
0faa383b256f0d0649e80fbdebd049b28e00f43c
F20110216_AABMWH manak_j_Page_019.tif
17d3c09675100ab8f422c9b96d16f9b1
839b7cb28a71e7d4fa99a70a98f8e3391ac55104
2351 F20110216_AABNAX manak_j_Page_125.txt
902f75fa72e0ad2465a63d483fd2c384
d3f9469b271a61545031a0032748518a2164a197
F20110216_AABLMD manak_j_Page_113.tif
8b0eff657d13caf137e65312a9e25ad6
1aa17f17310492df099ea3cc704baf2f7362946a
8695 F20110216_AABNTB manak_j_Page_215thm.jpg
47a9058b4e7ecd1bbc526d2a39484d58
d5ba75cacc7489dd860ad255df4a6b0a440bb3e2
F20110216_AABLZP manak_j_Page_103.tif
afeaa8842e07822a40b6f2fed0dcc509
1a7fbdd6ed5d8c0f350e561ef1678e67cb15705a
F20110216_AABMWI manak_j_Page_021.tif
f73a4f794d393bdb56470125f3f7f21e
76f80ca38c5ea33add042e91e26df4b0e0d5340c
2176 F20110216_AABNAY manak_j_Page_126.txt
c83a69701e90f773f4ea00a421fc8495
f74fd6637eeca6bec0c4b5c231bdde5e030ed8e4
F20110216_AABLME manak_j_Page_071.jp2
c8e4c2c4651e1a73209a7d785aabe37f
37aece21451a9b1811baaa684c050d5354797eab
8789 F20110216_AABNTC manak_j_Page_216thm.jpg
e7bdcd4800e948c513929f6897557430
79b7b9077b8cdcf8993e889f6984499c4cdc6184
32798 F20110216_AABLZQ manak_j_Page_112.QC.jpg
e4f9085f9821eae98b8a875d055bac88
cfcb884df46c73b79813783c60e3bfb170c999a4
F20110216_AABMWJ manak_j_Page_024.tif
6192d9cd32ff22b29716f72b1786c2db
7576030f514aeec21c6b716109ce9ecd504e32e2
1622 F20110216_AABNAZ manak_j_Page_127.txt
836ac9f6ceae3ca9399c4c67dd01c459
89564a63085ce006d20c7eaa1186ccbc9733a627
36018 F20110216_AABLMF manak_j_Page_133.QC.jpg
ab9914d154a81aaad035b09ac43ecafb
59be1fe80feb593d0ccb76190b543f7f62fa2f8e
9187 F20110216_AABNTD manak_j_Page_221thm.jpg
68febb98dc22a23f48b60dae2d756453
31ea91b0c7a9667a69cf71e1a74ac04a3d270837
1051951 F20110216_AABLZR manak_j_Page_097.jp2
09b6a5439a1bfbe919caa0ba25835274
1ad302697347c16ae49aa115d5ad0454a262b8a4
F20110216_AABMWK manak_j_Page_026.tif
25fbd943b256c706998dee6c7df30eeb
4499ee626987ccb9323ea8e9391db08cc9fb06aa
69050 F20110216_AABLMG manak_j_Page_008.pro
dc458e87a6c161dc689e53723a13d815
0bcfb2b6c5b9c1fefd2c00cd793879666577fc9a
8754 F20110216_AABNTE manak_j_Page_227thm.jpg
02d130f391e38dbd48c63039abdf0600
1b78e9e941deae19bd0bb63b541029d1088aa99c
8223 F20110216_AABMJA manak_j_Page_048thm.jpg
106e087e216c7c2417bd5b50fec6695a
5f0424b253e06c368b561423e7260b538bafefa4
F20110216_AABLZS manak_j_Page_237.txt
bd67c7066490cb636c9607a5382e70b6
5255fcdf405491411d879ea9df8f76eaef77021a
F20110216_AABMWL manak_j_Page_028.tif
a1d1c538a032b4f63e1f1ff452765041
01fcf2c72a576fa286c98a9ad1f7f5f4d310893e
F20110216_AABLMH manak_j_Page_240.jp2
3adf2906385be5857ed80ccf58a7f237
64ec623e6e0e65c25686318386a63ace20df6e3f
9108 F20110216_AABNTF manak_j_Page_231thm.jpg
4d94b69bdbc958dbbccbd941d0887eb8
d12ba15cc7cf3687cc4e50187158f57aa4ad2c79
F20110216_AABMJB manak_j_Page_224.jp2
57be042b3edf286e950274417f272076
90947114205a1af2b30e4e50b4a68638d6ec080d
9286 F20110216_AABLZT manak_j_Page_211thm.jpg
f2bf1db922c8bb9e784e5965f30fb53d
e9ea4ea89324cc8306a1f457343e42fdddd559c3
F20110216_AABMWM manak_j_Page_029.tif
77984fcc5d05e940ed8adc249d5738cb
712094a2c298313965dccc64381150774bf39418
F20110216_AABLMI manak_j_Page_175.jp2
acf2672b6cdfbe4e03eb575d0ac4ce3f
f6f0c6a3582ac934177f95fab37a3eb90ae8fd78
9244 F20110216_AABNTG manak_j_Page_238thm.jpg
a3e9ecc236ac8f52c3dc474163fdc2c7
8849771ff6595a0aef43159cc851db49f1eb30f7
F20110216_AABMJC manak_j_Page_246.tif
32365e7c00d327165420053240500e92
5cb9c58ec9deadf50cfcb862f382f6023f1e4ae2
36530 F20110216_AABLZU manak_j_Page_037.QC.jpg
3ddeca3fb508a5b4c139096010b7058a
2bc43e8d141ddfbc53deb467dbaab2564e2952ed
F20110216_AABMWN manak_j_Page_033.tif
c9088cc966eced725c61571bea6968b2
7d8c7523aed78f294d57868b2040c38dbc08b781
119286 F20110216_AABLMJ manak_j_Page_138.jpg
599cb3a249b395cabd9f0a3650679d45
6355f3c375b737822f841064563ec131ba77d3c5
7597 F20110216_AABNTH manak_j_Page_245thm.jpg
175cc91c4de2f67741a3857fd1bf7f46
56c946a4bd7a08caa47722b72d8fe9b72977b33b
9239 F20110216_AABMJD manak_j_Page_175thm.jpg
48976b666176cd6a5e1d772c2d0df9ae
3232a9d8a11dba738918b50936ca1e5fa1e46dc2
105026 F20110216_AABLZV manak_j_Page_025.jpg
d64f6511ef077569f4d9d8f8b64f8182
0bdb7e3e4fe94bd244a7ecc990a3393f28b29d7c
F20110216_AABMWO manak_j_Page_047.tif
39771f7a316e4dde5c3215cdffdf7825
8bb642945a72be025e1cd14329cb29165c05faa1
F20110216_AABLMK manak_j_Page_149.jp2
925f5086c769bed59782fba1d06aabe4
a006e4472a5f5b17583d4272a6e333a71f8cba71
7963 F20110216_AABNTI manak_j_Page_247thm.jpg
44fb272ea01c4842be5cda1d75fcdff3
d3fcc226d8476d0c8ed8ebdf8c4c82f0a12adda7
8284 F20110216_AABMJE manak_j_Page_173thm.jpg
b302c2fe4f355c960a52d896617b39b2
b168b26762dacbbc19509eca7d03532696431236
F20110216_AABLZW manak_j_Page_030.tif
55e6a1f157990ae251387c463012a65d
a53d7f6215a007fe2de361f415cc249e84bae92f
F20110216_AABMWP manak_j_Page_048.tif
846212e0309b20c4a3a2357266a42ef7
edc990a511bc874fffc9afad908c0f540bdcf6f3
11894 F20110216_AABLML manak_j_Page_024.jpg
58ed6d6003f066cabf36dd881820b220
a8cfc07a301273878741378b3c426cea317d3c90
7838 F20110216_AABNTJ manak_j_Page_250thm.jpg
444f11e8e0e03cc144105790bab9b137
907b3df5e958af9e960670e546e49a9a9e46b503
111255 F20110216_AABMJF manak_j_Page_176.jpg
fe59e104177d8710d8835c6316a7ac7b
f7a7b96aa2bbaa454df65fbd847a07a218b06e10
F20110216_AABLZX manak_j_Page_214.tif
1f1b631fb7f5e06a59108012ad646311
4f65b1a7f431a85e9c0abe6048fa53418f58d358
F20110216_AABMWQ manak_j_Page_052.tif
928b3c425e38d2534df6ede8f9ffafdd
c64992e0c45f2628873fb2297b1f1b83f5795ff3
37166 F20110216_AABLMM manak_j_Page_258.pro
67e8751d706e0c01b7f2149543c2d121
0a1facfae0639a91c4ab4c5b26fb14dc945b7d53
4135 F20110216_AABNTK manak_j_Page_253thm.jpg
5172e1b723ea59415a8a27b192f01c74
ec7db1318852c855447c418859439a627052cd8b
77640 F20110216_AABMJG manak_j_Page_268.jpg
465ef0cc2c7491aacb4bc70240ff8acc
0b4a02f4f631142d69809d00d8cd0d45510586cb
F20110216_AABLZY manak_j_Page_117.jp2
cf68859875f7ff942acce344129e52c7
17647cc9ad41a725827e8f13ea27b88a25f66be4
F20110216_AABMWR manak_j_Page_056.tif
8a189bf11b4154e9253dcff2e3081ecc
c84f78b1380ceaf14f14d05caec1e2626769b6ad
F20110216_AABLMN manak_j_Page_263.jp2
07471b3bd0839716c5a270d5fd412e9b
64deb614e0f34c3a3920573d1e6d0ea9fef5f228
9658 F20110216_AABNTL manak_j_Page_259thm.jpg
6dcf031f16d691428cfcc04f66102981
62300a0bedc309ea2013eeee83ede5a5ed518d43
F20110216_AABMJH manak_j_Page_056.jp2
d09053f00c57aa1d922823be3fe4e78e
fbfd5b2c6e96c05a5da408abaadd7ec92168f28b
31036 F20110216_AABLZZ manak_j_Page_245.QC.jpg
1ba652c5bb7207a34d21005e911a22a0
323ceead159a1a66362bde2a2258ede1b0193db1
47079 F20110216_AABNGA manak_j_Page_254.pro
23954e8cd5b30d9b31bc73c08c0c2f11
4c9325b86e26be4ef9a07a36b51ed6971ec8c374
F20110216_AABMWS manak_j_Page_062.tif
58a366d93504c59eea8bc8692a573e0e
9cefb3cf83118f8067fc7a6d28e0f983711f61ad
8721 F20110216_AABNTM manak_j_Page_265thm.jpg
b3938e0befc7cc7e732633f12430b3df
880628b6c126321430134c9ec4a063a14c908476
54033 F20110216_AABMJI manak_j_Page_078.pro
27e9ab8029d6121c7ab68afa8c886b07
9cea34d309b2b2cc4e1aa93d8ebcfe412db5040c
44063 F20110216_AABNGB manak_j_Page_255.pro
5319838d5db502d58dadf7bef2914f5e
8c3d11c35a201fd3c4e49a7cb23d6ad2912917bd
F20110216_AABMWT manak_j_Page_066.tif
7686d48b06fe2d3f1fd418ca0ea48483
2d8c1939f09eedb194af5b770a9387736fef6540
F20110216_AABLMO manak_j_Page_124.jp2
018330168630838da864fe4790d99e10
c29b5ce14fff248b8441709f7ccbe697f3eac529
6332 F20110216_AABNTN manak_j_Page_268thm.jpg
0708547f4df62b6db82adef94bc5e8e0
186065e95a6dcac2c156257178e6af85560e3f14
106134 F20110216_AABMJJ manak_j_Page_079.jpg
b23e467764d3ac7ddbc05d9a45255f30
6bfda51bad402f2d4fa7e48d27ec0ba684224f02
42334 F20110216_AABNGC manak_j_Page_257.pro
83fa3a2b8c3f6a218b2f7d9dfc777235
3e9350f180852d5822f88e5aed7e9bbeea21cd25
F20110216_AABMWU manak_j_Page_069.tif
636118a8686ebd3c658fa3e57bdcea05
8ae6763f6cad519a280fbbf3b9719d2de153a1eb
8654 F20110216_AABLMP manak_j_Page_004thm.jpg
6038c805b08d43581c46767cbcf1678f
bb203729f3121235d6849c4536cb6de61c92242f
312130 F20110216_AABNTO UFE0024950_00001.mets
07c3b9147b5e820a57550e7cbaca755c
51be8316657231e5fedc60eaaa00f60f815cc065
50715 F20110216_AABNGD manak_j_Page_262.pro
876005c71489b7b89a8d0977097941d5
490f76a1e5e8f491f857513b8310f3cb43d80aab
F20110216_AABMWV manak_j_Page_075.tif
f1c78e7b21dca38cad109c1ed179121c
dd07fafda087f9eac0d1c1c4a4071f62580d8e5f
F20110216_AABLMQ manak_j_Page_046.tif
f1eb736d7c4b206bc88421d30a3846ba
86b8495866f5ff67fe6de962a8a780a7cd8921ae
1126 F20110216_AABMJK manak_j_Page_013.txt
97b4ed4ea73235185402208eb2a0d0ce
948218e5309a19af6ca5c97df935a991229bfa69
55314 F20110216_AABNGE manak_j_Page_264.pro
a542ae8eb4bb443b08c79bfedc6cc03d
fcb72e689e50f7a902a9738984728c27d4001790
F20110216_AABMWW manak_j_Page_076.tif
1733e9ee8907b3f15d0d1f28d2e0a501
f7e27e631ed482af011e92502107b5cf1d0cdf77
38181 F20110216_AABLMR manak_j_Page_150.QC.jpg
5228190309c566c35d47d2714aa54ff8
f4a403c65ec1f767df8d20d3d5e6d15329dfb210
79156 F20110216_AABMJL manak_j_Page_187.jpg
456bb0cf7798d0f4c970e24db474b250
2e801459b5bc2de0c62112cdc042650a88eadcc7
36921 F20110216_AABNGF manak_j_Page_267.pro
fdbe0842accbef8ac8a3e8278e8d2012
da8edb7c167d21808d620a310dcd4a9670150d6d
98857 F20110216_AABLMS manak_j_Page_173.jpg
f14d2002905add85f0d53573cf9674d2
2e76350ea487797fe79805ab9677056c8341bdae
8955 F20110216_AABMJM manak_j_Page_084thm.jpg
ea892e6412819af5449f082f1bad15f5
7df05271d6ae2f2406d74313ee97a7a799fcb159
F20110216_AABMWX manak_j_Page_078.tif
691324cccaf5473d62d299260a9deccc
d93a6835905c7df5ac660b625919b3a9fc5c2f22
38601 F20110216_AABLMT manak_j_Page_224.QC.jpg
cb11b557da98f5c1554ba72afb177989
5bbac1c28debaa210c652b314f99b81ba4929fa0
460 F20110216_AABMJN manak_j_Page_003thm.jpg
4e65ef2930e198299b73d9966d506731
42728f91534602b7753580b558b34d53c4beb445
36521 F20110216_AABNGG manak_j_Page_268.pro
ab82837355d554770981e534c3e41801
ed7580d6e78c3a9cc96acd6ee8250b4467c52230
F20110216_AABMWY manak_j_Page_080.tif
9e1867d18dc94524452f0ddae8711371
1ea8e1d9dc7fc8eb1a37f91d97f1ad5a3cdd85f8
52197 F20110216_AABLMU manak_j_Page_032.pro
64633d334737be72431872aa70a3c2ee
4826d5b072ba2ad371d3bf3abf317be3abc72f37
F20110216_AABMJO manak_j_Page_050.jp2
c5a69946dd86caa1872c85abbf394ceb
3cdb55aa939b2266b594e7776d09734b7dcccbbc
4202 F20110216_AABNGH manak_j_Page_002.jpg
595e6f07adb1879fd0bee77eee137167
052a4765280742e6c4fe7681c51d1307b27c6707
F20110216_AABMWZ manak_j_Page_086.tif
807ff02eda0715933852b82644a346af
88ecf6cf6d907e70e72cd01ecab87f72bf002fda
56674 F20110216_AABLMV manak_j_Page_102.pro
eb3cefd36259a9542382a645d29cf355
bc2335da22bc4f8de78f250a5bcaff79d9286ad6
9013 F20110216_AABMJP manak_j_Page_155thm.jpg
31e8ffb13c4425c9c887bcf549870e7a
a38680c94dde2b2ab030f013958f2717b353eb63
1239 F20110216_AABNGI manak_j_Page_002.QC.jpg
af0fb13852ba26320d6fa42ad025f5e5
42f1e73eed8e23a765e98b00cfcc57d1121698e3
53704 F20110216_AABLMW manak_j_Page_045.pro
731e19dbbd6724cd9a19cb351067fa5c
ef756bf03b020a322a3f3a7eafb4bf9954fecf4f
2417 F20110216_AABMJQ manak_j_Page_138.txt
822d303ab76fe6bc9beb82a9f074aa7b
222f4edc5307bd041a9479be4c79ae959765dee6
107132 F20110216_AABNGJ manak_j_Page_004.jpg
e15efa1ba415af4038d9f7bf70472ccb
4bc8c7391a9d7a2e83cf1b2b64cfe7cbadcec163
F20110216_AABLMX manak_j_Page_031.jp2
97857ad9f38e8bf185cb06cae207af79
e38c3d5a952835db9f1da131287d3159f739b074
1051893 F20110216_AABMJR manak_j_Page_230.jp2
71861eb21bf70e2ba0ba75bec0fd6714
ca52ff639521ad0732c40eef7859d027007a7752
12970 F20110216_AABNGK manak_j_Page_005.jpg
d10307fde4119edcf701c1d4d0a3201b
7f5d3cc36082e134b9f386c15847b9e04237c7c0
8598 F20110216_AABLMY manak_j_Page_266thm.jpg
14bfed587a81b5e115679385ea461b5d
be45dc7f8b2ebb143a2bbe9611a83d4b5e6cf0a4
2297 F20110216_AABMJS manak_j_Page_263.txt
b24abdc56e464a0be2ae41aa378bc1ca
cc1f06984d7f94cd8ec483039a6b62772e86a832
25527 F20110216_AABNGL manak_j_Page_006.QC.jpg
5a6990747ebb14dce736f5ade40b48d6
db071d1a86c5ee3b2e82c3b7357f220df0db8c6b
35923 F20110216_AABLMZ manak_j_Page_043.QC.jpg
92c1cc45bd9db199d06ca26cbac87379
3d5a28ef5d99ff604919b84a1ddc74aa7e02e610
F20110216_AABMJT manak_j_Page_249.tif
b2072813a95bb5c7e5852aafd6c914b9
497bc9b886a4b066850fcaf8362026b05f18bcb9
101146 F20110216_AABNGM manak_j_Page_008.jpg
fcacb9bcb02c4bfbaa0a2341ab8bbafc
bbfa69ae99785b9c93f573f29696eda715b62ad6
104760 F20110216_AABMJU manak_j_Page_115.jpg
72e1b5fb0a79d9fe59db0cd9dd3c487c
ff1fe505b5126a7e91e6082e19c4228aaa1e01a2
24705 F20110216_AABNGN manak_j_Page_008.QC.jpg
2253ad0210f8ad149ec45d96fa279050
5c57b55c396cc651a45c679dfa3ff4038a0b4a73
27663 F20110216_AABMJV manak_j_Page_170.QC.jpg
7f7fefd4692a0e3a630f2f28fe5073d5
9f33cc16eaf729f9089482cbd0953d6745c0ba56
39285 F20110216_AABNGO manak_j_Page_009.jpg
99bf698105112eb22ab9b8c9b43723d6
485876ce8bb9522a0c589cc082b333312b310dc5
F20110216_AABMJW manak_j_Page_209.tif
a703202205c0e40574add7d68ff8fcad
65381decce0421277ca4f67434fcb9eed369194e
11457 F20110216_AABNGP manak_j_Page_009.QC.jpg
f5cb671ae27a173068f136a5dc66c937
96240fba0da85144a0f284b0cca5aa0f240ec39e
54462 F20110216_AABMJX manak_j_Page_052.pro
9b586e4ab4d811dc5b2ef3c0a9c12143
7fbe33c228cefbce2610b94bea9ed04eb1fa654b
31157 F20110216_AABNGQ manak_j_Page_010.QC.jpg
a75e665366b15ed9fbaca72718752619
96b6acaf12b32f7d605ce9f7be95b142290ad7b7
153786 F20110216_AABMJY manak_j_Page_007.jpg
d138e8c21af742874d6569745e35b141
d831966d0000cbf1e41018948cd2f33df39967d9
15071 F20110216_AABNGR manak_j_Page_011.jpg
5cce15e447fd289b06c187e3d8b28831
8db14c6d850ab8868271ad6de439ea8139a4d545
2352 F20110216_AABMJZ manak_j_Page_054.txt
ee1a4ee54c79db634da030c605061988
06c2ecbcbc424b3689567798fee7b75ddf2cf60b
31040 F20110216_AABNGS manak_j_Page_012.QC.jpg
d6d57ba4e7840e727405359fdb8b46b8
421b7922e6ce67fea1c750c731f62cdec8c34c64
19728 F20110216_AABNGT manak_j_Page_013.QC.jpg
f4f34f6c8329949ffc792745c7dfb5cd
4497d3520bb2e5bcbcef134a1c880ef35a7bd491
34887 F20110216_AABNGU manak_j_Page_014.QC.jpg
a141b5d2da5eee9eda53245856a106bb
79e1127a21425063144f1e3f52dc87dffc3c3fc1
F20110216_AABLSA manak_j_Page_030.txt
6943a3686e8fc59a4a7d90a9d0936a2e
f1dbfd1e35167facb914c434654254ded5372c9d
112375 F20110216_AABNGV manak_j_Page_016.jpg
f23ea2d3dc6c8e62846e64f326af4e42
89a884f7d2c588210346d8901b122a2764589e5a
8646 F20110216_AABLSB manak_j_Page_262thm.jpg
4b1f4a6083fa1a9975726cd6dde382a4
aea4f28c5bede5ffb20aa699efc691ddaaa99af9
109553 F20110216_AABNGW manak_j_Page_017.jpg
cc3d374f113d4b0260320c532040d182
0b7df103b73da5818a37de5658e63867d1a82870
1051948 F20110216_AABLSC manak_j_Page_042.jp2
ed069e7bb68dd535b564f72b1464e8fe
4531e8a4e28307a44725c2c2475a315de5c96a5e
35447 F20110216_AABNGX manak_j_Page_017.QC.jpg
2f5bb8e7fe0c468df9827dc6723c30c1
99499278829ec62978277fd3a63a9c73f71e3985
37665 F20110216_AABLSD manak_j_Page_194.QC.jpg
7494c6f48ee8c0dfc8d00f726345198f
2c481f26b9d7bdc46d3f6fe24b91999780893b4a
35555 F20110216_AABNGY manak_j_Page_018.QC.jpg
5ace969b3e6a753ab376519c3ab9b5c4
2da10dfb1d1596184a73c30a14582c667951503c
36438 F20110216_AABLSE manak_j_Page_140.QC.jpg
206c53970d5296a7d774341de1b21ec1
5ffaaf13c2549bf87fee8d5031c4e515e9e70ec7
111579 F20110216_AABNGZ manak_j_Page_019.jpg
f825fe19461f38f14f3702d1edb67026
250b2ee3165f0f1c24d4aabe05b97c2cb8c9e4cd
9325 F20110216_AABLSF manak_j_Page_097thm.jpg
7a98bd53393a2d7ec99532af8c47cc7c
86b8b9df1a5e86452414380b54f6fa3cc0f3b383
31104 F20110216_AABLSG manak_j_Page_254.QC.jpg
2f13269da853f753691128b4f7da03da
7ce0c2dadff04b0477854ac93d97a24a858a8824
2306 F20110216_AABLSH manak_j_Page_256thm.jpg
57573db4f1ee59859483031dfbc843ba
44289f008238591347dd8acb75f9d96d9041d571
46040 F20110216_AABMPA manak_j_Page_122.pro
8fd36fba7ad6624b7a17315e49279649
d9802dbd7a34a7ab3377d4459871cfd40fd9b01d
2109 F20110216_AABLSI manak_j_Page_048.txt
a5f1d39801816042398b653ffcc3c778
3448dc7ab3a7fc9cfda5b17a7aff37b564f50494
2543 F20110216_AABMPB manak_j_Page_110.txt
0e412c7e80966e708896c4c8ffe0f577
d5e1e2d2c48567ef3ed190e5c019beb4d34c294f
8237 F20110216_AABLSJ manak_j_Page_164thm.jpg
47171a8dd33bdb5592f67dea85b0c718
c3a13b1c29d63917fa6d3a979bbd10a7d22823e3
F20110216_AABMPC manak_j_Page_130.tif
e9ac7670f85a4f83fc01e581c193e18d
20cf6eeb9a17f340300be0d3cb867fb2079f67fb
2053 F20110216_AABLSK manak_j_Page_032.txt
02e4e70f93ddc7eab071378c8f3f7fc5
750f2d85247f2daa884cee1f3baaffe25e5abdf5
9001 F20110216_AABMPD manak_j_Page_116thm.jpg
640c099eb88cd1646cdb64e5a4116238
3259c2cd77db9dcbb06ed26a70f1e01fc18e20a7
2202 F20110216_AABLFA manak_j_Page_044.txt
35909c24aafd045c97313615bdfcb0e0
091efa8719486d4facf9df87680adf7af92756cd
F20110216_AABLSL manak_j_Page_213.jp2
02329dcdbf8d1ff4bb005408d97664e3
57813dcf3e612bff2fe8015b1fb1470a01a841d0
31810 F20110216_AABMPE manak_j_Page_235.QC.jpg
172d4470fef6756688d4715ea223e9b1
3e1ea2f6eee22ecb8c2d34c2ff85854c81465929
37109 F20110216_AABLFB manak_j_Page_175.QC.jpg
b13b7c22a8b2523b16c00e8317aaa87b
c2e050ba082f16694b51a99d695891042157c9d9
107752 F20110216_AABLSM manak_j_Page_118.jpg
ffc810899baef6f8a3987c464d8fe9f9
c5e058686fdbe3fc15c2bbd72e2f5da3be68cb25
2077 F20110216_AABMPF manak_j_Page_050.txt
19ba69111394d98b42e8ba69784a0e81
c11119a9c80ad3843c632c8009a26bd134f1801a
7594 F20110216_AABLFC manak_j_Page_012thm.jpg
ef91c7fcd53ad5e31fa7fc5dd74ef96d
aeae2b859eeed62a931c1cc7f3eb14b42a362aba
F20110216_AABLSN manak_j_Page_065.tif
1ad4e7371bf7d59d838d63ab2d4b4a93
1494e840c48de17136445a83a1af1f39d1cd4e44
47914 F20110216_AABMPG manak_j_Page_261.pro
419e23de98a98febf5ab5591a1e5b8a6
df848ff93ad057c8ddcf0c5490112950b807a609
35554 F20110216_AABNMA manak_j_Page_212.QC.jpg
9cc8110a8761c13e97f90cdf13cb10cf
7d7754a577149a866765cb6b15ac522112e95645
2081 F20110216_AABLFD manak_j_Page_079.txt
1c4de7094e8632f67471c9707d150f82
9d7ce6007f629d57e6166845b99db0db7f20b6d3
36415 F20110216_AABLSO manak_j_Page_019.QC.jpg
df9fedcbc2bacfac245a2ac56e0313ae
674edb8002a648b28a28e61f772344e236d319a8
F20110216_AABMPH manak_j_Page_117.tif
015a292fc87ef0d98418099b0d71a080
51f75db70ef7a62dec8f0af9a6b05c86d7388906
121987 F20110216_AABNMB manak_j_Page_213.jpg
cf33358db93a4a370b62512f191f2198
02495a0d4b16f1f8d7b6685735a47a985b87186c
109922 F20110216_AABLFE manak_j_Page_144.jpg
4cd90a58130a5810073f8b8e64337bd8
f1e2bc6e048a6b885839897256b1ce41eb3e4336
F20110216_AABLSP manak_j_Page_231.tif
83ffdbdb1d310fbe1e7e22c99322561b
750ae88cd12f6771275995ee99f65189609250a0
F20110216_AABMPI manak_j_Page_165.tif
dbe6a5d8480e976673ef64cb3150da7e
7265863e8d35530167f0e6b64f31507b29024a77
37530 F20110216_AABNMC manak_j_Page_213.QC.jpg
6f1e87021a0b5fe74647ac53c3bcad75
9ce3e889f30df2645afff17a773d31ad82f3db40
36323 F20110216_AABLFF manak_j_Page_016.QC.jpg
ee16815658f38a1229e920bd75f09f00
e4707807cbc77490c0a6e9eaa999b99548f09a75
F20110216_AABLSQ manak_j_Page_254.tif
8f6f738c83f0f6862673d0e17ba03cdf
7726430554c21e20294822d2db0d9c2e6aad373c
4933 F20110216_AABMPJ manak_j_Page_005.QC.jpg
1f58bce65c07c02242d78e7f3377facd
14b3b23855affec89eb7808740891968911e68c9
82812 F20110216_AABNMD manak_j_Page_214.jpg
4ec0d6fc7b8970f391c850652e1fdc50
f86d754488c79b919d5702a8ad0bcef237f270b6
94829 F20110216_AABLFG manak_j_Page_259.pro
233c71b3832d08adcb9488054245c8fe
7967e04ee00c0045c10ce832ed00457e46c41510
52214 F20110216_AABLSR manak_j_Page_115.pro
04d46568dd8e903072afe2fe09dae2c7
e9a29eb215be000be92a0820cd844af150d4586f
2065 F20110216_AABMPK manak_j_Page_156.txt
2ba1464d480666e21ecbb981a07ae4d5
ca8bb7e0a61842a695863f18b68515a4765c05f3
107907 F20110216_AABNME manak_j_Page_215.jpg
b4152658c01f555e7e548ce5fa448cbf
4455d282b0cb7c0742b4cd5edf359f0e98aabeb6
F20110216_AABMCA manak_j_Page_032.jp2
13df8422c203e84cd589353530931e03
bc7e65ca4843044e6235ecb265b4e99759a5dc93
F20110216_AABLSS manak_j_Page_119.jp2
098d6cbdb764995eb23705800ad33333
db930d183726199b710ff07d7677ceea18d0a7d0
3255 F20110216_AABMPL manak_j_Page_121.txt
087f39f7e105f21b38f8446877c7c6e5
d244b5a15aefcfe5594936efac242d6692f19a1b
111572 F20110216_AABNMF manak_j_Page_217.jpg
928e308f1c4f8e52e963f7168e80b198
df33a12416ca12c7aaa883a6f01d2fc1104c13e6
67664 F20110216_AABLFH manak_j_Page_140.pro
2ef496034c8940d582a71a6c7709b67f
d46d62f04aafa3282b9131aaec189e2cece7d00c
56706 F20110216_AABMCB manak_j_Page_194.pro
bac3698c38578e83770fa803c91b6ff2
08d70af9957bbe84477041803378c452e7b4fdd9
36244 F20110216_AABLST manak_j_Page_144.QC.jpg
659b1cc2421e4a65a5dcd9d942563461
a99f3a4a790a89f97fb5ef2e857e11fbf259bdf4
112624 F20110216_AABMPM manak_j_Page_134.jpg
a34ba777fba06c9630db22456f22fa32
975a11fbafb982693e29704b406ab77d24cdb6ef
36279 F20110216_AABNMG manak_j_Page_217.QC.jpg
858d0dd677c8f6dfccf5fbd85f2288cd
5e5adb73e38173b2c027c6194be1dc9fc595097c
1051956 F20110216_AABLFI manak_j_Page_192.jp2
af11c9e815f03780b2bbcfaa9d966f8c
5ba63b8baf88c4f4f42a34d0fb951106db034ed3
9316 F20110216_AABMCC manak_j_Page_229thm.jpg
79363d329cb0cc72884395f78b47e146
833ba45bd269e84c878139dc71da4c9182bc2157
9128 F20110216_AABMPN manak_j_Page_193thm.jpg
888dd08efef1542a855e692ab6140f9f
78a1fde830d6efdc09bdbbd3dc3d1e1587c66e4a
37210 F20110216_AABNMH manak_j_Page_221.QC.jpg
3f0bde3cc3f5f183b062c9da69b17063
0ba246406e6fe91d65e3d191e86160aa16aee9e4
41203 F20110216_AABLFJ manak_j_Page_127.pro
fd019f8be27c878ab664facfb0db9a2a
b89ca07005512d6f875c5366a95ecd9873cab224
2175 F20110216_AABLSU manak_j_Page_029.txt
3dc778cf9dd96fe1fc956826e0009c20
7b846a6f6f296566ad8ab8d1fcc8a91d8bb26ea3
1051876 F20110216_AABMPO manak_j_Page_188.jp2
cd257af2640ccc5dd17203a33017dc42
9de6cb5544ded6772f0553d0685485e151ca8f56
140465 F20110216_AABNMI manak_j_Page_225.jpg
d1dd20edf78adf407a362081f66b6970
cbc6b53815a2b56d1128b4baf96d53865007e9dc
9046 F20110216_AABLFK manak_j_Page_067thm.jpg
9f1c3ae7bfac0861be382145842949a8
0f94346ec5f4c86c30ffaca3a896d59b6496a882
F20110216_AABMCD manak_j_Page_184.tif
86ae5554128503e97610c5a6847d1da4
738b4c3fec76ddc931b589f18de75d473385f0b9
9378 F20110216_AABLSV manak_j_Page_224thm.jpg
93c6427d2222f81736cd23742d9bdd35
8e485ac8f5e3fa51261b42a4d2c20ebcbfc85c4b
53112 F20110216_AABMPP manak_j_Page_055.pro
732a3862f3601d5c621b27352c7c3d2f
3c71506153cf166d4e70d6726ea9443d6cb941d3
108344 F20110216_AABNMJ manak_j_Page_227.jpg
22fd8234489da7af8836bae9bb1f6a9b
0727f8135a1a005f2dba6a7865549f42e70a8f26
8890 F20110216_AABLFL manak_j_Page_072thm.jpg
7f3e86e81c64aaadcbe6fa6737bd6349
0b5da02292d4782652d8a327df449d87d4750638
35662 F20110216_AABMCE manak_j_Page_239.QC.jpg
c624738944070e3621de98750419ea08
37c153804bce1851769ac4182b42fe1eb5801b3f
893001 F20110216_AABLSW manak_j_Page_251.jp2
61f17213167a3475315d19fd699796eb
bb5e01b75fdc8fb6a79d9eac3f02dc525e92bd13
35364 F20110216_AABNMK manak_j_Page_227.QC.jpg
0e2909a635c0a1826f8f8b445141c800
0c84b55025ee021904f83d44b246096cfb3c5d73
86774 F20110216_AABLFM manak_j_Page_257.jpg
5c1e7f624c6a2517db17e572834ec473
fa4da982d8c56db5690df89b662cafe133aaa723
F20110216_AABMCF manak_j_Page_144.jp2
037db312ab151ed0406c7474a8265cfc
cb1882959282acbbf28a663f2fcb5c362100548a
556 F20110216_AABLSX manak_j_Page_002thm.jpg
9fa84b990f87349586bdec9e07d63cc2
704dfac4e05737d5c70141d46458847ea510beae
8647 F20110216_AABMPQ manak_j_Page_200thm.jpg
a43aa7fbc043b7a7db4c5b8d9321db4d
af578658ff07e542c1cbfe44ab7a38d0d818257c
108926 F20110216_AABNML manak_j_Page_228.jpg
25f9786e9a8483ceece88eb836872d01
a904ccb13b2a03acce3544c7372cf2bd02996f57
F20110216_AABLFN manak_j_Page_250.jp2
cfeaeb8616bdbdd9ecb7c3cda7925ce2
4211397fabae7a0da4cacce69f45c68b27d0f0cd
F20110216_AABMCG manak_j_Page_196.tif
1c49a5a52ca6115dad0a4ce6b2c963d5
6988def05fd5124505233bebdfb1c8f58fb73dca
235819 F20110216_AABLSY manak_j_Page_256.jp2
c0c47f1ade6aeec8c573f5cb6c5b3da8
ef6000cb27e6e19778cfea092a60f8958a575acf
F20110216_AABMPR manak_j_Page_045.tif
6424f7ed95cf9a4f8eb29215fb1e1958
079d1035d199ce6d77e6c5dbd5831ae9c867059d
58602 F20110216_AABLFO manak_j_Page_179.pro
d016abab1122921ce594f736c0fdbc2c
f27a6991dd1629ab7a7abf00d49e5248254e297c
56736 F20110216_AABMCH manak_j_Page_263.pro
90422f651117bfdd5e90ccb7d97bdcd4
a249ce2cac436f8001f1db9516a80c58cd9f86e8
8514 F20110216_AABLSZ manak_j_Page_118thm.jpg
88bbc61342a6a2e56c9b86e7c8c27011
8b79c38acdbcb1a896a275b6446213a6b320dffb
F20110216_AABMPS manak_j_Page_069.jp2
c28a91616c340f915cbbd0a794d78dd6
ba1ca3b96bdd07a563565088e349781fd2744169
113819 F20110216_AABNMM manak_j_Page_229.jpg
c640178a62d487e22fc09f0ffc5f3af9
9143be6e8ae46f498179615b2162c86a2d80505f
112004 F20110216_AABLFP manak_j_Page_086.jpg
697b9fb01bdec3ff4f5b6fccd597648b
144bcf0ea28645ef720b7dd92fb98a7c10015a3d
F20110216_AABMCI manak_j_Page_214.pro
2171dfb4d77e2cddf16fe4fd55f763d6
0e899d4f4289d1fed3532e65c2511b750e6dc66d
62667 F20110216_AABMPT manak_j_Page_109.pro
5921c5194aa2a69549394c3f1f7de57a
af273f893791a60f01d3ff2636d80058afcb90bb
36958 F20110216_AABNMN manak_j_Page_229.QC.jpg
f6d8ef099b0801a5f0c7007d83e1c7af
0af251999c715def6b995a369682ac135e1d68f4
56393 F20110216_AABLFQ manak_j_Page_064.pro
f61a2f56ff6cc41209203cc308dec75b
5d6d8004283a82c3bb041135fdce0f6e13ba6e44
153633 F20110216_AABMCJ manak_j_Page_259.jpg
64cf950ace9e13d9949733363c7b3e4c
483a1153c90825e2c96c5adbbf0206b7027853c8
F20110216_AABMPU manak_j_Page_100.jp2
7e9bd0c93f0b567af3b7d359fa852500
56e06adcbf98cef77e7de9185588fcda2f28abde
36793 F20110216_AABNMO manak_j_Page_232.QC.jpg
051bd16e733c54a70dddda8cf78258f1
1b5e7b4369736fa31bdb7b6cafdb3e7e947c7a68
56242 F20110216_AABLFR manak_j_Page_026.pro
c2d94e4e41d95fbae4c7a86247dd1c3c
a5a1edcb6fef0b723d87362ace61b59fe04d05bc
94365 F20110216_AABMCK manak_j_Page_130.jpg
2e46a12b2dbe41f667afda88bcc5368d
3d0aaf8830997358129d8558bc9ac6b69153348a
72323 F20110216_AABMPV manak_j_Page_111.jpg
d01260426d27a34b06bd8b846831c728
689bfe3773c6a433aa1a8402a213341c6f9ca56a
105653 F20110216_AABNMP manak_j_Page_233.jpg
94bfb40f40bde60c3c5f735300fc7b24
c67e8af9ddc762a6a6889cc5bea399fa621871e5
8629 F20110216_AABLFS manak_j_Page_094thm.jpg
34a523f63c2ab23381e71e6d30e103fe
ed65473ae4d577e7b36e431bcca356a95a838e64
27112 F20110216_AABMCL manak_j_Page_214.QC.jpg
23af6e80a7c0e7f671815a18ffdb9ef4
0c0eefc19e22dbca80e62ae895ad9e4314d52797
35417 F20110216_AABMPW manak_j_Page_120.QC.jpg
b76e187099450b0648698e17ab2e8724
a0b54eb2cbed132880de07a05fb1ce797c986df2
34247 F20110216_AABNMQ manak_j_Page_233.QC.jpg
98962553fa7695cfd820375c0c881cf5
25e97a6aca81a39c3e3297dae1d5e0356dab7af4
F20110216_AABLFT manak_j_Page_046.jp2
9d05081bec4b6aa9ce6293b00715bf3b
025e1349c10a9d456810fffef415d1b745e9296a
1011764 F20110216_AABMCM manak_j_Page_187.jp2
29c1766a9de07678a2bd5c6a42ccd016
70e9e986bc1516bb7f69a1612b7460028987782c
2098 F20110216_AABMPX manak_j_Page_196.txt
af03d37c6e362792d2b3250998e9b4cb
34b6b2719dd29f35a112b54a592b51b8f27f0ffa
20745 F20110216_AABNMR manak_j_Page_234.QC.jpg
f6ca7b3dd9db290a4c1545a7bc81afb6
2667f00c5feee5c53739957a97aadf47e5e3b62d
F20110216_AABLFU manak_j_Page_103.jp2
f12e48c662f1f73fa228b032bcdd8242
06fb1e887c6f3e4efccd0c4583e2d8629e974965
2146 F20110216_AABMCN manak_j_Page_083.txt
dad22b945b315f5661dcdd9c11538006
d123d94eff5c30cb85510a2b499f3f4d63337113
53005 F20110216_AABMPY manak_j_Page_043.pro
a116470dff3b1175c5434afe062a6dc7
c847e3b3ca466c538baed050c0721bb197e34d13
98644 F20110216_AABNMS manak_j_Page_235.jpg
94ae50108b08c36d21ad44088b7304b5
19a0b4af9187d9896b43923fc0549b319658b69f
1535 F20110216_AABLFV manak_j_Page_267.txt
708ad88e65631f9e71005b3e6b640061
1c59c8c85aae1947aa8330203b9c6fb136228ab6
8594 F20110216_AABMCO manak_j_Page_120thm.jpg
15420f054bcf2443eaecb9868ea5f505
d5443114d6e8835e914cea97f6c7a9b822f0e16a
F20110216_AABMPZ manak_j_Page_220.tif
d95d52dec6907668d58406391574f51b
20a31dd7b953092f51ffab6ebde604a06e2acf26
115686 F20110216_AABNMT manak_j_Page_238.jpg
30b239021b18181e6e67c6860aae3a2c
a6638753a78f914aa80916a54eb953ffb63fa8b4
F20110216_AABLFW manak_j_Page_023.tif
4910c5ee24b91dd2e0fc7772d0efefbc
ebd585b7eb8aeca2d41055f1cc4118e0e7e06ea1
1320 F20110216_AABMCP manak_j_Page_047.txt
5ec3bdc5f1e339d2aa3914604ba019d9
d9704319fc0148d7b829ffdf0521d4b7760d27f8
110563 F20110216_AABNMU manak_j_Page_241.jpg
79ddbbd76b07292aa65d4f8822bb0f53
e49185fdb81e1c4a6db02e8cd59cda56d9d10f72
51998 F20110216_AABLFX manak_j_Page_004.pro
97902ab1bc971689879db86baa9ece08
36602059189bc95f7ea43bb5e906b1a3357ddb90
37638 F20110216_AABLYA manak_j_Page_206.QC.jpg
273ef00977c934e9adc446b791020ff9
88e3bde66ace0e6546dd0bb19dbc539865a6486b
71752 F20110216_AABMCQ manak_j_Page_121.pro
0d9c241180bcbb780a08e05879ff9de3
86a03bf96812b2f8d7afb9af2c57cc1f12fe7691
100818 F20110216_AABNMV manak_j_Page_245.jpg
b93768feb738ba01cd203330a5faacdb
8400e659f5bb4851359e0925d4ac4edbd799c45e
F20110216_AABLFY manak_j_Page_005.tif
e3bb2eee547a33cfa38a4c3b3d9303d0
c76756fbe2bf522088777c6d02114c15bbd6070a
2979 F20110216_AABLYB manak_j_Page_172.txt
9dc8887e812e78467d53684d3cd22e56
0620edd5b791f29c4b13b060fd00152108daa999
24286 F20110216_AABMCR manak_j_Page_256.jpg
5255a8d959f4a04393a2b2dc6aa1e831
4ec61fb9d08f3e7efff6607a017156b4d92f5d46
112072 F20110216_AABNMW manak_j_Page_246.jpg
6338e09bb26d229408288713d337cb24
86a77aaa2be0143ae13a66d29c28e010cd7d82b8
108552 F20110216_AABLFZ manak_j_Page_045.jpg
cb6a914f0aaf295da1ec699aaa83100e
3736110ef6d31cc6c954738b5fb2a7e87afeb5d7
8922 F20110216_AABLYC manak_j_Page_064thm.jpg
be9d52ece2cc18a3e1d5aeab08990e11
089f55c25048538c3d5db9bc0c249e948b7ab28f
57777 F20110216_AABMCS manak_j_Page_065.pro
b0b931fc799a744abf10ddb9949aa36d
2fb49f70677db1136f35a092b013280c30465356
36646 F20110216_AABNMX manak_j_Page_246.QC.jpg
974095eebb1a4586a587f9010d6146ce
f99001ce45a2a9f3df25780a167214ccf32a4b13
109609 F20110216_AABLYD manak_j_Page_021.jpg
ba8a3035d1e009b03d46824a2f4bf1f3
ad7b9ee4537bc2b09ef7a4a41b09a81bbca42326
8286 F20110216_AABMCT manak_j_Page_117thm.jpg
b01deca39f1cc0a93aad222a2b74460d
03acced480130e2749ce394fc931e2e14bb0d2f9
27866 F20110216_AABNMY manak_j_Page_251.QC.jpg
05753b008c06d7fc9729a782f1bc752b
d1df14257516c3df818fab1c5ec225141ec26b56
418600 F20110216_AABLYE manak_j_Page_249.jp2
85e75991a6270b065fcacb324862fffa
781447121341edfa1055b5bd901942db8983597f
F20110216_AABMCU manak_j_Page_176.jp2
4802d3ef069c33d6657293943cd13fbf
52549358484d242aadaa1b7850796a87bb19a105
29021 F20110216_AABNMZ manak_j_Page_255.QC.jpg
00b35b40b7e6c693d961348a18801327
dee973ff9678d78744d7a7204bf3d78fa3b01310
9022 F20110216_AABLYF manak_j_Page_151thm.jpg
3df2f6ea9939f0e73b867b7d74ebc579
6d41a1979deebffe26c0f4d0161659f516420af2
F20110216_AABMCV manak_j_Page_045.jp2
54af68a6dc6babb07aa078e831f80c6f
8c66c4ddd4bddd40b428f2f933bb38fbbdb2f8c3
129066 F20110216_AABLYG manak_j_Page_140.jpg
54a847867247fa71127f608d0b14b486
83309c4e869295fd50eb98e68f6a5416d3a6e4c3
F20110216_AABMCW manak_j_Page_169.jp2
8d9bef2372023db9dec06b2ee891c6ce
61977beb5174c4c8d7e2e2f73c553a3d7b85cfb3
57532 F20110216_AABLYH manak_j_Page_038.pro
7f19c976505658b1342c0b60caa89d6a
ff5bad2871ecece25375af5eeedbd9281a6b801d
1249 F20110216_AABMCX manak_j_Page_234.txt
ebe2cba8ed2d12a2fa9cf4a58018ab02
81d1a57c328e06b6327a4afa0cfab069e3bf38eb
56879 F20110216_AABMVA manak_j_Page_199.pro
97f5dc11ce3e6d7d826c19939c1d3775
73f82b9a3f871ce8dfa5f173b76a4a146f196461
87627 F20110216_AABLYI manak_j_Page_219.jpg
e5fa218a1b821e8f4810ffa444cc0c7c
b447b5f9eaa3e87b9c9f1a339ef2f0b2995a9682
F20110216_AABMCY manak_j_Page_091.tif
4bf2bcea3c8fb46d0a0f37666bb096a5
99cff635dc390d42e9616f97ac5d78b742572fb7
F20110216_AABMVB manak_j_Page_085.tif
c946788daa4a0def33c4df407f78d4b9
8666958bd00b0cfbf8b0cb321fb25c3278859152
F20110216_AABLYJ manak_j_Page_028.jp2
b3e0bbf644f05961c3271392bc0c3cad
22d15f6c730b16e375348758dec22e03654fde56
87442 F20110216_AABMCZ manak_j_Page_225.pro
9a5f7a6324acfcedf28325cb3c451b5f
7cc1f5a45888e74652bda095364a01719c74527d
F20110216_AABMVC manak_j_Page_253.tif
7cf396f90cdeec0d22863fca786584ef
708304c6830b0a575150043924546578e627841f
F20110216_AABLYK manak_j_Page_057.jp2
55011d6bb9daaf5d6df7675e51f3b5b0
d5a9fe96c0d1a77e557de9682ecc3a7b7a8e55bf
57444 F20110216_AABMVD manak_j_Page_097.pro
2308ea5c9eb933a52750e850e8e23289
b0ec265b24d104fa850939854993654ddddb32af
33012 F20110216_AABLYL manak_j_Page_048.QC.jpg
e6652cd1db6b0857ae81189b8b8e3266
9e3d242659d6bccabd29d8b4ebd55c956120f3f7
F20110216_AABMVE manak_j_Page_129.tif
3b8e9f30be513ab00a8cefb57a3a72fd
1e55deb7f98c85c99486838b07794b461855730a
F20110216_AABLLA manak_j_Page_243.tif
5c558afe96fb3a59713f520169af56ca
0df45e4448a9ffc82e8928407f981049410131c7
F20110216_AABLYM manak_j_Page_207.jp2
29eb5bad0dc66403ae58235a59f63921
a832f63bc4df5015908110ece1a65f4d04997dc4
F20110216_AABMVF manak_j_Page_060.jp2
8fb1847d00bd0ae8daf48d0d96fb874e
0687a3c1c6b9916d81f638b7e399a7a643b98758
36200 F20110216_AABLLB manak_j_Page_242.QC.jpg
0240d3fa5f9ca69b48c7a95668050618
28a748b42a6e507f169edf960e22ba6c6a63ca9c
113382 F20110216_AABLYN manak_j_Page_093.jpg
4eec00c50e221f36d3a3176956177f0f
ca01d943d33f0e5e92d0620ea037db8949e4c8d6
4772 F20110216_AABMVG manak_j_Page_005.pro
82843c68424c6eed78ea6f1d71f1de8b
c5c123774d8a0794ca2c6832d213244e016035d7
33679 F20110216_AABLLC manak_j_Page_188.QC.jpg
371b90a3f9045ae4344659a6f63f91c2
4abf7165bc615ebcf4eab5f4900c13f4d7f6aeb8
9214 F20110216_AABNSA manak_j_Page_157thm.jpg
349c42f57ac372ca527d8e6e5c01302a
a5f0a75e90a9e13680129a7161d054d88a8cfd00
22989 F20110216_AABLYO manak_j_Page_253.pro
8c92eaef3f74ed75c5874e8e8d8fef11
5f06aab75a7d5d17635d099f171fe2b6095b762e
34972 F20110216_AABMVH manak_j_Page_040.QC.jpg
cb77ecdbdb5082ab10f8e40830a4a050
d3c26cece3689cf81d9da045a8a51814930a4acb
2216 F20110216_AABLLD manak_j_Page_168.txt
f0b9eebbbc735c3d5e6050ee76599cd1
84c7b22cf9f2445b22525b8786f825120e500f82
1397 F20110216_AABNSB manak_j_Page_160thm.jpg
a0f560de0927abd3b1a6d5874cc3adb6
671ee5e5d679d4e0720a041e85ef851b476d11c2
2126 F20110216_AABLYP manak_j_Page_058.txt
bde5dcdeb2972553604b39efd6a9d6b5
d80b3a31c07e9783433a9976835e59dc0ab8d9c5
F20110216_AABMVI manak_j_Page_196.jp2
7051ef16d7df3e7540db3170153650ad
df307abd85ad2668d84d299f16f95f6b7faddf18
37037 F20110216_AABLLE manak_j_Page_098.QC.jpg
48427df27ab1e3fd8bfa4b171b033d39
34eef4b1509473047671bfd62388a780b4596089
9082 F20110216_AABNSC manak_j_Page_161thm.jpg
04f8ce9a9953d12c7487b621fb37e9dd
b64a043c664a5d1213a0c24a60cfaac07566da8b
56927 F20110216_AABLYQ manak_j_Page_178.pro
82286682b274534d698be82844d42730
5bf6c1306a3b17a4549726b3805c7a9419633155
F20110216_AABMVJ manak_j_Page_201.jp2
a1aad61fb2a19130a0b4903684eaa45d
2d3c28f0d5a9606a94c84cb1b6a3aca2d3c985e0
F20110216_AABLLF manak_j_Page_202.txt
4e292d8ccbdf7b8a20a2af4c8cb8f688
ff70e8f369e5255906cc9d8631ee24cc5adf6d53
9066 F20110216_AABNSD manak_j_Page_162thm.jpg
8c49d0c868f43f6d66753d5394b12248
4896357d183e2180908518704df7cfc33feb7ca7
7881 F20110216_AABLYR manak_j_Page_254thm.jpg
d99061511f209e346863f915ac8cf3e8
0ca78a633fc648508bc4cb8d7719aaa30f2ee9da
F20110216_AABMVK manak_j_Page_093.tif
ddd8ae6b994c5b525aa123ec0c263ae1
502557fcc08023004aae235e245751eccc4dd252
35398 F20110216_AABLLG manak_j_Page_066.QC.jpg
f80763b3f18c4569ef1e9430be9d091f
060f720d9d21f6079345194a3a213a0502060ed5
9273 F20110216_AABNSE manak_j_Page_166thm.jpg
452c5b179081b7b366788f5d9bd85876
4df6c83e2c91cea66613fe089f2ddf2fac2df6c0
2123 F20110216_AABMIA manak_j_Page_233.txt
882eb18b2abf7f0a6ce1240f71f890fa
988cc0fa221584a7f9cfd4f0e2d8bbffe4266bdf
F20110216_AABLYS manak_j_Page_031.tif
de6683bd9672469448f11abd95d40468
5028a681b21946e471f534ecbc96b8a40644eea3
F20110216_AABMVL manak_j_Page_072.tif
0081c08c17e0200a9efebb4b58ea00e0
919f4c81eb6fb3597ed2af98c5d6b59be8433358
5011 F20110216_AABLLH manak_j_Page_011.QC.jpg
a99ea3c5bdd52f74ce9442699d6943c1
865de70cfe8be6938e2e499b79e9af6c91101be1
8851 F20110216_AABNSF manak_j_Page_167thm.jpg
42525976b293d5f23d3df73e10ed2c59
ad9c845929a79ed3d6a07a27caa6be67088ad5f2
F20110216_AABMIB manak_j_Page_012.jp2
03d3f5b5c40ff831e9c899530a50b28d
5c8fa131da7a93f09f31cb688ba37acf3c676d82
F20110216_AABLYT manak_j_Page_012.tif
6c6e12ac567f923949f2285637518b0d
16f8924f4ee5e4f29fbc0184a4045e70a564c059
108691 F20110216_AABMVM manak_j_Page_212.jpg
462f1267a1f91a3a629763c76df59e78
67550d0f427ad420dfa9158d9a3edcfefc20e206
54790 F20110216_AABLLI manak_j_Page_083.pro
e47bf47ec8f066fa77f581bcdae847b0
173cd1b40f960d7e898c3bcb21f408b94103b079
F20110216_AABNSG manak_j_Page_168thm.jpg
47fe8c149c1441cbb78883376e2c622f
d2395f5c1be5e63ac82fa53a4871ff6f7c723aef
55272 F20110216_AABMIC manak_j_Page_113.pro
9437e1d1cb59c1e4bc9a0d76d0c427dd
96b2c52548700237625960d31016ca9af4841455
F20110216_AABLYU manak_j_Page_170.jp2
feefd5bb473f712a70d521fdfdd6722b
fadc71215c36b7784e49064e88f15daa1acd806e
117445 F20110216_AABMVN manak_j_Page_174.jpg
01f1fc6bbb5d5464869192a905bd7888
010c3fd98060a3730c0658c6fc9968ca4f90d8ac
58057 F20110216_AABLLJ manak_j_Page_090.pro
f5bd4d42264351b40b3acd1d2c7868cd
14be062f2ae220ad698411a44a8509d2e8040150
8176 F20110216_AABNSH manak_j_Page_169thm.jpg
a6dc8bc9ec19e64822fe7de9eef0c7ba
59c07caf96cb12a6ca0dd6ea5dc7e711532620e9
113025 F20110216_AABMID manak_j_Page_061.jpg
b0c583a41e92e93d4915f112688af004
5cb2e3760b454e2af45f48a01b25b08ed7ec8e21
9447 F20110216_AABLYV manak_j_Page_194thm.jpg
bf46f2175f6eebbb8a19cfd9629bd9f7
da6433dfb669c4100626a6db44f3e06f56347410
F20110216_AABMVO manak_j_Page_152.txt
1b3fcdb69868146da4e102fb01660ef0
a32418433aff22a3eb44c3ced240073949098c69
35322 F20110216_AABLLK manak_j_Page_052.QC.jpg
7cec765f3de49906ba5a29ea878517a5
75fbbfed30cf8b4b19532b5e756d78d224e6fa9e
9459 F20110216_AABNSI manak_j_Page_172thm.jpg
c4f9b30e7a69fa8f55fe075fc49ee130
97cec9083be9a8ad347a7a082ae6acf68c0a9721
53865 F20110216_AABMIE manak_j_Page_185.pro
0200aca8d703e97a496237905e7972ea
9528e88e2afed26c55d04cb7d2bd1590f790a72f
26083 F20110216_AABLYW manak_j_Page_257.QC.jpg
50d752532ac8212ef4b1c5dde8621dca
66df57a487747d1af84389444b0288acc480e1bc
95775 F20110216_AABMVP manak_j_Page_254.jpg
a8b91ab9d33b2691c0c194032fc3a448
2ff338d503fbf441d96a106b6afb19245ba5f9fc
F20110216_AABLLL manak_j_Page_223.tif
62e462c68f29a57b3f7e5161948f0c9c
557e6800d52c148435197ab9a76946d0a564b3f4
F20110216_AABNSJ manak_j_Page_174thm.jpg
8e4d1905853a6f280ef1ebe1adddd050
dfc07d0fbd24ca9edf5f6497bd489c524b273fd6
55920 F20110216_AABMIF manak_j_Page_246.pro
689376a09de905cfbc0c669c9eb0c9a7
f1097498683ef194c8738570d81c1c5a1d17d2a2
F20110216_AABLYX manak_j_Page_262.txt
edc8440c554785d1b71558dc7a9de6aa
2907abdde4b70551090ff2f75b9d726d5348d22c
F20110216_AABMVQ manak_j_Page_261.tif
d9360116f72e12cc2adee4eb2ac3c1c7
247af804f00ee117f1b5f5983063cef617dfa6c3
103225 F20110216_AABLLM manak_j_Page_262.jpg
4fc78516aa769d15adc41f589ad962ec
74e6de53e1fe1e1537a155dc4a6157419f2fa431
9146 F20110216_AABNSK manak_j_Page_176thm.jpg
f5b785c1d3bc33fe7ae12897c11a7315
51a7ee8f7a21f568f35eeba3777dcac09b14e603
6035 F20110216_AABMIG manak_j_Page_008thm.jpg
6b720b051056d152907f361cff41e1ec
b4f2418985360aceaa081b6f5451444f5282eef7
56053 F20110216_AABLYY manak_j_Page_144.pro
af2eec3bbcfe3fc1c9d432d1a744b96d
0032e89afc48dac867dbd4925d5d67f72d6b06c6
F20110216_AABMVR manak_j_Page_041.jp2
07bdd44b80832a12fc87142b1ae96148
910c89160094ff330a3096c8a3a15ed710f96181
9098 F20110216_AABNSL manak_j_Page_178thm.jpg
dd4c435e220d418c5857e86f96212d25
f028056e9ceaf51e297a6e8b43b0cd577f7850d5
513155 F20110216_AABMIH manak_j_Page_253.jp2
bba6c48ea20ced480175cef58b91fc04
98ff2571ccf070591ac3b1b3d8168b7c9a9bf378
2074 F20110216_AABLYZ manak_j_Page_028.txt
14b506c2ab47ab40cadead304c06c06d
a3de0ba3be895833d78ddb13b2ee7ca123f14c8c
37904 F20110216_AABNFA manak_j_Page_163.pro
dc4f4458a3a1c19946d5f4dec9012a9a
426434a72b63d4bc9ea35afe636c1b205a83a287
F20110216_AABMVS manak_j_Page_231.txt
ea8a17649f1b3c2d2a776bcca681cdff
77e69d0ab590de43e6db383f41d6393adf1c6a70
115218 F20110216_AABLLN manak_j_Page_090.jpg
f64eada4dc826984d85ccd19008cff2b
825f2ca18e0f9ce1702e354719cbba69b7ff3ca2
8269 F20110216_AABNSM manak_j_Page_181thm.jpg
332a70edde2d590155a959d63b1577f6
2f5a5092710662f7bb1f4903ca23405d16e64d8d
2171 F20110216_AABMII manak_j_Page_062.txt
db90bd743ede73b476aea3b4d816dc3b
6b68bc9a05307dbc408d8cc3e93f8e2cdb14b438
69136 F20110216_AABNFB manak_j_Page_164.pro
a30fbd46d0b05031838e520c0182a976
f18b9262613a46ec07c92c381a174fa8203c1010
F20110216_AABMVT manak_j_Page_009.tif
fbe6ce48128a4857f3d8b962e72c5e87
334df8ac94d15b34290a307d386b5c92ee5fd104
F20110216_AABLLO manak_j_Page_064.jp2
5b436d2073145690aa3ffa343ea69093
eb1d7a4a9f3de0f6dea9dd5a576b79341683ea6a
8739 F20110216_AABNSN manak_j_Page_182thm.jpg
7f94616ee5feaa6903abfbc99b96d062
4b3a4c15d498eee53b9d135746df5ddae3b92c52
52371 F20110216_AABNFC manak_j_Page_165.pro
59da6cd6003edfd539b8e2b6f9ef1d90
60e6bcb782e763682e154497ade1aa1080d05efc
F20110216_AABMVU manak_j_Page_065.jp2
0821842cad007ae7411f89774f5c3212
f76f8b6a2c30a0561b7bd255245aa92d971e6131
111670 F20110216_AABLLP manak_j_Page_264.jpg
95485725f8394bdbbbb31b1aa818d29b
244f8f88fb01f1fbf189d8367a045b69b8d6acf1
8994 F20110216_AABNSO manak_j_Page_184thm.jpg
dcd05e5b4e180e71810a1b3af923324c
c53c62d3288615e592f40a374abd1a6e03014c53
8567 F20110216_AABMIJ manak_j_Page_031thm.jpg
142cc1b758876d37525a806d746173d5
f97af8ebce04a1864aca21bafd5c60a8345431cd
56663 F20110216_AABNFD manak_j_Page_168.pro
ccce1a82cf445b497e8868000aeb4d08
d7ea37542f2a0a2c50bfa806db67afaccfbbc5e6
59269 F20110216_AABMVV manak_j_Page_220.pro
56796d003d70fae87200beec3c937f26
5d3366157b384de1231fe12d9b9e1c3b4927d728
1032347 F20110216_AABLLQ manak_j_Page_226.jp2
d717f5cec69a079ffe52e4526590d9c1
8dc899a68069ee8b85acf3f832ed98080fef5e47
8940 F20110216_AABNSP manak_j_Page_185thm.jpg
2121f5ef746b0cb99cd82336e955f6cb
806625c87dc8bd098dc3f235c83936820f5d9f61
28487 F20110216_AABMIK manak_j_Page_226.QC.jpg
a852118be73caca84cb41aa454cd0fd7
839a1c5271b2fcd4b1b1c412193fb60c93804a49
32820 F20110216_AABNFE manak_j_Page_170.pro
50cb66ab1311d4497cfeb353ff93fbe8
d133ebdd9172fa808bfdbede3364bedd03c5e1ca
55285 F20110216_AABLLR manak_j_Page_016.pro
037ffb71998afbd7d2276816058961b0
8c1c05a1a496ee1873d50a977857cf45ab634691
8885 F20110216_AABNSQ manak_j_Page_189thm.jpg
e60a609a3b18248abd7f1afdac532d75
03a6da5c1cd0ca045416971517632b12af2e1b94
4076 F20110216_AABMIL manak_j_Page_260.txt
ed12cac10b2cfbbe78013894fe4ee526
d2ebe793b9a980b0c58a4dc78cc8cd614ab0f686
57935 F20110216_AABMVW manak_j_Page_150.pro
af256dd9eec9234968365cf69a7422fe
509edcfae065a4d576c737d84ba4501e073ae8f3
F20110216_AABLLS manak_j_Page_106.tif
0207ce02fcd5062c8de52fa8a8c9a481
3300afaf87df8a589f551391ac8fc65e9defe249
9308 F20110216_AABNSR manak_j_Page_190thm.jpg
6cc68ef4768bcac6de153f91de372a0a
2d6a2cafe8baad520fe8b02891a54250b6fb6cbc
8703 F20110216_AABMIM manak_j_Page_026thm.jpg
afa41975fa7b4319a48e2bf3eda66ad5
949bc58f98810f18d74012198037e37a4c6f3e5b
49268 F20110216_AABNFF manak_j_Page_173.pro
7f7cab2b1c2abb2043db912b5ebe56cf
2e75746325c6da176c9b6e0a9565452303784eff
F20110216_AABMVX manak_j_Page_054.tif
ac17752af619d4d6f84008ed92567c80
287c3bad466416f6f69726671785f1cddac7050b
64301 F20110216_AABLLT manak_j_Page_077.jpg
8e73f856e69c68dc71fe912e44b757b7
7be25dddd31c9694fa8a5f6ead37afb353ca4754
2298 F20110216_AABMIN manak_j_Page_137.txt
a423e13b2897fa3439654ef1c43a2733
58e05fd98b89b854c172b99a8a3f0649caf816a1
30536 F20110216_AABNFG manak_j_Page_187.pro
e3bd051db331cdcccb239a82ab0974f9
7cc17e46f824e7656b370187d5694b4b91bb4853
9135 F20110216_AABMVY manak_j_Page_243thm.jpg
422ecb0888704049f2fb4497ad49f072
e006ee29c3e8fd554ac832ca5a2df18997cdd7c9
F20110216_AABLLU manak_j_Page_016thm.jpg
51ffe63fae029aba862bdc526cb1e67e
82eddd14a6f2067d55f09cc6394ffab8cc6d74e5
8077 F20110216_AABNSS manak_j_Page_191thm.jpg
f68bf617d32a4d90f8bfb550021d1915
652a3b8ffbc78ce5f6ed1edcd29bb59723d2946d
52652 F20110216_AABMIO manak_j_Page_099.pro
76f7770be0f07f5818d5964495497c12
8f34d574711ab7978f060e3155766dc0b6252f3a
54672 F20110216_AABNFH manak_j_Page_189.pro
c6706cda6b5d0134b4918b4336932f0f
26ed77a2ff6faeb97c485c1334347a774049dfe9
F20110216_AABMVZ manak_j_Page_147.tif
adf8cc5db514da2879e4b8971e4d403a
02f9d22bc9e9fe37e5f4e78b241d972e80590a96
9026 F20110216_AABLLV manak_j_Page_071thm.jpg
6660d3701b28a115d9d8735b5f5ca055
f52c1b45461cd55e6f8bb05b325fac99faca7383
8696 F20110216_AABNST manak_j_Page_195thm.jpg
da64a0810b0870146724aca890398bb8
97e852b1889cd9289ce412f0edc261bab9fa1a44
2317 F20110216_AABMIP manak_j_Page_151.txt
5565235f38b74cb882f286d397d2295b
2171a86b58d5dfcacf3220c6ef0e47b243413134
52291 F20110216_AABNFI manak_j_Page_191.pro
710f56abb29c7e59f5e17e78df4836bc
22188d56580d2e9a2af39f4d68d679dfebc2f892
9145 F20110216_AABLLW manak_j_Page_213thm.jpg
ff4413e04649b6c9906715f1c5563737
c107479d907798af02eb91d261b6651a3189528e
8648 F20110216_AABNSU manak_j_Page_196thm.jpg
0075a8a6fc41403dddc1bff5bf2b532d
204a004fef15eb1b320e18179a895a5e36cab236
F20110216_AABMIQ manak_j_Page_170.tif
214a67bdd465a85051271a5c469a31e7
2eb8184a8cfb0a170beaf403d37e9fcb968f504d
56016 F20110216_AABNFJ manak_j_Page_192.pro
8a23e4b3639120313345e96cf08d062b
d351251b739510b089d494c7f0b7fb9f46e8a06e
8623 F20110216_AABLLX manak_j_Page_209thm.jpg
fdb03ea780ccc8d25599f653dc178dbd
01974a2795f3a9e3a66bb8dcdc3716e8a9b07c48
6529 F20110216_AABNSV manak_j_Page_197thm.jpg
003a4e94b7d2dd27fca5ed6f06f000ba
90672a355fc3c5e41f389509d543aed0adf827b4
55944 F20110216_AABMIR manak_j_Page_159.pro
214ad42bc3a62ad748e66fa886212a2c
9e990570a8b1004741edaf150508df003a3ac714
56563 F20110216_AABNFK manak_j_Page_195.pro
8f16e1a1106723858f0f4663ecccb2a5
971676d03954c59c754229e1397d00c2104f49c5
56648 F20110216_AABLLY manak_j_Page_051.pro
4cab60bcb7336dc3f719e3fb5dbb2fd7
9e0f82006e22cd08ffb0c6297c7143e76c668418
9793 F20110216_AABNSW manak_j_Page_205thm.jpg
eb03850f1d8ccde405acf795ecc82f24
36a28ff0a7f4545f1c564fbe069145bef2bfb03c
F20110216_AABMIS manak_j_Page_220.jp2
276c94ad4e4174feff35098d8ef16480
0b6b491c6b75f24f1c20a0a81e649fc2faca8844
54199 F20110216_AABNFL manak_j_Page_202.pro
c288da6789479379ffaab6aaa4f656f9
a489477539726d62bd72e5508fada5419dfe8b17
F20110216_AABLLZ manak_j_Page_230.txt
dbef76eab1c4d9f3b8a08e195978d577
a374f796f26122af764fb06e4dfa95b806985e42
8549 F20110216_AABNSX manak_j_Page_207thm.jpg
2e6cd883e4406ba08eb275fdd93dfc79
7b8255e7789e32b5a9c6b30a1bec5836a4ad01f4
9166 F20110216_AABMIT manak_j_Page_177thm.jpg
17e79331589aa8e3a2a02de9470d58e9
79b2f1fb5221bafcc5cd8b5d1d7b0f2c7c05e037
55265 F20110216_AABNFM manak_j_Page_203.pro
b935e4421cda82a285072b82703877f4
8b90fe40641259eeaf22e7c673a22469e0e5f43d
8532 F20110216_AABNSY manak_j_Page_208thm.jpg
954fab3f09d844cb29c766f5111a9b5e
74c7e797c152dccc7c45f32488c39cc119504af3
F20110216_AABMIU manak_j_Page_158.txt
5ef62962a8d95550d700778fb3aa7efc
a0c733ceb93dd8f0b955b12bbfbd2f566c3c4609
57587 F20110216_AABNFN manak_j_Page_206.pro
cd7589f846578a1700038061c033a291
f39afae9492c2a7be9bf309faa2d38c37cb8437f
8958 F20110216_AABNSZ manak_j_Page_212thm.jpg
c796017de1fe9abb011e5bf66dcb3819
6dfed0e690aa5f9cabe1454d845ceac714ab48aa
F20110216_AABMIV manak_j_Page_192.tif
5c086f18d77c24c071bfd2a4582157b2
fa9bebcfeffa8da57c1e5c27134965ef05776ac7
53760 F20110216_AABNFO manak_j_Page_207.pro
6c65300a12d8f941abf053f0dff24c56
8c3bda697f8d5657560f9eb43836d9c35d2427f8
F20110216_AABMIW manak_j_Page_143.tif
7243fb1881c265fa7bab5c4a2212574c
13e11be844e2b904d837aa0cb4b48121edceaec4
56834 F20110216_AABNFP manak_j_Page_211.pro
29b91520a6e6e6e2ebd12f4d184ff046
fce3deb8be37fa2c1a670663bf1ca19ebb922f87
F20110216_AABMIX manak_j_Page_199.jp2
ceeb6e85a25616f945a30437b2ae8bed
00728103c5256d2a8b37ca9e37aa1c4115bbf90b
53065 F20110216_AABNFQ manak_j_Page_215.pro
5449682de865aae9b3c4afdbbcae299f
13c6e38e2b0ba458ceb0398f676333822d459654
F20110216_AABMIY manak_j_Page_156.tif
78d6f84c27403e35afd68a51d82dd53c
97671175cd674cfbe615c7e0b285b7b63dbacd40
55687 F20110216_AABNFR manak_j_Page_217.pro
48c234d7c72a2c72a4c0527f15524410
a3d40f870fbc2f02948f713ac51b328c0c220c58
114567 F20110216_AABMIZ manak_j_Page_181.jpg
d7fb1162b6086fb18985e5f0a50f2717
afa900037a0c5face413585e5dd3797f453c4da5
43031 F20110216_AABNFS manak_j_Page_218.pro
1aefcaf921ab434249786cb594f38433
80c950295c2572bae9e9d40948a2dfb9a1840de2
52351 F20110216_AABNFT manak_j_Page_222.pro
21b7ef57f34ff22ca41c876ecab7fdd3
875ab9bdf899e6c2fc68bec36057ac6691d116ce
76200 F20110216_AABNFU manak_j_Page_224.pro
dc9a853e331df4c20fc3887b38b4ed12
16b32f3195e14ae9bc81f9747a302c79ef1f362c
53132 F20110216_AABLRA manak_j_Page_014.pro
3eeb2a9b382529b63e45d9036244e8a7
41b8cfbaa3499de5310f63b3f5146fb4f297abeb
56225 F20110216_AABNFV manak_j_Page_229.pro
ffbaeae14f4a1b84cfc47f90a7c951c2
b7f39404394587c7e2e595918c6205c9374cf389
F20110216_AABLRB manak_j_Page_023.jp2
8bfe868581fdc926bd47e1bf9371a129
a370a4cdc9ba03cec116e3e8800d6f9dcd2c30ae
55394 F20110216_AABNFW manak_j_Page_231.pro
995bbe915bb903c9141e36eb0e4d60dd
eaecf1c6a80c0f8e78d65a17ddeb6e5461e71936
48992 F20110216_AABLRC manak_j_Page_147.pro
4ad634cab4ea1e727295bc04634f7c04
edb2f69c11015e941157d5ae358fc13daea5742c
48578 F20110216_AABNFX manak_j_Page_235.pro
9435cad12b139644416a332a758d8a98
6f3be41ca2b942751c236405ca2fd7d4e0071e36
F20110216_AABLRD manak_j_Page_073.tif
0e14ac50341ebbd11b7f14a6a070f779
4931ddc00c0939f7a0d325e3a613f014e31c94a7
56029 F20110216_AABNFY manak_j_Page_237.pro
a6e57b8c7baa3d2b933017495616af2b
44a85559acad1b380ff3f52396a4f80d384c5edf
514 F20110216_AABLRE manak_j_Page_001.txt
28f4ec7e414370f35371054f0eefdf42
3e46b49f7189cc61eadf3cd6de17f63ab3a5d4f3
48247 F20110216_AABNFZ manak_j_Page_250.pro
caf163e4fc3598e61924b568f87e31d3
932ee647918258276011815aa9f6f5286a5e7d29
66560 F20110216_AABLRF manak_j_Page_182.pro
dfce6affd0cde73c45f4027b45f4f357
e993c43a33c659bca232665c9c773044cf111404
2187 F20110216_AABLRG manak_j_Page_113.txt
08eb379d07edab274783822a38cefc48
b90a36ff06cd86ff23e72640abdea913b713c33a
F20110216_AABLRH manak_j_Page_041.tif
fceb256024c97ca9f0e4d27a86a81ec1
dfa987118f4e7e537d3278f6361e0d2386d90cb3
2735 F20110216_AABMOA manak_j_Page_257.txt
bebc98da0b945d6dd64c673eb5f4069d
829a858c0248e33f41a2c0dda659d132e063c07d
2235 F20110216_AABLRI manak_j_Page_019.txt
c4ef7e3ae502fc06293a1ecc84568ded
31c90294ec03c168d153056313e9d777d1a95e7a
52739 F20110216_AABMOB manak_j_Page_050.pro
4ae8528146de3ea12ccd2c37029e2d8d
3eb2b6650e6a38490bcbadb48513c04141c18a86
36867 F20110216_AABLRJ manak_j_Page_064.QC.jpg
2317069e3c1b0f734a176ac587ca7e94
f70f9a755e02b13cb7dd69b9f9703ff387a6ca9e
2156 F20110216_AABMOC manak_j_Page_185.txt
a6f948ddda95b56ceb2773304c327885
5b19e9b7ee29647ad6b356ad35d06990fa72a736
69344 F20110216_AABLRK manak_j_Page_198.pro
0e234768d1ea730b2d85397478e15f5e
b465494e345727af08022e21a1d40502396aa7f1
54745 F20110216_AABMOD manak_j_Page_063.pro
bac2bd1036002ddb875f25839417eb55
af07f909e83f287925a777f53db65a4fb0082123
38070 F20110216_AABLEA manak_j_Page_149.QC.jpg
d611629ff2cc753de1b746bc28c28d11
c62a312024c629481b7a96c8c82a02150573f41e
F20110216_AABLRL manak_j_Page_204.tif
51a66d32f5ea267042d694d2582cfba6
a15f20c3dddcf67e81ef0e733e534a545eb2b8d1
5211 F20110216_AABMOE manak_j_Page_234thm.jpg
f3ed71563b3b54e5271a880fdad20413
477baac1b471a99ef3d8e511fb36b2df34eee38e
F20110216_AABLEB manak_j_Page_200.tif
41e9cc0e35006daf40a4ecec72c46052
61d62248c385e7171775863f8d50d548754b8954
5155 F20110216_AABLRM manak_j_Page_261thm.jpg
761dbe010c7ba52491540e3e5355ad5b
926c3eca2c0004afd18e10ef17a60889c818c470
1731 F20110216_AABMOF manak_j_Page_255.txt
77c277945c8e38b238165b464e4a9731
021f49ab6a6b25e291069b602fa7ff1518e21d8b
2111 F20110216_AABLEC manak_j_Page_043.txt
159dc9c285c5d960666fc492030efafa
716306100d2d28f53bec5293199f92ccdb0576c7
8634 F20110216_AABLRN manak_j_Page_021thm.jpg
135cd5360389f8bc501e1bd11e18ae6d
7aad2ad65fe20131af112add377a030f672a65af
9124 F20110216_AABMOG manak_j_Page_073thm.jpg
1f35daedcb97c307478e401fd5d8c1a6
881fe37f77fef6f0834acf3cc29edc555b8b79bc
33673 F20110216_AABNLA manak_j_Page_165.QC.jpg
c6318588c7105e9b8ebbb120f219e13e
bd54e7b2adda86351a7b10d7d55e67ec78429835
F20110216_AABLED manak_j_Page_004.tif
374ea54207ba23093a5b594812c9a240
4da6e3616e0ef2c01fba78749d7048bf84c277e0
2090 F20110216_AABLRO manak_j_Page_186.txt
0b7cd92a2b0eeee9ed0aa11e776ac6dc
5573ee772d38689a6fa82c3f6854ebee26d35761
F20110216_AABMOH manak_j_Page_145thm.jpg
1515ae1205d2d6b32bceb2d531347e88
61490d59bb7eb8b1574bb7afbe4c3da845f9e6b0
114865 F20110216_AABNLB manak_j_Page_166.jpg
fd736d97a50c29c9d49308f64cfcebe2
967b884ec76cce39d333c83ac98eb6abf8d22ac7
110580 F20110216_AABLEE manak_j_Page_010.jpg
9b0cca03ce688a18a7f8d28c6e0b06f8
cb560102fa9115123f576d426d3d1518fc8c2d3e
102806 F20110216_AABLRP manak_j_Page_191.jpg
f05e24345e195438270d97bc38ec1bbe
4600621ec94fe0f4880b84184c109086fb6c830c
3205 F20110216_AABMOI manak_j_Page_003.jpg
381d0bdb791172aeb61d9a5990701558
76c050c919e487bbfc9aad94f7f5b29cd8c25afb
110710 F20110216_AABNLC manak_j_Page_167.jpg
a770063774ff3135effff7ea1e554e7b
2d7f010648a7d459ba5608fdc08d002583179a8b
937 F20110216_AABLEF manak_j_Page_002.pro
e8e3d9d3f1d386403bccc45e7b109860
c485121ce3713b22a3204c8a28020b141b3ea7f1
23057 F20110216_AABLRQ manak_j_Page_111.QC.jpg
1e48faa92398f2bddd4d7191a7e64723
b0c10d4194355930f5627ef0f3f57c6a41b90417
1051950 F20110216_AABMOJ manak_j_Page_153.jp2
87e77e87e9941ce8f2afd3efec84341e
49afc17fb2cb8c65528be34747f5c2989a775734
33819 F20110216_AABNLD manak_j_Page_169.QC.jpg
eeea5b964b491696da509190b43568db
28fe93c37193852d7e26f2a81a34b4df425cf0c4
35132 F20110216_AABLRR manak_j_Page_186.QC.jpg
aa58740c8b0a9e70b414893ec1b9335a
2a6bc3f3cbc40058b8a7e13eb7d24ef7ef0ff933
F20110216_AABMOK manak_j_Page_030.jp2
87a7a4a0b74de691d1271af15c524da8
343e0c8d2bc2638b7a504c0ba6ffbc2e3f5d2f49
87145 F20110216_AABNLE manak_j_Page_170.jpg
6190a623d05c056481b2eb0cac4633f8
c3f7b3c23a0c0bd482efb777384a25e4b9f1cbf1
F20110216_AABLEG manak_j_Page_040.tif
466cbebf802f1184f2034a5b45ddb9c8
72a46188eadb6b1f42d210f2b7d31c8dbc24e9dd
900685 F20110216_AABMBA manak_j_Page_261.jp2
6460f3be3bef307c1ca24819ef2c16db
654b11aaac739b252a09b49da2c76615710764aa
1857 F20110216_AABLRS manak_j_Page_095.txt
8c0e570673a7534433beaaabc4b398b2
9668bb99ed8622d1d3981da1f0e2f4bd1d95a1fd
36376 F20110216_AABMOL manak_j_Page_031.QC.jpg
76b74aa13363b08101d5dc840b13f8e3
b4c29abb6f5787c1ade7f47a0af0a4afb841dbb2
32794 F20110216_AABNLF manak_j_Page_173.QC.jpg
d6e0f568e182a08a73775dcb260c0af9
0e33ab2f8b32f97224a2bd5927baded85b405d69
2218 F20110216_AABLEH manak_j_Page_102.txt
710d1f807ed87762f8534ca43eb0791c
be1562e94ce021fa2771dee2631d047b07a80708
36726 F20110216_AABMBB manak_j_Page_113.QC.jpg
87dc44af7fc23474ecc0cb74acef7811
1f8ec2188bcdbb6266e915cf7ed651f6fa92e22d
F20110216_AABMOM manak_j_Page_081.tif
ab305a39c37b8d098f1c200fbf606a1d
c2ba3c2a6c75778ac79944eeaca46cc9a906d6dc
118892 F20110216_AABNLG manak_j_Page_179.jpg
a96c7bdee0da445d95c6addd9a76c727
e98fb5bfd32e94f91d8e6aef9c8cc916cc3bafbb
F20110216_AABLEI manak_j_Page_203.tif
b76ddea4acdc18d25f209c3bd19a0754
53fc05effec3cb8510d47171e22b7f2f930688b6
F20110216_AABLRT manak_j_Page_161.tif
435ccdff521ca2aabffa8f3256d801d9
125453d8e5e0e089ea746e31cfaac8395ae1476d
111066 F20110216_AABMON manak_j_Page_036.jpg
e38ad7314a0fe6ae0e6149c8066fdc49
2ecdb07d09e785a90880d86e6aa085e18dfd39a9
28800 F20110216_AABNLH manak_j_Page_180.QC.jpg
6e177ec0e036c851c5236080ba66e5d9
b78bf70c6020779ea67685aa86f0b4401c1e6340
9284 F20110216_AABLEJ manak_j_Page_152thm.jpg
03ad4f74c6c9a6e11ffbb4f08185632a
0edd26ab743077b049bffd3138bd067395f06a7d
2186 F20110216_AABMBC manak_j_Page_056.txt
238d48d97ac9df00298669ba1b7e05ce
9fd866af2714f26c6ebf5ab68514d87520f0744f
1021843 F20110216_AABLRU manak_j_Page_122.jp2
a1f0ac0df809ac4b75de6e5b392bf555
bfa6b88f865effa5b2e508ac2fd810fa715aec2c
F20110216_AABMOO manak_j_Page_240.tif
f214b5a92eb3f80a240dbca07f351ce2
cc388220d610b943c19a3b8f782a5bb2eda10ea6
37268 F20110216_AABNLI manak_j_Page_183.QC.jpg
67e20028ac7ef98e17dfa29c3edcf3e7
60824f4c4955b03b4bf2286df887662d30f41dbc
33460 F20110216_AABLEK manak_j_Page_195.QC.jpg
cd524cf969b4661ae54d272b658ef4b8
05ea0a42ea249c4bb8c86b1791cb48fdcdced8f7
110413 F20110216_AABMBD manak_j_Page_096.jpg
17fdf53f4e8f48021799cb6e4f010f7c
f0501c655690afadbecc1e799834f963d4624a79
9292 F20110216_AABLRV manak_j_Page_083thm.jpg
dbb2d4ddc1c08136758253adb850d97b
5e4695019baca4e4a86a6021432b5dbb38a8d4e4
109570 F20110216_AABNLJ manak_j_Page_185.jpg
9bd48fc636dbd625d52af57153edd189
fc92874e900c8827a35e94a36384aa16450ab2a6
F20110216_AABLEL manak_j_Page_073.txt
6c2d11b8eb167d2c1dfac42837e91dca
38d23170d045842230ef1ac0eeb873b8931f3fa1
94 F20110216_AABMBE manak_j_Page_002.txt
c3a0f767dba533becff232b4d42cd858
b89ccbdb08a9d2899b9014c6f52c928241dea542
9015 F20110216_AABLRW manak_j_Page_149thm.jpg
a203ed948c463b78ab182c806ede5558
a62af259fe7488be77f42fd7bd98f5004b0d4773
36311 F20110216_AABMOP manak_j_Page_158.QC.jpg
c1be143a36dffd218d368e8161125f61
91a6d766e6fa6305888d7adce977c707b0d7b65b
34954 F20110216_AABNLK manak_j_Page_185.QC.jpg
1508e0089a8354fb82bc6b8c2b28283d
18947da8967e820a160edc498cbc769444f58cb3
119329 F20110216_AABLEM manak_j_Page_123.jpg
023382d619ed472c729a3b86c47fb28d
ab4b2152ab6354364cc161a67612bd62b3bdd366
32532 F20110216_AABMBF manak_j_Page_248.QC.jpg
e6ad50ecd6d836101d913e65648426be
ebb4298fc3fd095c418916037bf34c6e2b438d64
F20110216_AABLRX manak_j_Page_044.jp2
97228d8192b05c925d5d45538f95004b
4f42c8d13863f6e94585bdf7e9cc9912643ac3a3
8484 F20110216_AABMOQ manak_j_Page_050thm.jpg
2d0acb0891549bba96347e19906fba2e
7d1df61a2c735d30f24d3bb2ab873bb6a3616ae8
52553 F20110216_AABLEN manak_j_Page_015.pro
d45d11a4b959c45a10a878aa2886029e
ceab04a987b608910b1f1480d2eaa955a9dab02a
1344 F20110216_AABMBG manak_j_Page_111.txt
e93633e86238adbed80003867d9180b9
fe377fa63818e862358dd18cd2ec06b4697dcd39
2225 F20110216_AABLRY manak_j_Page_134.txt
dfd6e81724eecd20d270e874bdf4958d
a5261bfc595e31ab5037437c0558d310b31dfb11
8459 F20110216_AABMOR manak_j_Page_055thm.jpg
cfea4ea79dd0b9d1ba79bbf2470012b7
ad56a2caeb33aeafc15cec6ba2fc67a620ea21f7
25815 F20110216_AABNLL manak_j_Page_187.QC.jpg
cc274f81604ed32fcf3599e510fcd4ad
e940340a51c1223bd373601799e238f28a0619b2
2778 F20110216_AABLEO manak_j_Page_010.txt
46397ffe8e677b95dfc8c035b5c1e98a
3049c949e430f357bd5e59040df77d7a35dd92f0
111555 F20110216_AABMBH manak_j_Page_240.jpg
a6a1ff09f1f4663c312b7a746cf6a62d
f587aa62754ed5c4e04955af65627c8ad3f1263c
34256 F20110216_AABLRZ manak_j_Page_207.QC.jpg
ae82e4a59b2b0f2424ac104449b8271d
1f37e53ccd4ae97de129e5c379d5077d2a38d694
35433 F20110216_AABMOS manak_j_Page_180.pro
0fdf07e03700e2a11fb1eec1ec8ddd90
f4a3908b5e45085add1cb660bcc09e64549ab1e9
122947 F20110216_AABNLM manak_j_Page_188.jpg
b6758158eb8032dec36fff29462d96b2
c38a77e61c3ebec6973b5bc0de558014207136c3
2219 F20110216_AABLEP manak_j_Page_177.txt
d94854ba6da88e8adc611017b5376755
a7dfd9aa011833d82cdc744d4a2b5f185102d4b1
36658 F20110216_AABMBI manak_j_Page_192.QC.jpg
04d0c4b65f5e722d44fb88a6bd5067bb
b5e5ada42e08f426bb8e6bc2e59a5fdca08b9414
F20110216_AABMOT manak_j_Page_218.jp2
919577fa8cfb57650083196c7f91132b
05548348ac3bb7ecc035faf2db68228a30464d52
F20110216_AABNLN manak_j_Page_190.jpg
fc088b4705fa7c7ae2af539e33b67ff5
d6bd20c442cea63ffe715259d874e589c72f8a24
1051918 F20110216_AABLEQ manak_j_Page_058.jp2
9d244c49eb5e5bae3d998f179997fa0a
50d2d319c458830b9af7ed2935cd00e09c84f5b0
F20110216_AABMBJ manak_j_Page_159.txt
ea02d9d6d9e27184fa39d3bbdf09fd97
8fcfdabbcea2e0aefa44e9300edc48ef82770814
8463 F20110216_AABMOU manak_j_Page_156thm.jpg
c97b82c8630e56781ecd295279106496
802213688853d7ebae6752cf4f159d41c2734e82
110908 F20110216_AABNLO manak_j_Page_195.jpg
52ac780c624925334fdb3c31690b33c0
ea1c4c931dab3f9b251551e05f6abbf3b1461b79
F20110216_AABLER manak_j_Page_191.tif
25c387824682c10db3f84f5a0414a39c
90634c99c694167e81e57e0769700ff015194bd8
49080 F20110216_AABMBK manak_j_Page_245.pro
897b2c1bf9c88625a1016b9e8a58a765
3f66a2130105bb14b7bd018a6955d43114828574
33900 F20110216_AABMOV manak_j_Page_141.QC.jpg
ae44e31037e183836cff0a96f2a233e2
a700d58caac54e69cd02c2a5f61f4ad59724751a
78095 F20110216_AABNLP manak_j_Page_197.jpg
aa7b1174f631b9772e7836dafd445d4a
918ab9c6b20dcc09c6ac857028a8efbc8a9e4d4f
1051945 F20110216_AABLES manak_j_Page_194.jp2
4e41c284877f12c0c3276a584339c86c
0d82a789eed1c0dc21ac0a26a91a2bcef22676a2
1849 F20110216_AABMBL manak_j_Page_130.txt
9620b80ce493eb5abe64a3fb5cb92302
0b7d9988a85666a3bb2f0b8eb8935a67ad863c10
8157 F20110216_AABMOW manak_j_Page_121thm.jpg
f85771b688a85996525a2a0d95a8c591
fdf953f0d74646ef30e152c2cf0758b3d67a4564
35123 F20110216_AABNLQ manak_j_Page_198.QC.jpg
8b1d3bd45ce3b8d0c48ee6c2589eb566
dbccb312cb3a4f8ec783d10300e7ea4b02fd9117
4705 F20110216_AABLET manak_j_Page_013thm.jpg
d8475695688fd3a5b443afff196cc050
d89ed5d6ad756ceeae5d049a131dc72a6f9db8b3
58302 F20110216_AABMBM manak_j_Page_151.pro
80311109c42dfbded13dc93acd21823b
e17c3f730b58419044fc93913d8cd7580c755024
F20110216_AABMOX manak_j_Page_041.txt
50cca19775bcccd4b5bcccd0a9f4ea48
3ef969cccc9af002a74a5347b8feb2ae3f39a129
102382 F20110216_AABNLR manak_j_Page_200.jpg
2b427c89def0933f3d8daaaf0e0da591
ce82674a689c60c0cf219f5fb433b86977dcc331
35237 F20110216_AABLEU manak_j_Page_054.QC.jpg
385325cf4e4443e2263fa620fcc14fc8
03534a8ffee4128491d02824222869b47a7da959
42533 F20110216_AABMBN manak_j_Page_088.pro
89f61ea3e462006d650f41e7720425bf
b054f30a9dc3993da8d6525c0942f1bfcee53e9c
F20110216_AABMOY manak_j_Page_071.jpg
e84c19bad823a0998093d0c23a609a1a
04c247d74896a22798f77355831fee7d97b86997
33439 F20110216_AABNLS manak_j_Page_200.QC.jpg
d2b5820ec4af8cf14c4209cd34149823
86381d0f4b5417faad3f027f43010aba3cacb2fa
F20110216_AABLEV manak_j_Page_252.tif
d5a5c70ee9cf619b5ad11ee4e0cbbfb4
89572c495054ca91711331f57a31e5005f9cfac0
F20110216_AABMBO manak_j_Page_059.QC.jpg
7f618203f57681ad71ac2d52aa39cb7e
d1b756c8681b8613d55bf357244b73b121c2c5f9
27859 F20110216_AABMOZ manak_j_Page_219.QC.jpg
a4e84b742177375802ed651aa069c93c
31087353e09e60b3adca71b3a9297acbb069d769
32068 F20110216_AABNLT manak_j_Page_201.QC.jpg
4b07d7e36d16905bc8b14b3fd37eefb2
0962a7a57f8d28650f7107260cd5b24253881120
215000 F20110216_AABLEW manak_j_Page_252.jp2
a5bb5e585c72f4f5c91d89f5159856f5
93a31d2d18c60ccae5216e7a47b21ee8c69113da
F20110216_AABMBP manak_j_Page_186.jp2
4155d2b939482da35f2beef5dee0989b
eb35021e9ce2e4f64f0c57a2049c03edb7924a7b
35800 F20110216_AABNLU manak_j_Page_203.QC.jpg
90ce0190e3c600328cd1422e77b4b572
398c8c4774849b7844943439923b89f4a350b3c9
F20110216_AABLEX manak_j_Page_070.txt
a7605134e997619b870f7573ac3588d8
b677379c654eced4e3da172242d23f1af23d6441
F20110216_AABLXA manak_j_Page_074.jp2
c6203ccb4f225087943fdc63f4df2407
ef3a2be1fe46d67766b4fd125d536cbe75968d38
32939 F20110216_AABMBQ manak_j_Page_191.QC.jpg
1c83e22d65381fe3fa6d8e9ffc9f7562
ad3608bb73c78ea64ee4d4a8c068ac808455e34e
81272 F20110216_AABNLV manak_j_Page_204.jpg
b4cf15ba52322a239f9e3a21b289f489
a3c1c040b133723eea1bc35b9e87b517479bd71e
106503 F20110216_AABLEY manak_j_Page_207.jpg
d4d11f4836c90dee5d29026b171921f8
fe9ec2bfff73c338dac754e17faff70001bb862a
65336 F20110216_AABLXB manak_j_Page_120.pro
7a140e3b8277e11580e171e88c7b0b40
3d9ed5bcd6604ad1ceabdd62c34485580c32dd23
36500 F20110216_AABMBR manak_j_Page_230.QC.jpg
4635108681a8299bbba811de823e05ea
e72971dc12cbb50b8965f046bc47f6c938a6e39c
26240 F20110216_AABNLW manak_j_Page_204.QC.jpg
606b489bfbc60b29fed0520a4ac2630c
78cb3906e332f491da63961e5d7043dd16ef55e7
F20110216_AABLEZ manak_j_Page_132.jp2
74fb01acc7870723ab8faf9104a57a42
83412ebd55299629260d6703f5693b85a08cef59
F20110216_AABLXC manak_j_Page_034.tif
f218e9c7833f2570c76a325c25ed7a06
4e43aefcc370a9b6cd0e72c7ae71d5d24d24041d
6784 F20110216_AABMBS manak_j_Page_187thm.jpg
40f66dbd92df6006ceb3e1d9d599ae23
71cdbaaadc94f18409c2aee0672324647c1876fb
134128 F20110216_AABNLX manak_j_Page_205.jpg
8221ec46617586f66df3632ef6dc0f90
f2a458e79577b42978d326ccf7f67d775204c155
72427 F20110216_AABLXD manak_j_Page_181.pro
2534c50fece05b0704f514f84c3a2b47
9d99f9c90c41bac5b132fbfc3e3fbe97bb45a998
F20110216_AABMBT manak_j_Page_157.tif
1b8bb5016c8d7e0ea5d74b2922f257e0
5d5723095517f19d79de89c307cc6baa0e6e4293
35045 F20110216_AABNLY manak_j_Page_210.QC.jpg
1392d9cf74f152ccefb7e74c31cb5b93
f7cb0410b4f99d106b7576195acc09fc43e356ac
F20110216_AABLXE manak_j_Page_011.tif
d2137d384f85e5c02cde04a5d97f08fd
cf400f186cce1cf1b85fa56e0860e94405502739
57862 F20110216_AABMBU manak_j_Page_035.pro
f2d308703d11d96e9cf6f3d43ddb6724
9d1e232d3c323995f024a65499e8356f89b52b99
113623 F20110216_AABNLZ manak_j_Page_211.jpg
7a290cdff17306f112213d5bfc39c092
fd0c8351aa2b18e69a5a636f1bb1f4bdd59be6dc
8755 F20110216_AABLXF manak_j_Page_113thm.jpg
b1bd226186d92a212ce90ddd10a24c8d
59b8eb18a4ba7333d40ab983663f8d4519b11482
2199 F20110216_AABMBV manak_j_Page_091.txt
c5d49bdd350722c7ea8c3dc157e4781e
550fb79f2fcb5f51a1d79f3dcd7ff65ea5445357
F20110216_AABLXG manak_j_Page_121.tif
f14ff13c52b8acda267882200d57dd39
fb12ed661a2246e68b1988d1f9377b0f69f18753
8437 F20110216_AABMBW manak_j_Page_125thm.jpg
ce63ca3e530b479a4147bdc060e7ae09
c94a09e86b7e02ef19f25f50b53dfd2949e3b535
54062 F20110216_AABLXH manak_j_Page_031.pro
c5a55b9def88747be74778871c371edf
11034a7d1bb74f976746e38e19fc0d80649617cd
52254 F20110216_AABMBX manak_j_Page_209.pro
e7eb4681b90e078c4f8eaa098e76d75c
a13fbfd03f59159bfc39733fce9325c2a2f86bc7
36850 F20110216_AABMUA manak_j_Page_177.QC.jpg
c716c05671325e15014b0f6be47d00dc
93deb03fa44c470d57c26f60be62d710d1e6cd03
9123 F20110216_AABLXI manak_j_Page_192thm.jpg
476a0dbdfb88405125a6cd06053c3e1f
360a7844a3dee6e2e97a39113b79387207750e39
100874 F20110216_AABMBY manak_j_Page_260.pro
8b62c7acefd637431c058564fe770187
33c80101df9bc5cbb9b263aeb1a54af29e59c39b
6442 F20110216_AABMUB manak_j_Page_257thm.jpg
0e899a8e3adce41c05946bec42507e79
d099ad4b966f80b4fdf436abfd0e84f0297e0a84
23389 F20110216_AABLXJ manak_j_Page_258.QC.jpg
c0c445a0015fb49630a47e73fb315520
9e75929426b7d99dff45ac524100b2f7e172f1ff
F20110216_AABMBZ manak_j_Page_232.jp2
d5adfef164e9bf72163f4158ea2177aa
a3235643120ef1f1d677823abbbed8e3b3cb2f0b
39572 F20110216_AABMUC manak_j_Page_139.QC.jpg
8007016cbbf1ed0b2e159169fc969e15
ff681dd958a59fe059cea4a1e7fcca7e0e9073bc
55798 F20110216_AABLXK manak_j_Page_221.pro
8b7c065d8c6bd3887529659ba02ceba2
58c7f535df65ec0ac6a716852bbad02d02bbda6b
71228 F20110216_AABMUD manak_j_Page_162.pro
5d09dc7ffa8eafd9540bf87752984a6e
f6d575998d697cbe7c05540df67f67350c85dd55
F20110216_AABLXL manak_j_Page_120.tif
ff61744936de119ad57f304afff604af
93d52d60f12b50061b59a001ac75c486bd0a2175
F20110216_AABMUE manak_j_Page_177.jp2
0b1d01eb8473a8b9ff6d4bc776c2836d
3bc4806fc7bf8b993cd1c5c5f18dbfea901e67df
F20110216_AABLKA manak_j_Page_079.tif
deb956a7ac4acdbec4f8913ddf5e9637
e6ab1ff0844bf4f6fd066a00a9e747f5143b4fc5
2280 F20110216_AABLXM manak_j_Page_104.txt
01c6b87fe46b033e05cf4116d24a3132
1f355fe8b6bcd0df2e1bc299d17a1ebdc598f0b2
F20110216_AABMUF manak_j_Page_015.jp2
a86eaeb596677ab75113a67012f6d0a2
9f4ce4f05fe621c2166b0e88aa6c91fe1abbccdc
1642 F20110216_AABLKB manak_j_Page_119.txt
76da425da1062b7d6ed698d647edfbe5
8a2b9098c60ec1c254a20c31c5b2726954b9bd96
2152 F20110216_AABLXN manak_j_Page_193.txt
3ff91d6f4e09bfd1237915a5f64b8a6a
edc79c51324057c37eb90a629958f86b70a797dd
55814 F20110216_AABMUG manak_j_Page_240.pro
76270b47926586d4df03f708b21b72fc
05b24366cbd3e16bdd51f62147a47889efcfe691
35154 F20110216_AABLKC manak_j_Page_004.QC.jpg
403fd12cd0a99c7b9a68c784ba1e47b4
18efbb4de9ad957a52fbc94714fcf1a354204238
8797 F20110216_AABNRA manak_j_Page_054thm.jpg
47406c07de45eb020e6685fb27e40129
bc06e17573ec81934017f139d05d9dce8ecca12f
9006 F20110216_AABLXO manak_j_Page_056thm.jpg
617b85819c57d6615cd90f9c72fcd888
59c0c14c8c5859fab4215514f00b173c9c1ba3bd
52266 F20110216_AABMUH manak_j_Page_117.pro
6e48081bf4693cda417a7388ff3440ad
73e157b15342727a7daa7e43436981d887580f34
56071 F20110216_AABLKD manak_j_Page_044.pro
2e896833a45d299cf934427340d4465d
97d5c3e74ed8cae5fe8cee8c4b561ddbdf444ee5
8674 F20110216_AABNRB manak_j_Page_058thm.jpg
e62e5e30e4e0f053c619cac35ffee75e
ff07d161fc7d3b68886fc04e03e82675b85a6698
F20110216_AABLXP manak_j_Page_098.jp2
ee0f442a7bac4d226ba09f190222ab83
a6e245ba21225773e3a517f2649cfc04a3d4fc11
F20110216_AABMUI manak_j_Page_064.tif
4b3dc39cfc6d9f30ed95cba9a53e1d48
fbaab3add8e9edafd4438a9b909074c6fddbde61
F20110216_AABLKE manak_j_Page_063.txt
7f39de87a2616c784405b0a466e80813
4710c10a30aeaa30a89ca903f32c85819ccd44a5
9252 F20110216_AABNRC manak_j_Page_061thm.jpg
e90d4a8bc06e26cac357fb82b656a1ce
fab4065da0491ef5d4825ecd0543dfbfa64a5e07
F20110216_AABLXQ manak_j_Page_190.jp2
5cb0d40630c2a1ad12561cecd9655f44
f74c341a08dfdecf91a1af91b1f4ca156d4d99d7
113135 F20110216_AABMUJ manak_j_Page_223.jpg
5de15b448c522f992c5077ff453fe6e4
0a1ffca3b75b48e34852f2e9861961165decbfb1
63723 F20110216_AABLKF manak_j_Page_234.jpg
eb92df4ace32c3411bcac9f44e8c0e09
fffc8f274721af2f6b4ab75593eafaa33eef7acf
8767 F20110216_AABNRD manak_j_Page_066thm.jpg
05d1df3ea56ad4fe26d740b16b9b902d
c222f782c4e6eb45ff041b81b70dad8c955f1664
34012 F20110216_AABLXR manak_j_Page_117.QC.jpg
dc2d9cc886e102b6c37a99cd7eecf749
d6072066d6e6f453d101e3a09347d382ace29ed7
2256 F20110216_AABMUK manak_j_Page_264.txt
be693d66612dc3ff7990f94264af8d7f
45a09705c3ad78b8be1e37f523a0c945a61af247
F20110216_AABLKG manak_j_Page_235.jp2
2b17dbb70f1b79fdbe6a5196010c7fcd
3c4fd47a2816ae1aaec2c7ff3388f5594ed71466
8845 F20110216_AABNRE manak_j_Page_069thm.jpg
27197cf4ee1f73e9721e6036b04ed50f
83ec3d4a5edf76e38493f9ad02c028486a7dda5d
F20110216_AABMHA manak_j_Page_048.jp2
5c7819af474e2956f7d56aa23f478a14
6970642856c3a692c96fb2d2ef81f0dc1bf8c0f7
F20110216_AABLXS manak_j_Page_226.tif
cdf735c2ef031ea877bdee85a4748f54
98003bf3877a37e72c73ca1ec35d3a9369872bfe
F20110216_AABMUL manak_j_Page_154thm.jpg
2bfbba73191fb656f4f5fe3d272a33c9
f011ffc1506036672d67cf40875b6ad5612613dd
115628 F20110216_AABLKH manak_j_Page_164.jpg
7ba237068ffd37a8a10d328b206d40d6
772923fcf1195351707171fc7c1bc71b2a4dce03
8888 F20110216_AABNRF manak_j_Page_070thm.jpg
c3945ba7bc1a8c95b1d7990919d0ad14
67c20eab9947b57e630550ecdcc4ff6f720df73f
2083 F20110216_AABMHB manak_j_Page_227.txt
a22d4d8b7d600bffceef585a61e14df4
b772d52c49982a5b71727d4f78a035ff3011ba8c
39045 F20110216_AABLXT manak_j_Page_226.pro
82fcac8e719360817886a31578f10645
ae33b3e17bf9190ac2947f1b125a3915210e8318
2860 F20110216_AABMUM manak_j_Page_162.txt
b7e0273d4d640c39c27ba71fa2093d87
93b82e0528b57352eff462f936e9ec88e3cce9ce
36370 F20110216_AABLKI manak_j_Page_036.QC.jpg
cce182c49e489a52d9288c3f958fdc98
daf1d12e521a25ee0dc2b86c981d7275174097ea
8673 F20110216_AABNRG manak_j_Page_075thm.jpg
8d715708a68ff8f954f32b1ef291aa44
acf5c26ec2592f5ce581834c36e8867137b48be8
9021 F20110216_AABMHC manak_j_Page_062thm.jpg
30445433d8bb50f4aeebf6009f577f7d
9899b4451c23d53dab42747c5bed55f4fe9d278c
F20110216_AABLXU manak_j_Page_125.jp2
862aa22a1b366d9849730267880a998a
2ae65eb3495c5639d5c63db12f18c2d3b1330e48
1419 F20110216_AABMUN manak_j_Page_219.txt
846a78a1b872cda293eb1487001ea4b2
5d153cfc1809650cd3ecfab930f88bea86e3ab17
F20110216_AABLKJ manak_j_Page_003.tif
ae8df7a977bfceb2181639854f2e5537
2215533f11f6d8750c1b6cc02d086949571b71d9
8850 F20110216_AABNRH manak_j_Page_078thm.jpg
db08bd6faf4ee54dda1f378e56319a3f
93ba759c192f7ea2c352b3154060d4db042f62e5
F20110216_AABMHD manak_j_Page_138.jp2
d7f963c75a78a1f01d7585f07f24b794
2019ba362f22d36490eb54b3c7e53da15cf812bf
F20110216_AABLXV manak_j_Page_182.tif
e46c304ac5ffca7ba40a162bd59af453
61a109892f51a400a71a24d198f5659284dc1d49
2035 F20110216_AABMUO manak_j_Page_135.txt
d150ee602e6789aea1ca0bb78b6abe6f
d94687c2bfb6f9ecab403036bf2b6c782f8a0c73
108517 F20110216_AABLKK manak_j_Page_189.jpg
bbc26f33d8d6db4ba216ab6130ae2bee
4db0a5d8fa11a39973542f72445a68a4b75cfa97
8923 F20110216_AABNRI manak_j_Page_082thm.jpg
58606e46a04be00ecd8b79fefd580fee
39c8e652871c69ac04d53012e065208d7223c864
34329 F20110216_AABMHE manak_j_Page_115.QC.jpg
ffd17a1a93a74211ff916b53c64dec35
23a5602772f1397fb785449db09bbd54564e4eba
F20110216_AABLXW manak_j_Page_152.tif
5d26a8b4aa85894eb9e126ecc9f0652a
b1124ba858d1151bb55d9a45a8492bbd4231646a
28271 F20110216_AABMUP manak_j_Page_013.pro
7b4b0d65a3639dda2bee769297dc3af2
38e0bfbcd3ceca5e0f5e693aa5c34984fa6d0cc3
34081 F20110216_AABLKL manak_j_Page_136.QC.jpg
9f6afbc43932887a58a3627eaf24f8b8
3ec9e44c71c905c7c506e45968c00b9aab2fab4d
6829 F20110216_AABNRJ manak_j_Page_088thm.jpg
db265de498b36ed9cb69d1ae78e2cdef
59db45c93e1ca4430199f9d1a6648c9902df608f
2040 F20110216_AABMHF manak_j_Page_112.txt
6735b308a69fd6c5ea634333cfb7296f
a636a4609fd87394f650025e853a7b7a87b6c800
53660 F20110216_AABLXX manak_j_Page_210.pro
3be8c5158e965b501656bf569ee69171
8adcf2f130ed36d265cc4c6ed2a5227c700e0da9
56851 F20110216_AABMUQ manak_j_Page_093.pro
132de9d47c1239bc241147a31d78ccf8
3ff0c32fd7bd696a42f3dd05a4932d0a525d1e80
9425 F20110216_AABNRK manak_j_Page_089thm.jpg
4f645c4e385e4feb017c847b37604d3d
8c2c565d99de2d0476a5b14cccccfc26c3b9ba16
2055 F20110216_AABMHG manak_j_Page_108.txt
1f5f1830459a06f4a363b58cf91bd128
a3f4d23317c895d44f75785ab830953cc65efa86
55785 F20110216_AABLXY manak_j_Page_223.pro
3e8461d1ee7bf1b00c37abc7ed86d532
cdcb584130cd41640b3f7e7934ae7227426331ec
116091 F20110216_AABMUR manak_j_Page_263.jpg
48ded76472645772fc772b4d9e5a4dcc
a7f3242d6efe01d577c8c39e682b8ae49f9359a4
49679 F20110216_AABLKM manak_j_Page_128.pro
c00cad1758b5f2da2c873e35af5ed194
806a0081176ad6f3c592c9dbd5a922ab0d056bb4
F20110216_AABNRL manak_j_Page_096thm.jpg
25729efeb08a21d4da45b0eb71b70023
9009f8762006bf4dfa993d3727f5098d38f7cbe7
F20110216_AABMHH manak_j_Page_124thm.jpg
c6296715a54a2595e942723c0c343464
dea68c1a43c3f048c53945716c9274b0b23fff45
66100 F20110216_AABNEA manak_j_Page_084.pro
30323bf98b5fede03f2818d54516af3a
4f60176149a308595c7e0e1e5eec80dc560a0e33
34262 F20110216_AABMUS manak_j_Page_181.QC.jpg
8ef9b26f8c4d936704aa3d87a306fb97
f300b5252ac47ce71b096fd90fa941eebadb721c
57977 F20110216_AABLKN manak_j_Page_243.pro
e39bb03807407dd051741d0df6ff4361
9b923d85e447e2f6f9a7c2c47c6ad0b332602b0d
8951 F20110216_AABNRM manak_j_Page_101thm.jpg
91bed411fc0e5cf6753d9d612951e96f
aafb7cfebe46664c6514092ff05fe6d93670934a
F20110216_AABLXZ manak_j_Page_067.tif
4a96097bba7a8f6697375b4c95695531
9ce6b9a01208faf4e111dcd67bca4a18a2486d55
55964 F20110216_AABNEB manak_j_Page_086.pro
883e6fdbb1452015a2a23f7100ac2289
60ae49d4f7430946865a2020787f5318dd9edf78
34980 F20110216_AABMUT manak_j_Page_046.QC.jpg
6be1677a15bc90a015e36dfd694d8b9c
1224ec6a76ab4cd796228ce0a3f3c1b502466f08
F20110216_AABLKO manak_j_Page_006.tif
827685e08e1c2f551d3f559ca4075e5d
83a057f0bf9f7a42038ba11290942e5c525d60de
8833 F20110216_AABNRN manak_j_Page_103thm.jpg
af8e67c83fe2a7aa89ac0ed1c4e77be8
26a13777c7bd5382625f001b0e6773375e1786ea
1530 F20110216_AABMHI manak_j_Page_204.txt
87d752a5d029e833dbaa586086da2973
e67d44322ce3f810f403b8be3ca46b963fb8e80f
57816 F20110216_AABNEC manak_j_Page_089.pro
96163275e59a49cb9f14dbfb32766f24
d638c4abdc587de16669d9669df8cdb61c18e9fc
54207 F20110216_AABMUU manak_j_Page_074.pro
207836d324a0bce9162b6457ecc55598
8208cbcb6f5e64acb1ae153d1cfebc9b612d81cb
36729 F20110216_AABLKP manak_j_Page_176.QC.jpg
a711f8bba20b709d46785aa726b4e7cc
f6d71a915309acd501c056cfb27983741502b9bc
7961 F20110216_AABNRO manak_j_Page_108thm.jpg
0fa4d2564b16df9bbef1bd507f349ebb
521d2befd6a2e7261cd1329d5d7556130d605f6e
F20110216_AABMHJ manak_j_Page_063.tif
fcd590f491056f657fa8e5ac459e5c28
208b2d46223c2310a41ca3f7ee17f1b3ab896cdf
56103 F20110216_AABNED manak_j_Page_092.pro
16a5e56fd1ebd0938882d8715a38b264
dc0b215fd4f488672e23488ae050aabbcb4f3aba
F20110216_AABLKQ manak_j_Page_137.tif
f494cff4586defcad2b9f1d558c73f55
53f3de7aa28e476d8a5a83a33a5ee2f1e77cffa9
8221 F20110216_AABNRP manak_j_Page_110thm.jpg
098708cdc118e848b4958ca18ce2008d
774a76f691735fbae0c595af128d45a3c27bd903
8479 F20110216_AABMHK manak_j_Page_228thm.jpg
eeb9a395e2e514df09bf671afbad82ec
115ab349fbfc5866a3995d5b841081e70871ea55
8593 F20110216_AABMUV manak_j_Page_015thm.jpg
aea7afad0f63e4cd8efb172af1b058ca
82c2d50569caca278caa8bc97434cc39acdca839
9139 F20110216_AABLKR manak_j_Page_223thm.jpg
c59c652f6ea3f02117dd1b3b76c7671c
e475f713541dca60bd85d14eb0c748af1a297ebc
6102 F20110216_AABNRQ manak_j_Page_111thm.jpg
f92a6483adeb0b584ac43261590585aa
0ad0722b0144124f827ccd65b78cc08b73f50cdf
57042 F20110216_AABMHL manak_j_Page_175.pro
a9b5624d127d93c318d8b2d8680af6d3
3171745189b55dacff4680ebd50486688c8f07ce
43385 F20110216_AABNEE manak_j_Page_095.pro
8a20f8aeba24bee922a1a0590d17e6cc
edcbc6339e701429df7b27db8bd9a11e00e718fb
F20110216_AABMUW manak_j_Page_075.txt
5f8c23b0a8c56f15daf0aceacb0a66b6
02132ca938a0e7df596a41c03a863f1626f4fea9
8852 F20110216_AABLKS manak_j_Page_230thm.jpg
7b5e51b25a88460ef2247c2caad9496b
5324c772eacd27f0e1a71451120ce225e08428fc
9028 F20110216_AABMHM manak_j_Page_159thm.jpg
8741d9055b5be62397ac31f99f7e6012
26bb200fb291598cb89b2cca599b1d11f8bede2c
56472 F20110216_AABNEF manak_j_Page_098.pro
91674885e9ec41d9e57120d53b5727e8
c58054c62087289258a57f6a8d39e25dfd7282bf
F20110216_AABMUX manak_j_Page_198.jp2
991bad7ae735a42cca9bbef9aa3e61c6
be4bc047ae5c1acf43f498bbc902045775124771
2150 F20110216_AABLKT manak_j_Page_074.txt
61c3f972f243c492f5063253a06b01e0
9ea912f188d78674ad7cd3aec38f4587e5c61cd3
7611 F20110216_AABNRR manak_j_Page_112thm.jpg
49f88599311918eea8b053277af3b721
8cd2d8e75e20692a7ad43a2343a23273d0416184
59797 F20110216_AABMHN manak_j_Page_174.pro
a2b0a5849fc3f9e2d07a384f206a6ecd
ad115e9f33c721ad33de8871d07e67808ddd4180
54697 F20110216_AABNEG manak_j_Page_101.pro
617d28226e5d6701f12c8195f52b6763
882bf714f8c5692708e052ec137ef7b38e7d2e0b
1051910 F20110216_AABMUY manak_j_Page_264.jp2
00a6e5d390b16b6a3721f88e8f5c6b4a
64201bad0d08520cfdcf7a2e0f0a919f36078bf1
F20110216_AABLKU manak_j_Page_033.txt
91a2e357c4ebc3192e0915962db1fd0e
05e09d69fe2d7b1fcb619ba73a1bf5957fe53a2f
8042 F20110216_AABNRS manak_j_Page_128thm.jpg
cd662c84357a43d3dfd11642ab1e1586
fb5898ffb7df227fe2860802c75860fb1387124f
7355 F20110216_AABMHO manak_j_Page_170thm.jpg
93108cc7c354ea6a460a2369872d0f99
5a39d5c42a42cccfb09d98fbb5b3f6a5b043f79e
56383 F20110216_AABNEH manak_j_Page_105.pro
f3e5dee9fe890fb5db0d88d083336f6a
7b8dd00fe0340a41e870f03f36919e1fa7013981
38216 F20110216_AABMUZ manak_j_Page_157.QC.jpg
4cbceda36338e763a3bed26919eed2b5
8c90016bb796311b31b3012f2de263d066bca6fd
F20110216_AABLKV manak_j_Page_233.tif
4c0e5a3027e578e18de49922e6a9e4a2
785d9765f74564d8c8d6978bc6057195b1170e14
F20110216_AABNRT manak_j_Page_131thm.jpg
3bc2ea6656ba36f2af3c3c7f3a0ac1f2
8fc32a5ddb6627568d4d31dbdc7e971ab0e9dd34
755012 F20110216_AABMHP manak_j_Page_111.jp2
b5cfc08b78c24518e3dd87c1620e4fda
5d1a7752af6914b146a0045ca8554d10e0fc8bf4
55443 F20110216_AABNEI manak_j_Page_106.pro
a5de7fbd4795b88b982b38c12e2fa58c
270008237904ef6325a2a9bde25ad68d01bd0e40
107927 F20110216_AABLKW manak_j_Page_069.jpg
667d5e43bd94c0e5089eac61790b9e13
a6cc88109fb8f99197805f3ad4043b146ed225cd
8825 F20110216_AABNRU manak_j_Page_133thm.jpg
2f290ce609bc2066190be03850af6061
6f24b66ec8db0a9376a7a6f0de13b701dbf134f8
1051914 F20110216_AABMHQ manak_j_Page_135.jp2
efc5c09106a73a843da7d50b0570cefe
8dc49855ec88a8a2a5be062757af7998bbe6eb8a
33684 F20110216_AABNEJ manak_j_Page_111.pro
7038ab81fe9317f49f5a16163ae6100a
a829282e43ce4302fc6a62586b51c6fe23fcc26f
F20110216_AABLKX manak_j_Page_022.txt
69d871c3f90bd69fdbda903bbceac6aa
dbe69c1f8c4e2ad7eb64f86bd4a267fd2517cfb0
8702 F20110216_AABNRV manak_j_Page_134thm.jpg
fe83efd7612dec2bdd58d1d0d6c884bd
3aa76a04efb1af249dba1e1be81e8ae7fdb2fe48
8657 F20110216_AABMHR manak_j_Page_165thm.jpg
26a5a3dbaa4a2946c5d6a3344341092c
319b406461bd0263906bd7789f00129491283a91
50293 F20110216_AABNEK manak_j_Page_112.pro
5fa3f0466754a4d95f35c209dd114323
bbb2da210b9649f4fc72e62444e9cc175326feca
54384 F20110216_AABLKY manak_j_Page_069.pro
14e19892fd89130e9283831a860c0bf5
b566b215c8c344a44cb08cde995091da756155da
8178 F20110216_AABNRW manak_j_Page_135thm.jpg
49961724eed8132f69d3de94975d231a
c48a1cef00077a984ba1bd5e389e3a04e63a348d
28965 F20110216_AABMHS manak_j_Page_088.QC.jpg
c8ee4ade050ddf6bbe728543942aca24
0a11738ac7d38bf41fe1dcd317209ad86dc914b6
55538 F20110216_AABNEL manak_j_Page_114.pro
1f68fe6625f2652b099e3a970c0290a0
277949d7e17f2c8ffcec5701824a1c2cd0a9435c
F20110216_AABLKZ manak_j_Page_260.tif
458384f62981732f922bd4f76c5d4820
ada330642321a582dc0f5326d07bdd5bc27733e4
9005 F20110216_AABNRX manak_j_Page_137thm.jpg
b486046fa563f47bdd5e5192d6442580
a68e180438e9543d41a6a8ea31926f76c6ec43d2
110372 F20110216_AABMHT manak_j_Page_236.jpg
ecc9f45f776df655340b799f978a7b8e
5dd49cfc56ca648e9cce5508ac831e64705c7a1a
54131 F20110216_AABNEM manak_j_Page_118.pro
f1ca27b810570b4a5544ca537dac3faa
86b2ff201301f2cc4e2baf4705f1e2940a2db91c
F20110216_AABNRY manak_j_Page_140thm.jpg
10295c740012ef354741052f63006e0c
31bd39868ce18f823b05704a9ddfc4246e0d5a8e
F20110216_AABMHU manak_j_Page_157.jp2
b9e57ce0503ce5607399d925ce18d79a
2fd0a16af7854d95c7a0ee5bd66d7f2ef599be91
30389 F20110216_AABNEN manak_j_Page_119.pro
5d457c4f9a67cdc80ff7d8250821a349
a1237bb6a6b3e8fbe668b4eab61f33d8f7b8c235
8829 F20110216_AABNRZ manak_j_Page_143thm.jpg
e2f30740ae65c136194ebf69e9ce9d61
b9fcab3c09b014cc34cac71f165009f3dcce156f
F20110216_AABMHV manak_j_Page_245.jp2
e9f9e5c9a44e2d06b2af6ed8a542f9e3
f8892d759d42e247ef0403e71697dce4acb7b1a6
57390 F20110216_AABNEO manak_j_Page_125.pro
ac0f47f005181cfa5a12190c69673ad3
e16432ef3a18a06b69613e6e80aaa35294e500d4
1639 F20110216_AABMHW manak_j_Page_251.txt
74723b6077e4a72743eebacd5e55900b
cbdc39bf758ef23cafefcbd24cbf7e1110052f6c
54773 F20110216_AABNEP manak_j_Page_126.pro
3a14fa9f97e026ea8a13e1d5c6400972
515c3805e0b694a8fdba811c6d0851c5cc3359da
8542 F20110216_AABMHX manak_j_Page_233thm.jpg
84f966998a7c63d3a1c825383fa0d7a0
f50df1e6947c01d1d69e2df0fba2b0d7fae3a06b
71574 F20110216_AABNEQ manak_j_Page_129.pro
6fb983f350e91ef65ab7295615b9c788
1cb95965df181ab259764ad22fb4fe9d28a032f2
9229 F20110216_AABMHY manak_j_Page_065thm.jpg
a4d7c1c666d2ec7407b1303ff5ccade1
6150ba454611ece22a05ddd116a2d0a04eb328a8
64211 F20110216_AABNER manak_j_Page_131.pro
8e17e6f764c63a6270b894f2d2d1d6c8
d8540a573646d32c01e2a11443bd21acd4703e44
F20110216_AABMHZ manak_j_Page_049.tif
51f03c66494ae58f5ff1ba2b14e78ea0
d526dfce30ba6d59cb5b8eb90ad708c4ef0aca32
50726 F20110216_AABNES manak_j_Page_135.pro
90ca0227433027104b1f741d04a03075
6068e7f560bbdca5952a0ab72c32a25e07087b52
58483 F20110216_AABNET manak_j_Page_137.pro
9d9840271b57a3937c0a54ff6606c7e5
279e23fd18d6f7b93fa266b500e1ccfa3b3a75cd
57040 F20110216_AABNEU manak_j_Page_142.pro
635bcf05cf9951cadd5ca20172bd5a31
5aa63c7bd9f4e64121393133467c89a2dbbd2eef
F20110216_AABLQA manak_j_Page_097.txt
73f98767ee6757b86695e7e2d1ab7766
7ac687126a3f4a2afdd6045001f449d0e933aa5c
60680 F20110216_AABNEV manak_j_Page_145.pro
b6034585a9c60b82293dd1a02200a01e
ec307c08427315495ccd6964ce5122deb72b08a1
F20110216_AABLQB manak_j_Page_051.jp2
0ccfe44ad8d298a7fe9b6e62f5ca5c9d
470f355a3388fcadaffae88be9433732dac72c96
62353 F20110216_AABNEW manak_j_Page_148.pro
50843522affe8e012f3bac5a61759186
8dc481403994931cef3109eb073a669635d9ec67
F20110216_AABLQC manak_j_Page_061.jp2
11f80b48d75817d6c3ca72db25c807c9
1841edd481a48784be8c302cbd0e30787b63d70b
61676 F20110216_AABNEX manak_j_Page_149.pro
87d0bf235cb34f236c02812854e7509a
ba5e9fa20adc759befd37bbe28caaf1088b57463
111434 F20110216_AABLQD manak_j_Page_114.jpg
9d8bedf941a0f8b5c1f9de310d3820e0
d1ab67a6f588b80dba8a3fbac5a20626524b335c
57140 F20110216_AABNEY manak_j_Page_153.pro
9c0c267fe4695d7d9d040e440420617c
8fab27a4c03b6304165c0ee486224b100b5262f4
29329 F20110216_AABLQE manak_j_Page_122.QC.jpg
84361a38627651c0198f9e9aa72e8867
b03e16c23894b24c7a962ea960c272461c435a7a
5853 F20110216_AABNEZ manak_j_Page_160.pro
b3dd635e71dcda28c23c0d7337dedce3
0225366a088e575acc11cd80170cf7949d9679e9
107201 F20110216_AABLQF manak_j_Page_094.jpg
7b6c56b7652b6ea7bc07c0b8e1883528
5a37018fb0aa5551bc682148caac3028e470b023
51717 F20110216_AABLQG manak_j_Page_039.pro
75a11568eb689c7eb45802cb05a2ed41
dd05ac1e827869bbe05b4b4f083e413d06666467
F20110216_AABMNA manak_j_Page_242.jp2
cc78e33d2fab410fd8e44129bd6e88c5
589f241e96768bad17ed0dbc20b03c30ca48a475
108793 F20110216_AABLQH manak_j_Page_066.jpg
c4359e707a9d3275bba36885644fdc8e
a24bfb347377c84d75a04e61074c488b34b8c276
18137 F20110216_AABLQI manak_j_Page_249.pro
f3065b6b6ca2fc3a2875f458cbd6161d
9097d1b3864eb057d7708483ee1510681bd0545f
40707 F20110216_AABMNB manak_j_Page_259.QC.jpg
9c1949f10e5e799e0058205b95b2bb0b
d1ddcda68ce2352e96faad87a9668ade410bcee5
1830 F20110216_AABLQJ manak_j_Page_184.txt
f3411a16819b8c32e8554faa31f3e5f9
583cb8962a9b32b17e029d9b93555f4003aabc73
7294 F20110216_AABMNC manak_j_Page_171thm.jpg
145dcc004027c12015957ef6bb541687
c978fd708c0602c9ffd77a895346b960b0773961
7567 F20110216_AABLQK manak_j_Page_180thm.jpg
e89910663d81b99f3f0b81f21759c0ce
acb998f0d56b12d81427aa2c9a5fc498ccd7ccd6
F20110216_AABMND manak_j_Page_010.tif
7fb990d7d01828f471275533f85c3ff6
1ac12823189ebffcfd35c6d7acc3a7c294bde4f3
14689 F20110216_AABLDA manak_j_Page_160.jpg
f1119dad2a47d7c14bdfd4bb0c4bf56a
b5fe996f725f8638b2941bca9c0b02c9fcd1a472
F20110216_AABLQL manak_j_Page_016.txt
51c41accabc46e3933e5e34603994089
2878957bdd72e8550fd53994a55630c4a93e1e52
7677 F20110216_AABMNE manak_j_Page_095thm.jpg
a705230b29cc4c8d1ac67c3e4a790b73
8055e8a5d5cc0caf17db3341ff52f8746b276ece
8570 F20110216_AABLDB manak_j_Page_186thm.jpg
7c7694739517e0ec4107acd77feddbd1
fa74485165a715d42ae592afb95d28b6f021e43f
58241 F20110216_AABLQM manak_j_Page_027.pro
6a0d0145f9788a6cdabd9a921228859c
d1f591a82b304321fdbbb65e3f8b9b61cf374377
113657 F20110216_AABMNF manak_j_Page_044.jpg
7a9f4359e32e017e1ddfee6367766960
33c7ccf22c6263f91b5ba1668cabddfa229facac
F20110216_AABLDC manak_j_Page_185.jp2
379ece0bc87e45136f9f22573f3ddff3
5601f4bc9346ddcb521125801abf286542768ba6
56344 F20110216_AABLQN manak_j_Page_190.pro
3c049923f8c4938cef0e50d66996e425
fc165b97864b9d1fab596e52bb9bb2d0cfb64d47
52624 F20110216_AABMNG manak_j_Page_080.pro
29e1c1aaacbec11061435ffde9b00804
f57707e61671ab8c6a564750430bc1eadf8bf772
33440 F20110216_AABNKA manak_j_Page_135.QC.jpg
318bf995bda04a0006a2e94ed7432cbb
9d8e445b92c06835f4baaf89c7d2bf3d64f914e0
112916 F20110216_AABLDD manak_j_Page_120.jpg
ce1d3bd8114046f611629f56aa71fa78
8ad6d573cd5b45ebabb58613ca2a3750f0399983
F20110216_AABLQO manak_j_Page_068.tif
19b00c2bf52f65f30cc5251e8382cc7c
eb2d47ee7e7ccb432985be4f9dd96d49f6d52c65
36873 F20110216_AABMNH manak_j_Page_244.QC.jpg
60f64672e0736fc4c490971a93bc6a03
32c7fcfb0b002298a78cd7e47750aedf2ff8c22e
136026 F20110216_AABNKB manak_j_Page_139.jpg
8bc91411272a3e30367cf7ddf8ff2ab5
424a318cd79efedc36c8d438958d3256bfcf61eb
55639 F20110216_AABLDE manak_j_Page_167.pro
d3cb5055e9ebd81d7eb2d69251830692
fa392f1b3462507e3a5e5641d584fc9633aebef6
54644 F20110216_AABLQP manak_j_Page_161.pro
3bc53d693f318f6ecf384dec822daa66
708f85b3c45ba4e74a470d1b8c2b62e8c3a7f36a
55760 F20110216_AABMNI manak_j_Page_116.pro
a21c062bba44403dcfdac5b420c2242c
df49c8b8fffdfecff03d383dead711dac5b618d9
110379 F20110216_AABNKC manak_j_Page_141.jpg
25cfe5b190cf1230d51aadf2c815cd15
6c25ed83545733f252b4da268640ba1efefc83a6
55514 F20110216_AABLQQ manak_j_Page_176.pro
e1f0d79bcf973f91bd57ede902d98f66
8a066e3bbe7004b2ef0f77e6e13a3bea97c6fa3d
F20110216_AABMNJ manak_j_Page_142thm.jpg
ec3f2da4afd9dffd14f7e78197643f03
725dc484257cf871d7835d036b616db93ce30936
35248 F20110216_AABNKD manak_j_Page_142.QC.jpg
6cbfd77202dfd9c30f44f6868eb3bf53
e00cc407578b4a55bb449e59280ecaa524ddb63b
2634 F20110216_AABLDF manak_j_Page_023.txt
23e6af04af13fe5400684ccfaab7a805
97e1d463913c4a4912173117020ccb6ddb06074b
54619 F20110216_AABLQR manak_j_Page_236.pro
f8d1f43d93b46f666eeff8edc17383f1
7df387062cdd9c6c997e29a9d8841483fd10adb7
F20110216_AABMNK manak_j_Page_145.tif
6e67c9438f608761dccbd4a6e3c9da90
423c54d1dfda150652b830f251b34a98f610b50c
119910 F20110216_AABNKE manak_j_Page_145.jpg
5ddf515633375f68839fa1bf42162147
5b6758e7b71b889f10f16c3f824412745e3f618b
34653 F20110216_AABLDG manak_j_Page_184.QC.jpg
e6bd3a63f20dfdca363d7783a2209561
e30f449251fc066596e040c5a9b09b6fc8b6b919
35059 F20110216_AABMAA manak_j_Page_219.pro
7646cfe262f7c4532564706b537794ae
879293880206086f600582f6f69ad15d3c8661a1
F20110216_AABMNL manak_j_Page_173.jp2
7deb9837ed017b912d6fcc505259ad94
94e3351d2507382356f8c1f390b57056db8535bc
103630 F20110216_AABNKF manak_j_Page_146.jpg
dbf45ac2059574dd375d11b8cb8a7dd0
403108138d608cf22ae8aeda0be291c87eb7f4a1
8816 F20110216_AABLDH manak_j_Page_022thm.jpg
44981c269c3a73073b7d6eb69817f1d3
fa1b5d9ac6aa6671e1d9b51e8c8c3ef1cd683f3a
37400 F20110216_AABLQS manak_j_Page_034.QC.jpg
f19e8499fef2aacc061ed0fc3590054f
bf50ed4b734d7baa039c4394a0244974c6662daa
F20110216_AABMNM manak_j_Page_129.jp2
e21f73b796bfafe8922d312df208c1dc
7cad18e76df95054120445d49905e78de6b9f60e
30284 F20110216_AABNKG manak_j_Page_146.QC.jpg
a1cb6c4da346495477618c7e1c486dfe
6cda54e400e84f944f32430cc0967db556722b43
1051962 F20110216_AABLDI manak_j_Page_208.jp2
17a0c94ad22da2d906f9f78a87d65844
c63e28ef3ef79f5c19e983165fee7d11ef76f5df
F20110216_AABMAB manak_j_Page_152.jp2
82d0d9f7e03ffc09aa20b6d39fa297b2
98309bc90ea72c13f6891a64ce303962763e045b
111977 F20110216_AABLQT manak_j_Page_058.jpg
f545ae03d427b1ffa3f5dad7a58cfc95
a4a0587886605259a7e779c8d291469a8a90ff90
1049678 F20110216_AABMNN manak_j_Page_254.jp2
ec77b2718d6e5221793dd709480b9ff5
efde8db41dd26443ccd51a6cda4a3fc52f56a4c1
31221 F20110216_AABNKH manak_j_Page_147.QC.jpg
d1e7213e41e3965e97208eb3d3bcb2b9
2cd359c847abba3d7a687c3c42456c12c8ef9898
26834 F20110216_AABLDJ manak_j_Page_119.QC.jpg
382a5d94d39200171ef6b261a35d3b3a
a665066184f413915259e13c39979829e3cfb1ec
1051929 F20110216_AABMAC manak_j_Page_004.jp2
effb584d8839255692015784a1d74ba2
e6be55adcd17da2867d2720be4ea87a25538979b
5742 F20110216_AABLQU manak_j_Page_258thm.jpg
f963164f1a45f2b777dbf4f7bd73bf48
9cfe653618528f438d5885bcff9916219ee7797e
95656 F20110216_AABNKI manak_j_Page_148.jpg
3a25ce71a1768f7aceb54710d7e590e8
b2ae27840fcc1e4c16313d4114fabe505b2a1109
115551 F20110216_AABLDK manak_j_Page_206.jpg
2941573bbfbb1ebb0923d2e57023e495
e8d0de6ba350f7829f574dcf3387b4a2ffaf7ed0
F20110216_AABMAD manak_j_Page_182.jp2
b0fb05d850dba48f79db5195f176404c
d60a0f34fa7283fdae5fa0586fe63707cbf90ad7
8865 F20110216_AABLQV manak_j_Page_038thm.jpg
14d5fc037af8539b725e4c092560e2f7
6404a22a44e4e1d7f488b58c1223508c2984cdd9
8430 F20110216_AABMNO manak_j_Page_074thm.jpg
53c4c6cd0831b1420a7d90b77a39eb88
1d26a5823cb792555c09b63b5ddb42917cd41815
120757 F20110216_AABNKJ manak_j_Page_149.jpg
b01a05859bdf431916991be5647bcb60
7db37b6531255636ee384854b9a4224656d36f81
31187 F20110216_AABLDL manak_j_Page_234.pro
c2c47e8c982ccb430cbcc031c60f8c44
a70d4337d17f62649540967b14f3eb6bf5fa3f90
F20110216_AABMAE manak_j_Page_198.tif
9d3ff23f5eefa5f63c049ea9177af46a
0275f6325c6c2bbbb2b969ab477e69c9069c8708
1951 F20110216_AABLQW manak_j_Page_261.txt
507fcbf7c25376cdabd9a14a266605ac
ab368d74bc9def0e3c56231a1695c58cc8f36319
2262 F20110216_AABMNP manak_j_Page_035.txt
02251b417b540cfed82021cddea774c1
d9a19fd485e51c500f68bcf25c15095a755e8bea
2270 F20110216_AABLDM manak_j_Page_266.txt
994b9fe90d3eee941f43dc71c4b30372
849d9008d16e2fe5dc58ab7b4a0b7e70127c22be
F20110216_AABMAF manak_j_Page_036.tif
7f0d4a262a2c0aa424f153746acf60ad
2a3a73957f6094fe2071f14303cc6b2d5694b0a1
F20110216_AABLQX manak_j_Page_233.jp2
14f77f0271558aa9cdb9d784f3b923de
bdc6059ab814aba4b67bb6841b76aa8d19cf53ec
F20110216_AABMNQ manak_j_Page_156.jp2
f823de20ef494451d53d911365d6f433
7a91f9753c08b3b09b80f55a0f0da8febdb7830f
117107 F20110216_AABNKK manak_j_Page_150.jpg
30b29bd11ce6f9bf81ddb1acc0a0a614
408c8d04a07ddb49d9c74176b0fa0d759e3055c5
134214 F20110216_AABLDN manak_j_Page_172.jpg
a458bea36e61546c23fd8cecac576b2f
eedf6b5d72889425f173b7e43115b0ddb1ea1ca4
F20110216_AABMAG manak_j_Page_116.txt
ec683d202a472b803cacb8b0024911e6
b5ea10d5a3fd2c8f1419d7532111689121f0ce98
110322 F20110216_AABLQY manak_j_Page_239.jpg
31e45d8e3988b763584ab0da358998be
aeda25c6ec3b4371dd7a6870363569a5c5ab43b9
36756 F20110216_AABMNR manak_j_Page_026.QC.jpg
de0e2bbef9234e3579bb509d70af0fb5
d2db680dd40471a49bfcabd9fbb017943f570ba8
115147 F20110216_AABNKL manak_j_Page_151.jpg
df21772cd3dcb99d5f33f4cd466f64da
a32da9f62c392cae21ec6e05d0f78ed3220d8a27
44238 F20110216_AABLDO manak_j_Page_184.pro
1fab22dbef6cacbc2ce5917a2e4ff3aa
dc6f7b20f71befdcd77b7fdf74aa2853ae2d0369
34854 F20110216_AABMAH manak_j_Page_138.QC.jpg
5099c2751abbb78ae89cb4c1b0eda431
66cb3248f6a8062326a7318c253e1872cceb69af
114125 F20110216_AABLQZ manak_j_Page_178.jpg
69ee5cf0d1cddcbe326851a193bd1dba
bd412c43e9cb42c6cf7cdaa1b4167ef4df963d24
58977 F20110216_AABMNS manak_j_Page_238.pro
bd516bba8e73b04ec0e8a5dd7520511c
30f42e28ccaebb90a6543891e5f4e1ee90b792a6
113055 F20110216_AABNKM manak_j_Page_152.jpg
6b02e10947ecfe6f25b1db35754a1e26
bdaf7d004ae49dfc4b53bdcc66428ee11ec58372
2127 F20110216_AABLDP manak_j_Page_039.txt
606fa6003344a2cf9592a373d1328052
d6ae29731d86eae94122f5a669b681cc616882ac
F20110216_AABMAI manak_j_Page_268.tif
4ce12d01f9707e69f490ec2807174b0e
9f1613a1ac4bc72783f5b5bc322f94df45d0b344
37315 F20110216_AABMNT manak_j_Page_153.QC.jpg
7cc726fdeff783995f9c1175e9824a41
f34d902faccc368c2ac4632041da9c543d8abb7b
F20110216_AABNKN manak_j_Page_152.QC.jpg
ac11fb899c2db3c61f633d082b923b47
29717673f4f329512edfe94feb5fbe2a347544d9
109817 F20110216_AABLDQ manak_j_Page_203.jpg
19fc1e044b700852e25e0d6b0fc8d398
733f63564217e79ef627992a8210b4f8ffb6655f
63752 F20110216_AABMAJ manak_j_Page_146.pro
b540ba3c25f0cb4242c52629c9acf13e
d5ced6528b0ec866f7bfbb5c0f5e181c304378b3
34675 F20110216_AABMNU manak_j_Page_055.QC.jpg
a4e68e86af02dd9a9e69f8e4ac6769e0
e22f1174974296b35fd99d68459bff2de8ee5cfc
113278 F20110216_AABNKO manak_j_Page_153.jpg
9ab7a071b25858e32e5ef4756178dc75
5e1306d9d16331a7d34c92a2c1c72a933698f162
36447 F20110216_AABLDR manak_j_Page_237.QC.jpg
09b1a30bd04eb8dded8b0969d8ec2de9
fe98d9d9a4dc046d750b0e340885079588b61558
236 F20110216_AABMAK manak_j_Page_160.txt
fbcc89dbdf18c43685e6153edfa30d6b
ed75cd04c37363e6e4540f509c8a7177e5a980ec
110883 F20110216_AABMNV manak_j_Page_070.jpg
9d4fa3e2f5992f6f4645e47e624c80c2
6cd459458ae8db311b577b1a83959d891d2aba19
111393 F20110216_AABNKP manak_j_Page_154.jpg
fc80f605d719c03b53fcf997124a632b
d38396c713c9432e40dab86e773fc9ad3c79b748
20254 F20110216_AABLDS manak_j_Page_107.pro
603bd61900e47a8f8ab55ebdfb31a0b9
222587dfb87cd8813cf044866a9437802291e21b
111274 F20110216_AABMAL manak_j_Page_056.jpg
3c0a7d1b0d3e8626dee7fc91427f9cc1
d6fd93c5e2b0d06e38403816d037fccadd2dfae0
55810 F20110216_AABMNW manak_j_Page_036.pro
5160e92ab55dca4f74e2b0669af79c98
b13fa3bb8b38151ab6eecca81be4c8bcbe9ee640
114440 F20110216_AABNKQ manak_j_Page_155.jpg
26ae00b35bc4a81cae025e05bdb60c0f
9154805975a338d2b02638b4e517cd0eee99053b
9017 F20110216_AABLDT manak_j_Page_153thm.jpg
e9480a3c62c17a7c1182d7ce78a79dde
b725360bd77f9fcd948a670ca109ca2cfa72c3b1
F20110216_AABMAM manak_j_Page_248.tif
375135976d1d170471f54651acae53cc
13df5b6bfaf4689415d68796d011c8b7a9705540
F20110216_AABMNX manak_j_Page_255.tif
8015dd60059c1a79a6ba35fe147a76fa
411aa09dca10c7718a842d19dc6a2b253537e8f0
105169 F20110216_AABNKR manak_j_Page_156.jpg
216e1ec3b7fa70cc67834afcd4ad8570
bcfba26202a17093e2d33b97d30bea46f6aa0b33
110155 F20110216_AABLDU manak_j_Page_081.jpg
262ccb63d25479be195c79c960e20f32
be16fff2a84afdfa179702a3e8a3db2c7cf99992
F20110216_AABMAN manak_j_Page_136.tif
9c0a92c77cbbcbf553297b58cec025f4
c1ceddcc9d1256d67754849614671a9069e73a2a
F20110216_AABMNY manak_j_Page_222thm.jpg
4f0bc4ba17ef7bb5212035ced1451c28
82a20878c59d4f8a8bcfa8dcf6ad347d5e936329
112143 F20110216_AABNKS manak_j_Page_157.jpg
874552932ffe6d51a5c99cd7275160ac
e76c9fd7ff920914581d14b628fd08d51cb4d92a
2097 F20110216_AABLDV manak_j_Page_165.txt
eed4187bdb777fb72c251f4b39ffdc24
5b4553b818a08911f85b2bcc76f6a77a8bd1636b
F20110216_AABMAO manak_j_Page_058.tif
61902a7d94df9c1e6f00c1c381b56b4d
0e51644269f73821a63e80ac64b57b792adccb6b
F20110216_AABMNZ manak_j_Page_077.tif
d76836c7e62df330251e71cdef664bed
cf3c76581d68af384794b54eb76435001233c931
111597 F20110216_AABNKT manak_j_Page_158.jpg
3ae276450f6da502e7ee0ae17666f27c
6080daa40fc54bc7bc7a7e23c5d20285fa2139f8
108340 F20110216_AABKZG manak_j_Page_210.jpg
9fdc4df564a21aca0d2c82527f3d08cb
a84020c3deb05142c751fc250f8b561bb6bbcbe3
1051791 F20110216_AABLDW manak_j_Page_039.jp2
2b4bab3d9c1126d0f91d19b2029452a6
041d90972938b5d80fe1ccd12bbdfa05b15f38e1
F20110216_AABMAP manak_j_Page_057.tif
e8c7af356fee42a46ae4f7a49319cfd8
55eaf3d4723307a8fdedf91172e0b44ae15322f3
36196 F20110216_AABNKU manak_j_Page_159.QC.jpg
1956a0224bb82c1c3f2cbefbc110b830
be0cea45acaf7a8c0bc2bb12e2d2bd6dedff1ae4
F20110216_AABKZH manak_j_Page_006.jp2
862d35ac7d65cc425a620b104cb4e377
3c143d9c9c61a9900036edb208a438ce53ee97ae
F20110216_AABLDX manak_j_Page_236thm.jpg
bd17003b91cb5367293ac9b2ffc86747
6e58e29a83a05ed65d1ed75125e25421a67c8a12
23969 F20110216_AABLWA manak_j_Page_252.jpg
85c315acc448f61c391dad7c5c639dcf
9263c759850fa9bce45d109afbd1eb30bbcaf0b5
107897 F20110216_AABMAQ manak_j_Page_184.jpg
e7f529635dc540be7b5bab1d9398e48e
a1e3c50cebfc90471cd1d6c2ff6c2140d0d28aaa
110755 F20110216_AABNKV manak_j_Page_161.jpg
1aa88cc3097cbb19b56149c1d3c5b3ac
24c2f75d6484dfd43bb7c61ad4d55aa81ed8ca0b
F20110216_AABKZI manak_j_Page_243.txt
f3c2a909d89ba2f8e3084f37c0e221c6
dde57a37c093ae2b85e3ca9c78c929579eeee314
161890 F20110216_AABLDY manak_j_Page_260.jpg
a1935881b1600610853b5c8943087354
2f82d21d21ee4c9fecea57bdde784f205780f186
8753 F20110216_AABLWB manak_j_Page_240thm.jpg
facb5e6fa9a08e934056eff8295af78e
a07e1e411c8decf77459adb0001a564d7fcce732
F20110216_AABMAR manak_j_Page_110.jp2
c9fbef16960be79dd871acce5bd9bdb0
1fe113d91f40c19734c8dec830c5df761ee686a3
36195 F20110216_AABNKW manak_j_Page_161.QC.jpg
d9933e7d40de0652e32f97fe89442eae
9bf86874dfa0b2499a81885fd8d536e149db5882
37578 F20110216_AABKZJ manak_j_Page_223.QC.jpg
2ed16cff02fdf8bbeed3d0d330647da0
35dcb67a4f5135dc80930cbc50cd720a7b60f3af
F20110216_AABLDZ manak_j_Page_239.tif
f760bef915697d10b1a9310311728c57
2669502c5e1a427cb40381cf993f3b9724ae82cc
F20110216_AABLWC manak_j_Page_217.jp2
457fb3fb399ae6e7c63c33e3e20c12cb
2a8013f3555a504a101f2cb21a97ae61942cc1d2
35676 F20110216_AABMAS manak_j_Page_167.QC.jpg
9e4467a56b0d3b7df366a5d36dc23f46
1e8d33d344555ec8cce2877dc535a8aafd4b4447
137117 F20110216_AABNKX manak_j_Page_162.jpg
25893a2b4494df9649d26a6d2499e0e9
8e89aa2af46ab47d067d8edbf6f502e983d25cc2
111263 F20110216_AABKZK manak_j_Page_106.jpg
c2d94e465aba7b3effbb813577df6dc2
b2e4a3f1bcd871ee5233f26aca80c14fdeb00b7b
F20110216_AABLWD manak_j_Page_066.jp2
11c29f5c0d68d909d4afc0484ed56bbc
9b0586074bd0504ece378c1443ba81cdc5d747d6
110958 F20110216_AABMAT manak_j_Page_059.jpg
89a7cc21a37e1e7a406433910cf7ecd8
9d4513ae97845d3cc0240ec698140db1e35aa43c
95716 F20110216_AABNKY manak_j_Page_163.jpg
494f6aa95becdb2999eb19cede115d82
4fd1f672aa84f0fc5d1133e5d2a11585c353e07e
116813 F20110216_AABKZL manak_j_Page_053.jpg
8464d2a9a7c282e27050eacd4dd85581
67ae2175154c1be4f1875dfa02578c3e58acdb29
F20110216_AABLWE manak_j_Page_035.tif
00fa1accd2e020ef8d56db8aa711343c
7de0a0243c828bfcd5915c07513665bd401339d7
8982 F20110216_AABMAU manak_j_Page_060thm.jpg
f76b88d8324f8ce68439ea8a97c60c1b
657f7300ec585a2f8b190bc6608645623985b7ea
33372 F20110216_AABNKZ manak_j_Page_164.QC.jpg
74ade169c23c609d67b711a9a62716bc
23e99c69372e1b3fb06fcb7f8e860ced8004368e
34923 F20110216_AABKZM manak_j_Page_045.QC.jpg
0d4490c3166d4a7df0485e4b9cc9cf08
de6cc8637b0cf93ac16b29f2981be45999653ea7
76440 F20110216_AABLWF manak_j_Page_258.jpg
bbf8ce34347eff6ec71fc3ffcae3e36f
d0d1cd2172f17f42be736bde48587614277a98ca
F20110216_AABMAV manak_j_Page_183.tif
eb94637af714a063543113620cb0915d
871c6643af4df7779ada9f0640b247857d773041
8989 F20110216_AABKZN manak_j_Page_106thm.jpg
7cb0b60f6d35116896908e15476fc2c9
e6d55340c396b99e540632bc140e943b76641ef9
889796 F20110216_AABLWG manak_j_Page_267.jp2
8dde0da17ae96290cf033c5a6f627ffa
5eba9fb1a10e9f40604ae6a8a8e5f0ee40226057
55941 F20110216_AABMAW manak_j_Page_265.pro
2d7753c4581b543f8958a079842fc7b7
b11ad34946894b568b1df7718cc01406e203aefe
F20110216_AABKZO manak_j_Page_052.jp2
370ee133d8ea43cf09aa5680334bd8f6
4cd07c64bf08cbf753fdc6852b69fc569af91853
2238 F20110216_AABLWH manak_j_Page_161.txt
c0f9500ae3d4d0fe5db13686f2f5e818
5e061c6d166a97e3f7bab31c39e67a36ccaff9d5
108758 F20110216_AABMAX manak_j_Page_031.jpg
f4b83517ca7d49de5921f64e72415865
af17cbf15403a4b3d13cd565d3aed714a07f3952
36049 F20110216_AABMTA manak_j_Page_076.QC.jpg
e6e36a73fe8864637de4b4b846e2e06d
4d4d7d08ebb5c97f7664aa8db1d752d3c8ffba51
765523 F20110216_AABKZP manak_j_Page_047.jp2
5202ee9eaa8909b811d076bce3b1bfa3
7fc66a2d32107fa2388a52ea7db6331c085f46a1
2266 F20110216_AABLWI manak_j_Page_142.txt
bb0422bf90622ece943bf27df7a176b1
b20ba39908377c9165a5ffb989bff54b8ca17224
1039915 F20110216_AABMAY manak_j_Page_180.jp2
5701e273fe8b61ddbe921e725d698eaf
9053500fa6f1a325069e3b09a9cdc1eb8ca5ac84
2672 F20110216_AABMTB manak_j_Page_182.txt
b469adfeb5e7f5b6e08444594d3b1bf3
4d5db9393bc46636359540cc920fd2ba84a1bac9
F20110216_AABKZQ manak_j_Page_237thm.jpg
3c4cd8d25c0ae21c673644c3215953f2
92a048f8001e6831261ca513c6823266e4533a5c
54732 F20110216_AABLWJ manak_j_Page_208.pro
7ff2a396c87eb8ce9ead4aa3cd98c025
11819f0fc9e93bf33cc0e40acda5edf66bd5db1d
2206 F20110216_AABMAZ manak_j_Page_105.txt
df1cf05238e49394675cdaa94993fc48
6731b9373b7f2744d0adb6d9b424833787c50e50
37706 F20110216_AABMTC manak_j_Page_243.QC.jpg
7ab9341db007bd0b0838043374866e5a
f10b2a6e893eccd9b30d825aad753ea8212bcc98
102245 F20110216_AABKZR manak_j_Page_112.jpg
90560aa1a3e2cf8566e858a07c873544
1add746a41c7b2cf42910820d012dd4aa825b1b1
4589 F20110216_AABLWK manak_j_Page_007.txt
0f8fe101db9f07e00c9467845da7d793
4af65464593e68de65182ead2179873499a33f02
1051903 F20110216_AABMTD manak_j_Page_236.jp2
ff48bfc519078ff1d22833c4d51e9121
5c716c9c92800c9e2bb4ba2246ec13434d2e23df
F20110216_AABLJA manak_j_Page_109.jp2
f810020ee7430906c89969e9d4d39faa
6e5ff7aaf872dac1da7b6a21a2529412656d5794
1958 F20110216_AABKZS manak_j_Page_128.txt
a1fc6afdedaf51bc758c6c3de6912c55
9d2926cab30626d3d3414aa8e661266c4f08b84e
112259 F20110216_AABLWL manak_j_Page_007.pro
26ba2978092a5f0b907180c261c9e30a
d01c59fb53080a42a7525b8e7769e954c000fce5
103481 F20110216_AABMTE manak_j_Page_015.jpg
e696b4ba06ddc69569b7efbf729c8ea8
e5aed598a52bab7e2739ee40fa9a7e92a9071ef5
35561 F20110216_AABLJB manak_j_Page_078.QC.jpg
dcf9fd8239dc500330fbaf95eb933423
5a853c338ac5ff6e78520b51eed94683ba5a6e27
2095 F20110216_AABKZT manak_j_Page_100.txt
b071a0ff2dab253934113dae1d353730
2c1364ee95c11623e943fb4543843ca63e80313c
105791 F20110216_AABLWM manak_j_Page_136.jpg
6ff7e0b09eb9ac8f559113110a579892
705d2285e18a8e74eccee1bbf6322126598f9059
35197 F20110216_AABMTF manak_j_Page_082.QC.jpg
2e315313d7369825be90dad188c9b88d
e05c14a6c4a6e0ec8d670254cd9f64ae42bbec30
9092 F20110216_AABLJC manak_j_Page_104thm.jpg
4bffcda131f3aaca11c0e0e5a7a69559
6bc93da511711e46f4b3b3a9d26a228ebb84da8a
50032 F20110216_AABKZU manak_j_Page_169.pro
6bc9c44c3b8efc1e75cec6ab4cb5a725
e272291b7cd5b99f8c778967a7c9a4196c394066
F20110216_AABLWN manak_j_Page_232.tif
add0f6c02343b74c9559cf8e8f43d3ab
0affc6719be9dd2a1fd44f89f8b3b4a4d9593cfe
F20110216_AABMTG manak_j_Page_153.tif
277edf9e9597c2e2851e186b6fd23fc3
7fbccf13ed5fd8860cb93318465241fd3f9845ce
F20110216_AABNQA manak_j_Page_238.jp2
a12d623dc6770f17c11a4985b99694d8
1e1ff384b961a75df621b616b0427e9c475bcfd8
112969 F20110216_AABLJD manak_j_Page_192.jpg
9e63eb61daea8a191f58464d5830fb6c
7aa3fb6010eef7e40a35c132f06b08a2d68e21e9
40629 F20110216_AABKZV manak_j_Page_162.QC.jpg
2198e5200dbefe28bd5f760cc6c505b9
d5205f39db5d38689ab25caee25eeccdef26ac40
52132 F20110216_AABLWO manak_j_Page_025.pro
f7d26a072d20d7630a2eba0902516d2f
b0d649a569db605e8568398895a0d0af04daff28
7758 F20110216_AABMTH manak_j_Page_252.QC.jpg
4abd9cf2dd841d75bb7409a91b9c12ff
69adf4ebde9b74a271a9d33dd7f2135e1a7bf944
F20110216_AABNQB manak_j_Page_243.jp2
58b87375ff28726d0431cd5a87ceeff1
e6262f4c1c454f29354ccbddf6e01c65ae53d4e4
9257 F20110216_AABLJE manak_j_Page_232thm.jpg
856d23af552683fba4bd20fa0f42638f
e0847e112be96c82a851a85c42c306821ffdc21c
35183 F20110216_AABKZW manak_j_Page_197.pro
2434428353aff6e79f9a299e0c0eab5b
b7954773e904867caa66c9743c44f08a6f03157e
110701 F20110216_AABLWP manak_j_Page_266.jpg
c20bd4f0faf96a77ccf09651e0b58711
06abe68cffc8f82c76df76bb7b57cda6f851e3e5
F20110216_AABMTI manak_j_Page_266.tif
3d6bab0ece07d50505af94c66464e202
ff30d2f67547f1e7807c29fee9724bc813beae3a
F20110216_AABNQC manak_j_Page_244.jp2
8e1b06615f59c89ce29ed87b50b81c98
6b23a5baa7b9c5b30464e7e9d140609785151391
106396 F20110216_AABLJF manak_j_Page_222.jpg
59e0a5c4a1822f057424573182c4b716
9c27ded4e22cff7dff66b1dd1725d094793eeb99
8495 F20110216_AABKZX manak_j_Page_252.pro
f037856bb4b59c52ef8769b926770209
4368d19c14a6edc1fd60a25d4e80c2aa89b85066
49255 F20110216_AABLWQ manak_j_Page_253.jpg
2c20c9fb3339e1c5fb6072203f25d361
1f5279f748feaf452061b4fdf8a11a609da6cefb
115781 F20110216_AABMTJ manak_j_Page_035.jpg
bbbaa3697d1e42226643ae644d5eb7c2
3f2cc5af2f1fa0622c725d62cc3b49a62118d58c
F20110216_AABNQD manak_j_Page_247.jp2
bf59180a3b412b2fef0e3d5df8f84f70
2475a7e591e511db757d3d92c088819d6764c3a5
25377 F20110216_AABLJG manak_j_Page_127.QC.jpg
3df52ede10f89ce18a953c0c30979fec
c14d48f0d1b223fd373c6db772ccf9aa01fa9268
114531 F20110216_AABKZY manak_j_Page_065.jpg
cccec2e703dfc2c01ad1a1a0e70917f0
9226028db99edba8e6fdb9dc42e91c1d4ae8ca64
F20110216_AABLWR manak_j_Page_189.tif
e71680bfc573aabcc015bbbd5a22cdf3
6c0fb990d6705e76460ce4278dd593c8c85f9164
30671 F20110216_AABMTK manak_j_Page_001.jpg
78206112f8e500f7e24107b94fd76436
c0211cbb4f71c64cd4a48fab936d3511478f4e82
F20110216_AABNQE manak_j_Page_248.jp2
c1558f2daa0170bcfc8cac0c4aa9b774
c2891a60d992c26576a8a0d1829961eab298a3bd
2212 F20110216_AABLJH manak_j_Page_001thm.jpg
ab360312a77d260fecbee7ae054d9955
c623de16b0029c8a8b1082cbad309bb62e8723b3
1051919 F20110216_AABKZZ manak_j_Page_211.jp2
c35c5ee0f6219d665854e9d6de247778
4a73f4f01ace157e4e987fb774c8bde2f82b4aea
2756 F20110216_AABMGA manak_j_Page_139.txt
ece5b0903530c709535aea3ee8da802d
b16fe959a13d48cb85a49089d8500f3159d3a21a
1795 F20110216_AABLWS manak_j_Page_201.txt
1c9f7291e5bc27193ad688919a2c2750
d0c177b387ab10cf22869932ea09d891e511b127
8910 F20110216_AABMTL manak_j_Page_029thm.jpg
c7cec5291babef2cee732b91f9bde43b
1ae6e95f08519c33f45fe98edda403ec11ab9a59
980724 F20110216_AABNQF manak_j_Page_255.jp2
f65828505d40921e9bad20eecc04da64
4c3b540871e5f35eb97bb02f6ab4d56bdb49016b
99137 F20110216_AABLJI manak_j_Page_147.jpg
c990fa2b35953a97eae89e4addbc7642
168e8a5078f9c1b3941cb9b5c45d8c0ab8731c6a
56289 F20110216_AABMGB manak_j_Page_183.pro
b5c8b89a4152fb8a812cfddaf18b9261
3d263ffd814e4ff3fe25fc2a8916dd3408aa8c21
8651 F20110216_AABLWT manak_j_Page_076thm.jpg
18bf6d0df96da981b9d8c46db0242756
149a514b6d7e08d360f79bde0febccd8aa793c06
112475 F20110216_AABMTM manak_j_Page_143.jpg
70117fe8c05b6055fd31c37e816f3605
863dd3d9bdbff26740a27ec1504f2b70fbda1be1
F20110216_AABNQG manak_j_Page_260.jp2
f877fbcbbd66fadf8a8c8eff4ea02d9e
1f6cb0c9a40bc25e8fdf1c96ea9bcaf6cd274a2b
36965 F20110216_AABLJJ manak_j_Page_231.QC.jpg
da97fd15811cbf468922f3ff69a662df
f33a129ada24f45d50410d7786176678b499080b
36525 F20110216_AABMGC manak_j_Page_216.QC.jpg
f97d1795cd4127f636b8d67f8790568f
4499cbd3703a920133c54fc1f8a9e706ef42a8e1
F20110216_AABLWU manak_j_Page_162.tif
cfba360bce96f2768e3b06bf7a2e8fc9
a4865af680251be83917eb2406e97f1ff8645ba6
8711 F20110216_AABMTN manak_j_Page_017thm.jpg
621736f137e962a004562f301d0a874e
4725479df727674a74bcd17f4ea7cf43f0aa6d29
F20110216_AABNQH manak_j_Page_262.jp2
08b62c46912a1886495143c99f50ff92
dc81f29b17280940b090d47844a3d7f0fe21066b
F20110216_AABLJK manak_j_Page_111.tif
6253a84395b7e407163354bf6ce7ceef
ea491d45770673cd4a09f6fa95f9807ec849d132
226462 F20110216_AABMGD manak_j_Page_011.jp2
bc2774ad563fcff603e0e44d7adde332
afa0ec031c3099b84fe6821a4ee524d12fb61282
38559 F20110216_AABLWV manak_j_Page_182.QC.jpg
cbc5c885d72d532f6b4214cb69b10649
ccc83896881f2ddade077656394742868a677120
F20110216_AABMTO manak_j_Page_075.jp2
da96112be81ea110524edff69d7847cf
cc27b0039c26ce94f3fa8cbff6a877a2f08a1e6d
F20110216_AABNQI manak_j_Page_265.jp2
4f2a0b3ea68437c7d68ddde98b354d11
9a8f3551b127e460b0a85ec3bdd1165fe93d87f5
56738 F20110216_AABMGE manak_j_Page_177.pro
1c079b56e647439aafe1f3df3764821c
bb0b1c7ac5aa5640b4cdd5a7933d36a7acc628a5
118366 F20110216_AABLWW manak_j_Page_198.jpg
287676eff28a0b82bcc6aa25f1ebf270
72ee1ea004292d868890c30b51b7d738c33aab8a
F20110216_AABMTP manak_j_Page_055.jp2
88948912a8418de4846fe737fd6c4564
c5084ac1dc3b6d6cdbddf09efe545c29cce0f871
1051922 F20110216_AABNQJ manak_j_Page_266.jp2
17472c7b7be26246bb9f7b87d879055b
3c92c7d0633d6b11fa1fea2cc2d4c86cce432b08
53965 F20110216_AABMGF manak_j_Page_082.pro
148666341ecf1b225a4092ed5fad6af6
fee2b2c37b35bef22a883190bb016bf50a32407a
110722 F20110216_AABLWX manak_j_Page_159.jpg
e73526429056770f1ab3543fd569593b
0cfeec8ea2cf8a283807fc0874e25d44326ea65b
F20110216_AABMTQ manak_j_Page_119.tif
cca528cb8586ee319a797531f50191c8
fbac019906f3cf7be2db20d4918b25762a3c77b6
7311 F20110216_AABLJL manak_j_Page_226thm.jpg
b6b7f4e2628f4b5f2a339e6804dc3862
033e72a529d0b950f7ac45bfe4429e366ff79641
1281 F20110216_AABNQK manak_j_Page_005thm.jpg
05a76c4363bbbe981cc97ba45c19acf4
86ef8f46cee2ea3c882fe8ab64951af010734e4a
F20110216_AABMGG manak_j_Page_212.tif
84346b2bb8fb1db18ac4dd0c6c89244d
55c6b8dbeb14e5359e91fcba6f2a1ab01f949e04
37009 F20110216_AABMTR manak_j_Page_114.QC.jpg
5d0e04f47339060f65cb7dfbe894ef3a
eee7acfd5c1a53c56ae062f3d36bba3f53514484
82743 F20110216_AABLJM manak_j_Page_251.jpg
3dd1b58dbd2de5fe4210bdd9630e0d62
bb7c1e0edee855938bd5e5031590c7170ddf94f4
3074 F20110216_AABNQL manak_j_Page_009thm.jpg
663b1884afeeb637161068734a8bbc9b
0200332744b3d82b416a27829970950e0fb257fa
772557 F20110216_AABLWY manak_j_Page_258.jp2
58ab18e229345de3d8e33b06cbd9cda6
e16b8a1328436826ab01bdea74c887bb7d1fa5ad
489 F20110216_AABNDA manak_j_Page_256.txt
79a76f679e564a358a36efb9a1656593
dc8e0497639eefb096c63a10d3a77f774d5d6756
8856 F20110216_AABMTS manak_j_Page_034thm.jpg
db61aa820038c9c5ad16269b81bbee13
9afebef1b4791efaa6ad801966984b6be936f2be
111859 F20110216_AABLJN manak_j_Page_041.jpg
ba4ce6fe2ee5f9a98ff0c730129ba1e6
abdbb930ff732ac194412c9120017b345bc5fa1f
7798 F20110216_AABNQM manak_j_Page_010thm.jpg
80a4c88e8ecef325759caa8b5de46822
613ec6838777b9c91140d98d9f6fd34a167fe660
F20110216_AABMGH manak_j_Page_179.tif
8dd9bbaebd5de6fdeb35e7fecdb43caa
83c1fb9818254e5c29516c9b95fa561581579380
6919 F20110216_AABLWZ manak_j_Page_204thm.jpg
990c7f82e3daca94e325a37f2a75624a
0eab06325f740cb6388d16020bdb6a6f90bf50e7
1484 F20110216_AABNDB manak_j_Page_258.txt
48c33bf7207b786ef5ee33ef76ea8c78
da910e9e4ec2ba9b1c6923acc74271dc2c00262e
35249 F20110216_AABMTT manak_j_Page_074.QC.jpg
62e397db33e4e187f1bb0c52792e7cf5
e222a93654a00f6ba5228be23f07a02d6e742909
32709 F20110216_AABLJO manak_j_Page_068.QC.jpg
5f735c8fa710d527274bad236d96fb7a
052a0d9f0a500a1d13d51da68489b6ab28ac7ea5
8378 F20110216_AABNQN manak_j_Page_014thm.jpg
3139e171a58406886eb961bbd5f7ece8
d58f1386d8b5860bbcc60476f34621adf7ebff46
116799 F20110216_AABMGI manak_j_Page_089.jpg
e0159368332a2505e368f4c6ccf5a681
85c3331be4b91a11ee01ef3bec85bb067f47cf1e
2289 F20110216_AABNDC manak_j_Page_265.txt
c3d6d63243403661f418ebbeca5d8c75
6556f0c6b3adf805727037868a68b5a5e608941b
1051916 F20110216_AABLJP manak_j_Page_096.jp2
96946372606db50ed5acd876a8d8617d
153b3a9725c2c90c31855da4ee87f9fa9e90fa25
8900 F20110216_AABNQO manak_j_Page_018thm.jpg
68211ee6744e6cb2619c83a84014c8bc
630272a6d5dabab363adcc920cde4f83234405ed
62547 F20110216_AABMGJ manak_j_Page_213.pro
c5da566fc731964ca03c7bc27dcb08c0
5521804b745be1eded356bb8f5b4de4c90310423
F20110216_AABMTU manak_j_Page_154.jp2
5dfefe2dd8533a01f51e438f53147512
566262b713cd8c3d2748b82dcd6fa23c568e1a57
37365 F20110216_AABLJQ manak_j_Page_085.QC.jpg
5c067fa09ae38061dccd451ca6dbf0b3
5844f34dfe077a32c3fc9caa56afa4e3dccb2b28
8536 F20110216_AABNQP manak_j_Page_020thm.jpg
2f23dce21938c35d6abe01ce7e710020
bff77f4bddced9677c5e750497af3d472cf5efb8
F20110216_AABMGK manak_j_Page_250.tif
a1ee94d4ecf85cc99952f4abad666d13
699f032b3dc662b2806aeee92dec15e8ec203a37
1490 F20110216_AABNDD manak_j_Page_268.txt
698ca85d711598e49238b215a65c6870
f321b81c37e542b8aee9b1949f2be58847ad6791
58112 F20110216_AABMTV manak_j_Page_155.pro
8bfa3b04ad53915a655390074b94980f
a4199ad1314f70b30d4ae3aa4a074582a60ca48f
7937 F20110216_AABLJR manak_j_Page_039thm.jpg
62ce96c002bfdfb45677abadea4a34dd
78405460eb92e0f162866c3e6f3d51ba8d2dace2
34811 F20110216_AABMGL manak_j_Page_007.QC.jpg
b5e5dc05d53a500ca252d5635159140e
781be88ba7c528302ca7a0f83ee47237a6e0bfb4
9359 F20110216_AABNDE manak_j_Page_001.pro
769754242110f1718e497eb9c58115b9
8bc96acb015562de698e31015be0851d7d2117f5
8704 F20110216_AABMTW manak_j_Page_040thm.jpg
a007282ded66d55a67c7d42f307b65a8
0bda16067dfc3b86732d3ba7959a8c2edfdc8e86
30626 F20110216_AABLJS manak_j_Page_077.pro
00838ba1f45b513b4619cf73a6a101fb
ee4f9b081daafa89b8d7384c0b5f757087c5ea3b
9228 F20110216_AABNQQ manak_j_Page_023thm.jpg
5d1e468ccd9b10e0eda0e33ff40cfca6
e1a271ad43846c7e81c541237e9d3c057cfb73ee
54992 F20110216_AABMGM manak_j_Page_154.pro
4181b9b819b2956a343a5661d1641605
2c8f4d9a52de1bcdb75234407f5cbbc9c64ea19e
545 F20110216_AABNDF manak_j_Page_003.pro
60a2b56dd2138574c5cc6e5614276d4c
a95d741e2fa6fb77dc7ac3adc172b98515c61663
F20110216_AABMTX manak_j_Page_051.tif
a8006335fcf5a46ab59c1ccaa8a3b2a6
c4382521b6bb9443a147659aaa2fa3576a9acbd9
F20110216_AABLJT manak_j_Page_138.tif
d2585349e76b50f033a2ff0d5a79303e
bb85fbdf6906b971f8188814e8ed6e7deefb038b
926 F20110216_AABNQR manak_j_Page_024thm.jpg
38b7b65112c84ad704e41c9dd68bc1c0
df8cb8ca6856e9944856dab0c71ddcffd38bbb76
1051942 F20110216_AABMGN manak_j_Page_178.jp2
6d066af27cd043f95a2a98ff6da269b2
2603cd623af09845ab8d0e5a6f37d3b6fa15bff1
98554 F20110216_AABNDG manak_j_Page_006.pro
39b249ad65f75082481ae8ebcc64eabf
89c1f1d824f3c7333203a0d0931363f2e8c9ced0
F20110216_AABMTY manak_j_Page_037.jp2
4e20fd021db24ece097e1be9a5616bb4
54a31afbd6850445d0d7f6e4199c08116dcfa26c
6934 F20110216_AABLJU manak_j_Page_148thm.jpg
8146e68366360e0f5849dd428ea5193c
e418debc53db5e80d88cc3ef36afe98dad24443b
8385 F20110216_AABNQS manak_j_Page_028thm.jpg
99680ebee66b673cc5b1025e9f5acb2e
48c0e5379f1c3e052282da028218556d5cb9680d
87971 F20110216_AABMGO manak_j_Page_226.jpg
4f60767c705e2fe92989c93812ae8cb9
d0ae0421bafc1f2838288ceec04599cf3ac94796
22336 F20110216_AABNDH manak_j_Page_009.pro
29b5bd59e0f857f7cc2a1462c2d80d04
3cbf68f1f3b13e088bdecc32813c59dfd38eb52d
36605 F20110216_AABMTZ manak_j_Page_240.QC.jpg
f5abc8dace6039063d9578eed4a62b7e
b3e185e1d82aa882b137a3307cd0da2b6f7dbe34
2073 F20110216_AABLJV manak_j_Page_099.txt
2c76db97f78ad7dbfc0175d38f48c0ac
5104a4fd4802b70def0d55e10052b636c1a7b533
9094 F20110216_AABNQT manak_j_Page_035thm.jpg
7111593f3eb8500d15e579ffac953171
5987af0cd14efb902b213aff424f199b4cef626a
114745 F20110216_AABMGP manak_j_Page_194.jpg
0e09f912f1e161c7e3d30913bd1fe758
d0e4ad6b9df9dc0156e23cd7ddf5abf665b49a13
69735 F20110216_AABNDI manak_j_Page_010.pro
01058e8bd6ca6c6c8320b9e835cec714
418ca341f28e37c87f015f09bb55d3489156150f
F20110216_AABLJW manak_j_Page_106.jp2
998f5823304405340b8075ab0986f206
b1b0112dbe68fed83ff09b4ba93afdd17e91d1d2
8804 F20110216_AABNQU manak_j_Page_036thm.jpg
15e360ba7268989e407e5842992e323a
7f40dd691c3dc49629989169dc402a00d819da0f
2138 F20110216_AABMGQ manak_j_Page_136.txt
d91603508f3928386458d30dffe9bdaf
f16e564629cf87deb612129a341de7c12f2308aa
5778 F20110216_AABNDJ manak_j_Page_011.pro
88d38a288fa9106ca60391259d8d28e8
cd210af452a782b7b08a26d234cf54094560d49c
8579 F20110216_AABLJX manak_j_Page_123thm.jpg
071f3514799278dd7c9bc6798f80ca33
515d9138e8ac6493fb515a7ceb11c0909fb23377
8762 F20110216_AABNQV manak_j_Page_043thm.jpg
f9b8867bcc596fa55292e5749441f212
ad91b4f91f420c5f430c37f3df0f8c49e6c4c675
61330 F20110216_AABMGR manak_j_Page_110.pro
e685736e9eb5dc1976c181afcf0d4ce6
887baf572b84aac55b7f1deb728c8337b131e483
46633 F20110216_AABNDK manak_j_Page_012.pro
01e542bc05cf2fe027e72506170a43e1
7dd846664da7d0fafe38b3414fdeb72766d31b28
1443 F20110216_AABLJY manak_j_Page_011thm.jpg
2cbef0964d7e28ff96883a93b4e129c5
06d809e1c57a604566fd3edc999aa94a4b02ce15
5548 F20110216_AABNQW manak_j_Page_047thm.jpg
c620ae65a6794c659943134de13b1de7
1d6984777a37fddf25273921495239016e23fd51
8983 F20110216_AABMGS manak_j_Page_102thm.jpg
4027e8558d0b32b5515e514798cc337d
64763157b63c63cbe306d9e950669560b5aacc84
54852 F20110216_AABNDL manak_j_Page_017.pro
c0d0e6ff3e98856e14e0717940ecb3e4
d2e31e23249e427d25e2466cd429513efa80fcab
7851 F20110216_AABLJZ manak_j_Page_235thm.jpg
f9db018818db63788cbe4632de429c50
fc110168ce192059e907e5d1051b153f2d1fdfdb
8863 F20110216_AABNQX manak_j_Page_049thm.jpg
833fb3391ca550fff33201339fbf936c
c2ce8db32f1fb79a246799786ddbcd58c2726dd3
40544 F20110216_AABMGT manak_j_Page_251.pro
043aaad3a6d5c0805e8a0622b09ec0c9
e337d1ed9baf5796c60f3a0bd946ff81ca7a6c63
54417 F20110216_AABNDM manak_j_Page_018.pro
103e9130d2a01e128f108b760bfb2192
eec153fe15da6e41ddc333171c63ac1328a4dd64
8892 F20110216_AABNQY manak_j_Page_051thm.jpg
93e56795458771a03745374db78554f2
7b3fb8cede9fb48a3cfcf4c1d4e9b9cfd3c89c1b
F20110216_AABMGU manak_j_Page_092.tif
aa42e30b7ca06a6edf4e002b9e1ae12c
fc420ad1227798723b0c0e2e37e40ed07b957850
56237 F20110216_AABNDN manak_j_Page_019.pro
30cb6ae71d2f23c2d7c9a3eb8ee3428c
f50fb5297634da4b213601cb8be06e1e5a8de99c
8709 F20110216_AABNQZ manak_j_Page_052thm.jpg
28fa50d2dd86e138c11845b93062bb06
27387945eef8b918533b485036b285dea4d041af
117453 F20110216_AABMGV manak_j_Page_006.jpg
cf5887532ab939ec9e3c446367bc2603
925aa105b51cfd9ec91f287e623d4ea09d257ce1
53358 F20110216_AABNDO manak_j_Page_020.pro
5a2dbc0ac81f31be9fc894c30f1c5d0b
db5aceb74870b8d398e05def27fab647f78b6caa
53652 F20110216_AABMGW manak_j_Page_075.pro
65de383dff78e607ddead792898aa53d
4805279c7fc7a2f3d56ecb62f3c934823b47cec3
54550 F20110216_AABNDP manak_j_Page_021.pro
39f03cf3bcbacce5a8efdd04cb135a6c
63c1e0acd9c508ce390a7891265278b12f2093b0
22737 F20110216_AABMGX manak_j_Page_047.QC.jpg
0f7f27f902963ac2b3359534bef5854a
383996972fef34d729763b373eac2492ca3ccad2
F20110216_AABMZA manak_j_Page_230.tif
06414d2c3716423aeca75068185488c0
ac3a8b86a46c2110d61af056012b193a01b266e1
56558 F20110216_AABNDQ manak_j_Page_022.pro
4f9e6cc8d42b5ae5f592d3eea59d3cba
f988a2b063c058ef8fe000987a7b9dc0fddff483
35576 F20110216_AABMGY manak_j_Page_241.QC.jpg
2a2a476356efc06db64a6731b04cf9d9
a75b05aef037155790be82edeec8fda14e95ef1c
F20110216_AABMZB manak_j_Page_234.tif
812b4e4322fb690239e257d05c592198
abb594f8c5c40516928930120e739c426ac1cf0e
68591 F20110216_AABNDR manak_j_Page_023.pro
c5e614560a3002e502ac22498ce167c9
9ea2daf2673aa730cf38b9ca80c1734621ed1c71
F20110216_AABMGZ manak_j_Page_246.jp2
0c75979f3efdc2e7b5c25aca414ddee6
17c48764bab5b08dd0e63698370733bdae8cc0a3
F20110216_AABMZC manak_j_Page_236.tif
4c728f318252831f35ee44a639e081a8
cb0ba01c86ce2b086fa524171e317291c64730cc
52459 F20110216_AABNDS manak_j_Page_040.pro
3d6bfa68040596c871c04ae3b96b1a30
a8f5450e8afdad5f96233d7f893314ffeac7b985
F20110216_AABMZD manak_j_Page_238.tif
4076961d4f8843f8beb96d6881f5b652
3633587106b909453c6ce6b0179af8be53f7063d
54153 F20110216_AABNDT manak_j_Page_057.pro
c520e649589494839ef1c149a8f4fd32
d8697b684c86e941f7c997837c7983ece7a0b241
F20110216_AABMZE manak_j_Page_241.tif
da4cca7689962e1a8e331a4c0d9f7396
a82f08b96cf63fd477dbbae864bb725a3f4b5be9
57065 F20110216_AABNDU manak_j_Page_060.pro
ebaf2b36ccea48efc1086bb2ec8c6758
a2ca913664f0435e79b7b16fa9af6cd1e4743107
F20110216_AABLPA manak_j_Page_059.txt
8fd07506404fac1884ae84c265dd615c
aa3768f7e353af0ea5ab01b139da9408126b212a
F20110216_AABMZF manak_j_Page_242.tif
2ad6fdf05f10324ae3a37aaf9a2337eb
09094ec20212c595c9bb65bbd7cd59960e839aaa
55473 F20110216_AABNDV manak_j_Page_062.pro
142f8620be03eb470cb82762b3898a85
4db519e8eace814cfe21948761a4857d486b7b54
F20110216_AABLPB manak_j_Page_216.jp2
36e8c35c40bd628830c3a4041b4b3ee8
82f537062a345db02a6eeed08e769d9d8aa06691
F20110216_AABMZG manak_j_Page_244.tif
343c5cedb2571ae3a443470fc6098bb5
50a540ec6c52ec039608f4072fd827469815d461
54691 F20110216_AABNDW manak_j_Page_066.pro
955225ba1006102a5cd54a7de11f3343
cdaca85c2752b1f7099fbbbdcdff0ea50f7ec047
F20110216_AABLPC manak_j_Page_055.tif
d2f933f521243ad8c6a078ab2bef57f7
4e123c0e1643123fbac45ac9617187aec5094ded
F20110216_AABMZH manak_j_Page_247.tif
97f17bcb593f62aed40307415be5a1df
75e96c4b537a86be42348e41eab96adae6cfd309
60311 F20110216_AABNDX manak_j_Page_067.pro
c0074ab8b6e866894a81741d481ef900
4db3523532063d1c9ab8746ea8a10aa6d1f14a05
2195 F20110216_AABLPD manak_j_Page_208.txt
47c792ee08d7e57ace06abfd26031e42
608b585ffe447d2c3150707e6a965979515b4c41
F20110216_AABMZI manak_j_Page_251.tif
0165732cf0c29281a128df1bd81b71dd
1fb10e1c7397e19e1dfc8cc34a87aee1a829249b
58680 F20110216_AABNDY manak_j_Page_072.pro
8d912763851941d48000bfb076be84ec
e12c645759b9316d706760b4bf8942aa5a7a6961
108064 F20110216_AABLPE manak_j_Page_100.jpg
6d736e03d507575d96edda521e04ea96
4dc5709a4f9db23f1c96ab072a171351edfc5441
F20110216_AABMZJ manak_j_Page_256.tif
16a892009cf299c48826e7ad9d131370
63775bb015c87491a6bae8411bbfb438fef7a3c1
52330 F20110216_AABNDZ manak_j_Page_079.pro
e8730a0ef5c2c07a0760592367d6d248
84a0e11b7cb2956d13fc570077a440632a81e93a
F20110216_AABLPF manak_j_Page_049.jp2
aa5daf72dd72ea2cc985c7ec2df252c8
6dbabaea810939bf9d9bbe4bf7e9c54cb1075e73
F20110216_AABMZK manak_j_Page_257.tif
4e658342d29cf8f816bc9136bfe28a5a
1fd144eaf0c79b6b98ecd28c7970991192f53cdb
F20110216_AABLPG manak_j_Page_112.tif
736f522afe0e2b6a31996b78d50587c8
cbbb61177fc44ac9d100554b05a4a62bb2befca1
56829 F20110216_AABMMA manak_j_Page_157.pro
929cc9f89a06e3e799a46899fb219825
8903ea8de4dceab90781f1e1c8f3e0b90461240b
F20110216_AABMZL manak_j_Page_258.tif
dcde04ecbbc946302d7e71768aa6906b
c0451a9afa4fcb433a817bfa86050599d05114e7
9003 F20110216_AABLPH manak_j_Page_092thm.jpg
7db680b92ff461de372104c597713dd6
d3039ebf7bfc6865cf9aab87c725738989f2efc9
F20110216_AABMMB manak_j_Page_001.QC.jpg
bee98f3f1a27c28afef3f8f6e6b1d1a9
1c0ed28647778328e7af7e173bc877c179d7e070
F20110216_AABMZM manak_j_Page_262.tif
c0599fdd7857c9f2eb0025d5bd3cc43e
096424d1f9390e615d908c9f517d84e75bb7c84f
F20110216_AABLPI manak_j_Page_025.tif
2718c4e73763a8a8acf3528541287257
f6226aeee3b58503183749a157d0bb3e5d666e70
55520 F20110216_AABMMC manak_j_Page_134.pro
e76098ae7de07a92887c876e2b81329c
08ff5526fb6e1999d6e5661646a565f7b7c199f6
F20110216_AABMZN manak_j_Page_263.tif
1f306fcb5c86880f6d089d65b7f691a7
e78146c1fd036c60e56bf4c4327ee8503fc5676b
932449 F20110216_AABLPJ manak_j_Page_214.jp2
30296582bfa27409c6efce29b333f49e
42e70912ce678cf37eb93c3e652d24fcef22995b
F20110216_AABMMD manak_j_Page_081.jp2
4cabdd33219924dd7d01a2524edfe044
0921a1bc03d7653c8015b4d36093a8a74601e3ea
F20110216_AABMZO manak_j_Page_265.tif
2a70e35347b5ecad1f9f90055bf4c8b8
3bdfc03699b63df5af70cf7c68a6e80f14a77b82
105959 F20110216_AABLPK manak_j_Page_196.jpg
bbc1079fc15d673f4025c564f3dc078b
413ec7f6b54eeefe35b4f6fa2c0acf32b7f2d1db
8491 F20110216_AABMME manak_j_Page_136thm.jpg
ded8f6e369df28ab7e32adec265ba05e
38a316f3e6c63ecc350d39cfff46395525e5dc77
55166 F20110216_AABLCA manak_j_Page_054.pro
f90df3b114b6ebe403cddf44c274cd25
c8c6004edc420f04294835e6a4261a7316e7e546
F20110216_AABMZP manak_j_Page_267.tif
8f80bbd1d3933aa9552470c2a1ddee6a
4bb50aeae4d1c26b95734ce840ff74751a700e11
F20110216_AABLPL manak_j_Page_039.tif
c4fe6cf0603a120c35cc47b257c5f152
edeff09672ffa26698d5de34dce0bc7619bc72eb
36959 F20110216_AABMMF manak_j_Page_199.QC.jpg
85ea99e3509bccaadb68845525ce08b3
22b7158c25daba5ded7e5c5adcde733c73cc6a9b
113173 F20110216_AABLCB manak_j_Page_221.jpg
90245c8f4293c24288c292f8487d1f6e
ff0f19f1012870217c6f100ce306e709c9fef8b0
192 F20110216_AABMZQ manak_j_Page_005.txt
55740f80fd95b42ab4f5d797967aa734
93e9aa12b07567daf243eb707e77797c728b6fda
27431 F20110216_AABLPM manak_j_Page_148.QC.jpg
251a013f7e6c28536eadbf18fdb3c3df
8586531fea6b0d1a079dcadf8a83ad9b7997433e
1051901 F20110216_AABMMG manak_j_Page_241.jp2
d2cc1c8a433433b81affd930d7faa6eb
31121105894e49d643931a9140437760eb5c1659
55707 F20110216_AABLCC manak_j_Page_076.pro
a114319d4408cb25ca4d8f299a1ff25c
4837168f82128fd450a0a9ad1bcf956a63689c03
4051 F20110216_AABMZR manak_j_Page_006.txt
76ec1fe5d0b538d169f6aaa8ec5ecb62
c6bf7d0030a710c2559aee8d4687d9769b17ea17
7728 F20110216_AABLPN manak_j_Page_119thm.jpg
d864621993b07697faf660fcd6338d02
471874132903203c78a2aeb7500d62bb04c644ab
17563 F20110216_AABMMH manak_j_Page_003.jp2
137298d36cf1770e996b00acfe7c467e
a69e315cd1480de96b623aec90537eb8904b41bb
105524 F20110216_AABNJA manak_j_Page_099.jpg
a41775832ef9a3723c92b83ac9452622
957f72ed91db36c2cff2e5f226a8714a1acfcfd3
F20110216_AABLCD manak_j_Page_094.txt
0c72607d38186a7874fc1ab97fe99726
53910c294126431f44418d84820b2bd888691e3a
2790 F20110216_AABMZS manak_j_Page_008.txt
ffefa9c754d8b1058a69016c51e7ed75
b9c6757aec103c66771669c6b2d911c23b734a03
1051915 F20110216_AABLPO manak_j_Page_206.jp2
5cd700f8cb51f5f0fe5c727556f92d37
ad07851eca14139c49aa1e7fe60e235843e887ab
F20110216_AABMMI manak_j_Page_193.tif
1bd45eb02bc8b5d2280810586d24d9aa
8914ad4a651ec2b1b42143c69f0d8cce8eee9749
36086 F20110216_AABNJB manak_j_Page_101.QC.jpg
761096d2c75fbf304576b6600676f1d4
ade92afe7575f1aad26a145eaf9b8ad25b7002b4
233 F20110216_AABMZT manak_j_Page_011.txt
99ffe3a77b587a771da26ebbc97b9958
b645d9448f403f9ff94edbf5cc7faf1936e7e380
37640 F20110216_AABLPP manak_j_Page_023.QC.jpg
d0e503386d5e96b263f42e9b1adcfb0d
e3bca3836ce869c8bfc8399ff9c16409870f9533
F20110216_AABMMJ manak_j_Page_147.jp2
0c2a6fd2c7895f558590d320725df95e
f5cc2c72fe28cb4816b7bba24c64037524d256b5
36880 F20110216_AABNJC manak_j_Page_102.QC.jpg
e7a8198f86c7f43087954e325af34876
9774b2d86e7255fdce4024c0bcb8bcfd24f863b6
55404 F20110216_AABLCE manak_j_Page_070.pro
fd68b7f84b23359d0df086817f810a6b
9665cca863f857b7a88410b7bf1ffc14b746d568
2021 F20110216_AABMZU manak_j_Page_012.txt
aeb3c278dd9ed98f3ce1a15a7a1a044d
821b4672d0d8494ed501d81235a0219f764c2694
1051928 F20110216_AABLPQ manak_j_Page_167.jp2
859d6c4f2d0fe52858f167d07f52fa8f
70c2e968c1e072b174c0df9e5d28b02e7969b8e0
2229 F20110216_AABMMK manak_j_Page_076.txt
c7dd2e41a65e396ac14552f971b62887
423b409085bf61e7c6eafb995da17018eb3edded
36001 F20110216_AABNJD manak_j_Page_103.QC.jpg
5d1df7c0e745ffdbe397a49dbd7db36b
663abdb474652ced4daf28a023ec276fd243fdb4
F20110216_AABLCF manak_j_Page_168.jp2
a45be9ea4ea6b0b6617d9bd04561a31d
2d157ed4c5564a26d942cffbd40105bc710b8973
2144 F20110216_AABMZV manak_j_Page_015.txt
875c2763c97dc1ae0b0dbeca81d8e705
a11fc552f761446a86e053a73f3068909c4fba73
1051967 F20110216_AABMML manak_j_Page_085.jp2
3ffa5fec1957a69ab34e36b1a56d4f36
3cd1ec0635acce2e4c6f30c28a86cacad838b67c
115844 F20110216_AABNJE manak_j_Page_104.jpg
eb10569b87e6af1b4d1a4855e8bb5f0d
01989f35390033960dc73769e541e9d62bc98a81
55338 F20110216_AABLCG manak_j_Page_059.pro
98b65b3861fbe5a0580c8e1882fe58e9
20e32839a2333c1116d711e908df47f8aabf5f0d
F20110216_AABMZW manak_j_Page_017.txt
180b010961bdda5a04e91aece7088d6e
ded5a60a6d7ac3eed6f3e19d78f14def3dc58363
33763 F20110216_AABLPR manak_j_Page_228.QC.jpg
dbfda57aace5c42616d685f3cdc44a40
1ccd24ea77bc91cfc3b7df7749b9040bf1ad815a
52556 F20110216_AABMMM manak_j_Page_196.pro
0feaf28d0404d2f237ed5f6e83d30472
76959ead7d1b972f5a83fa2caf1316d2f0863506
38596 F20110216_AABNJF manak_j_Page_104.QC.jpg
0b14cba9caf4f351df16d42d0875db18
6c569fb9bed434fd3ce38dccb2bac96734b992dd
F20110216_AABLCH manak_j_Page_027.tif
23b0435cb6012fd722085fbb7ad59e32
401427ba8133f0d5e52982e9dca46be729e8d230
2093 F20110216_AABMZX manak_j_Page_020.txt
c0dd70f62476411bced283df143d6e3f
8cc26e6c11ebc67e1bf799eca21d0e4053299556
2340 F20110216_AABLPS manak_j_Page_220.txt
6493670df3ff0c985e2e92a3f7de92fc
7f4f7a72a2d15d8b6a996fa85e6b008424c63014
36633 F20110216_AABNJG manak_j_Page_105.QC.jpg
04d2d734a7de5f92ddc3f75276cf731e
05da3e169dc0ad046171895065c518e39a305242
F20110216_AABLCI manak_j_Page_125.tif
a0854a5adebb578a04af4e5386e60847
1c678c9cb4d8bfe3332297f9776534d33cc5214a
F20110216_AABMZY manak_j_Page_021.txt
d9359c3420df9b2972e858631af2e929
c639ee1a434f0694a85083e88a391c3e29dac51a
55253 F20110216_AABLPT manak_j_Page_239.pro
e618eaba9362a78904b221761ba9a95f
fe7289f67da5aab9b6bb230d218ca6d5ddc6411e
36992 F20110216_AABNJH manak_j_Page_106.QC.jpg
a289e8dce84d272b118fbcfa8a1f02a6
ed47ad4e67167d864ce50a1e200ea26425fd692f
128705 F20110216_AABLCJ manak_j_Page_182.jpg
1fe25653bcc1c3832be8486370a12d5c
51df3b4d4eafa8be012e292c0a6da67c0b070ed5
F20110216_AABMZZ manak_j_Page_031.txt
5f5f40528482f9ca1d52b8c35502184c
8255a5a21b770a0ea5b4da8f43ebce9822e6bd3f
1051917 F20110216_AABLPU manak_j_Page_073.jp2
9df21de7f047dcdd1ada693f289789af
66c051882c5c566443390a741ead81e485c00c20
F20110216_AABMMN manak_j_Page_118.jp2
f0aca6d318286629668a76b4f1b8f014
9cf43e3b708e2f8c79a1a8504028a9e2c1da663d
14756 F20110216_AABNJI manak_j_Page_107.QC.jpg
5cbde0120edd3657ea59f8712750c573
950c67f5fb5ab7f86a8cb1aed5638493307819ca
F20110216_AABLCK manak_j_Page_201.tif
909f7b4059ab4f188e609d70cd1340f7
c610ed1ce9c76b24aedb03f33836b12b1fe0cf60
56195 F20110216_AABLPV manak_j_Page_091.pro
ed80f268b8dbbb1c2b57ce5f7f07f596
cf5f0c8377c963edc31ae24e52fc1c59251db1ed
F20110216_AABMMO manak_j_Page_195.tif
f42c368126dbfe2b30d72c58aa65c241
b9632958e8207a142b8d394532db448040d831b3
F20110216_AABLCL manak_j_Page_068.txt
43c82890e9c65c4070fc840cacf1b19a
e737b977e1641476483be49d5bc108f809e97ca5
8972 F20110216_AABLPW manak_j_Page_202thm.jpg
80ce52e5f18775f88e220fc9a422e2b4
edb68ea5aaf829b1461be1fc50edde9ef5b72810
1051896 F20110216_AABMMP manak_j_Page_237.jp2
8ec15caf9626ebbdba8864b9bd3a3389
5ac2857ec61ab9c69ca93c718c1f7bbb0ec74fac
98796 F20110216_AABNJJ manak_j_Page_108.jpg
303e961b2bef39e95468471b2754ce82
1b2b80d021277f335d1f7eb091d02cbee1104010
34876 F20110216_AABLCM manak_j_Page_215.QC.jpg
ebe912f5fedc5a259223d2a48d029768
29316f7019b6d6e52011d6c0547fa10867042898
F20110216_AABLPX manak_j_Page_227.tif
1075b2fe865c56fb4ea3b87c0e703c3c
1836229d3bc755cf4bf9aca3df1d7bb2cbf818c9
2070 F20110216_AABMMQ manak_j_Page_080.txt
4fb0eb68f95a43a47bd857bdefc86415
a27b89520b492f96a216da0a31bd4b3c2896449b
32140 F20110216_AABNJK manak_j_Page_108.QC.jpg
9037fef054e8d4444d2a9b4610ad032b
051564d8945b39f9e07c0442a0bc7073d9483347
110524 F20110216_AABLCN manak_j_Page_033.jpg
1107c5a437a03800ddd9972907a243cb
0dedf1b6203cd306f5148be5ee229281190ed67a
F20110216_AABLPY manak_j_Page_228.tif
8f2844c43107b468a4b7f53fc6092cd8
018c4de67a5875d06453ad5519035f9c7355b91e
F20110216_AABMMR manak_j_Page_021.jp2
2ae7be19fdac773f5b7aec9090b28a79
0a189f5c5bf5fa249fc30e3cb076d02d38bf7daa
119033 F20110216_AABNJL manak_j_Page_109.jpg
f1797cd58788b11c21657a0aaf9c2734
b21c71c501346f5a633116adfed47d50147cb6cd
32910 F20110216_AABLCO manak_j_Page_247.QC.jpg
ef3e08b142fa89ce2006b7c54c340ee6
96ee3730cfd4544fb2bd1748b31bf4dc2508305b
F20110216_AABLPZ manak_j_Page_211.txt
77f7705d207576fa39f70aec1d911451
5ee9bdcbd0d3ca754642e7817fa0b6b29b324406
55306 F20110216_AABMMS manak_j_Page_266.pro
a53a333a954be29f01a7b8b6e91a38f7
825148fbe3ec735c83147e304a47596bc1b14842
34538 F20110216_AABNJM manak_j_Page_110.QC.jpg
1343b06540558999f527838e69239fb0
bfb6d2bae15bfb438337bc6bd44166ec07e72faa
101309 F20110216_AABLCP manak_j_Page_128.jpg
9716a18470e98e366be69aa13a56df2e
a66dcbf9c30186aa9c767ec265d04be8acf4826f
54923 F20110216_AABMMT manak_j_Page_133.pro
26c7149262ca9e3947d43f78fba4ae55
f22b6e1a9a230880e8ab8cb9659664602ec95321
109706 F20110216_AABNJN manak_j_Page_116.jpg
b421a42eb2a12a262b7bace346ca7caa
df1362a296ec90e54e0aa4e040761beb009f4447
F20110216_AABLCQ manak_j_Page_091.jp2
bb1b0fb7a386573d11cae7edc64938a3
8b6623f8ccdd829b956008a8f1c9f36795415032
38049 F20110216_AABMMU manak_j_Page_049.QC.jpg
9dcbf4687a7c6810d12e0b9330d7205d
38b0a279a996210d5e474c967355d2dcc3c6607d
110522 F20110216_AABNJO manak_j_Page_121.jpg
67e370d4cb3c936914db501b77bc96a1
1eeb69535ad567a89fa0ec1ba423cc2987dbea2a
F20110216_AABLCR manak_j_Page_050.tif
470217eea7d03e6efbc2a42922a92edd
48ca8726522e941c6979cc682b308e8dbcacd73f
55313 F20110216_AABMMV manak_j_Page_103.pro
9453385c6d372cfef6cdd82743041cac
53b51c076180a26a924bc4a273edefd25d7073bd
32758 F20110216_AABNJP manak_j_Page_121.QC.jpg
13cf7b5770150cfd476d40e02ddc1f1f
0489ccbbb410122dea2284adac5961a266821b6a
104495 F20110216_AABLCS manak_j_Page_165.jpg
d659b0f93a535ac6dd6dc76bf76de289
3dd730e3efd76895e036d1e01d5ed3ded47b2ce3
F20110216_AABMMW manak_j_Page_124.tif
dcb754c6d9e0334ae30fb6e3730b52c5
6b94edd8f9f129e42f26bf4164b9aeb562a86ca4
106362 F20110216_AABNJQ manak_j_Page_124.jpg
f68fdbefde1e1c449383630b0d8cff3a
890f4d71def1ba74a89659ec75246f8a92d6d3ab
9122 F20110216_AABLCT manak_j_Page_105thm.jpg
ab04e7f880b9e12453a83de1f5a8c1d0
6b064e618ad744bc020530b1465144810723ea92
93359 F20110216_AABMMX manak_j_Page_122.jpg
46d53dd341da893c3c4f5a21c1d21a41
d6851d7c314b39f6afc425b00f718ec1052ac5a2
34094 F20110216_AABNJR manak_j_Page_124.QC.jpg
b61076340d6d6d8108e5239e0c33c2c4
7e63a2cbe3ac7e3afa44cc4cabb7f72fe3c4b77f
F20110216_AABLCU manak_j_Page_189.txt
8b23e08bf7e417a7177f8cf63c076a4a
90f67d0137e0a6d413ff27ef5ea06ddd790e2cbb
F20110216_AABMMY manak_j_Page_001.tif
dc1ac65f6147b7ce6024553869558a05
75693f76d8bc4738b850917f25ff8d9ce1b0f95f
116319 F20110216_AABNJS manak_j_Page_125.jpg
4420d189675fd6e4070813ff3666f703
73dfc2767e728bb1904fd61746989f54c8a5276d
37740 F20110216_AABLCV manak_j_Page_155.QC.jpg
b4e434de8180532bc4ae5f8d396a1854
0b3601d6f07eafe290dbd8fa891a46a80089f173
114038 F20110216_AABMMZ manak_j_Page_231.jpg
0cfbbd18ec5ef33f6d3af695d484eb7e
ac370a83b962d56650168138af4b5464689496e0
34462 F20110216_AABNJT manak_j_Page_125.QC.jpg
1bbad4585c309d6a9f838b3eae05501b
0facd9c741633fa5e35dada2cbe805bb168f243e
37083 F20110216_AABLCW manak_j_Page_061.QC.jpg
8044ffc5d0af4902526ec5088773af88
589205ede1d8e66c645b566a895e1d01a5b223c0
110651 F20110216_AABNJU manak_j_Page_126.jpg
c483aabcca63e7d5c950196e50c8532e
712399e237c2c6348af0e1f94d42e7acf03b6efb
F20110216_AABLCX manak_j_Page_089.tif
b024024d32f3e63d4432542e81db8b09
41c37f2be1a76064cbcddd4ccb19033c02a53d9f
1051959 F20110216_AABLVA manak_j_Page_259.jp2
b7fb11dfdd46120c0cac6fe4010e1d16
649a789d378e0d82f9b896af162b9a4eca65919a
84785 F20110216_AABNJV manak_j_Page_127.jpg
62608d69fc019d65fca671759082df50
7852c82a21a075ad220e4d30590799dc316e49f1
8122 F20110216_AABLCY manak_j_Page_248thm.jpg
ab20be89a4c83fad59c9634cf5ffa4d6
5c3b879305fd73f351566bdc2029782bfccc5594
F20110216_AABLVB manak_j_Page_060.tif
e1d3173e2889c0c0e2e074b2f9568e91
9a6d4a7b3e122d3c9699a2671339569436456e9d
136312 F20110216_AABNJW manak_j_Page_129.jpg
2eef332062e9a307d5a20b854b88b119
a32a61042bc1269a4b9a75cd3644ef499e909135
36342 F20110216_AABLCZ manak_j_Page_041.QC.jpg
1434f2571a09f25fb02066b1e3094034
30b5811d8adbd287f21ec795962933383bc86826
F20110216_AABLVC manak_j_Page_043.tif
6b6184e0d3dfc4d97b0283943998fffc
5ac2fd793bc3e50770547c6dd202e4c38dc21cf7
124085 F20110216_AABNJX manak_j_Page_131.jpg
a78fb1b9b7411064a427400862302133
716f9d1335b0973bd8a0e1311919ef320aab6f86
F20110216_AABLVD manak_j_Page_225.tif
33437c06a7d8c3fbe6ccc5d581b4d5e7
414c37b779c313f98f982392b5b17fa91ba627ac
37577 F20110216_AABNJY manak_j_Page_132.QC.jpg
869ff7b1610bd84a71de18a080bb2427
d2753d726174004fe71501401212c727addf4383
F20110216_AABLVE manak_j_Page_239thm.jpg
908508f0a64efe0400776742fb060876
99102aa84b9438d44413490dfec8a0e6ff7493d4
104945 F20110216_AABNJZ manak_j_Page_135.jpg
62caf7ad96deb1aaa3e76dbbdce7b674
847ab1fa659046f2f549f30b5cbaa3b2bd5a6bd4
9068 F20110216_AABLVF manak_j_Page_033thm.jpg
4abc5d69b532ecdd5cf113692d1a5f95
77a9c19176bce1036acbb940f9634e7e3d80d900
113229 F20110216_AABLVG manak_j_Page_208.jpg
1c04844fc90346e54f62ab4c688c489e
bc3ad8642c8283333af0f61c0b2cf60149358280
3610 F20110216_AABLVH manak_j_Page_107thm.jpg
eb6f05ea016425c843a0d0bc33045918
866958334b6a6d5134fec3e930343653983af7d8
F20110216_AABMSA manak_j_Page_176.tif
e34a27f45c11acd93f1b69ca6c81ea2b
4ae6029e6ad5e49d1340d12655dc37f0cb8a8849
48957 F20110216_AABLVI manak_j_Page_108.pro
1adac5653353776c9d14d818a66256b8
c46f7a81b685987a7b794ba1a2081089da9ad750
9192 F20110216_AABMSB manak_j_Page_114thm.jpg
f6a2f1998934b1e664ad01878bbd2592
30e88df3b7c0403de21e29559fa7c62b14a2209d
8912 F20110216_AABLVJ manak_j_Page_242thm.jpg
a2f61ac67ecbeadf644735beeb27838c
99cd4ae0bac7296eb2b91e917c27eaaa62d0e0cc
55852 F20110216_AABMSC manak_j_Page_033.pro
0dcebaaf5e62a7ca6781e61142a0a635
f2ef1bc6ef9fe24b5f2b4a43ed80644c39b95ab6
F20110216_AABLVK manak_j_Page_099.jp2
71720a079a9b18b78643337e1087f114
4eddd46dc7f963a358443e2a0178e51b6e441fcf
F20110216_AABMSD manak_j_Page_037thm.jpg
bd70da3feabd54bc9c2501032ca22c47
737e928008b6f0e9a9d408f5c0b890a579de4656
9138 F20110216_AABLIA manak_j_Page_132thm.jpg
aeeebd0610691bb1e3814b2156e64c17
f7268a60d444efca0af5fd1923fc225c6a3bb92f
F20110216_AABLVL manak_j_Page_186.tif
e1f6da5275af37711d59bc104c948cfa
dbbfcef270944bf070800b7f8df2a55385f6ccfa
F20110216_AABMSE manak_j_Page_264.tif
fdba9b31ce469077e49b0103b0aede0b
09ee7d274bcee63e387a7efccab575623a6f8ca9
59134 F20110216_AABLIB manak_j_Page_013.jpg
b69615502dd5db55cdfa52048c4310e0
ff6fb1cd940f20995bcbdc34e17b8deee40eaff5
2213 F20110216_AABLVM manak_j_Page_106.txt
242b0673a21c99becb812c2d040efba0
bdf4664927f2eec2d1b4389c7185135cad60cc2a
40923 F20110216_AABMSF manak_j_Page_205.QC.jpg
e8d2cc6097c48625422b17673ede35d4
6f74b3aa53e272219235e4941f8ca488a6523516
37483 F20110216_AABLIC manak_j_Page_145.QC.jpg
fd33fb4591b160d0b88af73d27a6ac04
8cf945ab7f1c15e3f1a00c79ecec1132272ed7f7
2247 F20110216_AABLVN manak_j_Page_038.txt
a3a0b16a81bd4626a2d4e79351696aaa
64fa5e14af8697e311e78d34ff3f9e869e6840be
F20110216_AABMSG manak_j_Page_070.jp2
b2f530830cb465d2649559cc07ff7fdb
93fe78694e46f3d394b7f444f6ffa27913520e6e
F20110216_AABNPA manak_j_Page_143.jp2
2846d9f4eca10cdf5a8439e94c9a4900
a9b92d9a49d7427acf49c49fb5f6d54334061591
F20110216_AABLID manak_j_Page_188.tif
e6e9e638602b174fdab1d3cf1e9ac7c4
f90eb5acf6b046fb40bbd35b806e35a30a35b538
F20110216_AABLVO manak_j_Page_070.tif
e4b247f9709f059f14e7964aea758073
b268e397235de91df33dcfdaf6fb51ae0a1f6cc1
F20110216_AABMSH manak_j_Page_162.jp2
cb12380eec65c181fa076f1cf544dbbc
4d8ceb20e78772b50c92ac4527242f1b72147adb
1051964 F20110216_AABNPB manak_j_Page_145.jp2
ba39821ce0a1253d30ea1b4d37a165be
d86e71be237cb79b0e1b629af4f6962872d2e134
2056 F20110216_AABLIE manak_j_Page_117.txt
14837d318e2c71f9ed2b3af33cb74bd6
769080567a45fe63804d8bc778cb0c2e44121971
56616 F20110216_AABLVP manak_j_Page_037.pro
1be7f9276f8dbc9cc75d17f3ceedb115
c7501e811b7a243736bdad242ca89556ceae0b3c
F20110216_AABMSI manak_j_Page_087.txt
a4b0da3180da6c09013da4cce8894213
0f2c5d2b2fab75293063767e73c30cd69e3ba091
F20110216_AABNPC manak_j_Page_148.jp2
94bed8912d4f9fb5a644b46759131fbc
44e814d46bb87fb69d1f624901817f1b732424ce
35260 F20110216_AABLIF manak_j_Page_116.QC.jpg
f6720e5c57db7b3aa1949c40052a8065
439d825155a856c1465e1a661f62f946f5e0ad1a
1881 F20110216_AABLVQ manak_j_Page_254.txt
709d16ace5c41fbafe9811561c1d9c5d
0317ecfb78ff5de7530384d98e269896d3a47a69
2889 F20110216_AABMSJ manak_j_Page_198.txt
5da7268edffc1d6c93906a540933e9af
dc974616ca54834fb40f07653765dca2b1cdd5f8
F20110216_AABNPD manak_j_Page_159.jp2
a2999b67bbb632e702e21e008e512a8d
3b94aa011f891be96cf546b91b09f51152e85d2b
9023 F20110216_AABLIG manak_j_Page_263thm.jpg
c9df72a8cb9e13a990e03b613c6d9ac6
b384a4df829ebe73e5e2c0fec256551504d948ac
54939 F20110216_AABLVR manak_j_Page_193.pro
7426b77985777d49520c05a5f1675962
e6575aa0f955f3f5eb0e418bbed90a0473d2be56
7512 F20110216_AABMSK manak_j_Page_122thm.jpg
fd75d2be4e3e1809ef4a1dd7ffc948a0
034ca90932fceb503f070ca7dddda5976fa310c4
134506 F20110216_AABNPE manak_j_Page_160.jp2
f5227232241ea62a895d0229cf43589e
4bcd11ce2fb6ee16fd98201e0eeea82d1b068cfc
2264 F20110216_AABLIH manak_j_Page_090.txt
913253a30c1285dda0f1626a19000193
6d3bced5309f1542a2f605808f0ca347df63af5b
51509 F20110216_AABMFA manak_j_Page_068.pro
6ac504e20b8ca6a11f2343c4a867c09f
43c40190cbc7c9ccd7b5351d033e4b8244d26b9d
9304 F20110216_AABLVS manak_j_Page_129thm.jpg
4ad2a69e742fa6ad2a8ed891420b55d7
c646bbedd69dccdda794ff581940be407c13053a
55678 F20110216_AABMSL manak_j_Page_241.pro
d8116ae5f01f4dc6b42426c9714226de
5429f9841c8073f4560dd06cbb0db670390ddb2d
F20110216_AABNPF manak_j_Page_161.jp2
a17f1c5a7c0e6fb540b2434e8426f89b
b7801db60db8377fddbedc0d24877f34a7e79b74
F20110216_AABLII manak_j_Page_146.jp2
ed6322eabbbb169598b28cee637232f3
709f8e21f8d537baa25ff69585dd609cd3511120
F20110216_AABMFB manak_j_Page_132.tif
20b7447a3d933032cdd1116b30974c25
d0c5d378423687853756d779369ab2b3864ed1fd
923 F20110216_AABLVT manak_j_Page_009.txt
be94bc0c50bd9a62ecd4ef57445387bb
e642d1ee2e692890f29c3ea5bb845d088b48c715
3343 F20110216_AABMSM manak_j_Page_249thm.jpg
4f6d96bee9249893e5497ef6efca3437
abad8dfd93a08f2c9174bc6da370ae03a61a799e
F20110216_AABNPG manak_j_Page_163.jp2
a66f54e21059026d2e6b11c5c5363c9f
aac5084d524d99a2bea95c689ac83123dda5b456
1051940 F20110216_AABLIJ manak_j_Page_087.jp2
60121063696452980bbf699dd25fd29b
c03675b44b999f8858ab35be5c6dbcd670417b9f
36348 F20110216_AABMFC manak_j_Page_189.QC.jpg
cc64804b7ee0e25dec1aa12bc0ce2c8a
b9d51f62f5ecadd4718654fa7289d70334c2da43
9212 F20110216_AABLVU manak_j_Page_220thm.jpg
34ce081a68b1b5528eed69de621b7c89
7bea0b176750129830e903fbdb1d55a4abc31891
F20110216_AABMSN manak_j_Page_124.txt
d40d5f58ca500d0375715ca57110633a
99fc9af105555cae1c29fe56470f858de0340d81
F20110216_AABNPH manak_j_Page_164.jp2
5bfd6af29d8a0fe41e5192574f4a8db0
af7fe9f55a14182958cba42bf473d84d3c6bae93
1016672 F20110216_AABMFD manak_j_Page_130.jp2
aff8036feefd996e6867dce608682467
0fe43a1e89317a8b1ccbfc2e6e8f3c66363ce9b9
F20110216_AABLVV manak_j_Page_085thm.jpg
593e1207c7c629d7b16efcea59263988
3d0832571028a980fdc9e62be6ab876e7a50720b
33377 F20110216_AABMSO manak_j_Page_196.QC.jpg
f29602edda847ea380a8f719a8cb1895
296cd4a76deaf95b2fe8a5d89f0b676688d8a51b
F20110216_AABNPI manak_j_Page_165.jp2
e96b8942bfb510567e4b4ec577837d6b
be72b6fea11c01166a0795df947afd85670b4869
98257 F20110216_AABLIK manak_j_Page_012.jpg
ac55da9aa4ec9d8bceefe4faef857c5b
92c0a319d372b6fd54b9232c7ab415e94f6e68ed
F20110216_AABMFE manak_j_Page_087.tif
17fcb95db02df8c4404aff35b5d7c518
3f3c505204ace7e30630cb6d6e980d8f665dfc96
40511 F20110216_AABLVW manak_j_Page_172.QC.jpg
9d1ddd61f48bda6811156403defd5593
a6902f5fac4aac0ef1458fa2f1a26d5ba07f3a13
30375 F20110216_AABMSP manak_j_Page_163.QC.jpg
bdc76dc9dc8137b0c737997a07d1b376
15c75e0f9149cb93a08194540329c1a30e09cd78
F20110216_AABNPJ manak_j_Page_174.jp2
12835e4242bd14ba3157007a539f3594
2f436e3e8d3de4bbae846fd0439a1a6c8f5a7c22
8467 F20110216_AABLIL manak_j_Page_099thm.jpg
3721a22c9e17d93a3d0cbb67c0817499
4776c0c4caf77169e12fe3cc1c1f0d9cccb38b17
119169 F20110216_AABMFF manak_j_Page_220.jpg
f5bcb3c42d2bda78b2c0efb408c572c7
33e573ffef65d82789fb69b2b69f05b20b23aeab
36989 F20110216_AABMSQ manak_j_Page_168.QC.jpg
ebaa24dbf7ea1adf5b000e79ec9ca9cd
604c6e4fb53b8e8cb34b074e29800353181ad5a9
F20110216_AABNPK manak_j_Page_179.jp2
53cfa04a4875cecf4acee16e3cf9081f
504648e3227b055d092bea7c040805cd72f52f4e
8170 F20110216_AABLIM manak_j_Page_201thm.jpg
1c035409c059c7d4eeaa3b0f50920b37
2e3ac5ea318fdfc4610deb901a7c66e3046971ac
9126 F20110216_AABLVX manak_j_Page_030thm.jpg
79049c040e3b0e7ed4dd7d7d451ad2fd
ecaf58214a47ae882d00ee9d3ca274d9855ab98a
F20110216_AABMSR manak_j_Page_199.tif
27fe52cef651a448ba82afce4112b280
d1fc2a182963495ce9046cd0c6954d29b133ad19
1051934 F20110216_AABNPL manak_j_Page_181.jp2
0ebf8ba09b1fabb1db473cfecd1681c5
fcf2ecd6cde3ad1bd5c643984b5402498add9be0
2197 F20110216_AABLIN manak_j_Page_240.txt
c8796d3343725f83a5b2ca184812230f
d6b6b3f8cb8aed3626f5d38b6433c586cbf804de
F20110216_AABMFG manak_j_Page_134.jp2
b6a01341cefa13923d8a5df3abecb354
5d0d7cfe485c79786b2da9d3938426148aea2884
34907 F20110216_AABLVY manak_j_Page_109.QC.jpg
173da2f0132a4d1f1e691987e3349b90
8de8aca8271c1e4e552703ffd07931ac3f4d85a3
F20110216_AABNCA manak_j_Page_194.txt
3faabf458fb0eda3dfa328c8c847aa64
3c44d76836e4269bbf204940a9773442b3c70bdc
1976 F20110216_AABMSS manak_j_Page_169.txt
39a958df32ba1bcaa7e073ea96faa80b
5aa8b60f19a60d6c7469c6ff47d3e9bf41430349
1051927 F20110216_AABNPM manak_j_Page_183.jp2
b78da310ceed82bf4316317e3ca45561
068ddb50729ab424a519f830c27fa257adf9ebda
7955 F20110216_AABLIO manak_j_Page_218thm.jpg
b5aab44575f453c981808305cd828d6b
2d5bc34eff5b3694c8ac859ac2f0336bd2bffc93
F20110216_AABMFH manak_j_Page_146thm.jpg
0c04c932152945ad9e9938442122931e
10e39d63cf0f1bed36a84989fadc37ffce5ccc8d
9383 F20110216_AABLVZ manak_j_Page_183thm.jpg
f68b8ee4abc660f9462ad22f8bde39e3
a3da03f2662e8f6714a2043bec928b1bb82a0e3b
F20110216_AABNCB manak_j_Page_195.txt
1688bdc7cca51ab7386c87222c6ede1b
19b0332db5f4889be270bf738a415f587e463899
F20110216_AABNPN manak_j_Page_184.jp2
7039afecd238cb045e44fab72cf0c8f5
1b195a915cf926cb2761448c7a4eedc0be0c68a8
36416 F20110216_AABLIP manak_j_Page_151.QC.jpg
d5434ed799cad6aad57513eaf63005f5
d08e64545edfff986e7e67a951a833e8231c329d
2214 F20110216_AABMFI manak_j_Page_092.txt
df89fa6c2e8b97afc5251c6dcba96e7e
e35de621d4c0285272958933895555d3e4d2767b
37471 F20110216_AABMST manak_j_Page_190.QC.jpg
04e4cb3bba61227974aa42c86fc52200
957ff2509025201000a49078f506f8d1dc3102f8
F20110216_AABNPO manak_j_Page_191.jp2
cc1d886ed5d44e0d1bde58075d3438be
795ab19922418b0d7fd5a6820cf716389cfefe13
F20110216_AABLIQ manak_j_Page_032.tif
9cedc0a73f8b98560dc28692f15bc534
7c712567c5629f58dd75e6c5f9c9bc344166a736
48702 F20110216_AABMFJ manak_j_Page_247.pro
dcb0ef83bb5a59012ff998de7d423377
2d967bfa70e267c1c125c0419e1915243a815d4a
1452 F20110216_AABNCC manak_j_Page_197.txt
e18a4f81021fe097bafb863267224dc2
3e24db032b47955ddab68a317e07e5ca521667ed
113196 F20110216_AABMSU manak_j_Page_183.jpg
40ce8e781be930a11b6f7b8dfa586205
9514346522b02f69d88df61c38653ab63faf9314
35998 F20110216_AABLIR manak_j_Page_202.QC.jpg
eab289deccb45768982e751f7d9f39ce
eeb94d65db29a45ea42d72493e820f616a9eb041
F20110216_AABMFK manak_j_Page_094.jp2
8217178ace8b16e3147b0bf2bf5c7b25
a8012958b88ece54eb479ca29218ac3876380d0b
1732 F20110216_AABNCD manak_j_Page_200.txt
c0b19b2e870320d13e72a9e1b41916d1
f03cc4c3a9574fbffd64c83be959d7ae66195523
F20110216_AABMSV manak_j_Page_239.jp2
d97023b4902c5df9e3679e567a5c7067
64c641d0a6feaaebfe7c311d46da43e085897798
837761 F20110216_AABNPP manak_j_Page_197.jp2
1fb3f342fd020670751753e24ab511aa
27b64111d4ca4b99d0f030aa8f45e0b7040c2efa
F20110216_AABLIS manak_j_Page_101.txt
07ce6fa957c165d4c3fabf6cceaa3539
ecea9ea6af85b2ef27b476016a65880d989a9fdd
109416 F20110216_AABMFL manak_j_Page_133.jpg
887e22f60d117778d34491c74e1d9cda
0c1d5dcfc808512fe7d1f0c8aed26f0b68dd3b97
2168 F20110216_AABNCE manak_j_Page_203.txt
426712c4ef7c1ddc8adfaeb856702649
7ede18d2e73a054bc388228293755fee8518b653
36826 F20110216_AABMSW manak_j_Page_123.QC.jpg
b44bec9ea030ac27ac785cd12e6687ee
3a05c17b961b0c717c6e19503def61ee41c16ead
F20110216_AABNPQ manak_j_Page_200.jp2
ce2a71715a3f915037153f8242b93173
182c95b3b13d87bbc9295e19556de73f3242e114
F20110216_AABLIT manak_j_Page_042.tif
c1d7b03d248580bedebd944bae01b440
812f47b0709d52d9de63c4309fb74345b44b2a71
112701 F20110216_AABMFM manak_j_Page_199.jpg
34636d8906bd4501bd4b9bf1bcce0324
4c5ec19eda1c6ef62f46f7a7aa73b94806162935
2252 F20110216_AABNCF manak_j_Page_206.txt
81f7501880c30fe857f04bc878475de5
18b8f1bc294995d1017a6845494fb0793509ddfa
30385 F20110216_AABMSX manak_j_Page_095.QC.jpg
5d99773bcabf71b7025f8a47ec52654c
62541d611703dab5fd7c8b6b682a1796c4cfc1da
F20110216_AABNPR manak_j_Page_205.jp2
32c8e4fff8f4cd4cd5640b2891017e8c
9d60fd31e81a9ac87df448f58b7d0ed502382135
F20110216_AABLIU manak_j_Page_084.jp2
c00aeb4f07d2178284be1840a36c85c1
ebeea59a227835391139437280092ce56fb254b1
F20110216_AABMFN manak_j_Page_136.jp2
166ee6d0d14fdc80d3656d2663d17cc4
4d79a5498d3723144ccb2b39d09def761f54b982
2155 F20110216_AABNCG manak_j_Page_207.txt
362a8f0868f4febddddee4d8056f238b
8912628e50c773afa516b0326cb859fe4d5a77cc
35752 F20110216_AABMSY manak_j_Page_033.QC.jpg
f8e2d6619934ccea7721c7351c21cc26
4cf38ca326c97acba2d32480f54d3578fd72f864
1051932 F20110216_AABNPS manak_j_Page_209.jp2
cee30775e445fd07708cb8675fd254f5
7e3931a6dc86c0d6d1326713aedadd4dc32db4e9
2415 F20110216_AABLIV manak_j_Page_145.txt
7c8f52bac2cf727cae00521fe7ce3278
405b60fce4ae725f59bfc5732bb3b662d02d1643
34516 F20110216_AABMFO manak_j_Page_080.QC.jpg
855b81224c2875e468a195d57d1cc218
a706e055df746065488f558633b615e69cf6f28f
2052 F20110216_AABNCH manak_j_Page_209.txt
2ec02dafdd38086c5f347f8452455ca9
46d10f15078fe2bdef9d751160b3399881ce50db
F20110216_AABMSZ manak_j_Page_104.jp2
495abaa1f83b5acfa974d90e606786a2
2411528f57a9ebd39b4f85ebb3ce91bedb401425
F20110216_AABNPT manak_j_Page_210.jp2
3da0d9564cbfb461039a8cd7efd09d12
b338c67249a5468331ac4a21a1432055bbc9decf
F20110216_AABMFP manak_j_Page_175.tif
a7aad58f19cdc6eca79cc762d6a7479c
237b1ff69be1064f4b5010196d95af9de9a8bb75
F20110216_AABNCI manak_j_Page_210.txt
b5d8af72c9f5f8037db8f17f1adfb0fc
1ba7b72b099ace3411394490e141e435e8f575f8
F20110216_AABLIW manak_j_Page_202.jp2
dd6ddfd49de41c63edb7d1f69e22afd1
ed6896021087298305cd31cd7cf4f01913a93c3d
F20110216_AABNPU manak_j_Page_212.jp2
b23cdb265c3f8c3c55082465c058b20c
d6c0f48dbb30d26cbed36cf36c4c30b3a2626d45
109124 F20110216_AABMFQ manak_j_Page_057.jpg
134052c661cb93f2f38b7a4b4899e68e
b7bd8c523e59388f996c783240762707944bc5df
F20110216_AABNCJ manak_j_Page_212.txt
89a70fb0ece86e0d49a298f89b851f64
5c3794fef5dfcf61f194ba2854ba28cd92840a8e
52381 F20110216_AABLIX manak_j_Page_156.pro
860ec51d21cf0a71370e3e3c0f030fe1
2f9e820709aeba2a030e138de682b35b68b1a9e1
990606 F20110216_AABNPV manak_j_Page_219.jp2
8fbc46d555c1db9ebbee11161244d63f
73d7999f10514243e374182bbdce73706579f642
53159 F20110216_AABMFR manak_j_Page_186.pro
a4cd9e866ba1db051a66744caed975a1
237d4713fcdb9642e04886a361e5990ddd25fee8
1412 F20110216_AABNCK manak_j_Page_214.txt
74a7f21123e434f4f87d1e74924f004e
d05bce22b5cacd693d28a6848441428d0e4c4cbe
21312 F20110216_AABLIY manak_j_Page_261.QC.jpg
521b5973ff395ea35ebbebe6b9e037c7
27faafe3cdbff82e6600401654380bab503ad2b1
F20110216_AABNPW manak_j_Page_221.jp2
0739b5377c7947422a80676c0243291c
5780fe773ce55ff65a7af98412cf3e00821090fb
36458 F20110216_AABMFS manak_j_Page_051.QC.jpg
82c4b3463136f85aed86fb198213b53d
d4197d315f2fd62008302a1585eb6f9c0b968d82
3484 F20110216_AABNCL manak_j_Page_216.txt
1f83ac751dfd0d0498b79eced31edc13
a9446e56d79b1c8e7f609d9e6ebce6ca7a173481
6305 F20110216_AABLIZ manak_j_Page_267thm.jpg
389e2d5f4d325aea4fb644040ef1bcbd
6dc961534c06cec659f16010bd68e6203e72135c
F20110216_AABNPX manak_j_Page_223.jp2
0a32b43cc80ec196da1464c284db0613
a33e13fc8558eeab99046dbbfa787feb4e3527db
35452 F20110216_AABMFT manak_j_Page_134.QC.jpg
596c540ad79cc2ca82242e4643a7f3b0
425a42cd7b7abc4204a10219753471860b843baa
F20110216_AABNCM manak_j_Page_223.txt
949fc382384f704ba6795f394792e7e5
763eacab9ded2c45a6fa57b3938a0fdb39de3c08
F20110216_AABNPY manak_j_Page_225.jp2
8df91dddb6c15c96e4bf00168715a38c
2c185d86732f36f65c32801c880d54404d7f6978
16309 F20110216_AABMFU manak_j_Page_253.QC.jpg
5cba2b4b19a9cdba1f57fedb75b005fc
7482ba29077f5c11c15e8ddb323a73c74c80bf99
3530 F20110216_AABNCN manak_j_Page_225.txt
7f28f88d9c7c59655a180e17e5e28b37
aa162b62ae8923f03035e6112bdbec7839a26b09
F20110216_AABNPZ manak_j_Page_227.jp2
634515d189799d09179cb0e72ad2950b
343b08acb999853ef191fc4b9ed49891fd69b83d
33541 F20110216_AABMFV manak_j_Page_128.QC.jpg
dc83d174c1e1e60a373ddcf9bcedf985
f10b6b4d76449e5712aea6ff8058960658502ca1
1776 F20110216_AABNCO manak_j_Page_226.txt
da16543b75423fffdda8555d366e2e56
23c718c87f4500bdea3337671960e2e408fe7947
F20110216_AABMFW manak_j_Page_036.jp2
a4b2e45df3d128e5b1ccb5b359c3e17c
ad2ea1a75a754ea1cebfa9c05c3e5dcd4af3c390
F20110216_AABNCP manak_j_Page_228.txt
55d54a640effc986bb1a105af11727b1
425202f53bc5134477b0c9020493a22496a1c978
F20110216_AABMFX manak_j_Page_061.tif
4938ac1ac0b45d4ce8a96bd9d02fec0f
07b4e30aff24789f062a5d69eed90ffd2d628634
F20110216_AABMYA manak_j_Page_159.tif
ea66703861f3c59d2bf4d5a4f531554c
24eaa85bce7061aef481d27a5d9fd07f671e5caa
F20110216_AABNCQ manak_j_Page_229.txt
6d60f915bf301a82c0c997a2fc776fd5
8aa0e33901bdde26ddb5ea64c1b7e44dc6841cae
5487 F20110216_AABMFY manak_j_Page_160.QC.jpg
71959e8a37eb9202bfa00a12c7947842
acfb252c0164e3f17b51ab5326b1a23a454cfe28
F20110216_AABMYB manak_j_Page_163.tif
3d08aa3b1d606851bc93e026730bddea
d2273d5b821d6ce90760ec1f1fb51fdf7b9bb883
F20110216_AABNCR manak_j_Page_232.txt
33fa63e68cf419a588699586e4c168f7
42e480db1e1a966e1621b15887b8b78e0c84ad09
103079 F20110216_AABMFZ manak_j_Page_048.jpg
0a0f8093a90519935d2abc16533c0f5d
fff8cfc7dbc80805fe05021b89d2f8816b844c12
F20110216_AABMYC manak_j_Page_164.tif
673a3a6adccae1c31dab3c2ad4d8edea
73a3831cc25e23875b50945b52fc420feb340cb2
F20110216_AABNCS manak_j_Page_236.txt
0fd73098dca7f9924296bb58bbea28d5
e361e17d9cc1e3b4e26278a6d88251ba9dce494f
F20110216_AABMYD manak_j_Page_167.tif
b0f4ae0c2b57f7c9f5aef5c2d48d6f60
a76a788f8f0baf5048a4e0b0568dcdbdac2ef7c4
F20110216_AABNCT manak_j_Page_238.txt
6dc8c2bb91b2c08bc98c1a10fe780266
4742692f895cce95f1944d0f21a32b3a03a60292
F20110216_AABMYE manak_j_Page_168.tif
2d998e49a7a46812ef7ab0a53ec46dd3
b54817ca42d9c36674d7cb96d4872447de08703b
2180 F20110216_AABNCU manak_j_Page_241.txt
eb25679d391b87c6fe78400164c51ee1
d47dac3559e09107c2f4b77eb5c20e1a4804005e
96991 F20110216_AABLOA manak_j_Page_218.jpg
8adbccffd21fb803f88ea860b93b6c92
f9fb024e65ecb64652823ce31c3e97cf041dab20
F20110216_AABMYF manak_j_Page_169.tif
ac366250cebd3017b8549ec075d2e681
16e7126219f53c73024f15c7376c87c2716d99c6
2011 F20110216_AABNCV manak_j_Page_245.txt
bfb51198818327168a235ddf123cfbe0
edfe746b489b9735df298df7b9c7ffd97b6fac2f
F20110216_AABLOB manak_j_Page_071.tif
1016d18f958ea62a66a44cb147b56141
d854d228aa2a00ee9bbc73d60d9d5ec707c93111
F20110216_AABMYG manak_j_Page_171.tif
95ea834c0219b6cd6d6e0b6a28065da9
8a4ed0240b273378ee0be56330383ee53a5c5792
F20110216_AABNCW manak_j_Page_246.txt
f1080a7915c1944ea7bb14714bc852a6
2ab951eac86f02692a2c20a24adc2f4bc428a067
F20110216_AABLOC manak_j_Page_150thm.jpg
6d04fd7ecb2c84cdf02e461711f65dc3
1b25ce7f7b23ce69aca4febd7788f430becffd8a
F20110216_AABMYH manak_j_Page_172.tif
c115b241c5fc8910abd5560f7ffb6ed0
2a8232abeabab29b3a475348ca59a54a782d9b25
764 F20110216_AABNCX manak_j_Page_249.txt
ebb3c8ab0e767fa620fd9ef4e26a471c
ecb815455e1f6c1c42181fdcd2ade6cf2eab734d
106962 F20110216_AABLOD manak_j_Page_040.jpg
201ec5b01f999c8a521f6eed2bbed8aa
1575fc3e70324c92aac906ac9119c085995f5102
F20110216_AABMYI manak_j_Page_174.tif
f749fc9887903b06bc68b250400ee9db
67db92aaf49b2c06879852ca65be0476b66f4510
392 F20110216_AABNCY manak_j_Page_252.txt
68c848157469f97ffad806f029849413
0e0c988c1015ef8260e6fe250fb54e872b470940
8271 F20110216_AABLOE manak_j_Page_032thm.jpg
a31fa3887f6a4e36ef48cf2881becca7
0c43fb798a04e43ebfb700c82a794b2bf326dd97
F20110216_AABMYJ manak_j_Page_177.tif
8769d08a608b36a72e1e45d44091f31d
75a411e8865320bad7e664c9b9761af5c1cbca4b
944 F20110216_AABNCZ manak_j_Page_253.txt
f82b0f6d3a3cf863f6ca72abd78aebdf
450e1044cb0b1d687c140b2cb8698b49386080b5
37816 F20110216_AABLOF manak_j_Page_097.QC.jpg
b2d46681ff5bf6b0676811386037fe1a
f852ef8f7ffc244510a5b11222fafaa2a5389ae9
F20110216_AABMYK manak_j_Page_185.tif
44334cb2916cefb55a8e432f33686526
8999000b8801b711700005a34930c3f92c06e899
36635 F20110216_AABLOG manak_j_Page_143.QC.jpg
8006f1d9226d8ba1802c9a3898fb2e24
c1e0f1b3589fe7800c750a3146cdb123a3f91a45
36130 F20110216_AABMLA manak_j_Page_042.QC.jpg
f232b4b31c852d4813a304c424f4046d
70b953ffe16e20e67a5217f92724974f851ebc60
F20110216_AABMYL manak_j_Page_187.tif
19d2e4ff017be3ae7d30e1cf8af00e21
6dd9cd9294f85f45363bdf086ea88dccccbd1c02
F20110216_AABLOH manak_j_Page_053.tif
76d2b2a3c129ac16afd098711063abc5
bb9e8b882bec75ad804f9c1e81cbefe32c5d37ea
F20110216_AABMLB manak_j_Page_053thm.jpg
f4207ce7834fa94a5b9858d5fe52faf5
492beeda5df3e363d0db26a5bdf52c9190a33cea
F20110216_AABMYM manak_j_Page_190.tif
26e61e66878e50d103f80f0f24c12185
4a298d552320bf1a8a41cf00555298550a796f86
F20110216_AABLOI manak_j_Page_115.txt
9b4254da0e4acdbf132ac38f661f8ee8
c3e3cf4a30c916e2d8bf35c85ce385a76e536ccb
F20110216_AABMLC manak_j_Page_084.tif
50b5b9c3003bdcda75e6bb44d077aa48
05d41b3a19c6d1d28dbcf0f9006975bb9aaed6c9
F20110216_AABMYN manak_j_Page_194.tif
673e2ebe5b4e38ca1b8dc3c4b26dd626
b000a3c3608aa634fdb9060163f79161b4980ce3
F20110216_AABLOJ manak_j_Page_221.txt
b61ca0b0dade43c0b8385de4dae2f0e4
ba7024594a6a764f6ec78a2b76d19d53d02be812
895535 F20110216_AABMLD manak_j_Page_257.jp2
8424b03aadb08f2572237e6209ece5de
89b12ab2ebb967793ec1c50a6802828a63ee9733
F20110216_AABMYO manak_j_Page_197.tif
2d2018a0d1b08d8da1c3489df191121e
c05eb839826d321f903ca09eab22aea9475b34e4
F20110216_AABLOK manak_j_Page_180.tif
01b860abfcf09a8329fa285fb9a5cb7d
ed34d3cb711ae8c2c76e6a55482a3feda395e063
F20110216_AABMLE manak_j_Page_151.tif
dab18d4025d9ba398234ee2a5cbd1f47
d1ffdf362d18958b457b964fbd742d73ce2db3b4
3073 F20110216_AABLBA manak_j_Page_181.txt
38bbb05fb848844919cd69f6946bb862
681efdf9381d2c22b9468a7fd9905376b743f0f9
F20110216_AABMYP manak_j_Page_202.tif
080a7cfd6f75b85cfe23e3b35f87da1c
656901a290470bf03f426791f9ebb1c30db6c986
32649 F20110216_AABLOL manak_j_Page_266.QC.jpg
c5a89fa310ead83ad53ac32ac00d3fef
0b0803318ef8fdc4e4423f64b0bb2ce47b0f0f6d
34762 F20110216_AABMLF manak_j_Page_050.QC.jpg
b3f842916d9ece7ac146a230b3f85849
d5d2d3d362ab2306a0814fe3b1d89e81d1cc22bd
55975 F20110216_AABLBB manak_j_Page_152.pro
be9ae15e327eb2f604625f7531527014
d0c3a717e5ce3939b71ad2557efddc8f6a08d70d
F20110216_AABMYQ manak_j_Page_207.tif
683faba40bb7c543a711e7b7576d9a93
2ca874a3cc0b08f41796bf65adcfd8acadfeed8b
F20110216_AABLOM manak_j_Page_181.tif
fea2e4fc1ffbabb3a7c51c253059ba34
b83ec0765abcc2e60978c317b3e30b227037423d
36797 F20110216_AABMLG manak_j_Page_022.QC.jpg
82adb599c7d0ef926bf8a1ad1459615c
3ab2ce0b2cf0836f17d0236e45b59670672f5e33
52888 F20110216_AABLBC manak_j_Page_046.pro
c8cb119a12d62f2149567b8bc55bde15
b8e1b8fdf49f0d9cf91e595ccade682e6d432bb3
F20110216_AABMYR manak_j_Page_211.tif
c1c6954818248483b11acf106fd1b225
cbd1a310d66dca359fbcceb2cb10702d2306a960
68997 F20110216_AABLON manak_j_Page_139.pro
b10e43c4b4f8beafd163c0a2b5b82bec
ef8eb1d2d144804a11c772dcebe0b8f8c1774a16
95047 F20110216_AABMLH manak_j_Page_095.jp2
b56c41d5a12ac1e70852fc91d547f67d
b6bd8844b79db196a3f716f7cadbef3780b6eed6
35774 F20110216_AABNIA manak_j_Page_063.QC.jpg
d33c9135898328e3bab04aed39a021ec
3f6ef9d3aa30f4b9d71f858b1a3a43824af80525
F20110216_AABMYS manak_j_Page_215.tif
decb369cf1a98240f3522d23d13b7ffb
13da94f9da1430acebd31d2a89c8b4fe3a5318f9
F20110216_AABLOO manak_j_Page_059.tif
5d0c464139e8810d1b353a23a2ad1223
c02bd0cbe660149b18db87dbea971cda64099830
F20110216_AABMLI manak_j_Page_166.tif
e4d689ed5c4581d19d2de0d05a3168b7
283cb502e21c94990d53e5fc6982c128c71a8491
37200 F20110216_AABNIB manak_j_Page_065.QC.jpg
c299840bc81036b61429f1819a66f7fa
a3cfeb7d4d08f9531a70d21b60061a64b88cf039
55228 F20110216_AABLBD manak_j_Page_029.pro
38c245c2321853a77bc413c12b8828a7
e365fcef3f1584a84bb7e63af40b6c4290796aa0
F20110216_AABMYT manak_j_Page_216.tif
2d9ee7b08ba7e2d23f552dbe01953d68
28c18552af8e6a5037899d28c4809d63a06db462
2172 F20110216_AABLOP manak_j_Page_176.txt
dad87f9aeb7c7a36da31136adbf90af3
82078d95091c7857f0d9f48031449690f1f4d221
1001 F20110216_AABMLJ manak_j_Page_003.QC.jpg
d04cbbefaebcdbaf58ab03323732f9e6
de8a71b7836f64bedb9334759e6967b284f961b6
121107 F20110216_AABNIC manak_j_Page_067.jpg
03ade5f4e2cfd5943779d24236fb5757
33af66b671a5a2746bd67eb1eb20c66c11453667
111409 F20110216_AABLBE manak_j_Page_092.jpg
107dfa4c8a74534a40ba9d1790772c47
8c5eed2278d0ce7143630613d9b2566c6fdbb7b3
F20110216_AABMYU manak_j_Page_217.tif
a2eb38546c5741e792b49e8b3810dc4b
2290c72237d547dfc8d13dda2003c943585537d9
2230 F20110216_AABMLK manak_j_Page_144.txt
b0ed3f3872a8b965ae56987cfed9e466
4aa203e0923f9b7ad8be8cdf8c6f296c8cd17cb7
37934 F20110216_AABNID manak_j_Page_067.QC.jpg
03e4af68a62e60ef95fd355d6098d3cd
1b958331b4d9a0a5b55795d62a3fd035a6ef586d
2209 F20110216_AABLBF manak_j_Page_098.txt
1e2b69fc4f8c57392a7c546cb83f9299
2f2c8a93f08f1b16cdd4e3ff19409d84ec0d02aa
F20110216_AABMYV manak_j_Page_218.tif
b834fab09cbdac4174d1d40b54397104
ef27ba4375b9052d0c9c1a456e5d1e9685b0b4a0
8490 F20110216_AABLOQ manak_j_Page_264thm.jpg
19a0c89f82cb5c9c64e9d5456c6c3236
73c332d598815f25fdf3509ca2cd55b46254bc22
115421 F20110216_AABMLL manak_j_Page_132.jpg
d5169cda90f7514a10432efe220205fc
e0f6fe87439e92af0a04653efe7990c16a5f8021
36287 F20110216_AABNIE manak_j_Page_069.QC.jpg
2f396bb0948f0155501938370f371975
f2116c9634bbccc86239d7cd2a44234d601a937e
31261 F20110216_AABLBG manak_j_Page_218.QC.jpg
bb3395e80ea726f313156f9067861ed7
9f419c7f637a36f2b0a638c4e636cb9b3af8c3ca
F20110216_AABMYW manak_j_Page_219.tif
7b301c286eff35d5bd8f32dda0877aa1
938beb2e9aaf5b626d4048195dcb7b6cac01d5c7
8632 F20110216_AABLOR manak_j_Page_198thm.jpg
e2c84cdbf4bd62f68a618d91e4c81055
6da7a4a0d36185c35116a065b455960be7d91d0d
F20110216_AABNIF manak_j_Page_070.QC.jpg
0a58dd9b2134a5ebfa8e9ea9cd40b0c0
1073c51896f412dd7c7b64028274b323c97e96a9
116661 F20110216_AABLBH manak_j_Page_137.jpg
dcafe1ce00d156771c09b18ef018d197
897ac3607cc943f8f0e3270fcc199b5e80968d31
F20110216_AABMYX manak_j_Page_221.tif
a280728a3dc0db9385d79dec14039d6e
f36745584511512fa80e7c9190b68d295aa2fe20
9111 F20110216_AABLOS manak_j_Page_044thm.jpg
1e16758184d2f7a2cb0a437cb308c6d6
d4fbefdd6ab71aba21b84e1c96a17675c265e9ad
90620 F20110216_AABMLM manak_j_Page_255.jpg
7427c0aed3d65f294e73360229820775
b29baa02306c0ffbd7709eeba959efcbd4a69eb6
36644 F20110216_AABNIG manak_j_Page_071.QC.jpg
e57509b507d706935635e1ba9ff3d292
6bc00d658d4a3cf8d6c231472881876726899f8b
1009437 F20110216_AABLBI manak_j_Page_171.jp2
434d45772d6a4261c1ded58657a6ac7b
668c3f3ec1b823dbc15f72268f3e7df2e7e9aab7
F20110216_AABMYY manak_j_Page_224.tif
09ac9da76d03c14a642141158ed7eed4
d36d9b312f3d58bb09f5fc710738def21625b8bc
F20110216_AABLOT manak_j_Page_193.jp2
c05c7315180897509cb752d42f3c2576
63a0de7e9ee5ef73c533833ba5d170ec61b90be9
8960 F20110216_AABMLN manak_j_Page_158thm.jpg
8e770e356c3f2479fd42d4aff31d5e5a
8f67021661c5d6946a8f6dcb97a7664482e89f5b
37153 F20110216_AABNIH manak_j_Page_072.QC.jpg
93d966cae2d8aef0f3a273e1325fc159
0523bb70e6a1ce166f7940c4e3874a8da8b42daf
112987 F20110216_AABLBJ manak_j_Page_102.jpg
41bf61fe53b605d13f68d13bb41c3301
9ac374355d4fce69f13c6c94e7f84c4ca8efdd73
F20110216_AABLOU manak_j_Page_008.jp2
2c84c8e489341cd29258c624ab965c1a
200265a6093ffcf2f88961a70e311921d48508ce
8040 F20110216_AABMLO manak_j_Page_141thm.jpg
5dc94750dde6956930ffb3736358e028
6943fe99eeccbcdd545ee62b52e5c9902ea9e9e2
2159 F20110216_AABLBK manak_j_Page_154.txt
fb1cbe769ad38430154ebcd021cd5802
e1395c4ad26baeecfda9a2b6f125c8e8dae132f4
F20110216_AABMYZ manak_j_Page_229.tif
6916c89b0008562341382ca2b57c35e5
eb9cf87be7b6c33d08b150e970db5e8b5d5dff25
34429 F20110216_AABLOV manak_j_Page_208.QC.jpg
e1f071ef0c4502e3d716ffc669af41ee
908d58c6e4f403ad641aac9c429ad5b6ef2049d4
55820 F20110216_AABMLP manak_j_Page_248.pro
80fb04166f3a0c44f075aa8a09532e2b
d89b9af37a30f4b465ef57dfdda0f0f9dbaaf4f6
109689 F20110216_AABNII manak_j_Page_073.jpg
3181a3203fcfacc58bb39f83ca47b36e
29e4533009dd7b74c1f42f7988e2432b167fe5d9
34497 F20110216_AABLBL manak_j_Page_025.QC.jpg
4613cef6a55c85946620dbd6ac8ce751
253d020d76b16fc09fa4e43c4da6a964edef1fe5
F20110216_AABLOW manak_j_Page_020.tif
1f0e4f8b891b53547cb04b673cacefb3
b43436334b6064d3475cc26a67635e4a98f18a09
6519 F20110216_AABMLQ manak_j_Page_130thm.jpg
45ca0a7606eb5e5a9f7700814108c8bf
3bdf7d856a427c1261e3343ed9555814a5e95fcd
35316 F20110216_AABNIJ manak_j_Page_073.QC.jpg
47a21ea9af72805386ff97eafccfbcef
adf2c4f1580256ee848a761231caf4a00fb7f5ab
9366 F20110216_AABLBM manak_j_Page_206thm.jpg
8e716664346bbb391f94b599017c7395
4aaa5c0bb9b3de9d6fff24b2d127b1433f68e5fd
90306 F20110216_AABLOX manak_j_Page_088.jpg
40502eec15c410583ff48a1eb5abfd7d
be2322194ad706c6ab7d17fa83492f7ffa43f701
58196 F20110216_AABMLR manak_j_Page_104.pro
bffb8e0b8947b68dcddb334d451fddbe
2dbc2cf17d7060de0e0eaa00fa6a47d0a07a7602
110993 F20110216_AABNIK manak_j_Page_076.jpg
1da3e48c6f7860a834a4c8b5dfccccd1
b5538753f395659efd22fdb5e196c17d4fa8b266
8384 F20110216_AABLBN manak_j_Page_046thm.jpg
9c3f7a910c1821de37a30bdb38c7b7e3
ab86b790f0ce1848f64eadf4039ba591536997b0
38142 F20110216_AABLOY manak_j_Page_220.QC.jpg
b2f1d337c05d490aa03ce40093b43781
20c06d80d1d87ba004bef9205d1e5dfe9ec03830
2220 F20110216_AABMLS manak_j_Page_061.txt
141e2aebcd85e7c9910e0ab99cbf8125
b135a351d5b4c486613aedf03fbaf590c26e02e6
21101 F20110216_AABNIL manak_j_Page_077.QC.jpg
c396020c1add541e19ad6818037792db
c41f9536d4bbcfd13f8eaad147a153a4d5f9073b
F20110216_AABLBO manak_j_Page_019.jp2
7f41afb86695aaf3b7947ced07a91d63
15d233fffc36fcbde6c508b2b6cbcf841a2c7e0b
35435 F20110216_AABLOZ manak_j_Page_015.QC.jpg
2f653b328081ba77e3c353795534ff27
d0b26e35e10b2f4955f5d6e0bd3197ba4aa203b3
104866 F20110216_AABMLT manak_j_Page_117.jpg
6d754785f3c53744f9c7f4af8bf3aaaa
1698b6ea79f8a83ead676449517f42efc2aadaba
105888 F20110216_AABNIM manak_j_Page_080.jpg
1e8be6a2c2e79f0673d4a4d25347560b
998e0c34d66b0dd9840c5d344905718491c68402
115886 F20110216_AABLBP manak_j_Page_083.jpg
91b6f6a4521a90d5b6bc2f5b1a76c24d
d5111b4ec693741aafa0cbf862b53206088ad2f0
2508 F20110216_AABMLU manak_j_Page_213.txt
9b9a66b545fb149198d29ea2abde9c60
330c1117570b52745354191c57301cd2c6927c40
36943 F20110216_AABNIN manak_j_Page_081.QC.jpg
360d27cf8df388aed3159d38a06c9da4
c948ed1e4d5aadf88cffda10336e208f16e68fbd
101217 F20110216_AABLBQ manak_j_Page_169.jpg
9c2b7b4f98496f635f4741a3dfd3beea
66c166dbe3c5d6aa344a46b01fcee75131d8d07e
F20110216_AABMLV manak_j_Page_044.tif
6001b894442cbac10836c1a29c170a46
8f5b08c84a2b95141ba9eb20d6c2a6fcd34d9574
108119 F20110216_AABNIO manak_j_Page_082.jpg
cc7490d9fc97c04aafa093cfdbcb271e
aae07fc3771d05f4ba3e1cd187582ac0ae696761
F20110216_AABLBR manak_j_Page_205.tif
d1f144acbf491c10e245dfafe53ce394
45369bbbe8b85daa321254188abf25b3bbd12517
111871 F20110216_AABMLW manak_j_Page_062.jpg
4c80d3596c2a2084370b7d20fb42bb6f
8330633e56da25c304290810185974f0e0b1158b
125544 F20110216_AABNIP manak_j_Page_084.jpg
ab3eae2fe05320a8ffb8e60296494c80
e07f800a57862a724f4d117c2b361bfa9b2a8589
54009 F20110216_AABLBS manak_j_Page_058.pro
3376aac3b5d79c5be00f7c9a1a04b63d
a9051c641fc408fc76e838f9dc2d5a6177ce62e2
59595 F20110216_AABMLX manak_j_Page_138.pro
229c9c11056c84709c74d691cf67d192
5ce9c867814b5d000099836cf898e25184bcd9b4
37628 F20110216_AABNIQ manak_j_Page_084.QC.jpg
79ba285cf2225434593b589a3dc0b4a7
d1d4f6c6c2a54f3db86aa06f8c1d945e9b462395
55426 F20110216_AABLBT manak_j_Page_230.pro
eb7d0b16948cef6b6a5bdd17624ce143
4536796a05ee7316cbfc7e8548a7c22484b36962
36417 F20110216_AABNIR manak_j_Page_086.QC.jpg
fe6d181ae4469a93d2dfb62aaa7b511a
878eefa30ae3693d7544ec9451fe6d6ecfded918
8974 F20110216_AABLBU manak_j_Page_042thm.jpg
bb7a79b1593c4f19021921f84b8684b5
02ef6ad6cf2c44d5a7c4ccb7345ea2d9876ad8e6
106899 F20110216_AABMLY manak_j_Page_074.jpg
37412e597f71aee5d2f792a6d6be0a38
f27853603e64a358303b83b2801df0be9ad78adf
35377 F20110216_AABNIS manak_j_Page_087.QC.jpg
2d06a081a0e814746e07b8f25ecce76d
0c8d67150e37664261f7c3e1da02f5d4ed8f9c63
34786 F20110216_AABLBV manak_j_Page_118.QC.jpg
25c6b369a1e5545efed9ef8d480bbc07
4e199b86d909ae335b5fde2f81aec3d50b71b09a
39954 F20110216_AABMLZ manak_j_Page_129.QC.jpg
19ea94ab66b6dbdde0ec6fdfbdc8a7bf
7e1f56f0be66b9a0b02c2b3ba8a0fd6c5bcb19bc
38101 F20110216_AABNIT manak_j_Page_089.QC.jpg
f8c58d2458d1f17784676cbc04638bd6
42fc604f6f18307aa301d5e5f106c42dfdb98c45
8933 F20110216_AABLBW manak_j_Page_059thm.jpg
982f9c8f1a056102bc61702aae530920
5e808ce8d8e4f22a92e9c7f8a788846db9279543
36693 F20110216_AABNIU manak_j_Page_091.QC.jpg
f3628cd1f37220958be32920b23df139
7ec3e39ca77c9ea3083c9f26c59f489033d33601
F20110216_AABLBX manak_j_Page_042.txt
e3c8cdc0fffe26037218c17aecbf6ebe
d2676690709babeff46a93b336250190ee9ae84e
105705 F20110216_AABLUA manak_j_Page_032.jpg
99077329cad474470392354a36135f0a
9c460142ce9cb6553c7f31513eeaf49ff61173b1
37063 F20110216_AABNIV manak_j_Page_093.QC.jpg
f97177445d20e418393c9ad1ddde8c98
834cd9dd69e710e938e548056c9811a30e573c1a
2205 F20110216_AABLBY manak_j_Page_190.txt
8428c839cd5604b65c24ae3ba1534dde
da2685ed858806bed554c512a3e31bd9a837d030
111103 F20110216_AABLUB manak_j_Page_230.jpg
0378854e9b0cced092ca745c083bcb9b
5f41a748d750cf74741ccda3c854a685a20a29f3
35499 F20110216_AABNIW manak_j_Page_094.QC.jpg
9563d597ee8f3c0805c20bbfa1a1e06a
7e24f5760f62cc4a9169ae9f210fb08630a446c0
F20110216_AABLBZ manak_j_Page_082.tif
130ff2c66e2cd3ace2ab245dd4f89c62
776fbbfe332d5b9a4b1daf89bcf30cef4bc93441
F20110216_AABLUC manak_j_Page_141.jp2
5778542c705ea03f357f9e096e609b7d
6210f4556b8e38138e7f32c631214205192725a2
36386 F20110216_AABNIX manak_j_Page_096.QC.jpg
e836f09befc97089280757f6dbe2b208
134597aa2c14fc45cb6c939cc8c667b77684eac2
8793 F20110216_AABLUD manak_j_Page_057thm.jpg
b1fea84c03110b4a13c5ee43d7dba487
642b87220fb537e21cf83f6ae9260895b93a2bec
114880 F20110216_AABNIY manak_j_Page_097.jpg
961ba85494b685721c93477a54580c0c
81cfc4bb28f9486c2e6bb56af637bc723ab8e4af
76798 F20110216_AABLUE manak_j_Page_205.pro
142545e013dfefeb1064dd7d614754b9
2c7a31e9bdc376502eaa2ba125ea3a6db7fbff4b







INTERTEXTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE IMPACT OF INTERACTIVE READ ALOUDS ON
THE WRITING OF THIRD GRADERS DURING WRITING WORKSHOP




















By

JENNIFER AMY MANAK


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

2009


































2009 Jennifer Amy Manak




































To My Boys









ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

It is a pleasure to acknowledge the many people that provided me with guidance, love,

and support throughout my journey writing this dissertation. I have been fortunate to be

surrounded by many wonderful people who have encouraged me, developed my thinking, and

brightened my days throughout this study. To begin with, I am very grateful to my dissertation

committee members, Dr. Linda Lamme, Dr. Danling Fu, Dr. Zhihui Fang, Dr. Ruth Lowery, Dr.

Mary Brownell, and Dr. Martha Horn, who guided, mentored, and shared their expertise with me

throughout this journey.

I would like to thank Ms. Liz Daniels for giving me the privilege of conducting my

research in her classroom. I also wish to thank the third-grade readers and writers in Ms.

Daniels' class, Keith, Belkys, Osahru, Samone, Kingston, Jermaine, Frenia, Yomary, Renesha,

Nakota, Denise, Mark, Michael, and Mishka who eagerly shared their writing and thinking with

me each day. Thank you for welcoming me so warmly into your classroom.

I want to thank my family for their unending love, support, and strength throughout this

arduous journey. Most of all, I want to thank Michael, my husband, best friend, cheerleader, and

guide, who gladly engaged in discussions about my study, helped me navigate the seas of

formatting, and provided me with loving encouragement every step of the way as I completed

this dissertation. I am thankful that we are on our life journey together. I also want to thank my

little love bug, Gabriel, who ensured that my days were full of joy and laughter. I wish to

express my deepest thanks to Linda and Paul who have loved me like a daughter and cheered me

on throughout this journey. I particularly want to thank Linda who was always ready to listen,

share stories, and enthusiastically read my writing. In addition, I wish to thank my grandparents,

Mimi and Bebe, who believed in their little girl and told me that anything was possible with a









little hard work. Finally, I want to acknowledge Aurora who has supported my efforts for the

past two years by taking the very best care of Gabriel while Mommy was working.









TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ..............................................................................................................4

L IS T O F T A B L E S ........................................................................................................................... 9

LIST OF FIGURES .................................. .. .... ..... ................. 10

LIST OF FIGURES .................................. .. .... ..... ................. 10

ABSTRAC T ................................................... ............... 12

CHAPTER

1 IN TR OD U CTION .......................................................................... .. ... .... 14

In tro d u ctio n ....................................................................................................... ............. 14
Purpose and R research Questions .......................................................................... 15
R rationale for the Study ............................ ........................ .. .... ........ ....... ... 15
Sum m ary of M methodology ........................................................................ ........................19
Scope & Lim stations ............... ................. ............ ........................... 21
Significance of the Study ....................................................... .......... ...... ... .... 22
Definition of Terms .................. ..... ......... ..... ........... ........ 23

2 R E V IEW O F L ITER A TU R E .................................................................... ... ....................25

In tertex tu ality .................................................................................................... ............. 2 5
Social N ature of Intertextuality ..............................................................................................26
Intertextuality as a Transactional Process ............................................ ............... 28
Intertextuality in Classroom Learning Environments ............................................. 31
Intertextuality-Inform ed W writing Research .......................................... ............... 34
Interactive R ead A louds ........................................ ... .... ........ ......... 38
Integrating the L language A rts ........................................................................ ..................43
Reading and W writing Relationships.................................. ..... .................. 43
Nurturing Young Writers: Reading Aloud in Writing Workshop...............................44
S u m m ary ................... ...................4...................6..........

3 M E T H O D O L O G Y ................................................................................... ........................4 8

The C onstructivist R research Paradigm .............................................................................. ...49
D description of the R research Site .................................................. .... ......................... 52
The Research Site: Site Selection and Access...................................... ............... 52
T h e S c h o o l .......................................................................................................5 3
The Classroom Teacher .................................................. .. ..... .. ........ .... 55
T h e S tu d en ts .................................................................5 5
Data Collection Methods ............................................ ...... ............... 56


6









P articipant-O b servations ....................................................................... ....................57
Field Notes and Transcriptions........ ................ ............................ 60
Inform al and Semi-Structured Interview s ............................................ ............... 63
Collection of Student and Teacher Artifacts ....................................... ............... 68
D ata A n aly sis................................... ... .... ... ............ ....................................6 9
Issues of Credibility, Trustworthiness, and Generalizability..................................74
S u m m a ry ................... ............................................................ ................ 7 6

4 INTERTEXTUALLY CONNECTING READING AND WRITING: THE CONTEXT,
THE TEACHER, & THE LITERACY ENVIRONMENT .......................................... 78

Literacy Education in an Urban Charter School ............................................ ...............79
The School Context ............... ................................ ............ ............ 79
T h e T e a c h e r ............................................................................................................... 8 1
The Classroom Context ............................. ................ .. .......... ................. 85
Intertextually Connecting Reading and Writing: The Teacher................... ....... ..........92
Expectations, Routines, & Procedures ........................................ ........................ 92
Literacy Instruction ................ .. ..... ................................ .............. ........ 95
Pedagogical Choices, Resources, & Teacher Influence .............. ...........................102
Intertextually Connecting Reading and Writing: The Literacy Environment ......................104
S u m m ary ....................................106.............................

5 F IN D IN G S ....................................108.............................

Reading Like a Writer & Writing Like a Reader ...................................... ............... 108
H enry the D og \ iih No Tail................. ........ ......... .. ..... ..............................109
Summary of Reading Like a Writer and Writing Like a Reader................................. 114
Categories of Reading Like a Writer and Writing Like a Reader ................................. 119
N noticing the A author's C raft......... ................. ...................................... ............... 120
Exam inning the A author's Craft ..................... ............ .............. .............................. 124
Guiding Students' Understanding of Author's Craft........... ............... ................132
E explaining the A author's C raft .......................................................................... .. .... 137
Understanding the Purpose of Author's Craft...........................................................143
M entering Students' W riting................................................. ............. ............... 148
Crafting Writing Purposefully for a Reader .............. ............................................153
S u m m a ry ................... .......................................................................... 1 5 7

6 CASE STUDIES OF FOUR THIRD-GRADE READERS & WRITERS..............................161

K e ith .................................................... ............ ........ .. ................. ................ 1 6 1
Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Sharks .....................................162
Sentence Structure Unit: Lost in New York ................................................................ 170
B e lk y s ............................................. ... ............ ........ ................. ................ 1 7 8
Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Frogs ............. .... ...............179
Sentence Structure U nit: Sw eet 16 ........................................ .......................... 187
O sa rh u ..................................................................




7









Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Bats .............. ... ................196
Sentence Structure Unit: The NY Book Thief ........................................... ..........204
S a m o n e .................................................................................................................................2 1 3
Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Penguins ...............................214
Sentence Structure Unit: The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess....................223
Sum m ary ............................ ........................................................233

7 CON CLU SION .......... .................. ............................... .. .. ............... .. 235

Summary and Significance of the Findings................................................ .......... ............... 236
Reading like a Writer and Writing like a Reader ................................ ...............236
Intertextual Connections within Students' Writing.................................. ..................238
Intertextuality, the Teacher, and the Collaborative Literacy Environment...................240
Implications for Literacy Teaching and Learning ..................................... ............... 243
Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop......................................................243
Literacy Instruction ....................................... .. .. ........... .... ....... 246
F u tu re R e se arch .............................................................................................................. 2 4 8
Concluding Thoughts.......... ......... ..................... ........ 249

APPENDIX

A INFORMED CONSENT AND ASSET FORMS...................................... ...............250

Parent Informed Consent Letter and Permission Form ................................ ...............250
A sent Script for C children .......................................................................... ....................253
T teacher Inform ed C consent ......................................................................... ....................254

B SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT OF AN INTERACTIVE READ ALOUD (EXCERPT) ............257

C SA M O N E S FA IR Y T A L E ........................................................................ .....................259

L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ..................................................................................... ..................262

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............................................................. ...........268









LIST OF TABLES


Table page

3-1 Demographics of City, School District, and Project School............... ... ............... 54

4-1 M s. D aniels' Third-Grade Schedule ............................................................................ 88

5-1 Noticing the Author's Craft .............. ............................... ............... 120

5-2 Understanding Nonfiction Text Features.................... .. .................. ...............146

5-3 U understanding A author's Craft...................... ....................... ................. ............... 148

7-1 Guiding Students' Understanding of Author's Craft.................................................245

7-2 Integrating Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop............................... 248









LIST OF FIGURES


Figure p e

4-1 Big Ideas for the Writing Workshop: Sentence Structure Unit ......................................95

5-1 The Interrelated Nature of the Conceptual Categories involved in Reading Like a
W writer ............ ....... .. ....................................... .................. ................ 119

6-1 Cover of Keith's Nonfiction Book titled .h, \/i k .......................... ..............163

6-2 Keith's Nonfiction Book ,sh, //t ............................ ........... ..... ...............164

6-3 Keith's Illustration Comparing the Size of a Whale Shark to a Bus .............................170

6-4 Cover of Keith's Book Lost in New York ........................... .......................... 171

6-5 Keith's Fiction Story Lost in New York ......................................... ...............172

6-6 Cover of Belkys' Nonfiction Book titled Frogs ............................ ..... ...........180

6-7 B elkys' N onfiction B ook F rogs............................................................................ ..... 81

6-8 Belkys' Labeled Illustration of Life Cycle of a Frog...................................................... 184

6-9 Cover of Belkys' Book titled Sweet 16.............................. ................................. 187

6-10 B elkys' Fiction Story Sw eet 16.............................................. .............................. 188

6-11 Cover of Osahru's Nonfiction Book titled Bats........................... .............. 197

6-12 O sahru's N onfiction B ook B ats .......................................................................... ...... 198

6-13 Osahru's Diagram of a Little Brown Bat..................................... ....................... 200

6-14 O sahru's D ivided Illustration................................................. .............................. 201

6-15 Cover of Osahru's Book titled The NY Book Thief.......................................................204

6-16 Osahru's Mystery Book The NYBook Thief ................ .....................................205

6-17 Cover of Samone's Nonfiction Book titled Penguins! ............. .................................214

6-18 Sam one's N onfiction Book Penguins! .................................... .......................... ......... 216

6-19 Samone's Diagram of the Life Cycle of a Penguin ......................................................218

6-20 Samone's Labeled Illustration of Penguins Underwater .............................................219









6-21 Samone's Fairytale The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess.............................225

6-22 Samone's Illustrations for Chapters 1, 2, & 3....................................... ............... 226









Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

INTERTEXTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE IMPACT OF INTERACTIVE READ ALOUDS ON
THE WRITING OF THIRD GRADERS DURING WRITING WORKSHOP

By

Jennifer Amy Manak

August 2009


Chair: Linda L. Lamme
Major: Curriculum and Instruction

Teachers frequently read aloud as a part of writing instruction so that children's book

authors can serve as mentors for students' writing. Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of the

significance of reading aloud children's literature within writing workshop, the intertextual

connections students construct between interactive read alouds and their writing within writing

workshop has received little attention. This descriptive, naturalistic study conducted in a third-

grade collaborative learning environment examined how interactive read alouds at the beginning

of writing workshop influenced students' writing. Specifically, this study examined how the

dialogue occurring among the teacher, students, and the children's book authors during the

interactive read alouds influenced students' writing.

Over six months, multiple data sources were collected including observational field

notes, transcriptions, informal and semi-structured interviews, and student and teacher artifacts.

The data sources were analyzed according to the process of open coding, axial coding, and

selective coding and by the constant comparative method. A grounded theory of reading like a

writer and writing like a reader emerged from the data and addressed the social construction of

intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds at the beginning of









writing workshop. This grounded theory was composed of seven conceptual categories which

included: noticing, examining, guiding, explaining, understanding, mentoring, and crafting.

The literary understanding socially constructed by the teacher, students, and children's

book authors during the interactive read alouds significantly influenced students' writing.

Within each sentence of their writing, students made intertextual connections to multiple texts.

The content and ideas within students' writing were intertextually connected to a wide variety of

texts they had previously experienced; however, the students consciously crafted their writing

based on the socially constructed understanding of the purpose of author's craft which

intertextually connected their writing to the interactive reading and examining of the mentor

texts. The teacher facilitated the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality

during the interactive read alouds by guiding the discussion and explicitly discussing the

interconnected nature of reading and writing.









CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Introduction

When we write, we compose a written text that consciously and unconsciously embodies

traces of the many texts we have previously experienced during our lives. Our writing not only

reflects literary and written texts experienced in the past but also the texts of our previous

conversations, popular culture, and life experiences. This interrelated nature of texts is referred

to as intertextuality (Kristeva, 1980). Fairclough (1992) asserts that all written texts and spoken

utterances are "inherently intertextual, constituted by elements of other texts" (p. 270).

Therefore, a text is never simply the product of a single writer or speaker but is interwoven with

traces of many previous texts that have been borrowed, adapted, appropriated, and transformed

(Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). In composing a text there are a multiplicity of

textual voices available to a writer. According to Hartman (1992), a writer is a

"multidimensional space through which the utterances of others speak" (p. 300).

Intertextuality is a social construction located in the social interactions between individuals

(Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993). Short (1992a) suggests that intertextuality is "situated in the

dialogue between participants, even if one of the participants is not physically present (such as

when one reads a book)" (p. 316). With these views in mind, intertextuality is socially

constructed as students, teachers, and children's book authors with differing sociopolitical and

cultural histories interact within a particular learning environment. Furthermore, intertextuality

can be considered a transactional process between a reader and a text in a particular sociocultural

environment when students make connections to previous textual experiences to actively

construct meaning from the text they are reading (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1978/1994).

Moreover, Lemke (1992) claims that the social and cultural practices of a learning environment









determine the intertextual connections recognized and available in that particular social context.

Collaborative learning environments that provide opportunities for social interaction and

dialogue influence the intertextual connections students are able to construct (Short, 1992a).

Purpose and Research Questions

In order to gain a broader understanding of how children socially construct intertextual

links among integrated reading and writing events, this study naturalistically investigated

intertextuality within a third-grade collaborative learning environment. This six-month

descriptive, qualitative study focused on examining how interactive read alouds including reader

response and discussion of author's craft at the beginning of writing workshop influenced

students' subsequent writing. This study employed a broad definition of text including linguistic

and nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meaning with others such as an utterance, an

oral story, a conversation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a work of art, or a

poem (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1992; Sipe, 2001). My broad

research question was: How do the texts within interactive read alouds at the beginning of

writing workshop mentor children's writing? Three research questions guided this study:

1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read

aloud into their own writing?

2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual

connections between reading and writing?

3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing?

Rationale for the Study

During the past two decades, intertextually-informed writing studies have illustrated that

students' writing reflects traces of the many written, conversational, and popular culture texts

they have previously experienced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis









& McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993). Furthermore, these studies

demonstrate the multiplicity of textual resources available to young writers. While some studies

have focused on the influence of a written text on students' writing (Bearse, 1992; Cairney,

1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993) others have addressed the impact of a wide variety of texts on

students' writing (Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). Cairney

(1990) examined the impact of sixth-grade students' prior experiences with written texts on their

writing and found that a majority of students are aware of intertextual links between the texts

they read and the texts they write. Bearse's (1992) study of third-graders found that students

consciously and unconsciously borrow elements and language from the fairy tales they read and

blend them into their own stories. Also focusing on the fairy tale genre, Sipe (1993) described

the connections sixth-grade students made when reading traditional and modem fairy tales and

writing transformative fairy tales of their own. Pantaleo (2006) examined how reading

children's literature with Radical Change characteristics influenced one fifth-grade student's

writing. Pantaleo found that the student made intertextual links in her writing to books used in

the study as well as to other texts.

Studies conducted by Dyson (1993, 1997) and Kamberelis and McGinley (1992)

employed a broader definition of text including literary and written texts and the texts of

previous conversations, popular culture, and life experiences. Dyson's (1993, 1997) research

with primary grade children demonstrated how students' complex social worlds and popular

culture texts significantly shape their writing. Kamberelis and McGinley's (1992) case-study

examined the textual voices dialogically interacting within five 4th graders' writing. Kamberelis

and McGinley (1992) reported that writers synthesize the textual voices they experience

including the language of their parents, teachers, peers, books, television, and movies as they









develop their own voices as writers. Although we know that students consciously and

unconsciously borrow, appropriate, and transform aspects of various texts they have previously

experienced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992;

Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993), studies have not examined how the texts within a classroom reading

event, such as a read aloud, are appropriated and transformed into students' writing. Studies

need to determine how dialogic interactions between participants within a read aloud are

reflected in students' writing.

Read alouds, particularly interactive read alouds, appear to be intertextually-rich

collaborative learning environments (Oyler & Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000a, 2000b, 2001). Fisher,

Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004) suggest that during interactive read alouds, teachers select

interesting and developmentally appropriate books that they have previously previewed and

practiced. Teachers set a clear purpose for the read aloud, model fluent oral reading with

expression, and stop periodically to discuss the text asking both efferent and aesthetic questions.

Furthermore, teachers make connections between the read aloud and students' independent

reading and writing (Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey, 2004). During interactive read alouds,

students are encouraged to interact with the book, their peers, and their teacher throughout the

book reading (Barrentine, 1996); thus, facilitating the social construction of intertextual

connections between and among texts as well as the social construction of literary understanding.

Intertextually-informed studies on read alouds have identified characteristic types of oral

responses (Sipe, 2000a, 2008), the importance and various uses of intertextual connections

during read alouds (Sipe, 2000b), and how intertextual connections facilitate literary

understanding and schema-building for traditional stories (Sipe, 2001). As students dialogically

interact with one another, their teacher, and the text during interactive read alouds, students are









immersed in a language-rich environment filled with texts that they can borrow, appropriate, and

transform into their subsequent writing. Although research has shed light on the significance of

oral responses and intertextual connections during interactive read alouds in the development of

students' literary understanding and meaning making, none of these studies have addressed how

these responses during read alouds might impact students' writing. Furthermore, future research

needs to address how interactive read alouds emphasizing particular types of responses, such as

personal or analytical responses, may influence students' writing.

Read alouds are frequently becoming integrated into the literacy curriculum for

instructional purposes. Writing scholars suggest that integrating children's literature read alouds

into writing instruction, particularly writing workshop, provides students with opportunities to

experience exemplary writing models, study the craft of professional authors, and read like

writers (Calkins, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999, 2004; Smith, 1983b). In addition, writing

scholars suggest that as children listen to and discuss literature during read alouds, they

internalize the features of quality writing and begin to use these features in their own writing

(Harwayne, 2001; Ray, 1999, 2004). Book discussions help students focus on aspects of the

authors' craft including the authors' techniques, style, and language as well as the content and

themes within the literature (Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999, 2004; Siu-Runyan, 1996; Smith,

1983).

Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of the significance of reading aloud children's

literature within writing workshop, surprisingly no empirical studies have been conducted on the

intertextual connections students construct between read alouds and their writing within writing

workshop. Empirical studies need to determine how dialogic interactions between participants

within a read aloud event impact students' subsequent written texts, particularly when read









alouds are integrated within writing instruction. Specifically, research needs to investigate how

dialogic interactions within interactive read alouds are reflected in students' writing during

writing workshop. Furthermore, research is needed in classrooms where students flourish as

readers and writers in order to better understand the characteristics of literacy environments

which facilitate students' to make intertextual connections between reading and writing.

Summary of Methodology

This qualitative, naturalistic study, situated in the constructivist research paradigm,

examined the intertextual influence of interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing

workshop on students' writing. The study was conducted in a third-grade classroom in a

predominantly low-income, multicultural school that is committed to academic excellence and

collaborative learning. The teacher implemented a balanced approach to literacy and integrated

language arts instruction. Although the teacher read aloud to her students several times each

day, this study focused on the interactive read alouds of mentor texts and literature-based mini-

lessons at the beginning of writing workshop.

My stance as a researcher ranged on the continuum of participant observation from a

participant as observer to an observer as participant (Glesne, 1999; Spradley, 1980). During the

course of this six-month study, I observed two writing workshop units: a Nonfiction Research

Unit and a Sentence Structure Unit. The Nonfiction Research Unit included the reading of two

mentor texts, Spiders (Gibbons, 1994) and Bicycle Book (Gibbons, 2001). The Sentence

Structure Unit included the reading of three mentor texts, Henry the Dog n1 i/l No Tail (Feiffer,

2007), Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and AnimalDads (Collard, 1997). Multiple data collection

methods used in this study include participant observations, field notes and transcriptions,

informal and semi-structured interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts in

order to better understand how children's writing reflected the texts within interactive read









alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. Interactive read alouds, literature-based mini-

lessons, and semi-structured interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Participant observations were recorded in field notes and used to annotate observation

transcriptions. Student artifacts, included students' completed writings, planning sheets, and

published writings from each unit, and teacher artifacts, included writing workshop lesson plans,

unit overviews, and the third-grade curriculum plan, were collected. Informal and semi-

structured interviews were conducted with all 14 students focusing on the purpose of their

writing, the content of their writing, and how they decided to craft various aspects of their

writing. In addition, the teacher was informally interviewed throughout the study. Detailed case

studies of four students' writing (2 males and 2 females) gained an in-depth understanding of the

intertextual connections students constructed within their writing to the interactive read aloud

events.

The multiple data sources were analyzed recursively and iteratively according to Strauss

and Corbin's (1990) open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and Glaser and Strauss's

(1967) constant comparative method as a means to better understand how students' writing was

mentored by the various texts within the interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing

workshop. Additionally, analysis of multiple data sources provided insights into the

characteristics of a literacy environment and the teacher's instruction that encouraged

intertextual connections between reading and writing. A grounded theory (Glaser and Strauss,

1967) of reading like a writer and writing like a reader, specifically the social construction of

intertextuality and literary understanding within integrated reading and writing events, emerged

from the conceptual relationships I constructed from my data. A detailed description of the

research methodology is discussed in Chapter 3.









Scope & Limitations

The social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within integrated

reading and writing events, such as interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop,

are best studied in a collaborative learning environment with an integrated literacy curriculum

where authentic reading and writing are an integral part of literacy instruction. The purpose of

this study was to examine how interactive read alouds influenced students' writing within an

established literacy curriculum. The selection of this school and classroom was an instance of

intensity sampling (Patton, 1990, 2002) because the site was likely to intensely manifest the

phenomenon that I was studying, the social construction of intertextuality and literary

understanding within integrated reading and writing events. Patton (2002) suggests that

purposive intensity sampling can help researchers "learn from those who are exemplars of good

practice" (p. 234). The school was selected for its academic focus on literacy, particularly the

philosophy that reading and writing were a combined literacy process. The classroom teacher

was selected because of her commitment to effective literacy instruction, her strong belief in the

integration of reading and writing, and her pedagogical knowledge. The students in this study

were from low-income families as indicated by 93% of the students qualified for the school's

free or reduced-price lunch program. The 14 students in this classroom, from culturally diverse,

urban backgrounds, included 1 Asian, 3 Hispanic, and 10 African-American students. The

multiple data sources collected in this study demonstrate rich examples of how interactive read

alouds conducted at the beginning of writing workshop can influence young writers. Together,

these factors enabled the researcher to examine how students from diverse backgrounds socially

constructed intertextuality and literary understanding within a literacy curriculum focused on

fostering purposeful, critical thinking readers and writers.









This study is limited, similar to all descriptive case studies, since it examines how 14

students and one teacher within a particular classroom socially construct intertextuality and

literary understanding between reading and writing events. This qualitative study seeks to

provide readers with sufficient detailed, concrete descriptions or "thick descriptions" (Geertz,

1973) of the students, teacher, and the classroom setting in order for readers to "understand the

phenomenon studied and draw [their] own interpretations about meanings and significance"

(Patton, 2002). Therefore, it is the reader's responsibility to determine how this study can be

generalized to other students, teachers, and classroom contexts (Ruddin, 2006). Researcher

subjectivity is another limitation of qualitative, descriptive studies since it plays an important

role in the methodology. Chapter 3 addresses the measures taken to satisfy issues of credibility,

trustworthiness, and the generalizability of the findings in this study.

Significance of the Study

This study is significant because it broadens current understandings about the social nature

of intertextuality and literary understanding by describing the characteristics of a collaborative

third-grade literacy environment that integrates reading and writing, particularly interactive read

alouds into writing workshop. This study simultaneously intertwines and extends intertextually-

informed writing and read aloud research by describing how third-grade students socially

construct intertextual connections between interactive read alouds and their writing during

writing workshop. This study not only extends intertextuality research but also provides

empirical evidence to support the integration of children's literature read alouds into writing

workshop. Additionally, this study extends current understandings of how integrating the

language arts (i.e. reading, writing, speaking, and listening) impacts students' writing. Finally,

the educational significance of this study is demonstrated in its implications for literacy teaching

and learning discussed in Chapter 8.









Definition of Terms


In order to facilitate the reader's understanding, the following terms used throughout the study

are defined below:

Author's Craft: The particular way an author writes including their special skill and techniques
(Ray, 1999)

Conversational Turn: "Individual turns taken by one participant or another in a conversation"
(Glasswell & Parr, 2009).

Interactive Read Aloud: Reading aloud a book for instructional purposes by engaging students
in natural interactions with the story, their teacher, and their peers. Instruction and conversation
are interwoven during the reading of the book (Barrentine, 1996).

Intertextuality: The interrelated nature of current and past texts (Kristeva, 1980).

Mentor Text: An author's published writing that is read aloud several times and carefully
examined in order to learn how the author crafted the language and structure of the text (Ray,
1999).

Mini-Lesson: A short, whole group teacher-directed lesson conducted on the reading carpet at
the beginning of writing workshop. Lessons were instructive and part of broader writing
workshop units of study (Calkins, 1994; Ray, 2001).

Social Construction: A phenomenon constructed by participants in a particular sociocultural
environment. Within this study, intertextuality and literary understanding were constructed
during the read alouds and literature-based mini-lessons as the participants, including the teacher,
students, and children's book author, interacted through the use of dialogue.

Teachable Moment: An unplanned moment during instruction when a teacher takes advantage
of an authentic opportunity to teach students a particular concept, skill, or strategy.

Teaching Point: A concept that is being taught and reinforced over multiple lessons as part of
the overall goals of a particular unit.

Text-to-Text Connection: When readers are reminded of texts they have previously read and
connecting ideas and themes across texts (Keene & Zimmerman, 1997; Harvey & Goudvis,
2000).

Turn & Talk: During read alouds, the teacher asked the students to "turn and talk" to their
partners about a particular aspect of the story. During "turn and talks" the teacher listened to
several conversations between partners and then led a whole group discussion briefly sharing
what was discussed during the "turn and talks" between partners (Collins, 2004). During the
interactive read alouds and mini-lessons within this study, turn & talks were employed as a
collaborative learning strategy in order for students to share their thinking with their peers. The









conversations between partners during turn and talks focused on discussing what they noticed
about how the author crafted his/her writing within the mentor text.









CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter reviews a variety of theoretical perspectives and empirical findings that are

relevant to this study. This review of research can be envisioned as a series of concentric circles

moving from the broad concept of intertextuality to a more focused study of theory and research

relevant to the phenomenon of intertextual connections students construct between interactive

read alouds and their writing during writing workshop. It begins by describing and discussing

the understandings of intertextuality, then more specifically the social nature of intertextuality,

which forms the theoretical basis for this study. Based on a sociolinguistic view of language

(Bakhtin, 1981, 1986), this review of theory and research addresses how intertextual connections

are socially constructed within dialogic, collaborative literacy environments. The review

considers intertextuality a transactional process and therefore reviews reader response theory

(Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1978/1994). The review continues with an overview of intertextuality

research in the areas of writing and oral discourse and discusses the relationships between

reading and writing and the significance of integrated reading and writing instruction on

intertextual connections. In the last section, the study is situated within the current literacy

research employing the construct of intertextuality and demonstrating the importance of building

upon current conceptions of intertextual connections that students construct between integrated

reading and writing events. Finally, this study not only contributes to research regarding

intertextuality but also enables further consideration of how students' writing reflects their

overall literacy environment.

Intertextuality

When writing about the work of Bakhtin in the late 1960's, Kristeva (1980) coined the

term "intertextuality" to refer to the interrelated nature of current and past texts. According to









Kristeva (1980), a text "is a permutation of texts, an intertextuality: in the space of a given text,

several utterances, taken from other texts, intersect and neutralize one another" (p. 36). Kristeva

(1980) suggested texts may include literary and visual texts, which include works of art, as well

as texts of an individual's life experiences. Therefore, all written texts and spoken utterances are

"inherently intertextual, constituted by elements of other texts" (Fairclough, 1992, p. 270) and

interwoven with traces of many previous texts that have been borrowed, adapted, appropriated,

and transformed (Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992).

Within scholarship on intertextuality, texts have been broadly defined. Although we

typically consider a text to be printed language that can be read, we need not limit our notion of

texts to simply literary or written texts. A text can be comprised of both linguistic and

nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meaning with others such as an utterance, an oral

story, a conversation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a dance, a work of art, or a

poem (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1986, 1992; Sipe, 2001). With

this more inclusive conception of text, the concept of intertextuality extends to the interrelated

nature of the many linguistic and nonlinguistic texts an individual has previously experienced

during their lives. With this broad definition, Short (1992a) proposed that intertextuality can be

viewed as a metaphor for learning-"a central process of making meaning through connections

across present and past texts constructed from a wide variety of life experiences" (Short, 1992a,

p. 315).

Social Nature of Intertextuality

Intertextuality is a social construction located in the interactions between individuals

within a particular social context (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Lemke, 1992). Based on

Bakhtin's sociolinguistic view of language and Vygotsky's sociocultural theory, intertextuality is

socially constructed as individuals act and react to each other through the use of language or









dialogue within a particular sociocultural environment (Bakhtin, 1981, 1986; Bloome & Egan-

Robertson, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978;). Bakhtin (1986) asserts that each individual's language is

uniquely "shaped and developed in continuous and constant interaction with others' individual

utterances" (p.89). According to Bakhtin (1981), over half the words an individual uses in

everyday speech are actually someone else's words from a previous interaction. For Bakhtin

(1981), all language is considered to be social since any utterance an individual makes is in

response to previous utterances and anticipates the utterances of others. Therefore, all spoken

and written texts are shaped by texts they are responding to and texts that they anticipate.

Furthermore, Bakhtin considers language to be socio-ideological embodying individuals' social,

cultural, and political ideologies. Texts are comprised of multiple utterances which each embody

multiple voices and ideologies that are transformed when used by another speaker or writer

(Bakhtin, 1981; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). Therefore, all texts are inherently intertextual.

Bakhtin explained:

Our speech...is filled with others' words, varying degrees of otherness and varying degrees
of 'our-own-ness,' varying degrees of awareness and detachment. These words of others
carry with them their own expression, their own evaluative tone, which we assimilate,
rework, and reaccentuate (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 89).

Bakhtin (1981) proposed that we borrow and transform the voices of others in order to

create our own voice. Researchers and theorists in intertextuality also contend that no oral or

written text is the result of a single speaker or writer; rather, it is the result of multiple voices

interacting that an individual has borrowed and adapted to construct one's own text (Fairclough,

1992; Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). From this perspective, texts are

polyphonic consisting of many voices that dialogically interact within texts (Hartman, 1992;

Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). Hartman (1992) suggests that a text can be viewed as a

"patchwork intertext" resembling a collage of others' voices (p. 297). Since all texts are









composed of traces of multiple texts or textual resources, texts can be fragmented into

constituent elements to determine how individuals construct their own texts by appropriating and

transforming the voices of others (Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992).

The social nature of intertextuality emphasizes the significant role of students' social

interactions and environments on their oral and written language development. Considering the

significance of social interactions in an individual's learning and development, learning

environments should be rich with integrated literacy events in order to take advantage of the

inherent intertextual connections within these events. Research and theory surrounding the

social nature of intertextuality suggest that more studies are needed to determine how particular

classroom environments facilitate intertextual connections between and among texts.

Furthermore, studies are needed to address how intertextually rich learning environments impact

students' written texts. In the following section, intertextuality is discussed as a transactional

process between a reader and a text.

Intertextuality as a Transactional Process

From the 1930s through the early 1970s, the New Criticism movement influenced the

study of literature by advocating objective critical analysis or "close reading" of texts. New

Critics rejected reader's personal, subjective interpretations of texts and considered the author's

intention as well as the historical and social context of the text to be irrelevant. New Critics

proposed that literature was autonomous and had an exact meaning that could be determined by

closely analyzing the text (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995; Sloan, 2002). In part as a response to the

New Criticism Movement, theorists moved toward examining the reading of texts by considering

both the reader and the text. Reader response theory emphasizes the significance of the reader's

role in interpreting texts and creating meaning.









In 1938, Louise Rosenblatt first postulated a transactional theory arguing that the reading

of literature involves a transaction between the reader, the author, and the text. Based on

Rosenblatt's transactional theory (1938/1995; 1978/1994; 1982), intertextuality, the process of

making connections between past and current texts within a particular sociocultural environment,

can be considered a transactional process between a reader and a text in a particular social

context. Rather than using the term "interaction," Rosenblatt (1938/1995) used the term

"transaction" to emphasize the influence of both the reader and the text in the making of

meaning. Therefore, reading is a transaction during which the reader and the text are

continuously affecting one another.

During a reading transaction, a reader and text come together at a particular time under

specific circumstances. Since readers bring different literary, cultural, and social experiences to

their literary transactions, Rosenblatt (1938/1995) proposed that reading experiences and literary

works are unique for each reader. At the heart of reader response literature is Rosenblatt's

transactional theory and literary evocation, "the process in which the reader selects out ideas,

sensations, feelings, and images drawn from his past linguistic, literary, and life experience, and

synthesizes them into a new experience" (Rosenblatt, 1985, p.40). Readers employ previous

textual experiences to actively construct meaning from the text they are reading. A reader's

understanding of past texts will be changed because of new connections with the current text and

the current text will be changed by intertextual connections with previous texts. Rosenblatt

(1938/1995) suggests that a "poem" or new event arises out of these transactions.

According to Rosenblatt's transactional theory (1938/1995, 1982), a reader's stance or

purpose for reading significantly influences a reading transaction. Readers approach a reading

event from one or a combination of both aesthetic and efferent stances depending on their









purpose for reading. Similarly, the same text can be read from either an aesthetic or efferent

stance yet is often a blend of both. Although aesthetic and efferent reading are not opposites,

they lie on either end of a continuum with most reading occurring somewhere between the two

stances. Rosenblatt points out that readers typically adopt either a predominantly efferent or

predominantly aesthetic stance, meaning that they are usually toward one end or the other of the

continuum. Efferent reading occurs when readers read a text in order to gain knowledge. When

reading from a predominantly efferent stance, a reader primarily focuses on analyzing and

extracting information from the text. On the other hand, aesthetic reading occurs when readers

approach a literary work for pleasure rather than to find information. When reading from a

predominantly aesthetic stance, readers actively employ their experiential background

knowledge to virtually experience and live through the text (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995). Rosenblatt

advocates the teaching of both efferent and aesthetic reading because she believes that it is

necessary for readers to make distinctions between the two stances including how and why they

are reading a particular text. Making the purpose for reading explicit enables readers to approach

a text from the appropriate stance and attend primarily to either informational or experiential

aspects (Rosenblatt, 1982).

Readers' responses to literature are significantly affected by the sociocultural context in

which a reading event occurs (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995). Learning environments that help children

develop as responsive readers provide them with numerous experiences to read and respond to

quality literature, encourage a wide variety of responses, and promote interactive discussions

surrounding literature (Barrentine, 1996; Sipe, 1999). Classrooms that foster aesthetic

evocations and responses develop children's enjoyment and appreciation of literature. Aesthetic

transactions with texts and literary discussions surrounding literature help readers to recognize









that writing has meaning. According to Cai (2008) readers must aesthetically respond to a book

before they are fully prepared to begin examining its content in greater depth. Students'

aesthetic responses and personal connections lay the foundation for further examination of a

book.

In order to clearly understand readers' responses to a particular text, we must know how

various factors influence readers' construction of meaning. Readers' backgrounds and

experiences, what is being read, who wrote the text, the purpose for reading, and the

sociocultural factors surrounding the reading event must be taken into consideration. With these

factors in mind, questions arise about how students' aesthetic and efferent responses to read

alouds influence their intertextual construction of meaning and, in turn, impact subsequent texts

students compose. The following section addresses the intertextual significance of the social

interactions students experience within their classroom learning environments.

Intertextuality in Classroom Learning Environments

As emphasized within the previous discussions, the sociocultural environments

surrounding individuals have a significant impact on their oral and written language (Bakhtin,

1981; Vygotsky, 1978). Language is unable to be separated from the social context where it

takes place (Bakhtin, 1981; Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978). Individuals'

language is considerably shaped by social interactions within the primary socialization settings

of their family, community, and school (Vygotsky, 1978).

Lemke (1992) emphasizes the significance of intertextuality in the way language is used

within social communities. Lemke (1992) asserts that the social and cultural practices within a

community determine the meanings and intertextual connections individuals can make and

which connections will be recognized and acknowledged. In addition, the discourse practices

within a community establish ways that texts are related to one another and establish kinds of









recognized relationships between texts or discourses (Lemke, 1992). Bloome and Egan-

Robertson's (1993) microanalysis of the social construction of intertextuality during a fifteen

minute 1st grade reading lesson suggested that proposed intertextual connections must be

recognized, acknowledged, and have social significance in order for intertextuality to be

established within reading and writing events.

With a focus on classroom learning communities, students' language is daily transformed

through their social, cultural, and conversational experiences occurring within the classroom.

Depending on the social and cultural practices within the classroom environment, some

classroom contexts encourage more intertextual connections than others (Lemke, 1992; Short,

1992a, 1992b). Short (1992a) examined the ways in which literature circles, one particular

collaborative classroom learning environment, facilitated intertextual connections across texts

and learners. She found that the classroom learning environment significantly impacted the

intertextual connections students were able to socially construct. Short (1992a) further argued

that hierarchical learning environments, unlike more collaborative learning environments, limit

the intertextual connections available to students because of the social relationships between and

among students and teachers. Within these traditional classroom environments, the teacher's

voice typically dominates discussions with students seeking the "right" answers to their teacher's

questions. Collaborative learning environments support more democratic social relationships by

encouraging students to work together interactively and to value each other's diverse voices,

connections, and perspectives (Short, 1992a). Collaborative classroom learning environments

provide opportunities for social interaction and dialogue which support intertextuality and, in

turn, the development of students' oral and written language.









Within collaborative learning environments, students socially construct their own

intertextual voices as they dialogically interact with diverse voices in the classroom environment.

Intertextuality is not only situated in the dialogue between and among students and teachers but

is also situated in the dialogue with the diverse social speech, language, voices, and ideas within

an author's written text (Short, 1992a; Vygotsky, 1978). Therefore, intertextuality is socially

constructed as students, teachers, and children's book authors with differing sociopolitical and

cultural histories interact within a classroom learning environment. Since individuals' utterances

always contain traces of others' utterances that they have previously experienced, traces of the

oral and written texts students experience in the classroom will remain with them throughout the

rest of their lives.

As students dialogically interact and experience the language of others, they accumulate

words, phrases, expressions, styles, and structures, and integrate them to form what Kamberelis

and McGinley (1992) consider their "individuality as language users" (p. 201). Students'

internalization and transformation of the diverse voices they encounter within their environment

act as a zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1978). According to Vygotsky, "learning

awakens a variety of internal developmental processes that are able to operate only when the

child is interacting with people in his [or her] environment and in cooperation with his [or her]

peers. Once these processes are internalized, they become part of the child's independent

developmental achievement" (Vygotsky 1978, p. 90). That is to say, as students engage in

collaborative social interactions with participants in their classroom environment including

teachers, peers, and children's book authors, they internalize the language of these dialogues,

make it part of their internal speech, and then use this internalized speech independently in oral

and written texts (Vygotsky, 1978). Although we know that collaborative environments support









the social construction of intertextual connections between and among texts, we need to better

understand the characteristics of learning environments that specifically encourage intertextual

connections between literacy events. Specifically, we need to further explore how teachers can

facilitate students to intentionally draw upon their previous textual experiences as they write.

Intertextuality-Informed Writing Research

During the past twenty years, literacy scholars have widely employed the construct of

intertextuality in writing research. Several studies focus on the influence of written texts on

students' writing (Bearse, 1992; Caimey, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993) while others address

the impact of a broader definition of texts on students' composing (Dyson, 1993, 1997;

Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). Together, these writing studies demonstrate the

multiplicity of textual resources available to young writers. Furthermore, these studies suggest

that students' writing embodies traces of the many texts they have previously experienced during

their lives.

Cairney (1990) examined how 6th grade students' prior experiences with narrative texts

impacted their story writing. Through analysis of semi-structured student interviews, Caimey

(1990) found that a majority (90%) of students are aware of intertextual links between the texts

they read and the texts they write. Students' responses demonstrated various ways they borrow,

adapt, appropriate, and transform the written texts they previously experienced including:

reproducing a genre they were reading, using a strong character and characterization as a model

for their own characters, borrowing ideas and/or the plot from books they were reading,

transferring expository content into narrative stories, and creating a narrative by combining the

elements of several narratives. In a similar study focusing on fairy tales, Bearse (1992) explored

how the fairy tales read by 3rd graders influenced the fairy tales that they wrote. After the

students wrote their fairy tales, Bearse administered a questionnaire inquiring about intertextual









connections that the students consciously made between their reading and writing. Like early

studies of reading-writing connections (DeFord, 1981; Eckhoff, 1983), Bearse found that the

students' writing reflected the language of the genre they were reading. Bearse also reported that

students consciously and unconsciously borrowed elements and language from the fairy tales

they had read and blended them into their own stories. The studies of Cairney (1990) and Bearse

(1992) lead to questions about how other texts including conversations and personal experiences

influence students' writing. Also focusing on the fairy tale genre, Sipe (1993) described the

reading-writing connections 6th grade students made when reading traditional and modern fairy

tales and writing transformative fairy tales of their own. Although this study also focused on the

impact of written texts on students' writing, Sipe noted the benefits of social interactions

between and within groups of students as they engaged in writing their transformative stories.

Grounded in theories of intertextuality, social constructivism, and Radical Change,

Pantaleo (2006) examined how one fifth-grade student's writing was influenced by reading

children's literature with Radical Change characteristics. According to Dresang (1999), the

interactive, connective nature of recently published children's literature reflects changing forms,

changing perspectives, and changing formats. As part of a larger study exploring how students

read and understand literature with Radical Change characteristics, Pantaleo collected multiple

data sources including field notes, observational transcriptions, student artifacts, and student

interviews. In order to examine the intertextualities within one student's writing, Pantaleo

(2006) focuses on the analysis of a student's writing and interview transcriptions. Pantaleo

found that the student's writing was significantly influenced by several of the picture books with

Radical Change characteristics as well as demonstrated intertextual links to various other texts.

Pantaleo concludes that individuals make intertextual connections to their previous literary and









life experiences while reading, writing, listening, and viewing. In addition, Pantaleo (2006)

emphasizes that individuals' knowledge and understanding of the complex intertextual

relationships between texts affects their "transactions with, and enjoyment, interpretation, and

appreciation of texts" (p. 177). Although Pantaleo suggests that is necessary for teachers to

model making intertextual connections between and within texts and discuss how these

connections can enrich students' literacy experiences, further research is needed in exemplary

teachers' classrooms in order to provide specific examples of how a teacher can facilitate these

intertextual connections which enrich literacy learning.

Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) examined the interplay of voices within 4th graders'

writing by conducting a case study of five students as they wrote about themselves, their

families, their communities, and their cultural histories. Kamberelis and McGinley collected

multiple sources of data including participant observations, field notes, semi-structured

interviews, and student writing in order to develop an understanding of the source, type, and

function of the voices present in each student's writing. Kamberelis and McGinley segmented

each student's writing into utterances by "who is speaking" (p. 206). Then, they used their

observational and interview data to trace the source of the voice (e.g. teacher, peers, parents), the

type of voice appropriation, and the function of each utterance embodied in the text. Although

there are many ways individuals appropriate and transform others' voices, Kamberelis and

McGinley (1992) employed five forms of voice appropriation and transformation emphasized by

Bakhtin (1981) including: direct quotation, imitation, stylization, parody, and hidden polemic.

Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) found that the writings of all five case study students revealed

multiple voices resonating within their texts. Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) reported that

writers synthesize the textual voices they experience including the language of their parents,









teachers, peers, books, television, and movies. Kamberelis and McGinley suggest voice as an

intertextual, social, and political process since students' appropriation and transformation of

various voices help them form their own personal, social, and political identities. They argue

that a writer's voice is "constructed out of the voices of the individuals and communities to

which the writer has formed various social and political alignments" (p. 213). Since we know

writers appropriate and transform the voices of their social environments, we must better

understand how the diverse voices interacting within a classroom influence students' writing.

More specifically, we must consider how the texts, broadly defined, within learning

environments are reflected in and mentor students' writing.

Also addressing the interplay of multiple voices, Dyson's (1993, 1997) studies of primary

grade children, guided by Bakhtin's sociolinguistic theories, demonstrate how students' complex

social worlds and popular culture texts significantly shape their oral and written texts. Dyson

found that texts students composed in their "official school world" were imbued with themes,

discourse structures, and styles from the "unofficial worlds" of their peers, families, and

communities. Dyson suggests attention must be given to texts of students' sociocultural worlds

as well as to the official texts provided in school. Short (1992a) reported that when interviewing

1st graders about the stories they had written, students made intertextual connections to "a variety

of books, each other's stories, personal experiences, movies, television, objects in the

environment, visual texts, texts in their heads, and stories they yet had to tell" (p. 320). Although

Short (1992a) only briefly mentions the intertextual connections students made in their writing,

this study recognized the wide variety of textual resources that can influence students' writing.

Together, these intertextually-informed writing studies suggest that students' writing

reflects various features of the written, conversational, and popular culture texts they have









previously experienced. We know that students make intertextual connections between the texts

they read and the texts they write (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993).

We also know that students consciously and unconsciously borrow, appropriate, and transform

aspects of previously experienced texts (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997;

Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993). In addition, studies

suggest that students are capable of articulating intertextual connections between their writing

and previously experienced texts through interviews (Cairney, 1990; Kamberelis & McGinley,

1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a). Research employing multiple data collection methods is

needed to determine how dialogic interactions surrounding written texts influence the textual

resources reflected in students' writing. Studies of this nature will add to the literature on how

integrating the language arts (i.e. reading, writing, speaking, and listening) impacts students'

writing. With these studies in mind, interactive read alouds are proposed as a collaborative

learning environment facilitating intertextual connections between and among various texts.

Interactive Read Alouds

Educational research and current teaching practices support the importance of interactive

read alouds in the elementary literacy curriculum (Morrow, 2000; Ray, 2004, 1999; Sipe, 2000,

2008). Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, and Wilkinson (1985) state that "the single most important

activity for building knowledge required for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to

children" (p. 23). Reading aloud introduces children to the enjoyment of reading as well as

motivates students to read voluntarily (Morrow, 2003). Additional benefits of reading aloud

include familiarizing students with the written language of various genres (Calkins, 1994; Ray,

1999; Smith, 1993b), enhancing children's language and comprehension abilities (Beck &

McKeown, 2001), and developing students' literary understanding (Sipe, 2000, 2008).

According to Morrow (2000), readingig stories as an act in itself does not necessarily promote









literacy; however, the research suggests that certain methods, environmental influences, and

interactive behaviors apparently enhance the potential of the read-aloud event for promoting

literacy development" (p. 568).

Interactive read alouds occurring within a collaborative learning community provide a

dialogue rich environment for the social construction of intertextuality and literary

understanding. During read alouds, students become immersed in the sights and sounds of

children's literature and in the discussions surrounding books. Teachers have differing read

aloud styles (Martinez & Teale, 1993) yet implement many similar read aloud practices (Fisher,

Flood, Lapp, and Frey, 2004). Martinez and Teale's (1993) study of the read aloud styles of six

teachers found that each teacher had a distinctive reading style that varied based on the type of

teacher talk that occurred, the type of information discussed during the reading, and the

instructional strategies implemented by the teacher. Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004)

suggest that exemplary teachers commonly implement seven practices during interactive read

alouds.

Teachers:

Select interesting and developmentally appropriate books.
Preview and practice reading the book.
Set a clear purpose for the read aloud.
Model fluent oral reading.
Read with expression and animation.
Stop periodically to discuss the text asking both efferent and aesthetic questions.
Make connections between the read aloud and independent reading and writing
occurring in the classroom.

Some teachers prefer to read aloud with limited dialogue during the reading and conduct an

in-depth discussion afterward. These teachers consider dialogue during read alouds to interfere

with literature by disrupting the flow of the story and, in turn, the students' enjoyment of the

book being read aloud. There is also a concern that excessive dialogue during a read aloud will









reduce students' comprehension of the story. After reading discussions provide opportunities for

teachers and students to discuss, explore, and reflect on personal connections they made to the

story. Furthermore, after reading discussions provide students with opportunities to clarify ideas

and learn about different aspects of literature.

On the other hand, some teachers prefer to interactively read aloud encouraging students to

dialogically interact with the book, their peers, and their teacher throughout the book reading

(Barrentine, 1996). Interactive read alouds encourage students to socially construct meaning as

well as personally respond throughout the reading of the book. When implementing interactive

read alouds, teachers must develop a balance between talk and text in order for interactive read

alouds to be successful. As students engage in dialogue during a read aloud, they collaboratively

construct intertextual connections to previous written texts, conversations, and personal

experiences.

Intertextually-Informed Research on Oral Discourse during Read Alouds

Although read-alouds are one of the most common contexts for responses to literature,

only a few studies have explored the intertextual connections students make during read alouds

(Oyler & Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000a, 2000b, 2001). These studies explore how primary grade

students socially construct intertextual connections during read alouds in order to better

understand students' meaning-making and construction of literary understanding. Within most of

these studies, intertextually has been narrowly defined as connections between the read aloud

texts and other texts such as books, movies, videos, advertising, television programs (Oyler &

Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000b) and student writing (Sipe, 2000a). Only Sipe's (2001) study of

intertextual connections among fairytale variants employed a more inclusive conception of text

including the texts of students' personal experiences.









Oyler and Barry (1996) studied the intertextual connections 1st grade students made during

informational book read alouds and was the only examination of intertextual connections during

read alouds prior to Sipe's studies (2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2008). Oyler and Barry found that

students juxtapose informational books read aloud with various other texts including life

experiences; however, the article focused on texts other than life experiences. Oyler and Barry

noted the significance of the classroom community on the social construction of intertextuality.

Although this study focused on informational read alouds, this study left many unanswered

questions about the general use and nature of intertextual connections during read alouds.

Sipe (2000a) examined 1st and 2nd grader's social construction of literary understanding by

analyzing students' talk during interactive storybook read alouds. By analyzing students' talk by

the unit of the conversational turn, Sipe developed a five faceted theory of literary understanding

including: analytical, intertextual, personal, transparent, and performative responses. Sipe

categorized these five aspects of literary understanding into three basic literary impulses

including: (1) the hermeneutic impulse (analytical & intertextual responses), (2) the

personalizing impulse (personal response), and (3) the aesthetic impulse (transparent &

performative responses). Sipe's (2000a) study sheds light on how students socially construct

literary understanding during storybook read alouds; however, questions remain about how this

social construction of literary understanding may influence students' writing. For instance,

Sipe's (2000a) study leads to questions about how emphasizing one or more of the three literary

impulses, such as the hermeneutic and personalizing impulses, during interactive read alouds

would influence students' subsequent writing.

As an extension of his previous work, Sipe (2000b) investigated the use of intertextual

connections, one of the five aspects of literary understanding, by 1st and 2nd graders during









storybook read alouds. Sipe found that students used intertextual connections for hermeneutic

and aesthetic purposes. He suggested that the hermeneutic uses of intertextual connections

include (1) interpreting and analyzing the story and (2) making generalizations about the

characteristics of literary genres, while the aesthetic uses of intertextual connections include (1)

entering the story and/or personalizing it for creative purposes and (2) creating new stories or

linking stories together. This study demonstrates the importance and various uses of intertextual

connections within oral responses to read alouds but leads to questions about the relationship

between these intertextual connections and students' writing. In addition, further research needs

to be conducted on the characteristics of literacy environments that encourage intertextual

connections within and between read alouds and writing.

Considering a broader definition of text than in previous studies, Sipe (2001) studied how

1st and 2nd grade students used intertextual connections (text-to-text and text-to-life connections)

during picture book read alouds of fairy tale variants to develop their literary understanding.

Through this investigation, Sipe identified and divided seven types of intertextual links into three

categories including personal, text-to-text, and schema-building responses. Using these three

types of responses, Sipe developed a grounded theory of schema-building for traditional stories

suggesting that students build story schema by (1) personalizing the story, (2) making

connections to other stories, and (3) analyzing the story. Sipe (2001) noted that although

intertextual connections were the focus of the study that analytical responses formed "the

necessary backdrop to the intertextual discussion" (p. 347). This study of related texts leads to

further research on how students' schema building for traditional stories correlates with schema

building for other literary genres. Moreover, this study generates questions about how students'

various responses during read alouds are reflected in their writing.









All of the previously mentioned intertextually-informed read aloud studies emphasize the

importance of openly discussing literature and arranging experiences for children that encourage

intertextual connections in order to develop students' literary understanding and encourage

meaning-making. Read alouds, particularly interactive read alouds, appear to be intertextually

rich learning environments. More studies need to be conducted on students' intertextual

connections during read alouds in grades above the primary grades. Furthermore, research needs

to determine how Sipe's grounded theories of literary understanding and schema-building relate

to read alouds of other genres and how these theories may change with grade level. Furthermore,

research needs to be conducted on how students' oral responses during read alouds impact their

writing.

Integrating the Language Arts

Reading and Writing Relationships

"...In our society, at this point in history, reading and writing, to be understood and

appreciated fully, should be viewed together, learned together, and used together" (Tierney &

Shanahan, 1991, p. 275). During the past twenty years, literacy researchers have examined

reading and writing connections from various perspectives and have formulated an

understanding of how and why these processes develop together (Pearson & Tierney, 1984;

Shanahan & Tierney, 1990; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991). Reading and writing are both

constructive processes. Pearson and Tierney (1984) suggest that reading is a composing process

that resembles the composing process proposed by writing scholars such as Murray (1968),

Graves (1983), and Calkins (1994). Readers and writers are both composers of meaning that

proceed idiosyncratically through four stages: planner, composer, editor, and monitor (Pearson

& Tierney, 1984). Furthermore, reading and writing share similar kinds of knowledge and

processes. Although researchers have determined several similarities between reading and









writing, they are not absolutely identical (Shanahan & Tierney, 1990; Tierney & Shanahan,

1991). However, integrating reading and writing improves literacy instruction by fostering

communication and critical thinking (Tierney & Shanahan, 1991).

Even though many studies have been conducted on the relationships between reading and

writing, more research needs to be conducted on the examination of reading and writing together.

Future research needs to address how students idiosyncratically compose meaning and make

intertextual connections within and between their reading and writing.

Nurturing Young Writers: Reading Aloud in Writing Workshop

Authors such as Jane Yolen and J.R.R. Tolkien have long recognized the intertextual

nature of texts. This understanding is exemplified in the following two quotes: "Stories lean on

stories" (Yolen, 1981, p. 15) "there are no new stories, only a 'cauldron of stories' into which we

dip as we write" (J.R.R. Tolken, as cited in Cairney, 1990, p.478). An author "borrows, adapts,

appropriates, and transforms textual resources that come to him secondhand and stylized, already

imbued with the utterances of others" (Hartman, 1992, p. 300). As authors write they synthesize

the various texts they have previously experienced into a collage of textual voices that in turn

will be borrowed and transformed by other authors. As children read, respond, and discuss well-

written literature, they develop a "reservoir of knowledge" about literature that they can then

employ when developing their own writing.

Writing workshop is a model of teaching writing that focuses on students as writers

(Calkins, 1994; Ray, 1999, 2001). Although writing workshops differ slightly from classroom to

classroom, there are several essential characteristics of writing workshops. Writing workshops

focus on nurturing young writers to use writing in personally meaningful ways. Therefore,

students are given choice about what they want to write, yet their writing may be focused on a

particular genre of study. Within writing workshops, predictable blocks of writing time are









provided each day to give students experience writing. During writing workshop, students are

taught about writing in whole-group and small-group mini lessons focusing on particular

strategies and techniques. In addition, students are taught during one-on-one writing conferences

with their teacher and peers. According to Calkins (1994), conferences are at the heart of

teaching in writing workshop. Additionally, writing workshops provide writers with

opportunities to talk about and share their writing. During this time, writers have listeners and

readers responding to their writing which supports their development as writers. Finally, writing

workshops include publication rituals or celebrations where writers celebrate their published

writing. Although these characteristics may be structured differently or referred to using

different terminology, writing workshop is a framework for writing instruction focusing on

developing young writers not simply completing the process of writing.

Writing scholars encourage literature to be read aloud as part of writing instruction,

particularly writing workshop, in order to expose students to exemplary writing models, study

the craft of professional authors, and facilitate students to read like writers (Calkins, 1994;

Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999; Smith, 1983a). Children's literature is a powerful resource for

nurturing young writers. Calkins (1994) considers young writers apprentices of children's

literature authors in writing workshop. She advocates that good books improve the quality of a

writing workshop. Furthermore, Ray (1999) suggests that by studying professional authors and

their craft, young writers can learn many things including: where authors get their ideas, how

they deliberately arrange words to get a particular meaning across to the reader, how they

structure their writing, and how they make their writing "sing with beauty" (1999, p. 28). When

children's literature is woven into a writing workshop it not only makes "lasting impressions" on









young writers and inspires their writing but also develops a supportive classroom community

(Harwayne, 1992).

Summary

This study extends the work previously reviewed above in several ways. Research and

theory addressing the social nature of intertextuality suggest more studies are needed to

determine how particular classroom environments facilitate intertextual connections between and

among texts and how these environments impact students' written texts (Bakhtin, 1981, 1986;

Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Lemke, 1992; Vygotsky, 1978). This study

broadens current understandings about the social nature of intertextuality and literary

understanding by examining the characteristics of a collaborative third-grade literacy

environment that integrates interactive read alouds into writing workshop. Considering

intertextuality as a transactional process (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1878/1994, 1982), this study

explores how students' aesthetic and efferent responses during interactive read alouds influence

their intertextual construction of meaning and impact subsequent texts they compose in writing

workshop. Although we know that collaborative learning environments support the social

construction of intertextual connections between and among texts (Short, 1992a, 1992b), this

study describes the instructional practices within these environments that encourage students to

intentionally draw upon their previous textual experiences as they write. By examining

intertextual connections students made between integrated literacy events within a collaborative

learning environment, this study adds to the body of intertextuality research and builds upon

current conceptions of intertextuality.

This study not only contributes to research regarding intertextuality but will also enable

further consideration of how students' writing reflects their overall literacy environment.

Research suggests that students' consciously and unconsciously borrow, appropriate, and









transform features of texts they have previously experienced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990;

Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993; Short, 1992a).

Employing a broad definition of text, this study extends intertextually-informed writing research

by using multiple data collection methods, including participant observations, semi-structured

interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts, to determine how students

appropriate and transform the textual resources interacting within the literacy environment (i.e.

the voices of their teacher, peers, and book authors) into their writing (Dyson, 1993, 1997;

Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). Furthermore, this study intertwines

intertextually-informed writing and read aloud research by describing how students' social

construction of literary understanding suggested by their oral responses during interactive read

alouds influences their writing during writing workshop. Even though numerous studies have

been conducted on relationships between reading and writing, this study adds to previous

research on reading-writing relationships by examining reading and writing together and

addressing how integrating the language arts impacts students' writing.









CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

Intertextually-informed research has been conducted using many different research

methodologies. In order to gain a better understanding of how students socially construct

intertextual links among integrated reading and writing events, this naturalistic study investigated

intertextuality within a collaborative third-grade learning environment. This qualitative,

descriptive, naturalistic study, situated in the constructivist research paradigm, investigated the

intertextual connections third-grade students constructed between interactive read alouds of

mentor texts at the beginning of writing workshop and their writing during writing workshop.

This six-month study focused on examining how interactive read alouds including reader

response and discussion of author's craft at the beginning of writing workshop influenced

children's subsequent writing. This study employed a broad definition of text including

linguistic and nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meaning with others such as an

utterance, an oral story, a conversation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a work of

art, or a poem (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1992; Sipe, 2001). My

overarching research question was: How do the texts within interactive read alouds at the

beginning of writing workshop mentor children's writing? Three research questions guided this

study:

1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read
aloud into their own writing?

2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual
connections between reading and writing?

3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing?

This chapter begins by addressing the epistemological and methodological foundations of

the study. The following section describes the design of the research, the setting and









participants, and the data collection and analysis methods that were employed in this study. The

last section presents how the credibility and trustworthiness of the study were ensured and

addresses the generalizability of the research (Guba & Lincoln, 1982).

The Constructivist Research Paradigm

Qualitative research is an interpretive, naturalistic field of inquiry where "researchers study

things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms

of the meanings people bring to them" (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000, p.3). Naturalistic inquiries

are significantly influenced by the researcher's choice of research questions, paradigm,

theoretical perspective, methods, data analysis, and context. In order to produce meaningful

findings, the research problem, paradigm, theory, methods, and context of the inquiry must be

congruent (Guba & Lincoln, 1982). Qualitative studies provide researchers with contextualized,

descriptive findings through the process of directly observing, interviewing, and collecting

documents and artifacts in natural settings.

This qualitative study, situated in the constructivist research paradigm, examined how

children's writing reflected the texts within interactive read alouds conducted at the beginning of

writer's workshop. This descriptive, naturalistic study also investigated how the overall literacy

environment, including the teacher's instruction, facilitated the social construction of

intertextuality between reading and writing events. This study, theoretically grounded in

intertextuality and reader response, employed qualitative research methods, including participant

observation, semi-structured interviewing, and collection of student artifacts, to holistically

examine and interpret the intertextual connections third-grade students constructed between

interactive read alouds and their writing during writing workshop. These qualitative methods

captured the students' and teacher's social interactions, their social construction of intertextuality

and literary understanding during interactive read alouds and class discussions, and the influence









of these interactions on the intertextual connections present within students' writing. These

qualitative methods provided rich, descriptive data regarding the literary and socio-constructive

experiences of young writers in a writing workshop.

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy concerned with what kinds of knowledge are

possible and how knowledge is produced or "how we know what we know" (Crotty, 1998, p.8).

There are a range of epistemologies including objectivism, constructivism, and subjectivism.

While objectivists believe that meaning is external to and independent of human consciousness

and subjectivists believe that meaning is imposed on the object by the subject, constructivists

view knowledge and reality as socially constructed from interactions between individuals and

their social environments (Crotty, 1998; Glesne, 1999; Guba & Lincoln, 1994). This study is

framed within the constructivist research paradigm. Constructivists believe that "meanings are

constructed by human beings as they engage with the world they are interpreting" (Crotty, 1998,

p.43). Furthermore, constructivists assert that "different people may construct meaning in

different ways, even in relation to the same phenomenon" (Crotty, 1998, p. 9).

From this constructivist stance, knowledge is constructed as individuals make intertextual

connections among present and past linguistic, literary, and life experiences. Intertextuality is a

socio-constructive process that is essential for learning. Knowledge is constructed

interdependently as individuals in a particular community socially and dialogically interact with

one another. Dialogic interactions include both social interactions between individuals and

literary transactions occurring as individuals interact with an author's text. Thus, within a

classroom community, knowledge is constructed through dialogic interactions between

individuals and between readers and a written text. Although knowledge is socially constructed,









individuals construct their own knowledge as they make intertextual connections to their

previous experiences which make their construction of knowledge unique.

As a primary and intermediate classroom teacher, I have observed how writing curricula,

like the writing workshops of Calkins (1994) and Graves (1983), facilitate the development of

students' authorship and readership by making intertextual links between reading and writing

events. In these writing curriculums, students have daily opportunities to read and discuss

literature as well as write and share their own writing. I believe that these dialogic interactions

form the foundation of children's literary lives. As students compose and become authors of

meaningful texts, they consciously and unconsciously appropriate and transform aspects of prior

literary experiences and dialogic interactions into their writing. Students do not simply

appropriate and transform aspects of these interactions at one specific stage of the writing

process but are influenced by these prior textual experiences throughout their entire composing

process which is idiosyncratic and varies daily for each writer. Therefore, this study examined

how dialogical interactions occurring during writing workshop, including read-alouds and book

discussions, influence the intertextual connections students construct within their writing.

This qualitative inquiry focusing on children's responses to literature and the social nature

of children's reading and writing development is philosophically grounded in the constructivist

research paradigm. Guba and Lincoln (1994) assert that within the constructivist paradigm, the

researcher's voice is that of a "passionate participant" that is "actively engaged in facilitating the

'multivoice' reconstruction of his or her own construction as well as those of all other

participants" (p. 115). Similarly, Crotty (1998) suggests that within the constructivist

epistemology, "no object can be adequately described in isolation from the conscious being

experiencing it, nor can any experience be adequately described in isolation from its object"









(p.45). Furthermore, research framed in the constructivist research paradigm must provide a

"thick description" (Geertz, 1973) of the social context in which the data were collected.

Therefore this study not only examined the students' writing and responses to literature but also

described in detail the overall literacy environment including the teacher's instruction and the

students' writing behaviors during writing workshop.

Description of the Research Site

The research site for this study was the third-grade classroom of Ms. Liz Daniels in a

public charter school (kindergarten through eighth-grade). This public charter school was

located in an urban school district in a large northeastern city in the United States. The selection

of this school was an instance of intensity sampling (Patton, 1990, 2002) because the site was

likely to intensely manifest the phenomenon that I was studying, the social construction of

intertextuality within integrated reading and writing events. The following section begins by

discussing the selection of and access to the research site and concludes with a description of the

setting and participants.

The Research Site: Site Selection and Access

For several months before this study, a research site was sought in which a teacher

integrated reading and writing events, specifically read alouds of mentor texts at the beginning of

writing workshop. During the spring prior to the study, Ms. Daniels, a graduate student in a

literacy course that I taught at a nearby university, invited me to visit and observe in classrooms

at her school since her school employed a balanced literacy curriculum that integrated reading

and writing. In the weeks following Ms. Daniels invitation, I contacted the school's principal

and arranged a meeting with her. During this meeting, the principal shared with me the

philosophy of the school, the school's mission, and provided me with the opportunity to observe

read alouds in kindergarten, first-, and second-grade classrooms. All of the teachers observed









during these observations clearly integrated reading and writing and approached them as a

combined literacy process. One of the observed read alouds was in Ms. Daniels' second-grade

classroom. Upon the conclusion of the observations, the principal inquired if I was interested in

conducting my study at the school and mentioned that Ms. Daniels would be looping up with her

class to third-grade the following year. Since I had previously conducted a pilot study in a third-

grade classroom, a third-grade classroom was ideal for this study. Furthermore, Ms. Daniels was

interested in working with me and participating in my study the following school year.

Accordingly, research protocol and informed consent letters were submitted to the

University of Florida's Institutional Review Board and received approval (Appendix A). A copy

of the approved protocol and informed consent letters and my proposal were given to the

principal and Ms. Daniels so they had a detailed account of the procedures that would be

employed in this study. At the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year, the year in which the

study was conducted, Ms. Daniels signed the teacher informed consent and provided me with the

opportunity to read an oral script explaining the study to the students. After the oral explanation,

students received a copy of the approved informed consent letter which introduced myself and

explained the purpose and procedures of the study to take home to their parents. Parents and

guardians of all 14 students signed and returned the permission slips giving consent for their

children to participate in the study. In order to protect the students' privacy & identity, all

students' names are pseudonyms. Ms. Daniels requested that she be identified by her real name

since she was interested in collaborating on conference presentations and/or journal articles.

The School

This study was conducted in a public charter school (kindergarten through eighth- grade)

located in a large northeastern U.S. city. The school enrolled approximately 366 students with

182 students in the elementary school (kindergarten through third-grade) and 184 students in the









middle school (fifth through eighth-grade). A majority of the school's students (67%) came

from low-income backgrounds as defined by federal guidelines and lived in adjacent urban

neighborhoods. The diverse population of the city, the multicultural enrollment of students

within the surrounding urban school district, and the project school are illustrated in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1. Demographics of City, School District, and Project School
African Asian/ Hispanic White Native Multi-race,
American Pacific American non-
Islander Hispanic


City* 25.3% 7.6% 14.4% 54.5% 0.4% 4.4%

Surrounding 39.3% 8.6% 36.7% 13.4% 0.4% 1.5%
Urban School
District (K-
12)**

Project 75.7% 0.8% 21.3% 1.1% 0% 1.1%
School**
* City data based on 2000 census. **School district and project school data by State Department of Education

The teachers and administrators at this school were firmly committed to providing the

urban community's underserved youths a quality college preparatory education. The students at

this school were encouraged to demonstrate the core values of focus, integrity, respect, self-

determination, and teamwork. In order to increase students' instructional time, the school had

extended school days from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and an extended school year of 190 days. Due to

increased instructional time, elementary students received at least 3 hours of literacy instruction

daily. All teachers implemented a balanced literacy approach designed to help all students learn

to read and write effectively. Furthermore, teachers used an integrated approach to language arts

instruction. Teachers used a variety of literacy instruction techniques and strategies within their

classrooms including reading and writing workshops. All teachers had a scheduled time to read

aloud to their students during the literacy block in addition to other times throughout the school

day. Children's literature trade books formed the foundation of literacy instruction and were









frequently integrated within content area instruction. Because the school did not purchase basal

textbooks, money allotted for textbooks was spent on trade books and other supplies for the

classrooms. The faculty and staff were dedicated to professional development and collaboration.

They regularly met to discuss professional books, plan best practice instruction, and develop

innovative units of study.

The Classroom Teacher

Ms. Liz Daniels, European-American and in her twenties, was in her fifth year of teaching.

Upon graduating from Brown University, she became a Teach for America corps member and

taught third- and fifth-grade in a low-income school in Atlanta. At the time of this study,

Daniels was seeking her reading specialist degree at a nearby university. Daniels implemented a

balanced, integrated literacy curriculum with instructional practices that encouraged students to

make connections across texts, ideas, and experiences. The curriculum in this classroom was

organized in a way that students expected to make connections throughout various subject areas.

On a typical day, Daniels read aloud to her students multiple times as part of reading workshop,

writing workshop, and vocabulary/word study in addition to the scheduled read aloud. Daniels

believed it was essential to provide students with authentic literacy experiences-reading real

books and writing real texts. Furthermore, students were given multiple opportunities to

independently read and write throughout the school day.

The Students

There were 14 students (8 girls and 6 boys) in Ms. Daniels' third grade classroom when

the study was conducted. All 14 students looped up from second- to third-grade with Ms.

Daniels. All 14 of the students' parents gave permission for their children to participate in this

study. Of the 14 students, 10 were African-American, 3 were Hispanic, and 1 student was Asian.

93% of the students qualified for the school's free or reduced-price lunch program. 3 students









were English as Second Language learners (ESL) and 1 student had an Individualized

Educational Plan (IEP). Three students received additional assistance in reading and writing

from a student support teacher.

Although all 14 students participated in the study, 4 students (2 boys and 2 girls) were

selected as focus students for more detailed case study. Since Ms. Daniels was most familiar

with her students, I collaborated with her as I selected 4 focus students for this study. Ms.

Daniels and I discussed the students' reading and writing abilities as well as their ability to

verbally express themselves. After observing and conversing with all 14 students during writing

workshop, focus students were selected during the first week of the study. In order to develop a

more in-depth understanding of the intertextual connections students constructed between

interactive read alouds and their writing, I selected 4 focus students who had different reading

and writing abilities and diverse writing habits and procedures. Of the 4 focus students (2 girls

and 2 boys), 2 were African-American, 1 was Hispanic, and 1 was Asian.

Chapter 4 further contextualizes this study by providing a more detailed description of the

school's philosophy and environment, Ms. Daniel's philosophy of teaching and learning, and the

third-grade classroom environment including the students, the physical arrangement of the

classroom, the daily schedule and routines, and the integrated literacy curriculum.

Data Collection Methods

Over the past thirty years, researchers have employed a variety of qualitative

methodologies to study children's writing (Calkins, 1994; DeFord, 1981; Dyson, 1993, 1997;

Eckhoff, 1983; Harwayne, 1992), reader response (Beach, 1995; Lehr & Thompson, 2000; Sipe,

2000a), and intertextuality (Bearse, 1993; Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Kamberelis &

McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 1993, 2000a, 2000b,2001, 2008).

Literacy researchers rely on qualitative methodologies to study the socio-constructive nature of









children's literacy learning within their home and school environments (Bloome & Egan-

Robertson, 1993; Calkins, 1994; Dyson, 1992, 1993; Harwayne, 1992; Heath, 1983; Kamberelis

& McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 2000, 2008). Naturalistic qualitative inquiries

enable researchers to holistically study and observe children in their natural educational settings

with minimal interference.

Educational research on intertextuality requires a variety of data collection procedures in

order to determine intertextual relationships between texts (Lemke, 1992). In this study, I

collected multiple data sources in order to identify, classify, and interpret the intertextual

relationships students constructed between interactive read alouds and their writing during

writing workshop. Multiple data sources facilitated the development of a comprehensive

understanding of how children's writing reflected the textual resources within this particular

research context. Short (1992a) emphasizes that although researching intertextuality in

collaborative classroom environments complicates data collection and analysis, this type of

research enables researchers to "better understand how intertextual processes actually function in

the human process of making sense of the world" (p. 332).

Participant-Observations

Bogdan (1973) defines participant observation as a research method "characterized by a

prolonged period of contact with subjects in the place in which they normally spend their time"

(p.303). While immersed in this social setting, researchers systematically and unobtrusively

collect data through field notes, open-ended interviews, and other documents in order to

understand complex social environments and relationships (Bogdan, 1973; Glesne, 1999).

Within the method of participant observation, there are various degrees of researcher

participation from being an observer who observes without interacting to a full participant who

actively participates in the community of study (Glesne, 1999; Spradley, 1980).









Literacy researchers have conducted their studies from various points on the participant

observation continuum (Dyson 1993,1997; Heath, 1983; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short,

1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 2000a). While Dyson (1993) conducted her study as a passive observer "to

observe the children as they went about their own social work" (p.26), Heath (1983) completely

immersed herself in the home and school communities of Roadville and Trackton in order to

explore children's socialization and language development within their communities.

Qualitative researchers such as Kamberelis & McGinley (1992), Pantaleo (2006), Short (1992a,

1992b), and Sipe (2000) would be considered participants as observers (Glesne, 1999) since

they actively participated in classrooms and made their research intentions known to the teachers

and students while observing the overall classroom environment and literacy curriculum.

My stance as a researcher ranged on the continuum of participant observation (Glesne,

1999; Spradley, 1980). From September through February, I visited the third-grade classroom at

least twice a week during the literacy block to observe writing workshop. Writing workshop

routinely occurred each day and included interactive read alouds/literature-based mini-lessons,

writing time, conferring, and sharing. Over the course of the study, I observed writing workshop

a total of 33 times which does not include informal observations prior to the beginning of the

study nor publishing parties that I attended. 8 of the 33 observations were interactive read alouds

of mentor texts with the remaining 25 observations writing workshop mini-lessons based on the

mentor texts read aloud. During the course of this study, I observed two writing workshop units

including a Nonfiction Research Unit and a Sentence Structure Unit. The Nonfiction Research

Unit included the reading of two mentor texts, Spiders (Gibbons, 1994) and Bicycle Book

(Gibbons, 2001), while the Sentence Structure Unit included the reading of three mentor texts,









Henry the Dog i/ih No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and Animal Dads

(Collard, 1997).

Throughout writing workshop, I collected detailed, descriptive field notes that included

students' responses and behaviors, the teacher's interactions with the students, and the overall

climate of the literacy classroom. During interactive read alouds/literature-based mini-lessons

and sharing time, I sat on a chair behind the students on the reading carpet and took detailed field

notes without participating in the discussion. While the students are writing and conferring with

their teacher during writing time, I observed the students' writing behaviors and noted teacher

and student discourse during writing conferences. My role as a researcher shifted from being

predominantly an observer of writing workshop to a participant as observer when conducting

student and teacher interviews. Each week during writing time, I conducted brief informal

interviews with all 14 students about their writing while they were engaged in the composing

process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted twice, at the end of each writing workshop

unit, with all 14 students and focused on the writing the students chose to publish. Students

looked forward to sharing their writing with me and periodically would ask me to meet with

them because they wanted to share a particular story they wrote. While circulating around the

classroom observing and conducting informal interviews, students would occasionally ask me

questions about their writing including the meaning of words, if their writing "made sense," or if

they should add more to a certain part of their story. Because I did not want to influence the

students' writing, I intentionally did not guide their writing but made brief comments

encouraging students to be introspective. For example, when students asked, "Should I add more

details to this part of my story?" I would reply, "Why don't you read your story aloud to me and

see if it needs more details?" After reading their writing aloud, students evaluated and made









their own decision about adding details to their writing. As the study progressed, students

realized that during writing time I was interested in observing them write and learning about

their writing and was not a second teacher in the classroom. Although informal teacher

interviews or conversations about teaching and learning in the classroom were conducted at least

every other week, many questions I had following observations or during data analysis were

answered by Ms. Daniels through email correspondences. I limited my active participation in the

classroom because I was conscious of my influence on the children's writing and did not want to

interfere with the natural classroom environment including Ms. Daniels' literacy instruction. As

a researcher ranging on the participant observation continuum, I was able to develop a better

understanding of the complex nature of intertextuality within this collaborative literacy

environment as the teacher and students participated in integrated reading and writing events.

The interactive read alouds/literature-based mini-lessons were digitally recorded with a

digital voice recorder on the days that I observed in the classroom and video recorded two to

three times per month. The digital voice recorder was placed on the radiator beside the reading

carpet where the interactive read alouds/literature-based mini-lessons took place. Semi-

structured student interviews were also digitally recorded. Photographs were taken of the

students and teacher engaged in all portions of writing workshop in order to permanently

document various aspects of the literacy environment. Digital and video recordings were able to

capture the teachers' and students' authentic language, dialogue, and interactions. Video

recordings of the teacher's instruction and the students' interactions and responses have become

permanent observations that can be referred back to repeatedly (Glesne, 1999).

Field Notes and Transcriptions

Field notes collected during participant observations should be descriptive, analytic,

systematic, and detailed (Bogdan, 1973; Glesne, 1999). Complete field notes enable the









researcher to accurately portray the social context and interactions of the individuals they are

observing. Field notes can be taken during the observation or written up immediately after the

observation. Either way, after the observation, field notes should be read over, clarified,

expanded, and reflected upon (Glesne, 1999).

Qualitative research on children's oral and written language development and responses to

literature utilized field notes to clarify and supplement other data collection methods such as

audio recordings, video recordings, and other documentation (Dyson, 1993; Heath, 1983; Sipe,

2000, 2008). Similarly, my observational field notes clarified and supplemented digital

recordings of writing workshop, student and teacher interviews, student artifacts, and other data

collected during the study. Throughout this study, over 150 pages of handwritten observational

field notes were kept in a spiral-bound notebook. The observational field notes focused on

descriptively portraying the reading and writing activities in which the students were engaged,

the teacher's interactions with the students, the students' interactions with each other, and the

overall climate of the literacy classroom. Field notes also included a diagram of the classroom,

lists of reading and writing partners, pseudonyms chosen by the students, and students' seats on

the carpet. Although the focus of this study was on writing workshop, field notes were taken on

activities observed before and after writing workshop including portions of shared reading,

poetry and/or vocabulary read aloud. Field notes written during writing workshop were labeled

and divided into 3 sections: Interactive Read Aloud or Mini-Lesson, Writing Time, and Sharing

Time. During the interactive read aloud/literature-based mini-lesson and sharing time, I focused

on capturing student and teacher behaviors and interactions and noted the names of students

responding to facilitate accurate transcriptions. Since I briefly met with students at their writing

spots throughout writing time, this section of field notes included student writing observations,









comments about the overall classroom environment, and a list of the writing conferences

conducted each day. Student writing observations included the student's name underlined and

followed by a brief description of what and how the student was writing and notes about our

conversation. Student's comments of particular interest were written verbatim and surrounded

by quotation marks. Particular attention was given to observing the four focus students at the

beginning of each writing time. In addition, I observed and took field notes when one of the four

focus students was in a writing conference with Ms. Daniels. Within the margins of my field

notes, I included analytic notes (Glesne, 1999) regarding my thoughts, speculations, questions,

and preliminary conclusions. This notebook also included notes from informal conversations

with the classroom teacher and the principal regarding this study.

Like Dyson (1993), I used my handwritten observational notes as I transcribed and

annotated the digital recordings of the dialogue occurring during writing workshop. Digital

recordings were transcribed verbatim into field note forms with a large left hand margin for

analysis (Appendix B). Transcriptions were completed as soon as possible after each

observation. All 33 observation transcriptions, like the field notes were divided into three

sections: Writing Workshop Read Aloud or Mini-Lesson, Writing Time, and Sharing Time.

Additional observational notes were included at the end of the transcription. Field notes

regarding the student writing observations were rewritten and expanded upon in the

transcription. All observation transcriptions were labeled and organized in a four-inch three-ring

binder. At the end of each writing unit, each student's writing observations for the entire unit

were copied from the observation transcriptions and collected together to form a Summary of

Observations/Informal Interviews that was placed in the center brads of the student's data

collection folder. This Summary of Observations provided a glimpse into each student's writing









process, particularly the four focus students who participated in at least two informal interviews

each week.

Informal and Semi-Structured Interviews

Interviewing is a method employed by qualitative researchers to gain a better

understanding of a complex phenomenon. According to Glesne (1999), interviews enable

researchers to "capture the unseen" and learn "how respondents think or feel about something;

and how they explain or account for something" (p. 93). Semi-structured interviews are less

structured than formal interviews with a fixed written set of questions on a specific topic yet are

more structured than informal interviews with open-ended questions (Glesne, 1999). Semi-

structured interviews include open-ended questions focused on specific topics or themes that can

be flexibly sequenced and formed based on the conversation that evolves between the

interviewer and interviewee. Semi-structured interviews enable the researcher to probe the

conversation in order to elicit more specific descriptions, better understand the interviewee's

point of view, and clarify their interpretation of the conversation (Kvale, 1996). Spradley (1979)

expresses how interviews allow interviewers to learn from the interviewee when he writes:

I want to understand the world from your point of view. I want to know what you know
and the way you know it. I want to understand the meaning of your experience, to walk in
your shoes, to feel things as you feel them, to explain things as you explain them. Will you
become my teacher and help me understand? (p.34)

Spradley (1979) suggests that it is best to consider interviews as a series of friendly

conversations in which the researcher slowly assists the interviewees in sharing their

experiences. He emphasizes the need to develop rapport with the interviewees and warns against

turning interviews into formal interrogations.

Interviews can also be conducted informally in order to gain a better understanding of

interviewees' interpretations of what is happening at a particular time and place. Informal









interviews do not rely on predetermined questions and are less structured than semi-structured

interviews. Informal interviews include open-ended questions that can be asked in the context of

an ongoing observation. Open-ended, informal interviews allow the researcher to adapt to a

specific time and place and allow other issues related to a general topic to be addressed.

Furthermore, informally interviewing students while they are engaged in the act of writing

allows the researcher to learn about students' writing processes "when children's memory and

understanding of what they are doing is much more vivid" (Graves, 1994, p. 71).

Literacy researchers frequently use interviews to gain insights into children's writing

processes, the content of their writing, and how their writing is intertextually related to previous

texts (Cairney, 1990; Graves, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Lemke,

1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a). Graves (1994) advises the use of interviews to learn more

about students' experiences and interests as well as their writing processes and potential as a

writer. Graves (1994) demonstrates a method of conducting semi-structured interviews by

examining a piece of a child's writing and inquiring about various aspects of the writing during

the interview. According to Graves (1994), interviewing children in this manner helps the

interviewer "become sensitive to the potential children possess" and "begin to spot details in

children's writing that reflect knowledge of both content and process" (p.92). Broad open-ended

interview questions can elicit information about students' reading and writing experiences and

the connections they make between the two processes. Harwayne (1992) suggests that when

students bring writing samples and professional literature to their interviews it can "serve as a

point of departure for the conversation to follow" (p.40). Much like the semi-structured

interviews of Graves (1994) and Harwayne (1992), Kamberelis and McGinley's (1992)

intertextual study of one writer's construction of text and self also employed semi-structured









interviews focusing on students' previous writings. Including a writing sample and/or a

literature selection that has influenced a writer in the interview process enables the interviewer to

gain a better understanding of the writers' goals, what they envision as quality writing, and how

previous textual experiences have influenced their writing. Semi-structured and informal

interviews enable researchers to clarify intertextual relationships observed in children's writing.

During this study, I conducted informal and semi-structured interviews with all 14 students

as well as informally interviewed the teacher. Throughout this study, I focused on developing a

rapport with the students and teacher so that they considered me a trusted member of their

literacy community and felt comfortable conversing during interviews. Each week, I conducted

brief informal interviews with all 14 students about their writing while they were engaged in the

composing process. Informal interviews were conducted more frequently, during each

observation, with the four focus students. Informal interviews were conducted at each student's

designated writing spot and lasted, on average, approximately 4 minutes. Although these

informal interviews were initially digitally recorded, I found that a more natural conversation

about the students' writing ensued when I simply sat beside the student and took copious field

notes. In order to capture students' authentic language, comments and explanations of interest

were written verbatim and surrounded by quotation marks. Informal interviews began as soon as

I greeted the students and sat down beside them. Since students were all at different stages of the

writing process, I typically asked them a question such as, "What are you writing (or working

on)?" or "How is your writing going?" Then, students shared their writing, planning sheets, note

cards, or illustrations with me. Based on what students were working on, a brief conversation

followed about the content and ideas within their writing and/or their writing process. These

informal student interviews remained a part of the observation transcriptions in order to situate









the students' writing within the context of the observation; however, they were also compiled

together into a Summary of Observations/Informal Interviews for each child in order to gain

insights into each student's overall writing process.

Informal teacher interviews were conducted approximately every other week during the

teacher's planning period. These informal interviews or conversations focused on better

understanding the teacher's philosophy of teaching and learning, sharing my observations, and

discussing themes emerging from my data analysis. Like the students' informal interviews, these

interviews were initially recorded; however, I felt that the digital recorder added a formality to

the conversation that limited the discussion rather than enhanced it. Therefore, I took detailed

field notes during these conversations using the same notation system as I used in the informal

student interviews to capture the teacher's authentic language. The teacher and I also frequently

communicated by email. Email correspondences complemented the informal interviews by

further answering questions that arose during observations and data analysis.

Semi-structured interviews with all 14 student participants occurred twice, at the end of

each writing workshop unit, and focused on the writing that the students chose to publish. Semi-

structured interviews were conducted in a storage room attached to the third grade classroom

during the morning literacy block. Interviews typically ranged from 20 minutes to over 1 hour

depending on the length of the students' writing. All semi-structured interviews were digitally

recorded and transcribed verbatim by the researcher.

Prior to the semi-structured interviews, students' published writings were divided into

sentences, defined as a group of words that contained a complete thought, and initially analyzed

for evidence of possible intertextual connections to the texts within the interactive read alouds.

Sentence-by-sentence each student's writing was typed into a writing analysis table which









included the sentences listed in the far left column and sources of possible intertextual

connections in the remaining columns to the right. The sources of intertextual connections

varied based on the writing unit; however, writing analysis tables for both units included the

texts within the interactive read alouds (e.g., Teacher, Classmates, and Mentor Texts Read

Aloud). During these interviews, the student sat beside me on the floor of the storage room. The

mentor texts read aloud during the writing unit were propped up on the book shelves in front of

us. Semi-structured interviews for the nonfiction writing unit also included the bin of books

students read and researched regarding their topic. The student's published writing was on the

floor in between us, his/her sentence-by-sentence writing analysis was on my lap on top of

his/her data collection folder, and the semi-structured interview questions were in front of me.

Like Graves (1994), Harwayne (1992), Kamberelis and McGinley (1992), and Pantaleo (2006), I

asked students to share their published writings or books with me as a springboard for further

discussion about their writing. I began each interview by saying:

When writers write, they borrow ideas, words, and phrases from many places including
books at home, books at school, conversations, TV shows, websites, museums, zoos-all
over the place. As we look at your writing today, I'd like you to explain to me all of the
ideas and connections you made within your writing.

In order to determine and clarify the intertextual connections within students' published writings,

I asked students questions about the purpose of their writing, the content of their writing, and

how they decided to craft various aspects of their writing. After beginning with some general

questions about the student's writing and illustrations, the student and I discussed each sentence

in the published writing individually. The interviews concluded with a discussion of how the

authors' writing within each mentor text, their teacher's writing lessons, and their classmates

helped them to become a better writer. The following semi-structured interview questions,

informed by my pilot study and previous studies of intertextuality (Bearse, 1992; Kamberelis &









McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006), elicited insightful, meaningful responses about students'

writing. During the semi-structured interviews, I used the following questions to guide our

conversation:

Why did you write this?
Why did you choose to write about this topic?
What is the purpose of your writing?
Where did you get this idea?
Where did you get the idea for...?
Who do you think would like to read this writing?
What details in your book are like other books you remember?
How did (author's name) writing in (title of book) help you to become a better writer?
How did Ms. Daniels lessons during writing workshop help you with your writing?
How did your classmates help you with your writing?

The interviews at the end of the second writing unit also included the following questions

which addressed themes discovered during data analysis:

During writing workshop do you feel that you are a reader or a writer or both?
Do you think that reading and writing are connected? How?
How does reading make you a better writer?
How does writing make you a better reader?

Students' responses during the interview were digitally recorded as well as recorded by hand

within the students' writing analysis document. The interviews were transcribed verbatim into

an interview transcription form. A final copy of each student's writing analysis was digitally

completed while listening to and transcribing the student's interview. Semi-structured interview

transcriptions and rough drafts and final drafts of students' writing analysis were kept inside

students' data collection folders.

Collection of Student and Teacher Artifacts

Artifacts, including students' writing and teacher's unit lesson plans, are documents that

"corroborate your observations and interviews and thus make your findings more trustworthy"

(Glesne, p.58, 1999). Furthermore, Glesne (1999) suggests that documents provide "historical









and contextual dimensions to your observations and interviews" (p. 59). Artifacts may redirect

observations and interviews and provide information that is not available from other data

collection methods.

Qualitative literacy researchers collect artifacts such as student writing, written responses,

and journals in order to better understand students' writing processes and concepts about literacy

(Calkins, 1994; Dyson, 1992/1993; Graves, 1983,1994; Harwayne, 1992; Newkirk, 1989;

Pantaleo, 2006; Ray, 1999; Short, 1992b). Student artifacts can inform student interviews

(Graves, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006), clarify literacy

events (Dyson, 1993; Short, 1992b), demonstrate a writer's intentional use of craft (Ray, 1999),

or illustrate a child's writing development (Newkirk, 1989). During this study, I collected

artifacts from all 14 students including all their completed writings, planning sheets, and

published writings from each unit. I scanned all student artifacts into PDF files and returned the

original documents to the students. In addition to student artifacts, I collected teacher artifacts

including writing workshop lesson plans, unit overviews, and the third-grade curriculum plan

which facilitated a better understanding of the overall literacy environment as well as the

integration of reading and writing events.

Data Analysis

In qualitative research, data collection and analysis are not chronological stages in the

research process but occur simultaneously and mutually influence one another from the time

research begins (Glesne, 1999; Spradley, 1980). Qualitative data analysis is an iterative,

recursive process with theories emerging as data is collected which leads to further data

collection and the testing and refining of theories. In this study, I digitally recorded and

transcribed verbatim interactive read alouds/literature based mini-lessons and semi-structured

student interviews. Participant observations were recorded in field notes and used to annotate









observation transcriptions. In addition, numerous student and teacher artifacts were collected.

Multiple sources of data were analyzed by various methods in order to develop a comprehensive

understanding of how the students' writing reflected the texts within the interactive read alouds

at the beginning of writer's workshop. Analysis of multiple data sources also provided insights

into the characteristics of a literacy environment and the teacher's instruction that encouraged

intertextual connections between reading and writing.

The multiple data sources in this study were analyzed according to Strauss and Corbin's

(1990) description of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. I used the constant

comparative method as described by Glaser and Strauss (1967) when I assigned, categorized, and

modified codes throughout the data collection and analysis of my study. During open coding, I

broke down, examined, compared, conceptualized, and categorized the data. Open coding

involved the "naming and categorizing of phenomena through close examination of the data"

(Strauss and Corbin, p. 62, 1998). Codes were noted on the left side of all transcriptions. During

open coding, coded text from observation and interview transcriptions were organized into

coding sheets with the code name and definition of the code at the top followed by instances of

the particular code labeled beneath. These coding sheets organized the numerous sources of data

as well as facilitated the categorization of codes into conceptual categories.

Open coding began with line-by-line analysis of the observational transcripts which

generated many conceptual labels regarding the characteristics of a literacy environment that

encourage intertextual connections between reading and writing. Additionally, through open

coding categories emerged regarding the teacher's facilitation of intertextual connections

between reading and writing. As open coding progressed, analysis of observational transcripts

focused on analyzing the content and meaning within larger sections of text such as the









conversational turn, defined by Sinclair and Coulthard as "everything said by one speaker before

another began to speak" (as cited in Sipe, 2000, p. 263), or a series of conversational turns. For

example, the following conversational turns occurred during the interactive reading of Kate

Feiffer's Henry the Dog ni itl No Tail (2007) at the beginning of writing workshop:

Osahru: That's a lot of ors.

Ms. Daniels: I hear a lot of interesting things. I, too, think this is an interesting sentence
and I heard what Osahru said that he thought it was interesting because he was noticing
that there were a lot of ors. I think it is very interesting how Kate Feiffer used these ors to
join together the description of the tail. Yes, Frenia.

Frenia: I also liked this sentence because I liked the word puffy and it has a lot of
describing words.

When open coding this excerpt from the observational transcript, I coded both Osahru and

Frenia's conversational turns as "noticing." I coded Ms. Daniels' conversational turn with

several different codes in order to gain a better understanding of how her comments facilitated

students to make intertextual connections between their reading and writing. I coded the first

sentence as "acknowledging" since it recognized the students' previous responses. The

remainder of the conversational turn was coded as "extending" since the comment elaborated

upon the students' responses. Ms. Daniels' conversational turn was further coded as

"examining" since she extended the students' "noticing" response by examining the author's

purpose of using several ors to describe. Throughout the observational transcriptions, I noted

numerous instances where the teacher and/or students similarly noticed and examined the

author's craft and the teacher acknowledged and extended the students' responses. Preliminary

concepts such as these emerged from the open coding of the observational transcriptions.

In addition to the observational transcripts, analysis of students' semi-structured interview

transcripts generated categorical codes addressing how they appropriated and transformed the

texts from the context of the interactive read alouds into their writing and illustrations. Students'









published writing, which served as the focus of the semi-structured student interviews, were

divided into sentences defined as a group of words that contained a complete thought. The

sentence was chosen as the unit of analysis, rather than the utterance (Kamberelis & McGinley,

1992), because I was interested in holistically examining the intertextual connections including

the syntactic and semantic properties within each sentence. Students' writing was initially

analyzed prior to the student interviews for evidence of intertextual connections to the interactive

read aloud event (eg. teacher, classmates, read aloud mentor texts). However, because I did not

want to make assumptions about the intertextual connections that I noted, discussion of each

sentence occurred during the student interviews which clarified the various connections included

within each sentence and confirmed or rejected the preliminary analysis. Simultaneously during

student interviews, students' writings were analyzed for the source of intertextual connections as

well as for intertextual links to the meaning, form, and style (Fairclough, 1992) of the texts

within the interactive read aloud. For example, the following discussion occurred during

Jermaine's semi-structured interview about his nonfiction writing titled Turtles:

Researcher: Tell me about this illustration (Illustration is at the top of his writing about
turtle's bodies).

Jermaine: That is a diagram about a turtle and I got this from the Sea Turtles book because
I can show what kind of turtle. I got the eyes, head, legs, tail, and shell so that the reader
can know what the body parts of the turtle is.

Researcher: Is there another book that you have seen a diagram like this?

Jermaine: The Spiders book and Bicycles book. Because you can see in the Spiders book
what the... (flips to page showing diagram in Gail Gibbons' Spiders (1993) comparing the
bodies of a spider and an insect).

When open coding this excerpt from Jermaine's interview, I coded this explanation of his

diagram with several codes. To begin with, I coded his first conversational turn as

"understanding purpose of text features" because he understood the purpose of diagrams, a









nonfiction text feature. In addition, I coded this first explanation as "illustrating for readers"

since Jermaine explicitly stated that he included this diagram in order for the reader to know the

body parts of a turtle. Furthermore, Jermaine's second conversational turn was coded as

"mentoring mentor texts (nonfiction)" since the Gail Gibbons' Spiders book acted as a mentor

for the diagram he included within his nonfiction writing. Throughout the semi-structured

interviews about students' nonfiction writing, I noted many instances of students understanding

the purpose of various nonfiction text features including table of contents, labeling illustrations,

glossaries, nonfiction paragraph structure (topic sentence & supporting details) and organization.

Similarly, I found numerous instances of students "illustrating for readers" as well as "writing

for readers." Preliminary codes such as these emerged from the analysis of the semi-structured

interviews.

During open coding, coded text from observation and interview transcriptions were

organized into coding sheets with the code name and definition of the code at the top followed

by instances of the particular code labeled beneath. These coding sheets organized the numerous

sources of data as well as facilitated the categorization of codes into conceptual categories.

During axial coding, I categorized the numerous initial codes and concepts into larger

conceptual categories by "making connections between a category and its sub-categories"

(Strauss and Corbin, p.97, 1990). Axial coding resulted in the development of broad conceptual

categories describing how interactive read-alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influence

students' writing. Once I had a manageable number of broad conceptual categories, I began

selective coding to relate the broad conceptual categories to each other in order to perceive

patterns and relationships. During selective coding, I integrated the categories that I had

developed and selected a main category or "core category" that related to all other categories









(Strauss & Corbin, 1990). In this study, the central phenomenon or core category that related to

all other categories was reading like a writer and writing like a reader. According to Glaser and

Strauss (1967), I developed a grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader

which addresses the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within

integrated reading and writing events based on the conceptual relationships I constructed from

my data.

While Chapter 4 provides the context for this study, Chapter 5, 6, and 7 comprise the

findings of this study developed through the use of open coding, axial coding, selective coding

(Strauss & Corbin, 1990) and the constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

Chapter 5 addresses the overall phenomenon of reading like a writer and writing like a reader in

this third-grade classroom. Chapter 6 follows with a detailed case study of four of these third-

grade readers and writers. Chapter 7 provides the findings regarding characteristics of the

teacher and literacy environment that facilitates students to read like writers and write like

readers.

Issues of Credibility, Trustworthiness, and Generalizability

Like rationalistic studies, naturalistic studies must account for internal validity, reliability,

objectivity, external validity. Guba and Lincoln (1981, 1982) propose that these rationalistic

terms can be translated into terms more suitable for naturalistic studies, respectively, credibility,

dependability, confirmability, and transferability. This section begins by addressing the

measures taken to satisfy issues of credibility, dependability, and confirmability and then focuses

on the generalizability of the findings in this study.

In order to ensure that my data analysis and interpretations were credible I had prolonged

and persistent engagement in the classroom from September through February. Over the course

of this study, I accumulated over 100 digital voice recordings including 66 observational digital









voice recordings (33 interactive read aloud/literature-based mini-lessons and 33 sharing time)

and 38 student and teacher interviews. In addition there were observational field notes on all

observations, including observations prior to the beginning of the study, as well as field notes

taken during informal teacher and student interviews. During the study, I regularly debriefed

with members of my committee and met with the classroom teacher to share my observations

and interpretations. In addition, I collected and analyzed multiple data sources in order to

triangulate my data and build an in-depth understanding with rich description of the phenomenon

being studied. Furthermore, I collected 15 digital videotapes and digital recordings that were

used to test interpretations made from other data sources.

The dependability of my data was ensured through methodological triangulation or the use

of multiple data collection procedures, including interviews, observational field notes,

transcriptions, and artifacts. Multiple data collection methods created "overlapping data" which

cross-validated one another (Guba & Lincoln, 1982). This study examined the intertextual

influence of interactive read alouds of mentor texts on students' writing during two consecutive

writing workshop units. Therefore, the data in this study, particularly the students' writing and

semi-structured interview transcripts collected at the end of each unit, were gathered on multiple

occasions with consistent findings thus enhancing the dependability of the study.

To satisfy the issue of confirmability, I triangulated my data as well as used the iterative,

recursive process of constant comparative analysis to assure that my findings were data-driven.

The findings, based on the analysis of multiple data sources, are furthermore illustrated by

numerous examples from the data. With respect to the trustworthiness of my data, the classroom

teacher independently participated in analyzing a portion of the data including analyzing









students' writing for intertextual connections to the interactive read aloud, and coding various

data throughout the study (Guba & Lincoln, 1982).

With respect to the generalizability of my data, the research classroom and school was

specifically selected for this study since the social construction of intertextuality and literary

understanding within integrated reading and writing events was likely to be intensely manifested

(Patton, 1990, 2002). This study is a case study addressing one third-grade classroom, one

particular group of students, and one teacher. Strategic selection of cases increases the

generalizability of case studies (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Strategically selected cases reveal the greatest

amount of information on a given phenomenon as well as enable the development of a deeper

understanding of the phenomenon of interest (Flyvbjerg, 2006). Arguing the generalizability of

case study research, Ruddin (2006) states "[i]t is correct that the case study is a comprehensive

examination of a single example, but it is not true to say a case study cannot provide trustworthy

information about the broader class." Thick description (Geertz, 1973) of the sociocultural

classroom environment and reading and writing events will enable readers to vicariously

experience the classroom context and transfer the methods, ideas, and findings to similar

contexts. The findings of this study can be generalized as a theory (Ruddin, 2006) about how

children socially construct intertextual connections between integrated reading and writing

within similar contexts. Chapter 4 provides a rich description of the context of the study as a

means to situate the findings shared in the following chapters.

Summary

This descriptive, qualitative, and naturalistic study, situated in the constructivist research

paradigm, examined the intertextual influence of interactive read alouds at the beginning of

writer's workshop on students' subsequent writing. My main research question was: How do the

texts within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop mentor children's









writing? Three research questions guided this study including: 1) How do children appropriate

and transform texts from the context of an interactive read aloud into their own writing? 2) What

are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual connections between

reading and writing? and 3) How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between

reading and writing? These questions were investigated through multiple qualitative research

methods and techniques, including participant observations, field notes and transcriptions, semi-

structured and informal interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts. The

multiple data sources were analyzed according to Strauss and Corbin's (1990) description of

open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and Glaser and Strauss's (1967) constant

comparative method in order to develop a grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing

like a reader which addresses the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding

within integrated reading and writing events, specifically interactive read alouds at the beginning

of writing workshop.









CHAPTER 4
INTERTEXTUALLY CONNECTING READING AND WRITING: THE CONTEXT, THE
TEACHER, & THE LITERACY ENVIRONMENT

This chapter contextualizes the findings of this study as well as examines how the

teacher's literacy instruction and the interactive read alouds within writing workshop facilitated

students to make intertextual connections between their reading and writing. The first portion of

this chapter presents a contextualization of the intertextual connections and literary

understanding students socially constructed between integrated reading and writing events by

considering the school's philosophy and environment, the teacher's beliefs about literacy

teaching and learning, and the classroom literacy environment. This chapter begins by

discussing the philosophy of the school and addressing the characteristics of the school's literacy

environment that promote connections between reading and writing. The next section introduces

the classroom teacher including her background and her philosophy of teaching and learning.

The following section focuses on describing the third-grade classroom including the students, the

physical arrangement of the classroom, classroom expectations, the reading and writing

curriculum, and how literacy is interwoven throughout the school day.

Following the contextualization of this study, the remainder of the chapter focuses on

addressing the following two research questions:

1. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual
connections between reading and writing?

2. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing?

The second portion of the chapter begins by examining the teacher's instructional practices that

facilitated the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality within interactive

read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. The final portion of this chapter examines the

ways in which interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop, one particular









literacy environment, facilitated students to intertextually connect their reading and writing

experiences.

Literacy Education in an Urban Charter School

The School Context

This study was conducted in an urban public charter school (kindergarten through eighth

grade) in a large northeastern U.S. city. The majority of students at this school were either

African American (76%) or Latino (21%) and the remaining 3% of students were Asian (1%),

White (1%), and multi-racial (1%). A majority of the school's students (67%) came from low-

income backgrounds and lived in adjacent urban neighborhoods.

The school's mission was to "provide an academically rigorous public education to

students from the [urban community] that will ensure they are prepared to attend and succeed in

college" (School's Family Handbook). The school's commitment to college preparatory

education was evident in each of the classrooms. Classes had university or college names

reflecting the teacher's alma mater, and each classroom had a banner reading "Class of 2018,"

for example, recognizing the students' year of high school graduation.

The faculty and staff were committed to fostering students' academic success in addition to

instilling the five core values of focus, integrity, respect, self-determination, and teamwork in

their students. According to the school's website, the students at this school were encouraged

"to have focus and integrity, to respect themselves and others, to have confidence in their

abilities, and to value collaborative teamwork to achieve their personal and academic goals"

(School's Website). Colorful banners with inspirational quotes from Mahatma Gandhi, Eleanor

Roosevelt, Colin Powell, Albert Einstein and Theodore Roosevelt, to name a few, hung on the

interior hallway walls emphasizing the core values. The core values were the foundation of this

academic community and guided the faculty and staff in addition to the students. In order to









maintain a focus on learning and unify the school, the school required students to wear a uniform

of a light blue or navy shirt bearing the school's emblem with khaki or navy pants.

The school had a clear academic focus, particularly on literacy and math, and held high

expectations for all students. In order to help students successfully reach the school's

expectations, the school had extended days Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday from 8:00

a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and an extended school year of 190 days. Wednesday was an early release day

from 8:00 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. Wednesday afternoons served as professional development time

for teachers. Elementary class sizes were small with an average of 15 students in each

classroom. Individualized and small group instruction was provided for all students who needed

additional assistance mastering academic concepts. Due to increased instructional time,

elementary students received at least 3 hours of literacy instruction daily. All teachers employed

a balanced literacy model that "teaches students explicit phonics rules and clear reading

strategies, models effective writing, expects students to master grammar and spelling

conventions, develops oral fluency, encourages students to analyze literature, and provides daily

extended opportunities for students to practice reading and writing skills" (School's Website).

Teachers used a variety of literacy instruction techniques and strategies within their classrooms

including reading and writing workshops, shared reading, word study, and poetry study.

Teachers also had a scheduled time to read aloud to their students as part of their literacy block

in addition to other times during the day. Children's literature trade books were an integral part

of this school's literacy instruction and were integrated into the content area curriculum.

Throughout the school, students were referred to as scholars and, more specifically, as readers

and writers during literacy instruction.









The faculty and staff at this school demonstrated a sincere desire to be professional

educators and were dedicated to the school's mission and philosophy. New teachers were given

approximately 10 professional development books and required to read them prior to the

beginning of the school year. Teachers regularly participated in professional development

including reading and discussing professional books about curriculum and instruction, observing

and critiquing peers' teaching, and conducting unit studies and critiques. Teachers

collaboratively developed their units of study focusing on implementing best practice instruction

that was standards-based, conceptual, and empowering. After developing a unit of study,

teachers had opportunities to share their unit with teachers at other grade levels and receive

feedback prior to implementing the unit. Since the faculty considered reading and writing to be a

combined literacy process, teachers developed integrated literacy units that conceptually built

upon one another.

The Teacher

Ms. Liz Daniels, the third-grade teacher in whose classroom the study was conducted,

embodied a philosophy of education similar to that of the school's and was committed to

achieving the goals of the school's mission. Ms. Daniels, European-American and in her

twenties, was in her fifth year of teaching at the time of this study. Ms. Daniels, a competitive

swimmer in high school and college, qualified on two occasions for the Olympic Trials. Ms.

Daniels contributed her success as a swimmer to her motivation and determination as well as to

the guidance and support of the adults in her life. Her desire to teach stemmed from the

opportunities teachers have to shape and guide children towards their goals.

Upon graduating with her bachelor's degree in psychology from Brown University, Ms.

Daniels joined the Teach for America corps. Her philosophy of teaching and learning was

significantly influenced by her experiences teaching third- and fifth-grade in an underserved,









underachieving urban school in Atlanta as a Teach for America teacher. While teaching in

Atlanta, Ms. Daniels learned about classroom management, pedagogical theory, and

differentiation, as well as learned how students' communities and previous experiences in the

classroom significantly affected their education, motivation, and confidence. During the year

prior to this study, Ms. Daniels moved to the Northeast and began teaching second-grade at the

school where this study was conducted. In addition, Ms. Daniels began seeking her reading

specialist degree at a nearby university. In the spring prior to this study, Ms. Daniels was a

graduate student in a literacy course that I taught, titled Literacy: The Integration of the

Language Arts. The year the study was conducted, Ms. Daniels looped up to teach third-grade

with 14 students from her second-grade class.

Ms. Daniels, a passionate educator, demonstrated a clear set of beliefs about teaching and

learning. Ms. Daniels believed that students benefited from a supportive environment of

constructive criticism and positive reinforcement so she fostered that type of environment in her

classroom. She also believed it was important to support students academically and set standards

for their character. Like the faculty throughout the school, Ms. Daniels referred to her students

as scholars, readers, and writers and explained, "I really want them to think of themselves in

that way. They are readers, they are writers, and most importantly they are [school's name]

scholars. I think that it puts them in a certain mindset even if they do not realize it" (Email

Questions, October 10, 2008). Ms. Daniels considered teachers to play a pivotal role in shaping

the character of a child, guiding children towards their goals, and preparing them to be successful

in the classroom and beyond.

In regard to literacy teaching and learning, Ms. Daniels developed an articulate philosophy

of literacy education through her personal experience as a reader and writer and through









collaborative professional development at her school. She cited many professional resources

including The Art of Teaching Writing, The Art of Teaching Reatiln. and The Nuts and Bolts of

Teaching Writing by Lucy Calkins; About the Authors: Writing Workshop i/th Our Youngest

Writers by Katie Wood Ray; Interactive Writing: How Language and Literacy Come Together,

K-2 by Andrea McCarrier, Irene Fountas, and Gay Su Pinnell; Mechanically Inclined by Jeff

Anderson; Craft Lessons by Ralph Fletcher and JoAnn Portalupi; On Solid Ground: Strategies

for Teaching Reading K-3 by Sharon Taberski and Shelley Harwayne; ReadIt Again!: Revisiting

.\/hi edReading by Brenda Parkes; Readling i//h Meaning by Debbie Miller; Text Savvy: Using

a .\lhi ed Reading Framework to Build Comprehension, Grades 3-6 by Sarah Daunis, Maria

Cassiani lams, and Janet Angelillo; Guiding Readers and Writers: Teaching Comprehension,

Genre, and Content Literacy by Irene Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell; Growing Readers: Units of

Study in the Primary Classroom by Kathy Collins; Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary

Instruction by Isabel Beck, Margaret McKeown, and Linda Kucan; and Mosaic of Thought by

Ellin Oliver Keene and Susan Zimmerman. In addition, Ms. Daniels cited several books

addressing culturally relevant teaching, urban education, classroom discourse, and child

development which significantly influenced her instruction including Other People 's Children:

Cultural Conflict in the Classroom by Lisa Delpit, The Dream Keepers: Successful Teachers of

African American Children by Gloria Ladson-Billings, Classroom Discourse by Courtney

Cazden, and Yardsticks: Children in the Classroom Ages 4-14 by Chip Wood.

Ms. Daniels' expressed a strong belief in the integration of reading and writing: "The two

go hand in hand since they help students to become better in both areas. Students understand

craft, genre, and comprehension when they are able to look at reading and writing from both

sides" (Email Questions, February 2, 2009). She further explained how she viewed the









connection between reading and writing: "The subject matter is literacy and reading and writing

are two parts. Writing is the creation of the work and reading is the understanding of the work"

(Email Questions, February 2, 2009). In order to further connect and conceptually build upon

students' literacy knowledge, Ms. Daniels intentionally used the same terminology in both

reading and writing.

Modeling played a large role in Ms. Daniels' philosophy of literacy teaching and learning.

She felt it was essential to model effective literacy strategies explicitly and implicitly in her

teaching:

I like to model using many strategies all of the time just like real writers and readers do. So
I model reading, writing, speaking, and listening the same way as I want them to do all of
the time. ...I try to model breaking down a tricky word into chunks because I want them to
see that I am like them, a reader, and this is a strategy all readers use all of the time. I
model speaking to them and acknowledging others' ideas because this is what respectful
scholars always do. I want our classroom to reflect what scholars of reading and writing
always do. There is not just one strategy that is perfect at one given time, rather we use
many strategies all of the time (Email Questions, February 2, 2009)!

Modeling provided Ms. Daniels with the opportunity to share with her students that she, too, was

a reader and writer. Like modeling, Ms. Daniels also highly regarded mentor relationships in her

literacy instruction and found them beneficial to her students' understanding of literacy concepts:

"Writing can be extremely overwhelming and at times somewhat abstract to students. I think that

when I break down the process and show the students exactly what I mean either through a

mentor text or as a mentor myself it makes the concept more concrete" (Email Questions,

October, 23, 2008). Furthermore, Ms. Daniels considered children's book authors mentors for

students' writing:

I want [students] to realize that authors such as Gail Gibbons are people just like us and we
can be like them. I don't want authors/writers to be an unknown distant person, rather I
want them to feel like they know the author as though they are sitting right there in the
classroom. I really think that if students build that relationship with authors of books that
they will have the confidence and the belief that they can create something just like them
(Email Questions, October 23, 2008).









Because of this belief that students should become familiar with children's book authors and

consider them mentors for their writing, Ms. Daniels and the students in her class referred to

authors by name. Ms. Daniels's philosophy of teaching and learning led her to support students

academically and behaviorally, implicitly and explicitly model literacy strategies, guide students'

thinking, and encourage collaborative mentoring relationships within her classroom.

The Classroom Context

This study was conducted in Ms. Liz Daniels' third-grade classroom which was identified

in the hallway by a laminated white sign bearing the name and emblem of the school which read:

Ms. Daniels, Brown, Third Grade. Throughout the school, this class was referred to as Brown, a

shortened form of Daniels' alma mater Brown University. There were 14 students in this third-

grade classroom (8 girls and 6 boys). Of the 14 students, 10 were African American, 3 were

Hispanic, and 1 was Asian. This classroom consisted of a heterogeneous mix of ability levels.

In addition, 3 students were English as Second Language learners (ESL) and 1 student had an

Individualized Educational Plan (IEP). Three students received additional assistance in reading

and writing from a student support teacher. Thirteen students (93% of the class) qualified for the

school's free or reduced price lunch/breakfast program. All 14 students looped up from second-

grade to third-grade with Daniels. All of the students were given parental consent to participate

in this study. All student names are pseudonyms.

The overall environment of Ms. Daniels' classroom was structured, nurturing, and

collaborative. Ms. Daniels demonstrated a sincere respect for her students, passionately focused

on helping her students succeed academically and socially, and orchestrated an organized,

efficient classroom environment. Students respected each other and their teacher, remained

focused and determined during lessons and activities, and worked well cooperatively on

independent and group activities. Collaboration and teamwork were encouraged and modeled by









Ms. Daniels. Students were taught how to help each other by guiding their classmates' thinking

rather than by simply giving them the correct answer. In addition, Ms. Daniels emphasized to

students that they should explain their thinking and provide evidence for their answers during

class discussions. The teacher and students appeared to enjoy teaching and learning,

respectively, and welcomed visitors to their classroom. Students were accustomed to visitors

because teachers regularly visited the classroom to assist students or observe lessons as part of

their professional development.

The physical arrangement of Ms. Daniels' classroom facilitated collaborative learning and

a sense of community. Students shared materials in the classroom and were responsible for

taking care of their supplies. Students' desks were arranged in three clusters of five desks.

Sharpened pencils, erasers, and glue sticks were in a plastic container in the center of each group

of desks. Students' supplies were neatly organized in their desks with notebooks color coded

and labeled. A large bin sat on the floor beside each cluster of desks with the students' reading

book bags for reading workshop and dry erase slates. Upon entering this school, students were

provided with reading book bags and slates that they were responsible for throughout elementary

school. A kidney-shaped table and a rectangular table at the perimeter of the classroom were

used for group work and seating during workshops. A small circular table in the back corner of

the classroom served as a place for Ms. Daniels to conduct conferences and as an informal

teacher desk. A large carpet depicting a world map was the place where students gathered for

mini-lessons as well as small group instruction. Each student had a specific seat on the carpet

which was identified in relation to a particular continent. Directly in front of the carpet, Ms.

Daniels read and conducted lessons from a wooden chair beside the easel. Underneath the easel

were supplies needed for each mini-lesson including read aloud books, lesson plans, chart paper,









and markers. On the other side of the easel, several bean bags and pillows were stacked for the

students to use during writing and reading workshops. In the front of the classroom to the right

of the dry erase board, a writing center included fiction and nonfiction planning sheets, lined

publishing paper, note cards, colored pencils, and other specialized publishing papers. The

mathematics center, also in the front of the classroom to the left of the dry erase board, stored an

assortment of math manipulatives and games in clear bins in storage cubbies. Classroom

materials and work spaces were well-organized and easily accessible for students.

The classroom environment was rich with printed materials for the students to use.

Bookshelves lined the perimeter of over half of the classroom with leveled, recently published

picture books and chapter books of various genres, children's magazines, dictionaries, and

thesauruses. Students' published writings were displayed on a bulletin board in the hallway

outside of the classroom in labeled manila folders. The walls of the classroom were print rich

with teacher-developed charts and resources, word walls, and alphabet phonics cards. The

teacher-developed literacy resources included a chart identifying the pattern of fiction texts

(exposition, conflict, climax, and resolution), charts demonstrating this pattern in fiction books

read aloud in class, a chart addressing how to determine meaning in nonfiction, and charts of

interesting sentences collected from each of the three mentor texts from the sentence structure

unit. Charts on the walls also included Reading and Writing Partners, Brown's Behavior

Expectations, Parts of Speech, and a bar graph titled Brown's Reading Progress. As the school

year progressed, charts were added, moved, and replaced while others remained on the walls

throughout the entire study. These charts were referred to as resources by both Ms. Daniels and

the students during writing workshop mini-lessons, conferences, and conversations amongst

students.









The classroom expectations, listed on the chart titled Brown's Behavior Expectations, had

nine behavior expectations with consequences written beside each. For example, the following

four expectations were included on the list: using materials correctly and respectfully, treating

our teachers and classmates with kindness and respect, showing focus and using our entire

learning time well, and showing integrity. The expectations, which paralleled the school's core

values, assisted in establishing a respectful, collaborative learning community.

The third-grade schedule and curriculum, which integrated literacy throughout the day,

demonstrated the school's focus on literacy and the belief in the interconnected nature of reading

and writing. The schedule and curriculum provided students with numerous daily opportunities

to work independently and cooperatively in small and whole group settings. Classroom routines

and procedures ensured successful, predictable transitions between daily events and activities.

The curriculum and schedule maintained students actively engaged in learning throughout the

day.

Table 4-1. Ms. Daniels' Third-Grade Schedule
Ms. Daniels' Third-Grade Schedule
8:00-8:20 Morning Math
8:20-9:20 Reading Workshop
9:20-9:50 Word Study
9:50-9:55 Snack
9:55-10:15 Slate Math
10:15-10:35 Vocabulary/Shared Reading
10:35-11:35 Writing Workshop
11:35-11:55 Poetry
11:55-12:20 Lunch
12:20-12:50 Social Studies
12:50-1:30 Math
1:30-2:40 Recess & Co-curriculars
2:40-2:45 Snack
2:45-3:10 Read Aloud
3:10-3:40 Science
3:40-3:50 Afternoon Meeting/Core Values









The following description of Ms. Daniels' third-grade schedule focuses particularly on the

daily literacy events yet situates them within the context of the overall schedule. A typical day in

third-grade began at 8:00 am with twenty minutes of Morning Math followed by an hour allotted

for Reading Workshop. During Reading Workshop, students moved from their desks, to the

carpet for a mini-lesson, and then dispersed around the room to what was referred to as their

"reading spots" and/or "writing spots." Reading and writing spots, which were rotated biweekly,

included seats at the kidney-shaped table, at the rectangular table, at any desk, on the carpet with

bean bags, or sitting beside the front wall with pillows. On their way to their reading spots,

students picked up their reading book bags from the large bin beside their group of desks filled

with children's literature trade books for independent reading. During reading time, students

read independently and Ms. Daniels conducted conferences with students. At the end of Reading

Workshop, Ms. Daniels asked students to reconvene on the carpet to have students share how

they used the reading strategy from the mini-lesson in their reading that day. Then for the next

thirty minutes, students participated in Word Study comprised of teacher-directed instruction

and/or interactive read alouds, followed by a variety of independent and small group activities

focusing on phonics, spelling conventions, and grammar. A brief snack time preceded twenty

minutes of Slate Math when students would solve math problems on their dry erase slates in

small, teacher-directed groups or participate in math centers around the classroom. After Slate

Math, students gathered together with Ms. Daniels on the carpet for Shared Reading which also

included vocabulary study. During Shared Reading, Ms. Daniels provided each student with a

copy of a fiction or nonfiction article frequently from a children's magazine with the genre

alternating bi-weekly. On the first day of the week, Ms. Daniels read aloud the article modeling

fluent reading with expression. For the remainder of the week, students chorally read the article









at the same time as Ms. Daniels with increasing fluency and expression. Shared Reading

concluded with either a discussion of the article or the completion of a related literacy task such

as a summary, graphic organizer, or comprehension questions. An hour designated for Writing

Workshop immediately followed Shared Reading. At the beginning of Writing Workshop, Ms.

Daniels requested students to return to their desks to gather several items including their writing

folders, yellow writing pads, writing notebooks, and dry erase slates to bring back to the carpet.

Once all students returned to the carpet with their materials placed on the floor, the interactive

read aloud and/or mini-lesson began. After the mini-lesson, writing time began as students

moved with their materials from the carpet to their assigned writing spots around the room.

During the next forty-five minutes or more, students wrote independently and Ms. Daniels

conducted conferences with students at the small circular table. At the end of writing time, Ms.

Daniels invited students to gather on the carpet to share their writing as well as how they may

have incorporated the author's craft ideas from the read aloud or mini-lesson into their writing

that day. Ms. Daniels did not require students to use the craft ideas the same day in their writing;

however, she expected students to thoughtfully craft their writing each day and use features of

author's craft within their writing when they felt it was appropriate. At the end of sharing time,

which marked the conclusion of writing workshop, Ms. Daniels transitioned immediately to

Poetry for approximately twenty minutes before walking her students to the cafeteria for lunch.

After lunch, students returned to the classroom for thirty minutes of social studies and forty

minutes of math instruction. Ms. Daniels then dismissed students to recess followed by co-

curriculars such as art and dance. Upon returning to the classroom, students received a snack

and listened to Ms. Daniels read aloud a children's literature trade book for approximately thirty

minutes. The read alouds, which built conceptually on the overall literacy curriculum, focused









on reinforcing particular concepts such as determining importance, noticing language, or

studying characters. Following the read aloud, students received thirty minutes of science

instruction and the day ended with a short afternoon meeting emphasizing the core values. In

addition to the specified reading and writing events listed on the described schedule, authentic

reading and writing experiences occurred daily within the content areas.

The third-grade teachers collaboratively developed their integrated literacy curriculum by

focusing on the school standards, state expectations, students' strengths and weaknesses, and

their own personal experiences of reading and writing. Together the teachers crafted a

curriculum framework that systematically developed and reinforced students' literacy knowledge

and abilities. For instance, the curriculum plan ensured that students were immersed in a

particular genre, such as nonfiction, for several weeks during Read Alouds, Shared Reading and

Reading Workshop, before students began writing their own nonfiction. In addition to

experiences during literacy instruction, students were further exposed to non-fiction trade books

as they were read aloud as part of science and social studies instruction. In other words, students

had numerous experiences to read, examine, and explore the possibilities of a particular genre

before being expected to write in that genre. Furthermore, concepts initially taught in one area of

the literacy curriculum, such as Word Study, were later reinforced in other areas of the

curriculum. For example, conjunctions referred by the teacher and students as FANBOYS, an

acronym to remember the list of conjunctions, were first taught in Word Study and then

reinforced in Writing Workshop during the Sentence Structure unit. Ms. Daniels explained, "We

wanted [the students] to have the language (term) before we tried to get them to use it in their

writing" (Email Questions, February 2, 2009). According to Ms. Daniels when the teachers

developed the writing workshop units they "think about how to move [students] incrementally









and logically toward those things...and then we create overarching Big Ideas and mini-lessons

that fall within those Big Ideas" (Email Questions, February 2, 2009). The overall goal of the

literacy curriculum focused on fostering purposeful, critical thinking readers and writers by

facilitating students to make connections between their reading and writing.

Intertextually Connecting Reading and Writing: The Teacher

Ms. Daniels played a pivotal role in the development of a supportive, structured learning

environment that fostered students' literacy learning. Ms. Daniels purposefully orchestrated

students' literacy learning by thoughtfully planning and arranging literacy events in a way that

achieved a controlled, collaborative learning environment.

Expectations, Routines, & Procedures

To begin with, Ms. Daniels established clear expectations, routines, and procedures.

Students had assigned seats on the carpet as well as assigned writing spots around the classroom

that rotated bi-weekly. In addition, students had assigned partners on the carpet for Turn &

Talks and assigned reading and writing partners. Throughout writing workshop, students had a

clear understanding of what they were expected to do. At the beginning of writing workshop,

students sat on the carpet in their assigned seats for the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons,

participated in the discussions, and respectfully focused on the teacher or student who was

speaking. During writing time, students wrote quietly at their writing spots. Students neither

interrupted their classmates who were writing nor their teacher while she was conferring with

students. Occasionally students would ask each other writing related questions; however,

students became engaged in their writing immediately following these brief conversations.

During sharing time at the end of writing workshop, students returned to the carpet and

respectfully participated by sharing their own writing and listening attentively as their classmates

shared. Since routines and procedures were in place, instructional time was used efficiently and









minimal time was spent on transitions. Ms. Daniels who was committed to providing her

students with a supportive, organized learning environment explained, "I like to make sure that

there are clear expectations so that students know exactly what they are expected to do... In

terms of writing, I try to make sure that everything is structured and organized ahead of time. I

think this really helps my students because it allows them to write in a way that is not threatening

or scary because the expectation is clear. I think sometimes when you just throw kids into

writing it can be very intimidating, so by breaking it down in a structured way they feel like they

can be successful" (Email Questions, October 23, 2008).

Furthermore, the materials students used were thoughtfully and purposefully selected and

structured for students' success. Writing workshop materials included 2-pocket plastic folders,

yellow wide-rule note pads for writing, and composition notebooks for writer's notebooks.

These supplies were purchased by the school for each student. Ms. Daniels and the third-grade

teachers decided to use yellow notepads for students' writing for several reasons. First, the

yellow note pads provided a sturdy foundation for students to write upon as they wrote around

the room. Secondly, the note pads eliminated students looking for loose-leaf notebook paper and

the perforated sheets could be easily torn off. Most importantly, Ms. Daniels added, "[the

teachers] decided to use the yellow notepads because we wanted the paper to be a different color

for two reasons: 1) to clearly be draft paper and 2) because we wanted to be able to see their

revisions. We wanted them to be cutting apart the paper and moving them and making changes

in regular white lined paper and taping that in when changes were made. This way we could see

the revising more easily. We wanted this to feel like an authentic process. (This is what we do on

the computer, but we wanted them to feel it in real life.) ... The yellow paper makes it feel more

draft like, so this way the stages of writing are very clear" (Email Correspondence, June 21,









2009). The rough drafts of students' writings were torn off of the notepad, paper-clipped, and

included inside of their writing workshop folders. One side of their folders held their note pads

while the other side held their rough drafts. When publishing their writing, students wrote their

final draft on 8 12 x 11 publishing paper that the teacher provided. The publishing paper

included a line at the top for a heading, a box for an illustration below, and lines at the bottom for

student writing. The teacher also provided table of contents and glossary pages for publishing

which included boxes for the students to fill in with headings and page numbers or words and

definitions.

Each student's composition notebook for writing workshop was equally divided into four

labeled sections with Post-It Durable Tabs. The labels read: Ideas, Purpose, Strategies, and

Goals. Within the section labeled Ideas, there were pages with labeled headings at the top of the

page including: Things I Care About, Things I Know About, Things I Want to Know About, and

Meaningful Events. These sections were established at the beginning of the year. Students

added to the sections and referred to the different sections for ideas when planning their writing.

Within the second section of their writing notebook labeled Purpose, students wrote their

purpose before beginning a new writing. For example, when Samone was beginning to write her

nonfiction book about penguins, she opened her notebook up to this section and wrote, "I am

writing this nonfiction all about book called Penguins because I want readers to know more

about penguins." The Strategies section included a few strategies that they learned including

rules about punctuation. The last section of their notebooks included their goals for their writing.

At the end of each writing unit, students reflected on their previous writing and set reasonable

goals for their writing for the following unit. Students shared their reflections and goals with









Ms. Daniels during a conference. Students' goals were then written in the Goals section of their

writing notebook.

Literacy Instruction

Several aspects of Ms. Daniels' literacy instruction facilitated students to make

connections between their reading and writing. Ms. Daniels was explicit and systematic in her

instruction. First, it is essential to address the writing workshop units and lesson plans which

were collaboratively developed by Ms. Daniels and the other third-grade teachers. Each writing

workshop unit was composed of five or six Big Ideas to be addressed over the course of the unit

(Figure 4-1). Each of these Big Ideas was then broken down into teaching points that helped the

students "move incrementally and logically toward the Big Ideas" (Email Questions, February 2,

2009).


Writing Workshop: Sentence Structure Unit
Big Ideas:
Writers craft their sentences to make their writing clear and
interesting for their reader.
Writers have a purpose for each sentence that they write.
Writers choose their words carefully.
Writers have reasons for choosing different types of sentences.
Writers revise their sentences to make sure that they meet their
purpose.



Figure 4-1. Big Ideas for the Writing Workshop: Sentence Structure Unit

Each of the teaching points was then developed into detailed lesson plans including the

following four parts: Connection, Teaching/Active Engagement, Link, and Share. Ms. Daniels

explained, "We write the lesson plans like we are talking to the students. We make sure to

reference examples and then have the students do it on their own (active engagement) before









heading off on their own [to write]. This hopefully will allow them to be successful on their own

and gives them a strong understanding of what they are expected to work on."

As students gathered on the carpet for writing workshop, Ms. Daniels prepared the students

for the literacy event by requesting students to be quiet, focused, and to sit "criss-cross

applesauce." She explicitly told students where their materials should be located which was

typically on the floor beside them. Writing workshop began with Ms. Daniels situating the

interactive read aloud within the context of previous lessons and the overall writing workshop

unit. Ms. Daniels began by addressing the students as writers or scholars and then connected the

read aloud to what they already knew about writing or what they had previously learned. For

instance, "Writers, we know that writers want to make sure that their sentences are interesting

and clear for their readers so that their readers will understand and enjoy their books. Yesterday

we...." Ms. Daniels made explicit connections between how the author crafted his/her writing

within the mentor text and how it influenced the reader's ability to understand or enjoy the book.

Oftentimes, Ms. Daniels mentioned aspects of the author's craft that they noticed during

previous interactive read alouds. For example, "Yesterday we noticed how (author's name)

chose interesting words, used different types of punctuation, repeated words..." Then, Ms.

Daniels set a clear purpose for the read aloud which focused on having the students notice how

the author crafted his/her writing within the mentor text. For example, "Today, we are noticing

how (author's name) crafted his/her writing in (title of book)." Immediately prior to beginning

the read aloud, Ms. Daniels requested that students raise their hands when they wanted to share

something that they noticed.

The picture books selected as mentor texts were engaging and age appropriate. Ms.

Daniels previously read the books and noticed various aspects of the author's craft, so she was









able to thoughtfully guide the conversation and students' responses to the book. Ms. Daniels

began by reading the title of the book and the name of the author. During the read alouds, the

teacher and students referred to the authors by first and last name. Then she opened the book,

put it upright in her right hand and began reading aloud so the students could see both the

pictures and text. While reading, Ms. Daniels modeled fluent reading with expression and

emphasis. She also modeled sounding out difficult words as well as modeled genre-specific

reading strategies such as reading headings, diagrams, and captions within nonfiction books.

Furthermore, Ms. Daniels modeled the process of noticing the author's craft, "I notice how

(author's name)...." As she read, she would stop after every couple of pages and ask what

students were noticing or call upon students as they raised their hands. During the nonfiction

read alouds, students participated in Turn & Talks with their partners to share what they were

noticing and then afterward they shared what they noticed with the whole group. As students

responded to the book and/or noticed particular aspects of the author's craft, Ms. Daniels would

acknowledge and extend their responses. Ms. Daniels listened and guided students' responses in

a variety of ways including noticing other aspects of the author's craft, examining the text

further, explaining the significance of the author's craft, connecting the read aloud to previous

literary experiences, clarifying the meaning of the text, requesting further explanation of

students' thinking, or conceptually identifying students' responses. Specific examples of Ms.

Daniels' guiding are included within Chapter 5. When guiding students' responses, Ms. Daniels

explicitly addressed how the author's writing within the mentor text influenced them as readers.

She also took advantage of the young readers' responses to the mentor text and guided them to

notice how the author crafted his/her writing in a way to evoke a particular emotion in them as

readers. At the end of the interactive read aloud, Ms. Daniels summarized the author's craft that









they noticed and discussed while reading the mentor text. Ms. Daniels linked their experience

reading the mentor text with their writing during writing workshop. For example, "Writers,

today we noticed how (author's name) crafted his/her writing in (title of book). We noticed

interesting sentences with different punctuation, descriptions of characters, different length

sentences.... (Author's name) worked hard to make his/her writing interesting, and this makes

his/her book so much more enjoyable for us as readers. Writers, today and everyday when you

are writing, try to write really interesting sentences for your reader." The students then quickly

and quietly went to their writing spots for writing time.

The routine of the literature-based mini-lessons was similar in many ways to the interactive

read alouds however there were several differences. To begin with, Ms. Daniels similarly

prepared the students, situated the mini-lesson within the context of previous lessons, and set the

purpose of the lesson. However, the purpose of the lesson focused on examining a particular

aspect of the author's craft within the mentor texts. Typically, the particular craft, such as

interesting verbs used in the following example, had been noticed and discussed during the

interactive reading of the mentor texts. For instance, "Writers, we have been examining how

writers use interesting verbs. Yesterday we started to learn about how (author's name) choose

his/her words carefully. Today we are going to be studying the verbs (author's name) used in

his/her book, (title of book)." Then Ms. Daniels explained the specific purpose of the author's

craft, "Writers, we know that writers choose their words very carefully. We know that verbs are

very important because they make our writing clear and more interesting to read. It is much

more interesting for a writer to use a word like sobbed rather than just say cried." Like in the

read aloud, Ms. Daniels explicitly made connections between how the author crafted his/her

writing and how it influenced the reader. Ms. Daniels and the students then interactively read









through portions of the mentor text identifying and examining how the author used a particular

craft feature, interesting verbs in this case, within his/her writing. The teacher guided the

interactive examination of the author's word choice and discussed how these verbs were clear

and more interesting than other words the author could have chosen. Oftentimes, during mini-

lessons Ms. Daniels asked the students to examine and find a particular craft feature within their

own writing. Afterwards, a few students shared examples of the craft within their writings. Ms.

Daniels suggested that if they didn't find the craft within their writing that they may want to

reread and see if they could incorporate the craft into their writing. At the conclusion of the

mini-lesson, Ms. Daniels summarized the lesson by reviewing what they had learned that day

from examining the author's writing. Then she linked the mini-lesson to students writing,

"Writers, today and every day, make sure that you use (author's craft) ... to make your writing

just as interesting as (author's name)'s writing." At the end of both the mini-lesson and read

aloud, students moved from the carpet to their writing spots around the room for writing time.

During writing time, Ms. Daniels conducted four or five conferences each day at the

circular table in the corner of the classroom. She had a conference schedule with students

assigned to different days which ensured that all students were conferred with at least once each

week. Based on students' writing needs, some students conferred with Ms. Daniels more often.

Since Ms. Daniels' conference schedule had only two or three students assigned to a particular

day, she frequently met with several students more than once each week and/or conferred with

students for an extended period of time. Students who were in particular need of a conference

were able to sign up for a conference. Conferences addressed the student's individual needs and

writing goals.









Ms. Daniels was engaged in conferences throughout writing time. Ms. Daniels recorded

notes from each conference on a piece of notebook paper and organized the notes by the

student's name in a three-ring notebook that contained all conference records. When students

came for conferences, they brought their yellow notepads and writing folders and sat in a chair

beside Ms. Daniels. Since students were each at different stages of their writing, students shared

what they were currently working on. Some students were planning a new book while other

students were just beginning or finishing their writing. A conference typically began with Ms.

Daniels asking the student to share what he/she was working on and/or read aloud his/her

writing. Ms. Daniels frequently took notes as the student was reading aloud and then shared the

observations that she recorded. Then, Ms. Daniels and the student interactively discussed his/her

writing or writing planning page. Throughout the conference, Ms. Daniels encouraged the

students to think about the reader of their writing which reinforced the students' understanding of

the interconnected nature of reading and writing. In other words, Ms. Daniels' mentored

students to craft their writing for their reader's understanding. For example, if an event within a

student's story was unclear, she discussed with the student how adding more details and

description would help the reader to better understand what was happening in the story. She

would not just make the suggestion but inquire about what the student was thinking about and

visualizing within the story to help them to add the description to their writing. All aspects of

the students' writing from the use of descriptions to end punctuation were explained by Ms.

Daniels as essential for their reader's understanding. After conferring with Ms. Daniels, students

reported that they were more pleased with their writing and developed a better understanding of

how to craft their writing like and for a reader.









Finally, after writing time, students returned to the carpet for sharing. Ms. Daniels

prepared the students to share their writing by asking students to sit quietly and take out the

writing that they wanted to share. Sharing was typically focused on the aspects) of the author's

craft that they had noticed and examined during the read aloud or mini-lesson. Ms. Daniels often

mentioned how the students' writing, like the published authors' writing, provided students with

ideas that they may want to use within their own writing. Ms. Daniels called on students to share

regardless of whether or not they were raising their hand, so even the quiet, shy students had an

opportunity to share their writing. When a student was sharing his/her writing, all students

turned to face the student on the carpet. If a student was inaudible, Ms. Daniels requested,

"Loud and proud, please (students' name)." As students shared their writing, Ms. Daniels guided

the discussion in various ways including identifying the craft move used within the student's

writing, connecting the student's writing to another student's writing or the mentor texts, and

reinforcing how the student's writing would be interesting for his/her reader. Approximately

five to seven students shared each day. Ms. Daniels often concluded writing workshop by

briefly commenting on the writing the students shared, what they learned that day, and what they

were going to focus on the following day. Then, she immediately transitioned into the following

literacy event, Poetry, which was also conducted on the carpet.

As evident from the previous sections, Ms. Daniels was a thoughtful, professional educator

who intentionally modeled, mentored, and guided students' literacy learning. She provided the

students with a supportive, structured literacy environment in order to facilitate successful

readers and writers. Ms. Daniels explicitly made connections between students' reading and

writing experiences during writing workshop as well as interconnected reading and writing

throughout the day.









Pedagogical Choices, Resources, & Teacher Influence

During the course of the study, questions arose regarding the teacher's pedagogical

choices, the professional resources that informed the teacher's literacy instruction, and the

teacher's influence on the young writers in the classroom. To begin with, a question arose

regarding the teacher's decision to interactively read aloud the mentor text for the first time with

the purpose set to notice how the author crafted his/her writing within the text prior to

experiencing the whole text first. Although the students responded as readers by interpreting,

evaluating, and emotionally responding to the mentor texts during the read alouds, the students

had not previously experienced the text prior to noticing the craft and structure of the author's

writing. When asking the teacher about this pedagogical choice, Ms. Daniels explained, "We

decided to tell the students in advance about the purpose because we wanted them to be very

purposeful in their thinking. We wanted to make sure that the ideas that were being shared were

ones that would move all of the kids thinking forward in a meaningful way" (Email Questions,

July 3, 2009). When examining the interactive read aloud transcripts and students' writing

during the sentence structure unit, Henry the Dog ni i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007) was by far the

most influential on the students' writing. When inquiring about why Ms. Daniels thought that

this text was so influential on the students writing, she explained, "I think that Henry the Dog

ii i/l No Tail was influential on the students because they really loved the humor, the dialogue,

and the illustrations. I think they also really liked the idea of the story and how the dog had not

tail... it was very funny to them! So I think that the story was very memorable for them and

therefore they thought a lot about it when they were writing their own stories." When interactive

read alouds of mentor texts are conducted at the beginning of writing workshop, this suggests

that students can simultaneously enjoy experiencing the text while noticing the author's craft.









The teacher guided the interactive read alouds in such a way that students' enjoyment of the text

facilitated them to begin noticing aspects of the author's craft.

Furthermore, a question arose regarding the professional resources that informed the

teacher's literacy instruction particularly her explanations of author's craft during the mini-

lessons. For example, when interactively examining the mentor texts, Ms. Daniels explained that

questions in nonfiction writing are used to get the reader interested in the topic while questions in

fiction writing are used in dialogue between characters. This explanation was followed by the

interactive examination of the three mentor texts for questioning sentences. The questioning

sentences within the books supported the teacher's explanation. Additionally, during mini-

lessons examining the mentor texts for different sentence lengths, the teacher explained that short

sentences are used to catch the reader's attention, medium sentences are direct and clear, and

long sentences are used for describing characters, settings, or actions. Once again, the teacher

and students examined the author's writing within the texts and found evidence of short, medium

and long sentences which supported this explanation. When asked how she developed these

explanations for author's craft within the mini-lessons, Ms. Daniels explained how the teachers

collaboratively discussed author's craft including what they had learned about craft from various

professional resources as well as their own personal experiences with author's craft as readers

and writers. This collaborative discussion led to the explanations shared with the students during

the writing workshop mini-lessons. These teachers were members of a collaborative literacy

community who actively engaged in socially constructing a literary understanding that informed

their literacy instruction.

Finally, a question arose regarding the teacher's influence on the young writers' use of

author's craft within their writing. When discussing the powerful influence teachers have on









students, Ms. Daniels explained, "Honestly, some of the time I think they [incorporate various

craft ideas into their writing] because I ask them to, but many of them don't right away. I think

they really understand that they are Writers and that what I am telling them is what "real" writers

do, so they should try to do it. I also think that often the students really do see why the authors

write in the way that we are showing them and they want to try it out for themselves. I do not

think they are just trying to please me because they get nothing for it... no better grade... Do you

know what I mean? I truly believe that they think that writing is fun and trying out new craft

moves is what makes it so fun!"

Intertextually Connecting Reading and Writing: The Literacy Environment

There were several qualities of the interactive read alouds that made them have a

significant influence on the students' writing. To begin with, during the interactive read alouds,

students were given the opportunity to personally respond as readers to the mentor text. The

teacher and students approached the interactive reading of the mentor texts from more of an

aesthetic stance which provided an opportunity for readers to enjoy experiencing the text and

notice the author's craft along the way. During the interactive read aloud, the teacher and

students interpreted, evaluated, and emotionally responded to the mentor text. The students' and

teacher's responses to the books during the read aloud were often what prompted them to then

notice and discuss the author's craft. Students were actively engaged in the read alouds and their

responses demonstrated that they had a "lived-through experience" (Rosenblatt, 1994) of the

text. For example, throughout the interactive reading of the mentor texts, there were several

instances of transparent responses (Sipe, 2008) suggesting that the students were virtually

experiencing the text. Although these impulsive responses, in many cases, included only one

word like "What!" or a brief utterance like "Ooooo!" or "Eewww!," they demonstrated that the

students were engaged in the world of the text. These responses, reflecting the readers'









transaction with the mentor texts, were typically followed by analytical responses (Sipe, 2008)

noticing and minimally examining the author's craft that prompted the response. Oftentimes, the

students tried to recreate the emotional responses that they experienced during the interactive

read aloud. "Writers write to give someone else a reaction," Ms. Daniels explained, "[read

alouds at the beginning of writing workshop] put students in the shoes of a reader so they can

imagine what the reader will respond like to their writing...since they were just a reader it is

easier to imagine how to make a reader respond." Since the students experienced the mentor text

as readers before examining it as writers, this provided the foundation for the subsequent mini-

lessons further examining the author's craft.

Furthermore, interactive read alouds were collaborative, language rich environments filled

with dialogic interactions among the teacher, students, and children's book authors. Interactive

read alouds within writing workshop integrated the language arts including reading, writing,

speaking, and listening. During an interactive read aloud, the teacher read aloud a children's

book, students listened to the author's writing, and the teacher and students interactively

discussed the writing within the author's text. Immediately following the read aloud, the

students wrote their own books interwoven with traces of the interactive read aloud. The

intertextual connections within students' writing were not a simple reflection of the language of

their teacher, classmates, or the children's book author. The students' writing reflected an

understanding of how authors crafted their writing for their readers which was a product of the

interactive, social nature of the read aloud event. The collaborative discussion that occurred

among the teacher, students, and the children's book authors developed an understanding of how

and why authors craft their writing in particular ways for their reader. Each of the three

participants was necessary for the development of this socially constructed understanding of









author's craft. As students collaboratively engaged in the interactive read alouds, they

internalized the language, ideas, and understandings that were socially constructed and then used

aspects of them within their writing.

Moreover, interactively reading, rereading, and examining mentor texts at the beginning of

writing workshop actively engaged students in constructing their own knowledge and

understanding about how authors craft their writing. The students were able to develop a deeper

understanding of the author's craft because they constructed it themselves. The interactive

nature of the read aloud encouraged students to interact with their teacher, the text, and their

classmates as they explored the text as readers and discussed what they noticed as writers. The

teachers' more explicit instruction during the subsequent mini-lessons was grounded in the initial

interactive read aloud and helped students to further construct their understanding of the author's

craft. Ms. Daniels explained, "[Students] need to understand why authors make choices in their

writing, so they can make these choices in their own writing" (Teacher Interview, October 15,

2008). The interactive read alouds actively engaged students in socially constructing a literary

understanding about the interconnected nature of reading and writing.

Summary

This chapter began by contextualizing this study of the social construction of

intertextuality between interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop on students'

subsequent writing. This chapter situated the findings of this study by considering the school

environment and philosophy, the teacher's background and philosophy of teaching and learning,

and the overall classroom environment including the daily schedule and curriculum. The second

portion of this chapter addressed how the teacher and integrated literacy environment,

particularly interactive read alouds within writing workshop, facilitated students to make

intertextual connections between reading and writing. Ms. Daniels was a professional educator









who thoughtfully modeled, mentored, and guided students' literacy learning. She developed a

supportive, structured, and collaborative literacy environment, which facilitated the development

of successful readers and writers, by implementing routines and procedures and setting high

expectations for her students. Ms. Daniels' literacy instruction was purposefully developed and

explicitly connected students' reading and writing experiences. Throughout writing workshop,

Ms. Daniels specifically addressed the interconnected nature of reading and writing. As students

dialogically interacted with one another, their teacher, and the mentor texts during the interactive

read alouds, students developed an appreciation for author's craft as both readers and writers.









CHAPTER 5
FINDINGS

Reading Like a Writer & Writing Like a Reader

This chapter presents an analysis of the social construction of intertextuality and literary

understanding within a collaborative literacy environment during integrated reading and writing

events. Specifically, this chapter presents a grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing

like a reader which addresses how a teacher and 14 third-grade students socially constructed

intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds at the beginning of

writing workshop. This discussion of reading like a writer and writing like a reader is a

synthesis of the conceptual categories that emerged from the analysis of the multiple data sources

collected in this study including participant observations, field notes and transcriptions, semi-

structured and informal interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts. In order to

situate the findings of this qualitative study, this chapter begins with a vignette of the interactive

reading of Henry the Dog i i/l No Tail (Feiffer, 2007) at the beginning of writing workshop and

traces how the interactive read aloud mentored students' writing. Following the vignette, the

conceptual categories are described and summarized as they relate to the grounded theory. Each

conceptual category is then discussed with examples from the data.

The grounded theory presented in this chapter addresses the overarching research question

for this study: How do the texts within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing

workshop mentor children's writing? In addition, reading like a writer handwriting like a reader

addresses the three research questions that guided this study:

1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read

aloud into their own writing?









2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual

connections between reading and writing?

3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing?

Chapter 6 will provide an in-depth case study of four third-grade readers and writers while

Chapter 7 will further focus on how the teacher and literacy environment facilitated intertextual

connections between reading and writing.

Henry the Dog with No Tail

It is the beginning of writing workshop and the first day of the Sentence Structure Unit.

All of the students are sitting on the carpet with their writing materials placed beside them on the

floor. Ms. Daniels is sitting in a wooden chair beside an easel facing the students. She begins by

commending them on their hard work during the previous Nonfiction Research Unit and then

introduces the new unit of study.

Ms. Daniels: This unit that we are going to begin is going to be all about great sentences.
We are going to spend some time noticing how other authors write really great and
interesting sentences... [W]e are really going to be concentrating on the types of sentences
that we are writing. Because when authors write really interesting sentences it is more
enjoyable as a reader. So today we are going to start reading a fiction book that I really
love and I think you'll love it too. Part of the reason why I love it is because this author
has many VERY interesting sentences in her book. So, it makes it a little more enjoyable
to read. Today what I am going to ask you to do is to listen really closely and we are going
to notice some of the interesting sentences and then we're going to start writing her
interesting sentences up here (points to a piece of lined chart paper headed Henry The Dog
With No Tail hanging on the easel beside her) so that we have something to look back on
and maybe use in our own writing. We are going to read Kate Feiffer's book, Henry the
Dog i iih No Tail.

Ms. Daniels prepares the class for the read aloud by directing the students to sit "criss-

cross apple sauce" and reminds them "to listen VERY carefully and look at the page to see if you

notice any interesting sentences. I am going to notice an interesting sentence to show you what I

mean." Ms. Daniels reads the title of the book and the author's name and then opens the book on









her lap and gently caresses the palms of her hands across the pages. She puts the flatted, upright

book in her right hand and begins reading.

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Henry wanted one thing in life. He wanted a tail.

Henry was a dog with no tail. And this made him sad. All the other dogs he knew had
tails. His best friend, Grady, a black Labrador, had a great big black tail that he swung like
a baseball bat and chased like a cat.

After reading the first two pages, Ms. Daniels stops and says:

Watch how I notice. I notice that Kate Feiffer had a really interesting sentence here. It
was FULL of information. I'm going to write it up here so we can all see it. I noticed it
had commas and ands and all sorts of stuff joining together her ideas. (Ms. Daniels copies
the last sentence onto the lined chart paper on the easel). ... This is my favorite part...that
he swung like a baseball bat and chased like a cat.... I notice that this sentence is
interesting for a number of reasons. It is not just interesting because it is a long sentence
with lots of words in it. It is interesting because she used these commas to include a bunch
of details about his best friend Grady, a black Labrador. And then she was able to put in
the description about Grady right here. Do you see how I noticed an interesting sentence
from this book? ...Did you see how I explained why it was interesting?

The students chorally respond, "Yes." Ms. Daniels reminds students to raise their hands if they

notice an interesting sentence and that they can stop to talk about it. Ms. Daniels continues to

read aloud and stops to discuss sentences that students notice. The following excerpt from the

read aloud transcript occurs after Henry goes to the tailor, gets a tail, and then goes to the park to

show his friends his new tail:

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) "Wow. Neat. Cool," said Grady. "Does it do any tricks?"
asked Pip.

Henry ran around in a circle and jumped over his tail. The first time he did a high jump.
Then he did a long jump. Then he ran backward and jumped. He did a spin jump, a low
jump, and a leap jump.

Mishka, what did you notice?

Mishka: Because every small little sentence that tells the tricks that he was doing and
keeps saying jump,

/Students: (Chorally with Mishka) jump, jump, jump./

Ms. Daniels: Yeah.









Jermaine: (Loudly) It repeated.

Ms. Daniels: Yes, and you know what? It's actually not small little sentences. It's He did
a spin jump COMMA a low jump

/Ms. Daniels & Students: (Chorally) COMMA a leap jump COMMA./

Ms. Daniels: That's all one sentence. Let's look down here. Hold on.

(Reading aloud) Then he... dot, dot, dot.

(Students are excited.)

/Jermaine: This is like a surprise./

/Michael: He got tied up./

Ms. Daniels: Shhh. Frenia. You're raising your hand nicely.

Frenia: I am thinking that I like how the author described what kind of jumps he did.

Ms. Daniels: Can't you see it in your brain?

Students: (Chorally) Yeah.

Ms. Daniels: I can too. Yes.

Jermaine: I was thinking that when it said-that these dots mean something's about to
surprise.

Ms. Daniels: Something is about to happen and aren't you wondering what?

Students: (Chorally) YES!

Ms. Daniels: I love how Kate Feiffer chose to end her page here. But she didn't just want
you to flip and feel nothing. She wanted you to wonder what was going to happen. Are
you READY?

Students: (Chorally) Yes!

/Jermaine: Close your eyes. (Covers his eyes with his hands.)/

/Mark: No./

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Then he... (Flips page)

/Jermaine: dot, dot, dot/

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Tripped!









/Students: Oooh!/

Ms. Daniels reads aloud over half of the book and then explains that they're going to stop and

read the remainder of the book the following day. Ms. Daniels concludes the read aloud by

reviewing many examples of the author's craft that they noticed:

Ms. Daniels: Scholars, did you notice how Kate Feiffer wrote interesting sentences?

Students: (Chorally) Yes.

Ms. Daniels:...Did you notice how she chose her words carefully and put in interesting
verbs and bigger vocabulary words that she knows?

Students: (Chorally) Yes.

Ms. Daniels: Did you see how Kate Feiffer wrote longer sentences, and used commas, she
used words like or to join the sentences together?

Students: Yes.

Ms. Daniels: Did you see how she sometimes repeated words like when she said he
"moped and moped" to kind of really hit home how he's feeling?

Students: Yes.

Before students move from the carpet to their writing spots, Ms. Daniels suggests that

when students begin writing their stories that they can think about the many interesting ways

Kate Feiffer wrote her sentences and chose her words. She adds that they can try out some of

these interesting sentences and that they should think carefully about their word choice. Ms.

Daniels then dismisses the students to go to their writing spots around the room. Students

quickly settle themselves into their writing spots, take their yellow writing pads out of their green

writing folders, and begin writing. Students are writing different genres on many different

topics. Samone is writing a fiction story titled The MaskedBoy, Keith is writing a personal

narrative titled When I got My DS Sept. 23rd, Kingston is also writing a personal narrative titled

Spying on My Neighbors, while Osarhu is researching and writing a nonfiction book about

sharks. Throughout writing time, Ms. Daniels confers with four students about their writing.









After forty-five to fifty minutes of writing time, the students gather on the carpet to share their

writing. Ms. Daniels asks students to share a sentence that they wrote that was interesting and to

explain why the sentence was interesting. Eight students share interesting sentences that they

had written. Keith explains that he wrote a sentence about what his DS looked like which was

descriptive, Yomary shares a sentence using Then... like Kate Feiffer, and Belkys explains that

she wrote an interesting sentence that repeats a word. Ms. Daniels concludes sharing as well as

writing workshop by stating: Today and everyday that you are writing, use interesting sentences

and words.

Throughout the writing workshop Sentence Structure Unit, Henry the Dog i/ ith No Tail

was reread and further examined as part of various mini-lessons including lessons focused on

writing different types of sentences, different length sentences, interesting verbs, and adding

descriptions with commas. The interactive reading of Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail provided the

foundation of the subsequent writing workshop mini-lessons.

Students' writings throughout the unit reflected the interactive reading of Kate Feiffer's

Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail. During semi-structured student interviews focusing on students'

published writings, students explained how Henry the Dog i, iih No Tail influenced their writing.

For example, Michael wrote at the beginning of his story:

One hot day on a beach it was great until.... a huge storm so we ran but it was too strong.
So me, Keith, and Edward got sucked in and ended on a island.

He explained that he wrote his first sentence with a dot, dot, dot, "Because I just wanted to

make the reader wait and see what happened to these characters and what might come or what is

gonna happen next. I want them to be excited..." and then added that Henry the Dog i/ i1h No

Tail "keeps making me want to do dots so they [the reader] might be surprised that something

happened to them" (Student Interview, February 10, 2009). Keith, also influenced by Kate









Feiffer's writing, wrote a sentence describing snake, one of his main characters, in his book titled

Lost in New York. The sentence read: Snake was a red, yellow, and black snake that was

friendly. Keith explained that he "decided to write this sentence from Henry the Dog i/ ilh No

Tail because she described some of the characters." Keith then opened up Henry the Dog 1 ith

No Tail and said, "like when it says..." as he flipped to the pages where Kate Feiffer described

the main characters in the story (Student Interview, February, 2, 2009). When explaining how

Feiffer's writing in Henry the Dog i/ ilh No Tail helped her to become a better writer, Belkys

explained, "It helped me add more descriptions and it helped me add more commas and stuff like

that." Belkys then opened the book and began reading, "And naturally comma when a dog goes

in search of a tail they go to the tailors. Hello comma said Henry. Hello comma said the tailor"

(Student Interview, February 2, 2009).

These excerpts from the interactive reading of Henry the Dog i\ i/h No Tail (Transcription,

October, 30, 2008) and excerpts from students' semi-structured interviews provide a glimpse into

the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within this third-grade

collaborative learning environment. These excerpts provide examples of the conceptual

categories that emerged from the data. The conceptual categories relating to the grounded theory

of reading like a writer and writing like a reader will be discussed in detail in the following

sections.

Summary of Reading Like a Writer and Writing Like a Reader

The qualitative analysis of interactive read aloud transcriptions annotated with field notes,

semi-structured student interview transcriptions, informal student and teacher interviews, and

student and teacher artifacts enabled the development of broad conceptual categories describing

how interactive read-alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced students'

subsequent writing. The conceptual categories emerged through the use of Glaser and Strauss's









(1967) constant comparative method and Strauss and Corbin's (1990) description of open

coding, axial coding, and selective coding discussed in Chapter 3. This section introduces the

conceptual categories and summarizes how the categories were integrated into the grounded

theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader. The conceptual categories will be

described in further detail with illustrative examples in the following section.

The grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader is composed of

seven conceptual categories addressing the social construction of intertextuality and literary

understanding between integrated reading and writing events. The first four conceptual

categories which include noticing, examining, guiding, and explaining emerged from analysis of

the interactive read aloud and literature-based mini-lesson transcriptions. These conceptual

categories formed the reading like a writer portion of the grounded theory. The conceptual

category of understanding emerged from the analysis of the observational transcriptions as well

as the students' writing and semi-structured student interviews and joined the conceptual

categories regarding reading like a writer and the categories regarding writing like a reader.

Two broad conceptual categories, mentoring and crafting, emerged from analysis of the students'

writing and semi-structured interview transcriptions and formed the writing like a reader portion

of the grounded theory.

The first conceptual category, noticing, included all of the instances that the students and

teacher noticed particular aspects of the author's craft during interactive read alouds. This

category was limited to recognizing and observing an aspect of the author's writing and did not

include instances of further examination of the author's craft, since those instances formed the

second conceptual category, examining. For example, noticing included all instances when the









teacher and students observed and commented on the word choice, repetition, punctuation,

illustrations, sentence structure, ideas and information within a written text.

The second conceptual category, examining, included all instances of the teacher and

students analyzing and interpreting a written text including examining an author's intentions,

purpose for writing, or how an author crafted his/her words during interactive read alouds and

literature-based mini-lessons. Furthermore, this category included instances of the teacher and

students commenting on how the writer's choices within the mentor text influenced them as

readers. This category also included examination of a written text's illustrations and diagrams.

This category focused on the careful inspection of an author's and/or illustrator's craft during the

interactive read aloud and literature-based mini-lessons which distinguishes it from the previous

category of noticing.

The third and fourth conceptual categories, guiding and explaining, emerged from the

analysis of interactive read aloud transcripts and literature-based mini-lessons and focused on the

teacher's facilitation of intertextual connections and literary understanding. Although the

teacher's facilitation of intertextual connections between reading and writing will be discussed in

further detail in Chapter 7, these conceptual categories are an essential aspect of the grounded

theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader. The conceptual category, guiding,

included all instances of the teacher acknowledging students' responses during read alouds and

mini-lessons and then extending them by noticing other aspects of the author's craft, examining

the text further, explaining the significance of the author's craft, connecting it to previous literary

experiences, clarifying the meaning of the text, requesting further explanation of students'

thinking, or conceptually identifying students' responses. During interactive read alouds and

literature based mini-lessons, guiding led students to further notice or examine aspects of the









written text. The conceptual category of explaining included all instances when the teacher

instructively explained the purpose of an author's craft and its influence on the reader. During

interactive read alouds, instances of the teacher explaining occurred briefly at the beginning

when the purpose for the read aloud was given, briefly following an examination of a particular

craft feature, and briefly again at the conclusion of the read aloud. This conceptual category was

much more extensive and explicit during the literature-based mini-lessons than the interactive

read alouds. During literature-based mini-lessons, the teacher instructively explained the

significance of a particular craft feature, such as interesting verbs, lengths of sentences,

introductions, and tables of contents, and explicitly articulated how these specific craft choices

influenced the reader. Following this explicit explanation, the teacher shared examples of the

craft feature from portions of the mentor texts that were previously noticed and examined during

the interactive read aloud.

The fifth conceptual category of understanding included all of the instances when the

students demonstrated their understanding of the purpose of an author's craft and text features.

Although this category emerged from analysis of the observational transcriptions, the students'

writing, and semi-structured interview transcriptions, this category was most prominent in the

student interview transcriptions when students explained the purpose of particular craft decisions

within their writing. Like previously mentioned, this conceptual category linked the four

previous categories relating to reading like a writer and the following two conceptual categories

regarding writing like a reader. Understanding the purpose of author's craft appeared to be

essential for students to be purposeful readers and writers and ultimately facilitated students to

read like writers and write like readers.









The sixth and seventh conceptual categories, mentoring and crafting, emerged from

analysis of the students' writing and interview transcriptions and formed the writing like a reader

portion of the grounded theory. The sixth conceptual category, mentoring, included all of the

mentors for students' writing within the context of writing workshop including the children's

literature mentor texts, the teacher, and the students' classmates. During the interviews when

examining each sentence in the published writings, students specifically addressed how their

writing was mentored by the children's literature mentor texts, their teacher, and/or their

classmates. Student interviews concluded with a more holistic explanation of how the writing

within the mentor texts, their teacher, and their classmates helped them to become better writers.

The seventh conceptual category, crafting, included all instances of students crafting their

writing purposefully for readers. Throughout interview transcriptions focusing on their

published writing, students explained their thinking about their writing, articulated the purpose of

their craft choices, and demonstrated an awareness of the influence of their craft on the reader of

their writing.

Together, these seven conceptual categories describe how this collaborative literacy

community socially constructed intertextual connections between interactive read alouds and

students' writing during writing workshop. Furthermore, these categories describe the social

construction of literary understanding within integrated reading and writing events. Interactive

read alouds integrated within writing workshop "put students in the shoes of a reader so they can

imagine what the reader will respond like to their writing" (Teacher Interview). In the following

section, each of the seven conceptual categories is discussed in detail with emphasis on how each

category contributed to the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding and

how it influenced students' writing.










Categories of Reading Like a Writer and Writing Like a Reader

Within this section, each of the seven conceptual categories is discussed with illustrative

examples from the data. Although these categories may at first appear to be part of a linear

process from noticing the author's craft to crafting writing purposefully for a reader, these

categories are part of an interactive, interrelated, social process. The first four conceptual

categories, noticing, examining, guiding, and explaining, formed the reading like a writer portion

of the grounded theory. Throughout the interactive read alouds, these four categories were part

of an interrelated, iterative process that resulted in students' understanding of the author's craft

(Figure 5-1). Mentoring and Crafting formed the writing like a reader portion of the grounded

theory.





Understanding
of Author's Craft
& the Influence Examining Author's
on Reader Craft











Noticing
Author's Craft
Readers Initially
Respond Text
Guiding Students
to Notice Author's
Craft




Figure 5-1. The Interrelated Nature of the Conceptual Categories involved in Reading Like a
Writer










Noticing the Author's Craft

The category, noticing, consisted of all the instances where the teacher and students

observed and commented on particular aspects of the author's craft during the interactive reading

of mentor texts. Representative comments of students' noticing are included in Table 5-1.

Instances of further examination of the author's craft were regarded as part of the examining

category. Noticing typically occurred following the teacher's reading of one or two pages of a

mentor text. Included within this category were instances of the teacher noticing particular craft

features along with the students and modeling how to notice the author's craft, similar to how the

teacher noticed the interesting sentence at the beginning of Henry the Dg n/ ih No Tail in the

vignette. In addition, this category included instances of students spontaneously noticing the

author's craft as well as students noticing craft features following a request by the teacher.

Table 5-1. Noticing the Author's Craft
Noticing the Author's Craft
Spiders Jermaine: Me and Nakota noticed how Gail Gibbons told us how spiders lived during the
by Gail Gibbons dinosaurs.
Nakota: (Adding on to Jermaine's response) And we liked how Gail Gibbons told us because if
she didn't then we wouldn't know (Spiders Transcription, September 15, 2008).

Frenia: Me and Keith, we were talking about how Gail Gibbons, how she put a lot of things to
make it more...
/Keith: she put a lot of information/
Frenia: Yeah (Spiders Transcription, September 15, 2008).

"What I noticed about Gail Gibbons' book was that she says true facts about spiders" (Belkys,
Spiders Transcription, September 15, 2008).

"I like how Gail Gibbons told us details about how spiders catch their prey" (Mark, Spiders
Transcription, September 15, 2008).

The Bicycle "I was just noticing that Gail Gibbons kind of told you about the five different types of bikes"
Book (Samone, The Bicycle Book Transcription, September 18, 2008).
by Gail Gibbons
"She was telling us about the different types of bikes..." (Osahru, The Bicycle Book
Transcription, September 18, 2008).

"I just noticed that Gail Gibbons instead of just telling us about bikes that she is telling us about
the rules of bikes" (Nakota, The Bicycle Book Transcription, September 18, 2008).

"I like all of Gail Gibbons' diagrams that teach us all about bikes" (Renesha, The Bicycle Book
Transcription, September 18, 2008).












Henry the Dog "I also liked this sentence because I liked the word puffy and it has a lot of describing words"
with No Tail (Frenia, Henry the D- -. ,ih No Tail Transcription, October 30, 2008).
by Kate Feiffer
"He moped and he moped... Because the word moped is a good describing word" (Renesha,
Henry the Dog with No Tail Transcription, October 30, 2008).

"(Referring to the repetition of a word and connecting it to a previous experience during poetry)
Remember that author who was writing that poem called Dreams [by Langston Hughes]?...Yeah,
like how he repeated" (Nakota, Henry the Dog with No Tail Transcription, October 30, 2008).

"I am thinking that I like how the author described what kind of jumps he did" (Frenia, Henry the
Dog with No Tail Transcription, October 30, 2008).

"I liked it when she put the exclamation point because it tells you like [they are] saying
something really loud" (Jermaine, Henry the D- ,I ,ih No Tail Transcription, October 30, 2008).

Scarecrow "I noticed that she used the word borrowed..." (Keith, Scarecrow Transcription, November 5,
by Cynthia 2008).
Rylant
"I liked how...when the sentence says...(reads from book) They ignore the pie-pan hands and
the button eyes and see instead the scarecrow's best gift: his gentleness" (Samone, Scarecrow
Transcription, November 5, 2008).

"I like how Cynthia Rylant told how the scarecrow watched those things" (Frenia, Scarecrow
Transcription, November 5, 2008).

"I like how she said that spiders are making webs like lace" (Jermaine, Scarecrow Transcription,
November 6, 2008).

"I like how Cynthia Rylant said 'and soon the birds will be coming by' instead of saying soon the
birds will fly past him" (Nakota, Scarecrow Transcription, November 6, 2008).

Animal Dads "I like how the author said that the female and male take care of their downy youngster..."
by Sneed B. (Keith, Animal Dads Transcription, November 3, 2008).
Collard
"He used interesting words like youngster and grooming..." (Belkys, Animal Dads
Transcription, November 3, 2008).

"I was just noticing how after every page about a dad taking care of his...that he has a comment.
Like right there..." (Nli hh I iiml Dads Transcription, November 3, 2008).

Michael: I like how he put dot, dot, dot.
/Jermaine: Me too!/ (Animal Dads Transcription, November 4, 2008).

"I like how Mr. Collard uses good words instead of just saying like...Like he says stay but
instead of saying stay he said remain" (Belkys, Animal Dads Transcription, November 4, 2008).


Instances of noticing focused on comments about word choice, repetition, punctuation,

sentence structure, illustrations, ideas, and information within the mentor texts. For example, the









following conversation occurred at the beginning of the interactive reading of Scarecrow

(Transcription, November, 5, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Scarecrow. ... by Cynthia Rylant.

His hat is borrowed, his suit is borrowed, his hands are borrowed, even his HEAD is
borrowed. And his eyes probably came out of someone's drawer.

Keith, what are you noticing?

Keith: I noticed that she used the word borrowed.

/Ms. Daniels: Three times./

Mark: She repeated it.

Ms. Daniels: I wonder how she might use the word borrowed? Three times. It's obviously
important. Why do you think it's important that we know that all these things are
borrowed?

This excerpt represents three instances of noticing. In this excerpt, after reading the first

page of Scarecrow, the teacher requested a student share what he noticed. Keith noticed

Rylant's choice of the word borrowed and Ms. Daniels interjected that the word was used three

times. Mark then added that the author repeated the word. Ms. Daniels then guided the students

to further examine the author's word choice as it related to the theme of the story. This example

demonstrates how the teacher and students noticed the author's word choice and use of repetition

which then led to a more in-depth examination. Furthermore, this example illustrates how

noticing, the first conceptual category of the process of reading like a writer, interactively and

immediately occurred following the reading of the mentor text.

Within the Nonfiction Research Unit, noticing occurred during Turn and Talks

interspersed throughout the interactive read alouds. In this case, students collaboratively

discussed what they noticed about the author's craft with their partner and then shared with the









whole group following the Turn and Talk. The following excerpt of a Turn and Talk occurred

during the reading of Spiders (Transcription, October 2, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: 3..., 2....,1. (Getting students attention following Turn and Talk.) Thank you
for coming back together so quietly. I was talking to Mishka and Samone. Mishka said
that she liked how Gail Gibbons told us that spiders were roaming EVEN before dinosaurs
because that really let her know how old spiders must be. And Samone was saying that
she liked how Gail Gibbons told us that there are many different shapes and sizes because
some people may not have known that unless she wrote it in there.

What else did you notice? Jermaine. (His hand is raised.)

Jermaine: Me and Nakota noticed how Gail Gibbons told us how, how ummm, spiders
lived during the dinosaurs.

Nakota: (Joining in.) And um, we liked how Gail Gibbons told us because if she didn't
then we wouldn't know.

Ms. Daniels: Yes, because we are reading this to become experts too. So she needs to tell
us everything. Yes. (Calling on student with hand raised.)

Michael: I told Keith that I liked how Gail Gibbons put a little story and then told us ...

Ms. Daniels: Yeah, I liked how Gail Gibbons did that too. She told us where spiders got
their name from, right? By telling us this little story, this little myth. Yes. (Calling on
student with hand raised.)

Renesha: I liked how she tells us that she turned her into a spider, you know...

Ms. Daniels: Yeah, it is a Greek myth.

This example, which includes several instances of noticing, demonstrates the collaborative

nature of the Turn and Talks within the interactive read alouds. Furthermore, this excerpt

illustrates how other conceptual categories are interrelated with students' noticing. This excerpt

begins with Ms. Daniels sharing the conversation that she had with two students about what they

liked about Gail Gibbons' book (noticing) and why they liked it (examining). While Jermaine,

Michael, and Renesha's conversational turns were noticing the author's craft, Nakota's

conversational turn demonstrated that she had begun examining the author's intentions for

including particular information in her book. Furthermore, Ms. Daniels' following three









conversational turns, acknowledging and extending students' responses, illustrate the conceptual

category of guiding.

Within these excerpts and throughout all the interactive read aloud transcripts, noticing

was a prerequisite for further examination of the author's craft. During the interactive read

alouds, the students and teacher noticed aspects of the author's craft that they liked as readers.

This was reflected in the language they used when noticing which frequently included "I liked

how..." and "I liked when..." in regard to how the authors crafted their writing. In general, the

instances of noticing illustrated that the students were paying close attention to the language,

stylistic devices, and ideas within the interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing

workshop and had learned to "read in a special kind of way" (Smith, 1983).

Examining the Author's Craft

The category, examining, consisted of all the instances where the teacher and students

analyzed and interpreted a mentor text during interactive read alouds and literature-based mini-

lessons. These instances included the teacher and students examining an author's intentions,

purpose for writing, or how an author crafted his/her words as well as discussing how the

writer's choices within the mentor text influenced them as readers. This category also included

the examination of the illustrations and diagrams within the mentor texts. This category focused

on the close examination of an author's and/or illustrator's craft during the interactive read aloud

and literature-based mini-lessons which distinguishes it from the previous category of noticing.

Although a single conversational turn may demonstrate the analyzing and interpreting of a

mentor text, these conversational turns typically were part of a series of conversational turns

examining an aspect of the mentor text. For example, the following conversation occurred

during the interactive reading of Scarecrow (Transcription, November 6, 2008):









Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) So he doesn't mind that there is always a smile on his face or
that his eyes are always open. He doesn't mind being up high. He doesn't mind staying
there.

Michael: He doesn't mind if he stays there or if he's high...

Ms. Daniels: He doesn't mind if he is high up or just staying there and he doesn't mind that
his eyes are always open. Yeah, why do you think Cynthia Rylant repeats that three times.
That he doesn't mind? What do you think she wants us to understand? Think about that
for a second. Why is she saying that he doesn't mind over and over? What is the author
trying to tell us?

Michael: That he is a scarecrow and scarecrows don't close their eyes...

Ms. Daniels: But why doesn't he mind...?

Samone: Maybe because he knows that he is not a real person.

Ms. Daniels: What is Cynthia Rylant trying to show us?

Frenia: That he is probably happy with who he is.

Ms. Daniels: Yeah, he doesn't mind. And she is saying that over and over again because
Cynthia Rylant really wants us to understand that this scarecrow is ok with who he is. It
doesn't matter that he is all borrowed and that he can't close his eyes. It doesn't bother
him. He is happy with who he is.

Samone: In the book The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane since his eyes are painted
open he doesn't like it.

Ms. Daniels: Yeah, the character in The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane didn't like
it, but this character is ok with it. They have different personalities. They are different
characters...

This excerpt examining the significance of Rylant's use of repetition is typical of the

instances of examining that occurred during the interactive read alouds. This excerpt began with

Michael noticing how the author repeated the phrase "he doesn't mind." Ms. Daniels then

guided the students to further examine why Cynthia Rylant repeated the phrase three times and

what the author was trying to convey to the reader. Frenia suggested that Rylant was letting the

reader know that the scarecrow was "probably happy with who he [was]." Ms. Daniels agreed

with Frenia and further explained that Rylant's use of repetition helps the reader better









understand the scarecrow's feelings. Then, Samone made an intertextual connection to a

character within a book previously read aloud in class, The Miraculous Journey of Edward

Tulane. This examination of Rylant's use of repetition concluded with Ms. Daniels explaining

how the scarecrow and the character within The Miraculous Journey of Edward Tulane were

different characters with different personalities.

Intertextual connecting during the interactive read alouds enabled the mentor text to be

related to the oral, written, or visual texts they had previously experienced. Analysis of the

transcripts suggested that when students examined the ideas and author's craft in light of their

previous literacy experiences that they were using these experiences to interpret the mentor text.

During each interactive read aloud, at least one instance occurred where the teacher or students

related the mentor text to a previous literacy experience when examining the text. Several

instances occurred where students made intertextual connections to texts read aloud in class.

Therefore, when literacy experiences were intertextually linked or related to the mentor text, it

was included within the conceptual category of examining.

Examining was a multifaceted, collaborative process which the teacher and students began

by noticing an interesting sentence or an aspect of an author's craft. As the mentor text was

interactively examined, other features of the author's craft that contributed to making the text

particularly interesting were also examined. The following excerpt demonstrates the interactive

nature of the examining process as well as includes an example of the mentor text being related

to a previous literacy experience. The following excerpt is from the read aloud transcript of

Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail (Transcription, October 30, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Henry moped around his house feeling sorry for himself. He
moped and he moped.

I'm noticing that last sentence. (Students are engaged in book.) Were you noticing that
too?









/Students: chorallyy with excitement) Yeahhh!/

Ms. Daniels: What did you think?

Renesha: He moped and he moped.

Ms. Daniels: Why do you like that sentence?

Renesha: Because the word moped is a good describing word.

Ms. Daniels: Yeah, that's a great describing word. (Rereading sentence.) He moped and
he moped.

Denise: What does moped mean?

Ms. Daniels: Who can help us with that? He doesn't have a tail. Who can tell us what is
happening? He doesn't have a tail and he is walking around...his... house...feeling sorry
for himself. He moped and he moped. What might moped mean?

Denise: Sad?

Ms. Daniels: Sad. It's kind of when you walk around like this (demonstrates with her face
down bobbing head). You mope around sad feeling sorry for yourself. I have a question
for you. Did anyone notice how Kate Feiffer repeated the same word?

All Students: chorallyy) Yes!

Ms. Daniels: I thought that was really interesting because now I really can see that [Henry]
must have moped and moped...it just kinda kept going. He didn't just mope for a minute,
he kept moping. Yes, Nakota.

Nakota: Remember that author who was writing that poem called Dreams? (Referring to
the poem, Dreams, chorally read and studied during Poetry.)

Ms. Daniels: Langston Hughes.

Nakota: Yeah, like how he repeated...

/Yomary: Yeah, like how he repeated.../

/Mishka: Yeah, he repeated a word./

Ms. Daniels: He repeated the whole lines, right? Hold fast to your dreams. Right, because
we know that repeating makes a point even stronger.

/Belkys; Yeah, he repeated dreams.../









This example begins with Ms. Daniels reading aloud and noticing an interesting sentence.

Renesha repeated the sentence and was guided by Ms. Daniels to explain why she liked that

sentence. Renesha began examining the sentence when she explained that she liked the word

moped because it was a good describing word. Ms. Daniels then acknowledged and extended

her response and reread the sentence being examined. Denise then questioned the meaning of

the word moped and Ms. Daniels guided Denise to conclude that moped was synonymous with

sad. Ms. Daniels then guided the students to notice that the word moped was repeated. This led

Nakota and three other students to make an intertextual connection to Langton Hughes' poem

Dreams that included both repetition of a line and the word dreams. These students related Kate

Feiffer's repetition of moped to their previous experience with another author who used

repetition to convey meaning and importance to the reader. The conversation concludes with

Ms. Daniels explaining how an author's craft of "repeating makes a point even stronger" for the

reader.

Examining the author's craft during the interactive reading of mentor texts was a

collaborative process where the teacher and students actively constructed literary understanding

and intertextuality. The conversational turns within the previous excerpts were rich with

thoughtful analysis and interpretation of the mentor text. The students were active participants in

their construction of understanding and the teacher was their guide. Together, they notice,

inquire, make connections, and construct a literary understanding as both readers and writers.

The conversational turns provided by each of the participants within the interactive read aloud

enriched the discussion and examination of the text thus enhancing their social construction of

literary understanding.









The teacher and students further examined the author's craft within the mentor texts during

literature-based mini-lessons. This examining was much more explicit and guided by Ms.

Daniels than the collaborative examining that occurred during the interactive read alouds.

Literature-based mini-lessons were focused on a particular teaching point such as the use of:

powerful verbs, questioning sentences, different sentence lengths, or paragraphs to organize non-

fiction information. During these mini-lessons, the teacher and students further examined the

mentor texts regarding the teaching point for the day. Mini-lessons typically examined aspects

of the mentor texts that they had been previously noticed and examined during the read aloud.

Oftentimes, mini-lessons, focused on a particular teaching point, would first examine the mentor

text(s) and then provide students with an opportunity to examine their own writing for this

particular feature. Since the instances of examining during the mini-lessons included much more

teacher directed and explicit explanations of the author's craft than during the interactive read

alouds, these instances were included within the category of explaining. The following example

demonstrates the interrelated nature of examining and explaining during the literature-based

mini-lessons. This excerpt is from the observational transcript focusing on the use of medium

length sentences (Transcription, December 16, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: ... Writers, we have been talking about how writers choose their sentences
very carefully. First we talked about how they choose carefully the types of sentences that
they write whether it's statements or questions or exclamations or commands. And we
make sure that we try to use every type of sentence because it makes our reading more
interesting. Then we started, yesterday, talking about the lengths of the sentences that we
can use. We know that there are long sentences. We know that there are medium length
sentences and then there are short sentences. Yesterday we talked about those short
sentences. We know that writers can make a very short sentence if they want to draw
attention to their point. If you're reading something and there are many medium or long
sentences and suddenly there is a short sentence, it really catches your attention. So if we
have something important to say, it can be helpful to put it in a short sentence. Today we
are going to talk about MEDIUM length sentences. Not really, really long. Not short, but
they are just kind of a medium, average length sentence. We are going to look at Kate
Feiffer's book. We are going to look at her medium length sentences.









(Osahru demonstrates different sentence lengths with his arms.)

Writers use medium length sentences to just be direct, that means say what they want to
say, and do it in a clear way. They don't make it really, really long because sometimes
when you start adding description and making it longer, it can be a little hard to
understand. Longer sentences can require more thinking because there is a lot being said
so we can actually use medium length sentences when we just want to be very clear.

OK, let's look at Kate Feiffer's book, Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail. (Opens book and flips
to the first page. Ms. Daniels strokes the page gently down and flat before beginning to
read. As Ms. Daniels reads she moves her finger across the words stopping at end
punctuation.)

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) Henry wanted one thing in life.

I'm noticing that's not short. It's medium length. It is very clear isn't it? We know that
he wanted one thing out of his whole life.

(Reading aloud) He wanted a tail.

That is a short sentence. (Quickly with emphasis.) What's the point?

Jermaine: Ooh. He wants a tail.

Ms. Daniels: Is that clear?

Students: (Chorally) Yes.

Ms. Daniels: Oh, it's very clear. Did it catch our attention?

Students: (Chorally) Yes.

Ms. Daniels: Yeah. Interesting. Isn't this whole book about him wanting a tail? That
must be why Kate Feiffer wrote this short sentence to make sure that it caught our
attention. I want you to be noticing on this next page.

(Reading aloud) Henry was a dog with no tail.

I understand that is about a

/Ms. Daniels & Students: (Chorally) medium/

sentence. It's direct. It's clear. He had no tail.

(Reading aloud) And this made him sad. All the other dogs he knew had tails.

These are medium length sentences that are very clear.









(Reading aloud) His best friend Grady, a black Labrador, had a great big black tail that he
swung like a baseball bat and chased like a cat.

/Jermaine: Nooo./

That was long. I know the first time I read that, it wasn't very clear to me, so I had to read
it again to make sure that I took everything in. Do you see how a medium length sentence
is more clear?

Students: Yes. (Students nod in agreement.)

Ms. Daniels: That isn't to say that long sentences are bad, but we use them in a different
way and for a different reason. So let me remind you what I am telling you about right
now. Short sentences catch your attention when we have something really important to
say. Medium length sentences are just clear. And tomorrow we'll talk about longer
sentences. They have a very different purpose... I want you to look through your writing
and see if you can find a medium length sentence. Not a short sentence and not a really
long one, but one that's just medium length. Thumbs up when you find one.

(Students look through their writing for about one minute. When they find the first
medium size sentence, thumbs eagerly pop up.)

After all of the students have their thumbs up, Ms. Daniels asks the students to think about their

medium length sentences including why that sentence should have been a medium length

sentence and the purpose of the sentence. Then, she asked students to turn and tell their partner.

The students immediately begin to Turn and Talk to their partners. Ms. Daniels joins nearby

partners and listens and adds to their Turn and Talk conversation. After approximately 40

seconds, Ms. Daniels gets the students attention, shares the discussions that she heard, and then

three students share the medium length sentences that they discussed during the Turn and Talk

with their partner. The mini-lesson concludes with Ms. Daniels explaining:

Scholars, it is important that we think carefully about how long we make our sentences.
One, it helps make your point clearer. But also it makes it more interesting for people to
read. Not all long sentences. Not all short sentences. Not all medium length sentences but
different types of sentences-different lengths of sentences-make your writing more
interesting.

This example demonstrates how the teacher began literature-based mini-lessons by

explaining the purpose of a particular author's craft, in this case the purpose of different length









sentences, and then guided students in the examination of the mentor text regarding that aspect of

the author's craft. The portion of Henry the Dog ni ilh No Tail that they examined had already

been noticed and examined during the interactive read aloud. The students participated in

examining the mentor text during the mini-lesson with brief remarks and comments of agreement

which differed from the collaborative nature of the examining that occurred between the teacher

and students during the read alouds. Ms. Daniels' explanation of the author's craft and the

examination of the mentor text for this particular craft helped to facilitate students'

understanding of the purpose of the author's craft. The final portion of this mini-lesson applied

their understanding of medium length sentences to their own writing. Prior to the beginning of

writing time, Ms. Daniels once again explained the purpose of different length sentences and the

influence of different length sentences on the reader.

Within this section, the examples of examining illustrate how the teacher and students

analyzed and interpreted the mentor texts during the interactive read alouds and the literature-

based mini-lessons. Although the examining that occurred during the interactive read alouds was

more collaborative and multifaceted than during the mini-lessons, in all instances the teacher and

students were examining the author's intentions, purpose for writing, or how the author crafted

his/her words as well as developing an awareness of the influence of the author's craft on the

reader. The examination of the mentor texts during the interactive read alouds was the

foundation of the literature-based mini-lessons which further examined the author's craft.

Guiding Students' Understanding of Author's Craft

The category, guiding, included all of the instances where the teacher acknowledged

students' responses and then extended them during read alouds and mini-lessons. Guiding was

involved and interrelated with the other categories within reading like a writer including

noticing, examining, explaining, and understanding. Instances of the teacher's guiding were









spontaneous responses that extended the students' responses and took advantage of teachable

moments thus enhancing students' understanding of the author's craft. Guiding was an

important component of the discussions because it led the students to think more deeply about

the mentor texts by further noticing and examining the author's craft. Instances of guiding

illustrated that the teacher acknowledged and extended students' responses by noticing other

aspects of the author's craft, examining the text further, explaining the significance of the

author's craft, connecting it to previous literary experiences, clarifying the meaning of the text,

requesting further explanation of students' thinking, or conceptually identifying students'

responses. Throughout the previously presented interactive read aloud and mini-lesson excerpts,

there have been several examples of Ms. Daniels acknowledging and extending, or guiding,

students' responses during instances of noticing and examining. The following transcription

excerpts provide examples of some of the different ways the teacher guided the social

construction of intertextuality and literary understanding by acknowledging and extending

students' responses. For example, during the interactive reading of Animal Dads (Collard,

1997), Ms. Daniels guided students to further examine a sentence that a student noticed

(Transcription, November 5, 2008):

Samone: I like when it said aunts and uncles...

Ms. Daniels: When it had the list. Listen to that sentence. Like gorillas comma dwarf
mongooses live in close families that have aunts comma uncles comma

/Ms. Daniels & Students: (Loud & Chorally) brothers comma sisters comma and of course
comma PARENTS./

That is a very interesting sentence. He used commas to make a list.

This excerpt began with Samone noticing a sentence that Ms. Daniels had just finished reading.

Ms. Daniels began this instance of guiding by identifying the sentence that Samone noticed

within the mentor text. Then she extended the student's response by reading aloud the sentence









emphasizing the use of commas separating the items within the list. As Ms. Daniels reread the

sentence, the students chorally began reading aloud with her also emphasizing the commas. This

instance of guiding concluded with Ms. Daniels reinforcing that it was an interesting sentence

and specifying the author's craft, Collard's use of commas to join ideas together to make a list.

This instance of guiding led to further examination of the mentor text.

Another type of instance of guiding occurred during the interactive reading of Spiders

(Gibbons, 1994). Within this excerpt following a Turn and Talk, Ms. Daniels guided the

students' noticing of the author's craft by explaining the purpose of the craft within nonfiction

writing (Transcription, October 2, 2008):

Frenia: Me and Keith, we were talking about how Gail Gibbons, how she put a lot
of things to make it more...
/Keith: She put a lot of information./
Frenia: Yeah.

Ms. Daniels: She put A LOT of effort into putting A LOT of information. So, if
you want to make a book like Gail Gibbons, which you can, you need to put in a
lot of effort and find a lot of information and really become an expert.

The previous interaction illustrates one kind of guiding that occurred during interactive read

alouds. This excerpt began with Frenia and Keith sharing that they noticed Gail Gibbons put a

lot of information into her book. Ms. Daniels acknowledged and reiterated what the students

noticed about the book and then she extended the students' response by explaining how

nonfiction authors craft their writing by putting a lot of effort into becoming experts on a topic so

they can include a lot of information within their books. This extension of the students'

comment interconnects their reading and writing of nonfiction as well as recognizes them as

authors capable of writing a nonfiction book similar to their mentor, Gail Gibbons.

During interactive read alouds and mini-lessons, Ms. Daniels also guided students to make

connections between literacy experiences. Within this brief excerpt, Ms. Daniels guided students









to relate a student's response about the author's word choice to a previous literacy experience

(Scarecrow, Transcription, November 5, 2008):

Jermaine: ... One thing that I like is when she said tremble.

Ms. Daniels: Tremble. Remember that word...that powerful word from last year?

Students: (Chorally.) Yes.

This is just one example of how Ms. Daniels related and interconnected literacy experiences

during interactive discussions. Jermaine noticed the word tremble when Ms. Daniels read the

sentence, "He has seen the sun tremble and the moon lie still" (Rylant, 1998). Ms. Daniels

acknowledged his response and then extended his comment by connecting it to Word Study from

the previous year. Ms. Daniels' guiding helped students to make connections between their

literacy learning and facilitated students to conceptually build upon their prior knowledge.

Yet another kind of guiding occurred during the interactive reading of Henry the Dog n/ ih

No Tail (Feiffer, 2007). Within this excerpt, Ms. Daniels not only guided students to further

notice a specific word but also identified the word's part of speech and conveyed the meaning of

the word (Transcription, October 30, 2008):

Frenia: I liked how she used some vocabulary words.

Ms. Daniels: Yes, I love the word SCOFFED. What a great verb. It is kind of like... she
must have said, (imitating the tone of the character in the book) "I told you that wasn't a
REAL tail," Larry scoffed.

This excerpt began with Frenia noticing that Rylant used some "vocabulary words" within her

writing. Ms. Daniels began this instance of guiding by acknowledging what Frenia noticed and

then extended her comment by suggesting a specific word that she particularly liked, scoffed, and

conceptually identified it as a verb. She then clarified the meaning of the word scoffed by

imitating how the character would have mocked Henry as she repeated the sentence. This









excerpt demonstrates how Ms. Daniels' guiding took advantage of teachable moments, since she

conducted an authentic vocabulary mini-lesson within the context of the interactive read aloud.

In addition to the interactive read alouds, instances of guiding also occurred during the

literature-based mini-lessons. Since the literature-based mini-lessons were focused on a

particular teaching point, the guiding during mini-lessons typically focused on further examining

the mentor texts regarding a particular aspect of the author's craft. For instance, during a

literature-based mini-lesson focusing on interesting verbs, Ms. Daniels guided students to further

examine Rylant's use of verbs in Scarecrow (Transcription, November 25, 2008):

Ms. Daniels & Students: (Chorally reading sentence on chart paper.)
He has seen the sun tremble and the moon lie still.

Ms. Daniels: Let's look at some of the verbs in there. There are a couple verbs
that we can look at.

Osahru: Tremble.

Ms. Daniels: TREMBLE! The sun is not standing still. It is trembling. That
paints a very different picture in my mind than just saying that he has seen the sun
and the moon. He has seen the sun TREMBLE. Very different.


Within this example, Ms. Daniels and the students chorally read a sentence from Scarecrow

(1998) that they had previously noticed and examined during the interactive read aloud. After

being requested to focus on the verbs within the sentence, Osahru noticed the verb tremble. Ms.

Daniels acknowledged his response by enthusiastically repeating tremble and then extended his

response by further examining the meaning as well as addressing the readers' visualization of

this verb. This instance of Ms. Daniels' guiding led the students to further examine Cynthia

Rylant's writing as both readers and writers.

The previous examples illustrate a few of the ways Ms. Daniels guided students' social

construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds and mini-









lessons at the beginning of writing workshop. Instances of guiding demonstrated how Ms.

Daniels elaborated upon students' responses and exploited teachable moments thus enriching the

interactive, collaborative discussions surrounding the mentor texts. Guiding promoted students

to further notice and examine the author's craft as both readers and writers which, in turn, helped

students develop a better understanding of the purpose of the author's craft.

Explaining the Author's Craft

Explaining included all instances when the teacher instructively explained the purpose of

the author's craft and its influence on the reader. During interactive read alouds, instances of

Ms. Daniels explaining occurred briefly when she set the purpose for the read aloud, briefly

throughout the read aloud as particular craft features were noticed and examined, and then

briefly at the end of the read aloud when she explained and summarized the author's craft within

the mentor text. Explaining during the interactive read alouds addressed the author's craft and its

influence on the reader more generally than during the literature-based mini-lessons. Explaining

during the mini-lessons explicitly and instructively explained the purpose of a particular craft

feature, such as introductions, lengths of sentences, interesting verbs, and descriptions, and

addressed how the craft feature influenced the reader. Following the explicit explanation of a

particular craft at the beginning of a mini-lesson, the mentor text(s) were examined for examples

of the particular craft. At the conclusion of the mini-lesson, the particular craft was once again

explained and summarized immediately prior to the beginning of independent writing time. The

following example of explaining occurred at the beginning of the interactive reading of

Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998) when Ms. Daniels was setting the purpose for the read aloud

(Transcription, November 6, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: Scholars, we know that we have been working really hard on a new unit.
We've been doing some research, sort of, before. We've found 3 great books and we are
looking at 3 great authors. And we are using them to figure out how authors of books









write interesting sentences. Yesterday we started noticing some things. We noticed that
some authors repeat words. We noticed that some authors compare things to each other.
We noticed that some authors use different types of punctuation to make their sentences
more interesting or clear. We know that authors write shorter sentences and longer
sentences and they mix them up. We've been noticing how authors have been using words
like and and or to join ideas together in one sentence. We've also been noticing a lot of
interesting description. Today we are going to finish reading Scarecrow and we are going
to continue to notice interesting sentences.

Ms. Daniels began by reviewing and situating the lesson within the new writing unit. She

explained that the purpose of reading and examining the three authors' books was to help them

better understand how these authors wrote interesting sentences. Then, Ms. Daniels began listing

some of the craft choices that they had noticed during the previous interactive read alouds

including repetition, comparisons, punctuation, different sentence lengths, compound sentences,

and descriptions. Rather than explaining the purpose of each of these crafts and its effect on the

reader, as she does in the mini-lessons, she generally explained that these craft features "make

their sentences more interesting or clear." Finally, she set the purpose of the read aloud event

that followed. This excerpt demonstrates a typical example of explaining at the beginning of the

interactive read alouds.

During the interactive read alouds, instances of explaining were brief and followed the

noticing and/or examining of an aspect of the author's craft. The following example is a typical

instance of explaining that occurred during the interactive read alouds:

Ms. Daniels: (Reading aloud) The wind is brushing his borrowed head and the sun is
warming his borrowed hands and the clouds are floating across his button-borrowed eyes.

Nakota notices that Rylant repeats the word borrowed, and then Yomary adds that she

thinks the author is describing.

Ms. Daniels: She is definitely describing it. And I think she is reminding us to remember
that who he is really belongs to somebody

/Ms. Daniels & Students: ELSE!/









Everything about him is somebody else's. It is important isn't it? We repeat things when
they are important and when we want to make sure the reader remembers them
(Scarecrow, Transcription, November 6, 2008).

Within this excerpt, Ms. Daniels guided the conversation by acknowledging and then extending

Yomary's response by explaining the purpose of repetition-to remind the reader that something

is important. This explanation of the author's choice to repeat the word borrowed was brief;

however, it contributed to the students' overall understanding of the purpose of author's craft and

the influence it has on the reader.

In addition, at the end of the interactive read aloud, Ms. Daniels summarized the aspects of

the author's craft that they collaboratively noticed while reading the mentor text and explained

the purpose of these craft choices. The following excerpt occurred at the end of the interactive

reading of Animal Dads (1997) immediately prior to independent writing time (Transcription,

November 4, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: ...Animal Dads was a very interesting book and it was interesting how this
author took a topic, a non-fiction topic, and kind of put a special twist on it. Mr. Collard
didn't just write all about sea horses or all about piper fish, he wrote about animal DADS.
And what was really cool about what Mr. Collard did is he used many different types of
sentences. He tried to make them interesting so his book was fun to read. He thought
about his word choice VERY carefully so that we could BEST understand what he was
trying to say. He used LONG sentences. He used SHORT sentences. He had sentences
with COMMAS. He had sentences with DASHES, with EXCLAMATION marks, and
with QUESTION marks. When we are working on our books today, you should be trying
to do the exact same thing as Mr. Collard AND as Kate Feiffer in Henry the Dog ni i/h No
Tail. We are going to be looking at one other type of book before we begin to STUDY
these sentences. Listen carefully. Your job today is to continue writing your book. You
need to think about your WORD choice and your SENTENCE choices...

This example began with Ms. Daniels stating that Collard's nonfiction book was interesting since

it focused on a specific, interesting topic of animal dads. Then she explained that he used many

different kinds of sentences which made his book interesting and fun for readers and that he

carefully chose his words so readers could easily understand his writing. Ms. Daniels continued

by listing the various writing techniques they noticed during the read aloud. In the last part of









this excerpt, Ms. Daniels explicitly connected the interactive reading of the mentor texts with

students' writing, thus facilitating students' to connect reading like a writer during interactive

read alouds and writing like a reader during writing time.

During the literature based mini-lessons, the teacher explicitly and instructively explained

the purpose of the author's craft and the influence of the author's craft choices on the reader.

Following this explicit explanation, the teacher shared portions of the mentor texts that were

previously noticed and examined during the interactive read alouds as examples of the particular

writing technique. The following example is from the literature-based mini-lesson focusing on

questioning sentences (Transcription, December 9, 2008):

Ms. Daniels: Writers, all of this unit, we have been looking at how authors write sentences
and write books that are very clear and interesting. We've looked at their word choices
and we've looked at and found sentences that we liked. Yesterday we started talking about
something else that all great writers do. We started talking about how great writers include
different TYPES of sentences in their stories. They don't just write all statements. They
don't just write all questions or all sentences that are said with excitement. Yesterday we
looked at statements and we talked about how statements are usually written to say
something very clearly and they always end in a period. Today we are going to look at
QUESTIONS. And it is really important that we understand that questions are written in
different kinds of books for different kinds of reasons. Let me tell you what I mean. In a
fiction book, like Henry the Deg i i/h No Tail, questions are usually written because
characters are asking each other questions. But in non-fiction books like Animal Dads,
questions are usually written to get the reader more interested about the topic. Do you
understand how questions are written in different types of books for different reasons?

Students: Yes. (Students gesture using connecting hand sign.).

Ms. Daniels: In this kind of a fiction book (holding up Henry the Deg / i/h No Tail),
questions are usually written as dialogue between characters and questions in non-fiction
are usually trying to get readers

/Ms. Daniels & Students: more interested./

Ms. Daniels: Are you with me?

Jermaine: Yeah!

Ms. Daniels: I want to look to make sure that I am right about that because we shouldn't
just believe everything our teachers say. I should have to show you, right?









Students: (Chorally) Yeah...

Ms. Daniels: Let me show you what I mean. (She begins flipping through Henry the Dog
ii ith No Tail.) I'm looking in this book to find a question... hummm.... because you are
going to be doing the same thing as me right now... OH, HERE is my example. Right
here is where Pip and Grady are talking about tails, remember?

/Students: Yeah!/

Right here is some dialogue. And LOOK. It says,

"Wow. Neat. Cool," said Grady. "Does it do ANY tricks?" asked Pip. Do you see how
the question in this FICTION book was part of the dialogue?

Students: (Chorally) Yes.

Ms. Daniels: Do you see how the question ends with a question mark?

Students: (Chorally) Yeah.

Ms. Daniels: You guys know that questions end with question marks. You learned that a
long time ago but we still sometimes forget to put them there. So we need to remember
that.

After finding and further examining a questioning sentence within the dialogue of the fiction

book Henry the Dog ni ith No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), this mini-lesson continues with Ms. Daniels

providing an example of how questions are used within non-fiction writing. Ms. Daniels once

again explains, "So we use questions for different purposes in different kinds of books...In non-

fiction books we ask questions to get the reader interested in our book. In fiction, usually our

questions are in dialogue." Ms. Daniels then asks students to look for a questioning sentence

within their previous or current writing. After approximately a minute, students complete

looking at their writing and either find a questioning sentence or realize that they should add a

questioning sentence to their book. Three students share the questioning sentences that they

found within their books. Two of the students found a questioning sentence within their

nonfiction writing while one student found a question within her fiction writing.

Ms. Daniels: These are great examples of what we are talking about... I know we have
more to share. If you do not have a question in your book, you might want to go back and









add a question because we know books are more interesting for our readers if we have
different types of sentences. If all of our sentences are the same, our book is not
interesting...When you go off to your spot today you are to continue writing, but make sure
you are using a variety-that means many different types-of sentences.

The previous excerpts were typical of the explicit craft instruction that occurred during

the literature-based mini-lessons at the beginning of writing workshop. Ms. Daniels began by

situating the mini-lesson within the context of past and future lessons. She then explained the

purpose of the particular aspect of author's craft that was the focus of the lesson and how it

influenced the reader. Following the explanation of the purpose of the author's craft and the

influence on the reader, the mentor texts that were interactively read and discussed were shared

as examples of the particular writing craft. Ms. Daniels showed the students examples of the

craft from the mentor text(s) and then requested students to similarly examine their own writing

for the particular craft. This facilitated students to immediately transfer their understanding of

the author's craft to the craft choices within their own writing. Prior to independent writing time,

once again, Ms. Daniels explained the purpose of the author's craft and developed students'

awareness of this craft's influence on the reader.

During the interactive read alouds and literature-based mini-lessons at the beginning of

writing workshop, the teacher and students socially constructed a shared literary understanding

interconnecting their cumulative knowledge of reading and writing. Instances of explaining

during the literature-based mini-lessons and interactive read alouds developed students'

understanding of the purpose of various craft features on the readers' understanding and

encouraged students to make intertextual connections between their reading and writing.

Because students had previously experienced the mentor text as readers and understood how the

authors' craft choices influenced them as a reader, students were able to develop an









understanding of the author's craft that enabled them to craft their writing purposefully for a

reader.

In summary, the interconnected nature of noticing, examining, guiding, and explaining

facilitated students to read like writers and develop an understanding of the author's craft. Thus,

these conceptual categories formed the reading like a writer portion of the grounded theory. The

next conceptual category, understanding, linked students' ability to read like writers and their

ability to write like readers; therefore, the category of understanding joined the two broad

conceptual categories into the grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader.

Understanding the Purpose of Author's Craft

Understanding included all of the instances when the students demonstrated their

understanding of the purpose of author's craft and text features. Students' literary

understanding, including their understanding of the purpose of the author's craft, cumulatively

developed throughout the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons. Students' understanding was

most evident and prolific in the student interviews. Numerous instances of students'

understanding occurred during the student interviews when students explained why they made

particular craft decisions within their writing. During the semi-structured interviews conducted

at the end of the Nonfiction Research Unit, students explained why they included various

nonfiction text features within their writing including: table of contents, titles, introductions,

topic sentences, labeled illustrations, diagrams, captions, headings, and glossaries. In addition,

during the interviews conducted at the end of the Sentence Structure Unit, students explained

why they used different length sentences and types of sentences, combined sentences together,

used particular words, included dialogue, and used various punctuation. Students' interviews

illustrated that they were metacognitive and understood when and where to use craft features

within their writing. This section includes instances of understanding from both writing units.









The following excerpts are from the student interviews at the end of the Nonfiction

Research Unit. During this unit, students researched an animal, recorded facts about the animal

on note cards, and then organized their information into headings, thus developing sections about

their animal within their nonfiction books. Each student's book included a table of contents and

a glossary as well as illustrations and diagrams on each page. Each student interview included

multiple instances of the student explaining various aspects of their writing. For example, the

following instance of understanding occurred at the beginning of Jermaine's interview after

discussing his cover illustration of a detailed, lifelike sea turtle (Student Interview, November 5,

2008):

Researcher: Why did you choose to have the title Turtles?

Jermaine: Because that's what the author tells you that it is going to be about turtles and a
picture of a turtle. Like it is called Spiders and they see a bunch of spiders.

Within this excerpt, Jermaine not only explained why he chose to title his book Turtles but also

connected his craft choice to the mentor author, Gail Gibbons, who similarly titled and illustrated

the cover of her book Spiders. He understood that the purpose of a nonfiction title was to tell the

reader what the book was "going to be about." Within this unit, much conversation in class

focused on getting the reader's mind ready for reading their nonfiction books and this was

reflected in Jermaine's choice of title and his explanation of his choice.

In addition, Osahru's book, titled Bats, included information about bats and their bodies,

bat survival, and bat babies with detailed illustrations and diagrams. The following instance of

understanding occurred as Osahru was explaining the first part of his introduction which read

(Student Interview, November 4, 2008), "Bats are the only warm blooded mammals that can fly.

In this book you will learn about bats and what they do."

Researcher: ... In this book you will learn about bats and what they do. Where did you get
the idea for that sentence?









Osahru: Well, when I write nonfiction, I usually explain about what they do, so I thought
about my book and my rough draft and I knew that I was talking about what bats do and
about bats, so I thought that when I was explaining it I should add what bats do, so the
reader can know what they are going to read before they read the book.

First of all, this excerpt illustrates that Osahru understood that the purpose of nonfiction writing

was to explain a topic to the reader. Furthermore, this example demonstrates how Osahru

described his thinking about his writing and his understanding of the significance of

introductions within nonfiction writing. He considered the facts about bats that he found while

researching and then crafted an introduction that was intended to prepare the reader for reading

his nonfiction book about bats. Other representative examples of students' understanding of

nonfiction text features are included in Table 5-2. These examples demonstrate how the students

explained their understanding of nonfiction text features and how this understanding was

conveyed within the intentional choices they made within their writing.

The following excerpts are from the student interviews at the end of the Sentence Structure

Unit. During this unit, students wrote in their choice of genre with thirteen of the fourteen

students choosing to publish fiction stories. Instances of understanding were even more

prevalent in these interviews, than in the previous interviews, since students typically explained

several choices that they intentionally made within each sentence of their writing.

For instance, as evident in Keith's explanation of how he crafted his writing, he understood

the purpose of author's craft and the influence it had on the reader. The following sentence is

from his book, Lost in New York, when dog asked hamster to be friends:

Researcher: Then the next sentence says: Dog asked, "Do you want to be friends?"

Keith: It is a short sentence.... I added that sentence to show the reader that he asked a
question so it can grab the reader's attention.

Keith's explanation reflected the conversations the teacher and students had during the

interactive reading of Henry the Dog ni i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007) as well as the literature-based










mini-lessons on short and questioning sentences. Not only does he understand that shorter

sentences grab the reader's attention, he demonstrates an understanding of dialogue and the use

of questioning sentences within his writing. Keith's explanation about how and why he crafted

his writing illustrates his literary understanding including his understanding of author's craft.

Table 5-2. Understanding Nonfiction Text Features
Understanding Nonfiction Text Features
Table of Contents [A table of contents] helps people find the place they need to go and
learn what they need to learn about and if they didn't have a table of
contents then they couldn't find it and they would have to scramble
through the pages" (Keith, Student Interview).

"It shows where the places in a book are..." (Kingston, Student
Interview).

Topic Sentences "...It is a topic sentence. It was like, it was going to be about the parts
of it and then I tell about the parts of it. ... I decided to write a topic
sentence because I wanted to like say that my topic sentence is what
my whole section is going to be about" (Belkys, Student Interview)

Introduction "I did my introduction so it gets my reader ready to read my book. I
am introducing them to what my book is about and what they are
going to learn about like habitats, what they eat, what they live in..."
(Mishka, Student Interview).

Captions with Illustrations "If I didn't use captions, they wouldn't know what [the picture] was
all about. What the picture was" (Michael, Student Interview).

Diagrams "That is a diagram about a turtle and I got this from the Sea Turtles
book because I can show what kind of turtle. I got the eyes, head,
legs, tail, and shell so that the reader can know what the body parts of
the turtle is" (Jermaine, Student Interview).

Glossary "I included my glossary because I know that some people might not
know what megabats or microbats, vandal, fur, hibernate, migrate or
prey means.... I wanted them to know what it was so I added a
glossary" (Osahru, Student Interview).

"[A glossary] helps them know what a word means" (Michael,
Student Interview).



The following excerpt similarly demonstrates Osahru's developed literary understanding

and how his explanation intertextually connects his writing with Henry the Dog n, ith No Tail.

Researcher: Your next sentence says: Then they saw it.









Osahru: Because I didn't want to tell the reader exactly what they saw and I wanted to
describe it at the next sentence. So I said, "Then they saw it" to get the reader's attention.
... A LOT of [sentences like these] are in Henry the Deg i ith No Tail.

Researcher: Short sentences to get your attention?

Osahru: Yep. There lots of sentences in this book.

Osahru understood that short sentences catch the reader's attention. He was using this

knowledge and understanding of sentence lengths to build suspense in his book, New York Book

Thief and then added a long sentence describing what they saw. Osahru then compared and

intertextually connected his short, suspenseful sentence to Henry the Dg n/ ith No Tail which

includes similar short, suspenseful sentences. Other representative examples of students'

understanding of author's craft are included in Table 5-3.

The social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality within the interactive

read alouds and subsequent mini-lessons significantly developed students' understanding of

author's craft and influenced them to craft their writing purposefully for the reader. When

students socially construct an understanding of the purpose of author's craft and nonfiction text

features as readers, they develop literary knowledge that they can access when crafting their own

writing. Understanding the purpose of author's craft choices provide students with the capability

to appropriate and transform aspects of an author's craft into their own writing. It is indeed the

case that "students develop a deeper [literary] understanding because they construct it

themselves" (Ms. Daniels, Teacher Interview). Understanding the purpose of author's craft

appeared to be essential for students to be purposeful readers and writers and enabled students to

read like writers and write like readers.










Table 5-3. Understanding Author's Craft
Understanding Author's Craft
Different Kinds & Lengths of Sentences "I wrote a medium sentence because I didn't really want to
make a long, boring sentence. Because long sentences are
usually for like explaining or description and a short sentence is
just to get to the point" (Samone, Student Interview).

"I wrote a long sentence because it described what they were
doing" (Kingston, Student interview).

"I broke up that sentence because like in Henry the D. -. I ,il
No Tail there's like a sentence from all the way over here to all
the way over there (pointing to page in Henry the D -. i ,1il No
Tail) like my sentence...My sentence was too long and then I
decided that I should write a period by making the reader's
voice stop at a period" (Belkys, Student Interview).

Combined Sentences Together "I combined the two sentences together so it won't be short
little sentences" (Keith, Student Interview).

"I wanted to try to put a comma instead of like making it a run
on sentence, I stopped it by adding a comma" (Frenia, Student
Interview).

Word Choice "I wrote the word backyard because I wanted to describe and
show where they are at" (Keith, Student Interview).

Dialogue "... I thought dialogue was like really, that it makes readers not
get bored of the books. It is like explaining what is happening,
but characters explaining. And I think by writing what they say
it makes the readers better understand the characters" (Samone,
Student Interview).

"Dialogue is important because you have to like know the
character and you can really know about the character by them
saying stuff. Like what they say is important to the story"
(Frenia, Student Interview).

Punctuation "I didn't want to use just periods because I would have to stop
3 times, so I used commas to show that it was a list" (Keith,
Student Interview).

"[I used dot, dot, dots] because I just wanted to make the reader
wait and see what happened to these characters and what might
come or what is gonna happen next. I want them to be
excited..." (Michael, Student Interview).



Mentoring Students' Writing

Mentoring included all of the instances where students explained that their writing was

influenced by the children's literature mentor texts, the teacher, and/or classmates within the









context of writing workshop. This conceptual category of mentoring consisted of three

subcategories which reflected the three mentors for students' writing within this collaborative

literacy environment. While students explained throughout the interviews how various aspects

of their writing were influenced by these three mentoring relationships, the interviews concluded

with a more holistic explanation of how the writing within the mentor texts, their teacher, and

their classmates helped them to become better writers. The excerpts within this category

illustrate how the interactive reading and discussion of the children's literature mentor texts, the

teacher's writing lessons and conferences, and students' interactions with their classmates

contributed to mentoring the students' writing.

The following examples illustrate the influence of the mentor texts on students' writing.

While discussing her nonfiction writing titled Insects, Nakota explained:

Nakota: You know Gail Gibbons kind of teaches everything. ...If you need help, if you're
writing a nonfiction book, Gail Gibbons always knows how to write one and she can help
you by writing one herself and helping you. But you don't copy the topic of her book.
Like if she was writing about bicycles and I was writing a different book and I needed help
writing, then I couldn't change it from insects to bicycles because that would be like
cheating and copying her work. But you can copy her IDEAS and then you can get a great
book.

This excerpt demonstrates how students understood how to borrow, appropriate, and transform

the ideas, or craft, within mentor texts into their own writing. This also illustrates how children

were aware of the difference between using an author's ideas within their writing and

plagiarizing an author's writing. When holistically discussing the influence of Gail Gibbon's

mentor texts on her writing, Samone similarly explained, "[Spiders] mentored my writing

because it showed me a lot of things that I could do. Even though I am not writing things about

spiders, it still showed me that I could do different things with my writing."

The student interviews at the end of the Sentence Structure unit, similarly addressed how

the mentor texts influenced their writing. For example, when discussing a long, descriptive









sentence in her writing, Belkys explained, "I put one day comma-I got that [idea] from this

book, Henry the Deg i ilh No Tail and I was describing where she was and what they were doing

like Henry the Deg i/ ith No Tail.... I did that because I really wanted to describe my characters

and what they were doing." Also during the interview while discussing her story titled Ammy 's

Biggest Problem, Frenia explained that she got the idea to describe the man in her story as "a

small tanish creamy color man sitting at his desk" from the descriptions within Henry the Dog

1 /ih No Tail. She picked up the book and flipped to the pages with the descriptions of the dogs

and said, "Like over here. His best friend, Grady, a Black Labrador, had a black tail that swung

like a baseball bat ... like how the poodle had a-how Larry or Larrissima had a puffy ball at the

end of [her tail]. Puffy described what it looked like." Furthermore, at the end of the interview

when Samone was reflecting on how Cynthia Rylant's writing in Scarecrow (1998) helped her to

become a better writer she explained, "I think that this book really helped me because this was

really descriptive and it gave me ideas how I should make my book really descriptive."

During the student interviews students also discussed how the teacher's writing lessons

and conferences influenced their writing. The instances of teacher mentoring frequently

included Ms. Daniel's reading, examining, discussing, and teaching of author's craft surrounding

the mentor texts during writing workshop. During conferences, Ms. Daniels frequently referred

back to the mentor texts as evidence of a particular strategy and guided students to consider their

reader's understanding. The teacher's instruction and the way that she integrated the mentor

texts within writing workshop significantly influenced students' writing. For example, Samone

explained how Ms. Daniels' writing lessons influenced her understanding of author's craft and

her writing overall:

I think that [Ms. Daniels' lessons] influenced my writing because before I didn't know
about these books and when Ms. Daniels read these to us and we like saw how they were









descriptive and different lengths of sentences and lots of dialogue like helped me to really
understand their books to understand my own-the books that I would write.

Samone essentially summarized the grounded theory that emerged from the data in one articulate

sentence during her interview. She addressed how Ms. Daniels' reading and examining of the

mentor texts led her to better understand the mentor texts which, in turn, helped her to better

understand her own writing.

When discussing how Ms. Daniels helped her to become a better writer, Frenia focused on

Ms. Daniels' teaching points and how she used them to improve her writing. During the

interview, Frenia explained:

It helped me like in different ways because like how I got each of the teaching points that
Ms Daniel was trying to tell us then that's where I got it from. ...I wouldn't just forget [the
teaching point], I would USE it in my story. Like how we usually share. Then I would
have something to share because I used the teaching points.

Frenia's explanation illustrates how the teaching points or explanations of the author's craft that

Ms. Daniels' explicitly stated at the beginning and end of the read alouds and mini-lessons

focused her writing and made her more conscious of how she was crafting her writing.

Additionally, this excerpt demonstrates her interest and motivation to share how she appropriated

and transformed the daily craft lessons into her writing.

In addition to the read alouds and mini-lessons that Ms. Daniels conducted at the beginning

of writing workshop, students noted how conferences with Ms. Daniels influenced aspects of

their writing including the ideas, sentence structure, paragraph structure, and word choice within

their writing. For example, Keith's fiction story included a sentence with several smaller

sentences combined into a longer sentence. He explained, "I wrote it with commas instead of

periods... I learned to do that in my writing mini-lessons and in my conferences." Samone

explained how conferring with Ms. Daniels' influenced her use of words such as responded and

ordered instead of said when she explained, "Because in one of the books that I wrote...Ms.









Daniels said that I had a lot of dialogue but she said that I kept saying said, said, said so she said

that I should try to say something besides said." When discussing the penguin life cycle facts

that she included within her writing, Yomary added, "Me and Ms. Daniels were conferencing

and we found out that first they start as an egg and then a chick and a fledgling and then a grown

up and the grown up dies and has a baby and it keeps going and going and going." The

conferences Ms. Daniels conducted with each student during writing time and her overall

instruction during writing workshop mentored the students' writing in many ways. The aspects

of Ms. Daniels instruction that facilitated intertextual connections between reading and writing

were previously discussed in Chapter 4.

The final subcategory of mentoring included all of the instances that students mentored

each other's writing. When discussing their writing, students shared how their classmates

influenced various aspects of their writing including facts within their nonfiction writing, details,

ideas, descriptions, and punctuation. Students considered their peers as the audience of their

writing and, therefore, frequently imagined them as the reader of their writing while they were

composing. Student mentoring occurred throughout writing workshop. For instance, sharing

time mentored students' writing, Samone explained, "When I heard other writers do stuff, like

when we shared our [books], they gave me ideas of saying something about that except not about

their topic but MINE." Students also shared writing with their classmates informally during

writing time as well as with their writing partners during portions of writing workshop mini-

lessons. Belkys, a second language speaker who frequently left out words and confused endings

explained, "Sometimes my classmates tell me to like add more details and words and all those

stuff." During writing workshop, she regularly shared her writing with her classmates sitting

near her writing spot as well as with her writing partner. In addition, Mark emphasized how his









writing was influenced during the regular times students shared with their writing partners during

the writing process. He explained, "Well, Osahru sat over here and he said that I really like how

you added the details. And when I read his, I liked his pictures and really loved what he was

doing in his book." Since students considered each other as writers and authors, mentoring from

peers including advice, suggestions, and complements influenced their writing.

The conceptual category of mentoring captured the collaborative nature of the classroom

and addressed how intertextuality was socially constructed as students, teachers, and children's

book authors interacted within the context of writing workshop. The excerpts within this

category illustrate how students borrowed, appropriated, and transformed the dialogue between

the participants within writing workshop into their writing. Considering a broad definition of

text, students' writings were mentored by several texts including the author's writing within the

children's book, the dialogue between participants during the interactive read alouds and mini-

lessons, and the dialogue occurring independently between students and their teacher or peers.

This collaborative literacy environment provided students with numerous opportunities to

socially construct intertextual connections and literary understanding. This social construction of

literary understanding and intertextuality within integrated reading and writing events developed

students' understanding of the purpose of author's craft and led them to purposefully craft their

writing for their readers.

Crafting Writing Purposefully for a Reader

The category of crafting included all instances of students crafting their writing

purposefully for readers. Throughout the student interviews, students explained their thinking

about their writing, articulated the purpose of their craft choices, and demonstrated an awareness

of the influence of their craft on the reader of their writing. Students made intertextual

connections within the content of their writing to various texts experienced in the past including









written texts, conversations, life experiences, websites, television shows, and movies; however,

students consciously crafted their writing including their use of varied sentence

lengths/structures, word choice, description, punctuation, and dialogue based on the literary

understanding and intertextual connections socially constructed by the teacher, students, and

children's book authors as they interacted during writing workshop.

Within one sentence, students often made intertextual connections to multiple texts. For

example, in Frenia's book titled Ammy's Biggest Problem, she wrote the following sentence

describing the main character who was an orphan slave:

Ammy was 10 years old, and she lived on a farm where she had to take care of animals.

Frenia explained that she got the idea for the topic of slavery "From a book. It was called A

Place Where the Sunflowers Grow (Lee-Tai, 2006). It was like talking about slavery and that's

where I got my topic from...." Frenia further explained that Ms. Daniels read A Place Where the

Sunflowers Grow (Lee-Tai, 2006) during Reading Workshop for a mini-lesson "...We were

focusing on the [character's] feelings, how they changed from the beginning and changed at the

end. Just like how the little girl at first was scared and upset and as she got a friend in the book

she got happier." Frenia explained that like the little girl in the book, Ammy's feeling also

changed. When specifically discussing this sentence, Frenia explained that she combined two

sentences with a comma to make a long sentence that described Ammy. She added, "Since we

had a whole unit on commas then I wanted to try to put a comma instead of like making it a run-

on sentence, I stopped it by adding a comma." Frenia further explained that she learned about

commas and run-ons during writing workshop. She then said, "In Animal Dads they had

commas... and in Scarecrow they have the different parts, like in there, the different parts of his

body (looking at specific pages including commas within Scarecrow)." This analysis illustrates









how students made intertextual connections within one sentence to multiple texts and explained

how and why they crafted their writing in particular ways.

Throughout the interviews, students explained how their writing and their illustrations

were crafted in order to help their reader better understand their writing. For example, while

discussing his writing and illustrations within his nonfiction book, Bats, Osahru explained, "I add

a lot of captions. I really explain what I mean and when I am comparing I always say the two

words that I am comparing so the reader won't get confused." In addition, Frenia took her

experience as a reader of nonfiction into consideration when writing her nonfiction book,

Fantastic Butterflies! She explained that it was important for information within a paragraph to

match, "because if I just added something about another animal and it didn't help my

reader...because like in another book-in the insect book-it was talking about mice and other

animals and I didn't really get that part how it talked about other animals in the insect

sections...I don't want my reader to be confused." Within Nakota's realistic fiction book,

Remembering, she described how her main character, Nicole, drove up to her new middle school

and then walked into school:

It almost looked like a college and skyscraper put together. Then Nicole got out of the car
said bye and headed for the school door. When she went inside she saw a lot of kids but
her eyes were on one kid she had seen in K-2 (kindergarten).

Although each sentence was discussed individually, when discussing these three sentences

Nakota explained, "I want my reader to visualize Nicole walking in the school door and she gets

talking and running into class and all that stuff but then she spots one kid she's seen in

kindergarten." As we discussed these sentences she explained in detail how she crafted each of

these sentences. She talked about how she combined smaller sentences together into longer

sentences, thought about Henry the Dog ni ith No Tail when she was writing her description, and

made connections to personal experiences like coming to a new school and winning lunchroom









staring contests by "putting [her] eyes on one thing." Nakota, Frenia, Osahru, and their

classmates learned to write like readers and were clearly writing for readers. Students

thoughtfully crafted their writing based on the literary understanding and intertextual

connections socially constructed within writing workshop. Students did not simply borrow an

author's craft, they understood author's craft and how it influenced the reader which allowed

them to appropriate and transform various crafts in order convey meaning and/or elicit a

particular response in the reader of their writing.

As evident by the students' concern for the reader's understanding of their writing,

students imagined a reader when they were writing. At the end of both student interviews,

students were asked about the reader they imagined while they were writing. All students had a

reader in mind which included their classmates, teacher, parents, themselves, and/or children's

book authors. While Samone suggested, "The reader that I imagine is one of my classmates,"

Mishka considered her reader to be "one of my classmates, my mom, or Ms. Daniels." In

addition, Frenia suggested that the readers of her writing were "the people who we had our

publishing party with. Those were the readers I was thinking of." Osahru explained,

"...sometimes I pretend I am the reader and I read my book and sometimes I think that my things

are not very clear and that's hard because sometimes you just want to say your book is perfect.

And then I have to add the things that are missing." A few students, like Kingston, Mark, and

Jermaine, even imagined Gail Gibbons as the reader of their nonfiction books. Interestingly,

students more frequently considered their classmates as readers of their writing than their

teacher.

"Reading and writing are like cousins...,"Mark stated as he was explaining how reading

and writing were connected, "They're like cousins because they are like the same thing...they









really have the same ideas that we can use in reading and writing." Students in this classroom

viewed reading and writing as a combined literacy process which facilitated students to read like

writers and write like readers. During the interviews at the end of the Sentence Structure Unit,

all of the students considered themselves to be both readers and writers during writing workshop

and explained how reading and writing were connected. Mishka considered herself, "A lot of a

writer and some of a reader," and explained, "I'm kind of both because in my writing I do almost

the same amount. I do everything but I kind of get words from my reading books, and books Ms.

Daniels teach us during reading, and visualizing what I am writing." During writing workshop,

Mishka was a writer who was aware of the influence of her reading on her writing. Belkys

explained that she was both a reader and a writer because "I write my books and I go back and

revise and read them." Like Belkys, several students emphasized how they wrote their writing

and then reread it during writing workshop. When discussing the connections between reading

and writing, Samone explained, "In writing you have to read what you wrote and in reading you

have to read what all authors wrote and learn how to describe in your stories." The social

construction of literary understanding and intertextuality within this literacy community

facilitated students to be thoughtful, purposeful readers and writers.

Summary

The grounded theory presented in this chapter, reading like a writer and writing like a

reader, addresses how a teacher and 14 third-grade students in a collaborative literacy

environment socially constructed intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive

read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. This grounded theory is composed of seven

conceptual categories including noticing, examining, guiding, explaining, understanding,

mentoring, and crafting that emerged from the analysis of multiple data sources collected in the

study. Noticing, examining, guiding, and explaining were part of an interrelated, iterative









process that facilitated students' ability to read like writers and resulted in students'

understanding of the author's craft. Understanding cumulatively developed throughout the

interactive read alouds and mini-lessons and facilitated students' ability to write like readers.

Mentoring and crafting focused on how the students were able to write like readers. Mentoring

captured the collaborative nature of the classroom and addressed how intertextuality and literary

understanding were socially constructed as students, teachers, and children's book authors

interacted within the context of writing workshop. The final category of crafting illustrated how

students purposefully crafted their writing for their reader.

The grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader addresses the

overarching research question of this study which focused on examining how the texts within

interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop mentored children's writing. As the

teacher and students transacted with the children's book during the read alouds, they

interactively experienced and constructed a shared meaning of the written text. The participants

within the interactive read aloud including the teacher, the students, and the children's book

authors, together socially constructed an understanding of literature as well as an understanding

of the interconnected nature of reading and writing. This social construction of literary

understanding and intertextuality was developed during the interactive read alouds as the

students were guided by the teacher to notice and examine how authors crafted their writing for

their reader's enjoyment and understanding. During the mini-lessons, which built upon the

interactive read aloud experience, the teacher's explanation of the purpose of the author's craft

focused on how the craft influenced the reader. Students developed an understanding of the

purpose of author's craft and an understanding of writing as a process to communicate meaning

to a reader. As a result, students crafted their writing purposefully to convey meaning to their









readers. Together, the participants within the interactive read aloud mentored children's writing

by developing a shared literary understanding that was intertextually reflected in the students'

writing.

Although the three research questions that guided this study will be further discussed in

Chapter 6 and 7, this grounded theory addresses how children appropriate and transform texts

from the context of an interactive read aloud into their own writing as well as how the teacher

and literacy environment facilitates intertextual connections between reading and writing. To

begin with, reading like a writer and writing like a reader demonstrates how children

appropriated and transformed aspects of the author's craft into their writing based on their

literary understanding of the author's craft that was socially constructed during the interactive

read aloud. Students did not simply replicate an author's craft but appropriated and transformed

aspects of an author's craft into their writing based on their understanding of the purpose of the

particular craft feature and its influence on their reader. The interactive nature of the read aloud

was essential for the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality between

integrated reading and writing events. Interactive read alouds facilitated authentic discussions of

author's craft. The immediacy of the discussion during the reading encouraged the teacher and

students to discuss the feelings and emotions that the author evoked in the reader at a particular

moment in the text. Responding immediately to the reading of the mentor text helped students

notice the feeling that the author was conveying and then examine how the writer's choices

influenced them as readers. The teacher fostered purposeful, critical thinking readers and writers

by facilitating students to make connections between their reading and writing. The teacher

guided students' thinking during the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons and mentored

students' writing. The collaborative nature of the interactive read alouds, including multiple









opportunities for students to interact with the children's book, the teacher, and their classmates,

facilitated students to develop a literary understanding that intertextually connected their reading

and writing.









CHAPTER 6
CASE STUDIES OF FOUR THIRD-GRADE READERS & WRITERS

This chapter focuses on, Keith, Belkys, Osarhu, and Samone, four of the third-grade

students in Ms. Daniels third-grade classroom. These four students, including 2 girls and 2 boys,

were selected because they represented different writing abilities and demonstrated diverse

writing habits and processes. Like the ten other student participants in this study, these four

students looped up to third-grade with Ms. Daniels. The multiple data sources collected in this

study, including informal and semi-structured student interviews, the collection of student

artifacts, field notes, and observation transcriptions, contributed to developing an understanding

of each young writer within the context of this third-grade collaborative literacy environment.

This chapter presents in-depth case studies of these four students' writing abilities and processes

and examines how the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality within

interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced each student's writing.

Keith

Keith was a quiet, shy African-American male with a sweet smile. He was considered by

his teacher to have average reading and writing abilities. Keith was a focused student who

stayed on-task and worked toward his goals. Like the other students in his class, Keith set goals

for his writing and worked toward those goals when he was writing. For example, when

discussing the revisions he made within his fiction book titled Lost in New York, he explained, "I

wanted to do that because it was my goal to revise." He also added later in the interview that he

used different types of sentences and end punctuation because "that was one of my goals."

During this study, Keith was recognized for his excellence on a bulletin board in the hallway. A

certificate beside his picture read, "This third-grade scholar has been producing excellent work at

all times of the day and on his life work each night." Keith's parents appeared to be involved









with his education and were one of only a few parents that attended the Publishing Parties at the

end of the writing units.

During the course of the study, the quality and quantity of Keith's writing improved. For

example, the following excerpt from my field notes (October, 1, 2008) occurred early in the

study and illustrated how Keith's writing development was guided during conferences:

Ms. Daniels asks Keith to read aloud his writing. Ms. Daniels takes notes on a T-chart
divided into + and as Keith reads his writing. After Keith completes reading his writing,
Ms. Daniels shares the observations with him that she has been recording. She begins with
the positive things that she noticed. She mentions his use of headings, introduction,
attempts at paragraphs, and his capitalization and punctuation. After sharing these
positives, Ms. Daniels discusses with Keith the need for the supporting sentences to match
the main ideas within his paragraphs. Keith's introduction paragraph has too many details
and some of the information included in the introduction is repeated in later paragraphs.
Together, they read through the introduction, sentence by sentence, and discuss whether or
not the sentence matches the paragraph. They decide to eliminate several sentences. Ms.
Daniels crosses out the sentences they want to delete with one line through the writing.
She suggests that some of the facts that they are deleting from the introduction paragraph
could be used in other sections if they are not already. Keith appears to leave the
conference pleased with the outcome and seems to understand how to make sentences
match paragraphs which was the focus of the conference.

Throughout the study, like in this conference, Keith worked on developing the paragraphs within

his writing. Keith focused on staying on topic within his nonfiction paragraphs and providing

several details to support his main ideas. Within his fiction writing, Keith worked on including

more descriptions as well as stretching out the exposition, problem, events, and resolution within

his stories. At the end of the study, Keith's story Lost in New York demonstrated how his

paragraph development and writing overall had progressed since the beginning of the study.

Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Sharks

During the nonfiction research unit, Keith researched sharks and then wrote a nonfiction

book titled .\lh/i Aks'. His book bin included seven nonfiction shark books including .\/lhi k '

Strange and Wonderful (Pringle, 2001), Surprising .lhAi k\ (Davies, 2003), .h,/Ai k\ (Clarke,

2007), .\/,i, k Tales (Ebersole, 2005), .,\/i, k Attack! (Dubowski, 1998), All About .h\i kA-









(Arosky, 2003), and .hia/ Ak (Chandler, 1996). As Keith read the shark books in his bin, he

wrote some of the interesting facts that he found on note cards with the title of the book where he

found the fact. When Keith began writing his book, he had recorded facts on fourteen note cards

including one note card with a labeled diagram of a shark. Like all of the students' books,

Keith's nonfiction book was written on 8 12 x 11 nonfiction publishing paper that the teacher

provided. The publishing paper included a line at the top for a heading, a box for an illustration

below, and lines at the bottom for student writing. The teacher also provided table of contents

and glossary pages which included boxes for the students to fill in with headings and page

numbers or words and definitions.


















Figure 6-1. Cover ofKeith's Nonfiction Book titled Sharks!

Keith's Book, .\/ Ak-', was eight pages in length with a colorful illustration on the front

cover of a shark catching a small fish in the ocean (Figure 6-1). When discussing his book's

cover illustration and title during his interview, Keith explained that he decided "to put the

exclamation point because then [my book] would sound like it was exciting." Referring to

exclamation marks after titles, Keith added, "I've seen it on TV. I've seen it on this book

(picking up ,h//i A, Strange and Wonderful)... and ,\h/i k Attack!" Keith's book included the










following headings: Table of Contents, Introduction, About A Shark Body, About Sharks And

Their Prey, About the Different Things About Sharks, Fun Facts, and Glossary. Not including

the table of contents and glossary, each page included one paragraph as well as an illustration or

diagram that corresponded with his writing. Keith's writing within his nonfiction book, .\/hti A ',

is included in Figure 6-2.

Sharks!
1 Introduction
2 There are about 40 sharks that live in the ocean. Sharks are amazing! Sharks are all different
3 sizes. In this book you will learn about the different sharks. And you will learn about their
4 bodies, prey, and other things.
5
6 About a Shark Body
7 A shark is a type of fish. Its body is made out of cartilage. They have no bones. Sharks have
8 lots of fins. Their fins help them swim faster. And they have gills to breathe underwater. Their
9 jaw helps them kill prey. A shark can not swim backwards like other fish. Sharks sleep with their
10 eyes open and float when they sleep.
11
12 About Sharks and Their Prey
13 Sharks got a sense of smell so they can find prey with their nose. Only Great White Sharks and
14 Bull Sharks eat people. Sharks bite their prey to make the prey weak so the sharks can eat the
15 prey. A whale shark eats little fish, plants, and plankton.


17 About the Different Things Al
18 Sharks lived millions of years ago. Sharks are different
19 medium, and small sharks. A whale shark can grow up to
20 row teeth. Sharks can catch its prey before a person can re
21
22 Fun Facts
23 The first prehistoric sharks lived 400 million years ago.
24 Great White Sharks have 5,000 sharp teeth.
25 Cartilage is soft.
26 Nearly 80 sharks have been threatened.
27
27 Bull Sharks swim long ways up rivers.
28
28 Greenland Sharks live in the icy North Pole.
29
9 Sand Tiger Sharks have pointy teeth.
30
31 The edge of a Great White Shark's tooth is like a saw.
32 Shark's teeth are used for jewelry.
33 Shark skin is used to make wallets, belts, and shoes.
34 Shark fins are used to make shark fin soup.
35 Great White Sharks can swallow a seal in one gulp.
36 Some sharks eat turtles, jelly fish, and crabs.
37 Many sharks may completely disappear from seas.
38 Sharks get killed many times a year.
Figure 6-2. Keith's Nonfiction Book .\/hi A,'


bout Sharks
shapes and colors. They are big,
be the size of a bus. Sharks gots lots of
el the fish up.









Within his nonfiction book, Keith made intertextual connections to the mentor texts

interactively read aloud as well as demonstrated an understanding of nonfiction text features

which intertextually connected his writing to the nonfiction interactive read alouds and mini-

lessons. It was most clear from his introduction paragraph that he was significantly influenced

by the discussions surrounding Gail Gibbons' writing within the mentor texts. In addition,

Keith's writing reflected aspects of conversations that he had with his classmates and Ms.

Daniels during writing workshop. For example, the following dialogue occurred among Frenia,

Keith, and Ms. Daniels during the interactive reading of Spiders:

Frenia: Me and Keith we were talking about how Gail Gibbons, how she put a lot of things
to make it more...

/Keith: She put a lot of information./

Frenia: Yeah.

Ms. Daniels: She put a lot of effort into putting a lot of information. So, if you want to
make a book like Gail Gibbons, which you can, you need to put in a lot of effort and find a
lot of information and really become an expert.

Keith's writing and his explanation of his writing in the following paragraph reflected this

dialogue that occurred during the read aloud. Furthermore, Keith made numerous intertextual

connections to the nonfiction books included in his sharks book bin. The following discussion of

Keith's writing includes excerpts from his semi-structured interview at the end of the nonfiction

research unit.

Keith considered his book to be similar to Gail Gibbons' books, Spiders (1994) and

Bicycle Book (2001), because "it tells true facts about animals and it shows-it has diagrams,

like Gail Gibbons does, and it has a picture of a shark trying to get its prey like the part where the

underground spider." He also added that his writing was similar "because it has a lot of facts

about sharks and Gail Gibbons has a lot of facts about spiders." Again, at the end of his









interview, Keith explained that the mentor texts "helped me as a writer by putting things that

Gail Gibbons did. Like where she put the diagram, like the spider catching its prey." Keith

added that his introduction was similar to Gail Gibbons' introduction because "it helps by getting

people ready for the Gail Gibbons book to know what it is going to be about." Then he flipped

open his book to his introduction and explained, "Cause when she said, Spiders are all different

shapes and colors and sizes-that's what I did. And when she said that there were a lot of

spiders, I put that there was 40 sharks. And she said that spiders come in different ways-I

didn't put that down-but sharks come in different ways too."

To begin with, during the interview, Keith explained the purpose of nonfiction text features

including table of contents, diagrams, and glossaries. His explanations reflected the socially

constructed understanding of nonfiction text features developed during the interactive read

alouds and mini-lessons. As he opened his book, Keith explained the purpose of the table of

contents, "So you can find a place you want to go and learn about the things you want to learn

about in that section.... It helps people. It helps people find the place they need to go and learn

what they need to learn about. If they didn't have a table of contents, then they couldn't find it,

and they would have to scramble through the pages." He added that he had previously seen table

of contents in some of his shark books and "in books the teacher read to us." In addition, Keith's

second page of writing about shark's bodies included a diagram of a shark similar to the diagram

on one of his note cards. Keith explained that he got the idea for the diagram from Surprising

.\/hti k (Davies, 2003) and drew the diagram because "I wanted to do that so people could see

about the shark's body." Furthermore, he demonstrated his understanding of glossaries, "It helps

my reader by thinking and knowing the words if they don't know it. Then they can learn a new

word." In addition, Keith explained his choice of words in his glossary, "I chose some of these









words for the glossary because some people don't know what cartilage is or threatened or like

prehistoric." Keith's descriptions and explanations of these text features reflected the interactive

discussions and Ms. Daniels' explanations of how the author included these text features to

enhance the reader's understanding. Not only did Keith understand the purpose of these

nonfiction text features, he understood how author's of nonfiction craft their writing for their

reader.

Keith's introduction paragraph was significantly influenced by the interactive read alouds

and subsequent mini-lessons explaining the purpose of introductions within nonfiction writing.

On the first page of Keith's writing, he included an illustration of a shark and his introduction.

Keith began by explaining where he got the idea for his shark illustration, "I found it in this book

here (pointing to Surprising .hIti k\). Cause I thought it would look cool if it was just in [the

water] and didn't have nothing else there." Sentence-by-sentence Keith explained his thinking

behind each of the sentences within his introduction (Figure 6-2 Lines 1-4).

Keith's first sentence read, "There are about 40 different sharks that live in the water."

Like Keith did with each fact within each sentence of his writing, Keith explained where he

found the fact frequently pointing to the nonfiction shark book or flipping to the specific page of

the book that included the fact. Keith explained that he found the fact about the number of

different sharks in .,\/it k Tales (Ebersole, 2005). The interactive examination of the introduction

within Gail Gibbons' Spiders (1994) found that she used "big facts" all about all spiders to help

get the reader's mind ready to read all about spiders. Keith's sentence which similarly included

a "big fact" about the number of different sharks reflected the collaborative discussion and the

socially constructed understanding of the purpose of introductions. The second sentence within

Keith's introduction read, "Sharks are amazing!" This sentence was mentored by Ms. Daniels'









modeling of an introduction during writing workshop which included the sentence, "Bikes are

amazing!" When asked if he was thinking about Ms. Daniels when he wrote this sentence, he

said, "Yeah. I thought of that.... I thought that it would be very exciting and cool to put Sharks

are amazing! because they really are." Keith explained that he found the big idea for his next

sentence, "Sharks are all different sizes," in two books ,//i,//Ak (Chandler, 1996) and Surprising

.\/hit/ (Davies, 2003). The last two sentences of Keith's introduction read, "In this book you

will learn about the different sharks. And you will learn about their bodies, prey, and other

things." Keith explained, "I got that sentence from thinking cause you will learn about all

different kinds of sharks and it is about the sharks. ... [Those were] the sections at the end of my

introduction. So that [the reader will] know that they'll learn about their body, prey and other

facts.... Some books I read don't have that. I just knew I should do that." Keith's explanation

demonstrated that his ideas for these sentences did not come from one particular source. These

sentences were intertextually influenced, like the grounded theory in the previous chapter

illustrated, by the literary understanding the teacher, students, and children's book author

socially constructed about nonfiction writing. Keith understood that the purpose of introductions

within nonfiction writing was to prepare the reader for reading the book. He crafted his

introduction by combining his understanding of the purpose of introductions with his

cumulatively developed knowledge from researching sharks.

As Keith continued through his writing, he explained where he found the ideas within his

writing and his illustrations. The ideas and facts within his sentences and illustrations generally

came from the nonfiction books that he used to research sharks. However, his facts did not all

come from the main text of the books. Some of the facts also came from the captions and

illustrations. Interestingly, Keith, like the other students in his class, knew exactly where he









found the ideas and facts included within his book. Although almost all of Keith's facts came

from the nonfiction books, one fact about sharks having gills to breathe underwater came from

his personal experience visiting the New England Aquarium.

During the interview about his book, Keith explained how he borrowed, appropriated, and

transformed ideas from the nonfiction books about sharks into his writing and illustrations. The

socially constructed understanding of nonfiction writing not only helped Keith to be a writer of

nonfiction but also a reader of nonfiction texts. Keith understood the significance of plagiarizing

another author's words and described how he put the facts into his own words. He explained, "I

thought it wouldn't be kind or nice to copy off someone's book so I thought I should do it a

different way so that's why I didn't copy the words out of the book.... I would read the book and

then write the note card and then read a little bit more." Keith also explained how he borrowed

and transformed aspects of the illustrations within the nonfiction shark books into his own

illustrations. For example, the illustration at the top of the page titled About Sharks and their

Prey, included a shark chasing after a fish. Keith explained that the idea came from .V, /i/\ k

(Clarke, 2007) and then added that "in this book the shark tried to catch an octopus, but instead, I

drew a fish." The illustration on his next page, About the Different Things About Sharks, also

was influenced by .,\/,i kA\ (Clarke, 2007), "but I drew it different cause this part right here

(pointing to the illustration on the page in the book) the whale shark was inside, but I drew it

outside so you can see how big it was" (Figure 6-3). Keith recognized the importance of

illustrations and diagrams within nonfiction writing since he understood they also conveyed

information to the reader.










-I- ---- ------











Figure 6-3. Keith's Illustration Comparing the Size of a Whale Shark to a Bus

In summary, Keith's nonfiction book, h, hu k\', reflected the structure and organization of

nonfiction writing which was mentored and intertextually influenced by the texts, broadly

defined, within the interactive read alouds and literature-based mini-lessons during writing

workshop. Keith understood the purpose of various nonfiction text features and used his

understanding to convey meaning to his reader through his writing and illustrations. Keith's

book embodied traces of many texts including the mentor texts, the interactive conversation

surrounding the mentor texts, the teacher's modeled writing, and the nonfiction shark texts in

addition to the texts of his life experiences.

Sentence Structure Unit: Lost in New York

During the sentence structure unit, Keith wrote three fiction stories and one personal

narrative. His fiction stories included Lost in New York, A Great Day, and Baby Bear Catches a

Fish. His personal narrative was titled When Iget my DS Sept 23rd. All of Keith's writings for

this unit were approximately one and a half to two pages long, written on yellow notepad paper,

and collected in his writing folder.




























Keith's book, Lost in New York, was three pages long and written on publishing paper

(Figure 6-4). Keith chose to publish his fiction story titled Lost in New York (Figure 6-5). Keith

explained, "Because I think this one would be funny for people to read." He added that although

people read the books that he doesn't publish it is "not like the books I publish." Keith's book

included colorful illustrations on the cover and at the top of both pages of writing.

Keith made intertextual connections to multiple texts within his book, Lost in New York.

Within the content of his story, Keith made intertextual connections to various texts he had

previously experienced including books read aloud and independently at school outside of

writing workshop, conversations, life experiences, television shows, and movies. However,

Keith consciously crafted his writing including his use of varied sentence lengths, punctuation,

descriptions, word choice, and dialogue based on the understanding of the purpose of the

author's craft that developed as the mentor texts were interactively read aloud and examined

during mini-lessons. Within one sentence, Keith made intertextual connections to several texts.

The following discussion of Keith's writing includes excerpts from his semi-structured interview

at the end of the sentence structure unit.











Lost in New York
1 One day there were 3 pals snake, dog, and hamster. They lived in New York. Snake was a red,
2 yellow, and black and snake was friendly. Dog was black and brown he loves to make jokes.
3 Hamster was little and he talks a lot he's brown.
4
5 One day dog found hamster in a backyard. Dog said "do you want to be friends?" Hamster
6 said "yes." So they were walking down street and a slithering snake came out a pipe. Dog asked
7 "do you want to be friends too?" Snake said "sure." And started walking again.
8
9 They did not know where they were going. Dog asked "where are we?" Hamster said "I don't
10 know." Dog said why did the duck cross the road? "To run away from a farm" said snake.
11 "Nope to get his quackers" said dog. "I'm cold" said hamster. "Me too" said snake. "how about
12 you dog?" asked Snake. "I'm hungry" said hamster "me too." "Are we still lost?" "Yes" said dog.
13
14 Then all 3 pals had to go in back of a restaurant to eat leftovers out of the trash. They ate
15 carrots, bones, and rats. After they ate they had fallen asleep on each other.
16
17 The next morning a lot of cars were passing by. They tried speaking. But people couldn't hear
18 them. They barked, hissed, and squeaked. But nobody heard them. They ran and slithered after
19 cars. Finally they came to a stop and gave up. And slept in the cold dark night. After that day at
20 the park they found a Big Pet hotel. They ran to it. It was like a miracle. They stopped to catch
21 their breath. A man came out and caught them and carried them in the pet hotel. So then dog had
22 a dog family, snake had a snake family, and of course hamster had a hamster family. And they
23 lived happily ever after.

Figure 6-5. Keith's Fiction Story Lost in New York

During the interview, Keith explained how the various texts within the context of the

interactive read alouds influenced his writing. To begin with, Keith summarized how the

authors' writing in the three mentor texts, Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), Scarecrow

(Rylant, 1998), and AnimalDads (Collard, 1997), helped him with his writing. He explained,

"They all helped me with my writing because Animal Dads had to do with the animals. Henry

the Dog i1 i/h No Tail helped me with the dialogue. And Scarecrow helped me with my settings.

... Some of the sentences in Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail and Scarecrow helped me describe what

was happening in the story." In addition when discussing his writing sentence-by-sentence he

explained how the mentor texts influenced various aspects of his writing. For instance, he

explained that he "decided to write this sentence from Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail because it

describes some of the characters" and that he got the idea to use commas in a series from









Scarecrow "because it kept having commas in between words" (Figure 6-5 Line 1 Sentence 3).

Keith also added that Ms. Daniel's influenced his writing, "she helped me when she conference

with me." In addition, he noted the influence of the writing lessons on his writing. Keith

explained, "I learned to combine sentences...from [the mini] lessons." Although Keith did not

specifically mention how his classmates influenced his writing, his classmates implicitly

influenced his writing as they contributed to the collaborative discussions during the read alouds

and mini-lessons. Keith's writing was influenced by the various participants within the

interactive reading and examining of the mentor texts including the author's of the mentor texts,

his classmates, and his teacher.

During his interview, as we discussed his writing sentence-by-sentence, Keith explained

the ideas within his writing as well as how he crafted his sentences in particular ways for his

reader. In the following excerpt, the three main characters, Snake, Dog, and Hamster, were lost

in New York City and had gone behind a restaurant to eat leftovers out of the trash. Keith had

just finished explaining that he used the word leftovers in his previous sentence because his mom

used that word when there "was food that was left over." This excerpt is typical of the

conversations that surrounded each of the sentences within his writing (Figure 6-5 Line 14

Sentence 2):

Researcher: The next sentence: They ate carrots, bones, and rats.

Keith: That is a medium sentence

Researcher: And why did you include a medium sentence?

Keith: So readers will know or see what they were doing.

Researcher: Why did you choose carrots, bones, and rats?

Keith: I know that hamsters love vegetables so I added-so I put in carrots. And I put
dogs like to eat bones. And snakes like to eat rats.









Researcher: Have you ever seen that before? Do you know that from personal
experience? (Keith and I had previously discussed that he owned a pet hamster, his Nana
had a dog, and he had learned about snakes at the zoo.)

Keith: Yeah, from personal experience.

Researcher: Did Scarecrow, Animal Dads, or Henry the Deg n i/h No Tail help you to write
this sentence?

Keith: (Pointing to Scarecrow.) It helped me write this because... (referring to commas in a
series) I got that idea from Scarecrow because it kept having commas in between words.

Within this excerpt, Keith explained that the idea for Hamster to eat carrots, Dog to eat bones,

and Snake to eat rats was intertextually connected to the texts of his personal experiences with

his own hamster, his Nana's dog, and his experience visiting the snake exhibit at the nearby zoo.

However, Keith also consciously made intertextual connections within his writing to the texts

within the context of writing workshop. Keith explained his use of medium length sentences to

clearly share information with the reader as well as the use of commas to list items in a series.

Keith particularly cited that the commas within his sentence reflected the commas used within

Scarecrow; however, it was not simply a reflection of the text but the collaborative discussion

surrounding the text that facilitated his understanding of the use of commas. This understanding

enabled Keith to borrow, appropriate, and transform various craft features into his own writing.

Throughout the interview, Keith explained how and why he used different length

sentences, included dialogue within his story, combined sentences or parts of sentences together,

and chose specific words. Keith's explanations and his understanding of these craft features

intertextually linked his writing to the understanding of the author's craft that was socially

constructed as the teacher, students, and the author's of children's books interacted during the

read-alouds and mini-lessons. For instance, Keith wrote the following sentence, "Dog was black

and brown he loves to make jokes" (Figure 6-5 Line 2 Sentence 1). He explained, "That is a

medium-long sentence....I decided to write this sentence from Henry the Deg ni ith No Tail









because it describes some of the characters... .(Keith opened Henry the Dog \i ith No Tail &

flipped through the pages looking for an example.) When it says..." When discussing another

sentence, "Dog said "do you want to be friends?" (Figure 6-5 Line 5 Sentence 2), Keith

explained, "It is a short sentence.... I added that sentence to show the reader that he asked a

question so it can grab the reader's attention." This explanation reflects the socially constructed

understanding of the use of short sentences to catch the reader's attention as well as the use of

question marks within fiction for dialogue between characters. As we continued discussing his

writing, Keith further explained his use of dialogue, "I didn't just want it to be plain without

dialogue... Dialogue shows the reader what the characters are saying or acting."

In addition, Keith explained the purpose of combining sentences and the use of commas

within his book. For instance, when describing Hamster at the beginning of his story, Keith

wrote, "Hamster was little and he talks a lot he's brown." Although this was a run-on sentence

and could have benefitted from commas, Keith explained, "I combined the two sentences

together so it won't be short little sentences." In addition, near the end of his story, he further

explained an instance where he revised his writing by combining three shorter sentences into

one. His revised sentence read, "They barked, squeaked, and hissed." Keith explained, "I didn't

want to use just periods because you would have to stop 3 times, so I used commas to show that

it was a list." When interactively reading and examining the books, the teacher and students

noticed how the author's writing flowed smoothly together and wasn't choppy. Ms. Daniels had

later explained how sentences about a similar topic could be combined into a longer sentence

with commas. Keith's intentional attempts to combine shorter sentences together reflected the

understanding that developed from the examination of the author's writing within the mentor

texts. Furthermore, Keith's thoughtful selection of word choice was linked to the discussions at









the beginning of writing workshop. For example, he wrote, "One day dog found hamster in a

backyard." Keith explained that he chose the word backyard because "there's no other place a

dog can meet a hamster. And hamsters they like to eat food so they'd be in a back yard because

there is food." Then he added that instead of just saying yard or outside that he "wanted to

describe and show where they are at." A couple of sentences later, Keith wrote, "So they were

walking down the street and a slithering snake came out a pipe." Keith explained that he chose to

use the word \li/thi ing "Cause I didn't want to say just coming out of a pipe cause [the reader]

wouldn't know how. If he was on his back...or if he was going backwards." Keith's use of

specific word choice to help his reader better understand his story reflected the conversations

surrounding the mentor texts as the teacher and students interactively noticed and examined how

the authors' word choice within the mentor texts helped them as readers visualize the story in

their minds.

Throughout his book, Lost in New York, Keith also made connections to texts outside of

the context of writing workshop. To begin with, the content of Keith's writing was interwoven

with the texts of his personal experiences and conversations with his family and friends. For

instance, the character's traits and actions within his story reflected his personal experiences.

Keith explained that he made the hamster within his story love to talk because, "I used to have [a

hamster]....I know that hamsters move around a lot and squeak and make noises a lot."

Furthermore, Keith's writing included traces of previous conversations with his family and

friends. For example, Keith wrote that dog in his story loved making jokes and included the dog

telling a joke that his cousin had previously told him, "Why did the duck cross the road? To get

his quackers." In addition to the text of personal experiences, Keith's writing reflected movies,

such as Hotelfor Dog and 101 Dalmatians, and television shows. Finally, on several occasions,









Keith linked his writing to books read aloud in other grade levels or at times of the day outside of

writing workshop. For instance, he explained that he decided to have his snake be red, yellow,

and black because of the book, Do Spiders have Teeth?, which Ms. Daniels read aloud during

reading workshop earlier in the year. He also noted the influence of books on his writing and

illustrations that his teachers read aloud in first-grade and preschool.

At the end of the interview, Keith answered questions regarding his literary stance during

writing workshop and the interconnected nature of reading and writing. Keith considered

himself both a reader and a writer during writing workshop "cause one day I write my story and

the next day I read my story over. I feel like I am a reader because after I read I make sure that

all my sentences that my capitalization is correct and my writing is complete. I am a writer

during writing workshop because I see if my writing is neat and if it has punctuation at the end."

When asked if reading and writing were connected, Keith explained, "Reading and writing are

connected because when you write then you have to reread it. And when you read it is like

writing because somebody had to write the book and you are reading it." He also explained,

"Reading helps make me a better writer because it helps me understand what I should write

about and what I should do with my writing." Then, he added, "Writing makes me a better

reader because when I write I can understand a book even more and I can see what the author

means in the book." Keith's explanations suggest that integrating reading and writing events,

particularly interactive read alouds within writing workshop, encourage students to perceive

reading and writing as a combined literacy process and understand the interrelated nature of

reading and writing as a communication process. Keith's insights into the meaning conveyed to

the reader through particular aspects of author's craft not only fostered his ability to write but

also fostered his ability to understand the message an author was conveying to him as a reader.









In short, Keith's book, Lost in New York, was interwoven with numerous texts that he had

borrowed, appropriated, and transformed into his writing. Although the content and ideas within

his writing came from a wide variety of textual sources, Keith consciously crafted his writing

based on the understanding of the purpose of author's craft which was socially constructed

during the interactive reading and examining of the three mentor texts during writing workshop.

Keith understood the purpose of author's craft and intentionally crafted his writing for his

reader's understanding. Even though Keith's attempts at using particular craft features within his

writing were not always done seamlessly, he had developed an understanding of the purpose of

author's craft that will remain with him as he grows and develops as a writer.

Belkys

Belkys was a friendly, social Hispanic female for whom English was a Second Language.

Although Belkys was quite social, she remained focused and on-task during writing workshop.

Belkys was considered by her teacher to have average reading and writing abilities. Belkys was

a metacognitive student who was aware of her thinking and intentionally used particular

strategies to improve her reading and writing. Throughout the study, particularly during

informal interviews at writing time, Belkys articulated her use of various metacognitive

strategies. For example, the following excerpt from the field notes illustrates her thinking when

reading Freaky Frogs while researching for her nonfiction book (September 25, 2008):

Belkys begins reading aloud Freaky Frogs. She reads the heading, "Deadly Disease" and
reads the paragraph. Then she stops and tells me that in order for her to understand her
reading best and to write the best book, she likes to summarize what she reads before going
on. "I learned in this one that..."

When writing personal narratives and fiction stories during the sentence structure unit,

Belkys worked toward her writing "making sense." She typically read her writing from the

previous day quietly to herself prior to beginning to write during writing time. She explained









that she did this in order to help her writing "make sense" as she wrote from day to day. One day

when reading aloud her personal narrative, AtMy Grandma's Housefor 15 Days, Belkys

finished reading aloud her story and then added, "It is kind of confusing. I finished cleaning too

fast-I should have put the swirls." Belkys was referring to the last part of her story and the use

of swirls that she had previously seen in Judy Moody (2000) to show a change of setting. Belkys

was one of the first to include swirls in her writing to show a change of setting; however, by the

end of the unit, several students included swirls within their writing.

Belkys often sought and appreciated assistance with her writing from her classmates and

Ms. Daniels. For instance, during her nonfiction semi-structured interview Belkys explained,

"Frenia is a good friend. She actually helps me like spelling my words and she reads my books

and she tells me you need to add details here, here, and there. And she tells me, you can fix that

sentence." In addition, Belkys' writing conferences with Ms. Daniels routinely focused on

clarifying and explaining her thinking and describing the details within her story as well as

addressing her writing conventions. Typically, Ms. Daniels would confer with Belkys the day

that she began planning a story in order to help her clarify her thinking. Belkys explained that

she liked to have conferences with Ms. Daniels because it helped to make her writing better.

Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Frogs

During the nonfiction research unit, Belkys researched frogs and then wrote a nonfiction

book titled Frogs. Her book bin included five nonfiction frog books including The Life Cycle of

a Frog (Kalman, 2002), Frogs (Bishop, 2008), Freaky Frogs (Hogan & Hogan, 2004),AllAbout

Frogs (Amosky, 2002), and Red-Eyed Tree Frog (Cowley, 1999). Although there were five

books in the frogs bin, Belkys explained that she read and recorded facts from only a few of the

books, "The first book that I read was Freaky Frogs, but I didn't really understand it. I didn't

think that it was a fun fact book but I didn't even find lots of stuff. But when I got to this book









(Life Cycle of a Frog) I found A LOT." Belkys recorded facts on thirty note cards including one

note card with a diagram of the life cycle of a frog. Most of her facts came from Life Cycle of a

Frog (Kalman, 2002).

















Figure 6-6. Cover of Belkys' Nonfiction Book titled Frogs

Belkys' book, Frogs, was ten pages long and written on publishing paper (Figure 6-6). Her

cover included the title Frogs at the top with a box around two trees with grass. At the bottom of

the cover of her book, she wrote by Belkys and then beside it illustrated by Belkys. She

explained how Gail Gibbons' illustrations influenced the design of her cover. "I got the idea for

my cover. I looked at that Gail Gibbons book. I wondered that if I did the box and did that

thing. I wondered if that would be interesting (referring to putting a box around the illustration). I

did my cover like that and then I did a line and I put the [picture]... I wanted to make my cover

interesting, not just like the color green, blue, and brown and that's why I made different colors

on the top." Belkys' book included the following headings: Table of Contents, Introduction, A

Life Cycle of A Frog, Where Do Frogs Live, Frogs in Danger, A Frog Hibernation, What Frogs

Eat, Fun Facts, and Glossary. Each page included one paragraph as well as an illustration with a










caption, a divided and/or labeled illustration, or a diagram. Belkys' writing within her nonfiction

book, Frogs, is included in Figure 6-7.

Frogs
1 Introduction
2 Do you know that a Survivor Frog can stay frozen for a couple of years? Frogs can come in
3 any color, and sizes that's because it help them hide from predators. Frog are near ponds, streams,
4 and rivers because its skin will dry. This is the difference between a frog and a toad. Frogs can
5 jump and toads can not. Frogs have smooth skin but toads have bumpy skin. Frogs are not
6 poisonous but toads are.
7
8 A Life Cycle of a Frog
9 There are different parts of a frog's life cycle. A frog's life cycle is that first it starts with eggs.
10 They are under water. Then they turn into tadpoles. Tadpoles look black they have a tail. They
11 are like a fish but no longer have legs or arms. Then it turn into a froglet. A froglet grows leg and
12 arms but it still has its tail. Then it turns into a adult frog. Its green then its tail falls off. A frog
13 total change takes 1 year also it called metamorphosis.
14
15 Where Do Frogs Live
16 Frogs don't live in the same way. They live in many different places. Frogs live in wetlands
17 Frogs that live in wetlands also drought and sleep to survive heat. Frogs live in ponds, rivers, and
18 streams.
19
20 Frogs in Danger
21 Some frogs are in danger. People are taking away their habitats. This makes them in danger
22 because they don't have homes to live in. Frogs are getting very sick because of water pollution.
23 Snakes and birds are eating frogs that make them disappear.
24
25 A Frog's Hibernation
26 Frogs have to hibernate to stay warm in the winter. They dig up under a pond and stay there
27 till winter is over. There are air bubbles in the mud to help them breathe. They know when winter
28 is over when the water warms.
29
30 What Frogs Eat
31 Frogs eat different kinds of food. Frogs eat insects. They eat insects by waiting for them ad
32 snatch it with its tongue. Frogs eat anything that moves and fits in its mouth. It can eat a mouse,
33 moths, beetles, or even baby snakes, lizards, cockroaches.
34
35 Fun Facts
36 Frogs been on earth for 190 million years.
37 A Survivor Frog can stay frozen for a couple of days.
38 There are 2,800 species in the world.

Figure 6-7. Belkys' Nonfiction Book Frogs

Belkys' illustrations, paragraph structure, and explanations of her use of nonfiction text

features for her reader throughout her nonfiction book were connected to the interactive reading









and examining of Gail Gibbons' Spiders (1994) and Bicycle Book (2001). The factual content

within her book was almost completely from one nonfiction book; however, during her

interview, she also made intertextual connections to other nonfiction books that she had

previously read with text features similar to the ones included within her book. Furthermore,

Belkys' writing reflected aspects of conversations that she had individually with her classmates

and Ms. Daniels. For example, the following discussion occurred one day during writing time as

Frenia and Belkys were sitting across from one another at their writing spots (Field notes,

October 6, 2008):

Belkys is beginning a new section of her writing. She asks Frenia, "How should I write
hibernate as a heading?" Her headings include A Life Cycle of a Frog, Where Frogs Live,
Frogs in Danger (heading from her book). After reading through her headings, Belkys
suggests that her heading should include the word frog like all of her other headings.
Frenia agrees. Belkys decides on the heading, A Frog's Hibernation, "cause I noticed in
each one of my headings that I used the word frogs, so Frog's Hibernation. Belkys and
Frenia then begin discussing the differences between surviving and hibernating. Belkys
asks, "Isn't surviving like hibernating?" Frenia explains by defining hibernating and
surviving, "Well, hibernating..." After listening to Frenia's explanation of the differences
between hibernating and surviving, Belkys says, "You gave me an idea." Belkys flips
through the book A Life Cycle of a Frog and turns to the page titled Survival. Belkys
shows Frenia the page in the book titled Survival and Frenia suggests, "You could include
it as a supporting detail.

This discussion between Belkys and her classmate, Frenia, was reflected in her writing

(Figure 6-7 Lines 25-28). The heading of this section of Belkys' writing was influenced by this

conversation as well as the facts or supporting details that she included in this section. The

following excerpts are from the semi-structured interview conducted at the end of the nonfiction

research unit.

Belkys considered her writing and illustrations to be similar to Gail Gibbons' mentor texts

in several ways. Belkys explained, "My book was similar to her books because she drew

captions and stuff under her pictures to tell what it is about. And she drew like those stuff for her

pictures (referring to labels)... She did something just like me. I put one of the sections Frog or









Toad and she did Spider or Insect-like I did." She added, "[My book] is similar because Gail

Gibbons did paragraphs that had topic sentences and closing sentences and paragraphs that had 3

supporting details."

Belkys' explanations of the nonfiction text features that she included within her writing,

such as table of contents, captions and labels, diagrams, and glossaries, reflected the socially

constructed understanding of nonfiction text features. When looking at her table of contents, she

explained, "A table of contents-it tells you if you want to figure out something like, you know,

if you want to figure out the life cycle of a frog (pointing to the heading and page number on her

table of contents), that helps you go to that section and learn about it." As Belkys looked

through the Life Cycle of a Frog (Kalman, 2002) for the page where she found specific facts, she

used the table of contents repeatedly as a reader herself and demonstrated her understanding that

tables of contents are in fact extremely beneficial for readers of nonfiction.

On the following page, the Introduction to her book, Belkys' illustration of an underwater

scene with a frog, insects, and grass, had a caption under it which read: This is a picture of a frog

with a bug inside. She explained that she had seen captions in a lot of books and "decided to do

a caption in my picture." The next page of her book, A Life Cycle of a Frog, included a similar

underwater scene with the life cycle of the frog labeled (Figure 6-8). While researching, Belkys

found a similar picture within Life Cycle of a Frog (Kalman, 2002) she flipped to the page

within the book and added, "I looked at this picture and thought, Ooh, this might be an

interesting picture, so I drew a whole bunches of eggs right there (pointing to her illustration) but

they are usually black and purple. I drew tadpoles and froglets and frogs." The last sentence on

this page of writing said: A frogs total change takes 1 year also it is called metamorphosis. Then

she added, "I learned about metamorphosis because I knew that in A Life Cycle of a Frog, right










here... (points to page within book) It says this change in the frog's body is called

metamorphosis. So, I looked at the glossary and it said that metamorphosis means the process

of a change and I know what process means so I decided to write it down. Instead of just writing

metamorphosis I wanted them to know what it means so I wrote metamorphosis [in my glossary]

and I thought it was an interesting word." Rather than simply including the word metamorphosis

in her book, Belkys understood the purpose of glossaries and wanted her reader to learn what the

word meant, so she included this word as well as habitat, pollution, and life cycle in her glossary

at the end of her book.






-' -I.-



W *



Figure 6-8. Belkys' Labeled Illustration of Life Cycle of a Frog

All of the illustrations within her book either included labels identifying the different parts

of the illustration or a caption beneath the illustration. When explaining where she got the idea

to label one of her illustrations she whispered, "in first and second grade..." and then added,

"there is actually a lot of authors of nonfiction books that do that...like Gail Gibbons." This

demonstrated that her understanding of text features, such as labels, was conceptually built upon

over time and interrelated with her previous literacy experiences as well as further constructed

during the nonfiction research unit. Gail Gibbons' divided illustrations, particularly in Spiders

(1994), influenced Belkys, and several other students, to divide their illustrations into 2 or more

parts in order to include more pictures about their topic for their reader. On her page, A Frog's









Hibernation, she had the illustration box at the top of the page divided in half with one part

showing a frog in summer and the other side showing a frog in winter. Belkys further explained

that when she was trying to illustrate a picture of a frog hibernating that Ms. Daniels suggested

during a conference that she could "draw a part that has summer and a part that has snow coming

down."

In addition to these nonfiction text features, Belkys understood that the purpose of

nonfiction writing was to explain to a reader and demonstrated that she understood how

nonfiction paragraphs were structured with topic sentences, details, and concluding sentences.

The following excerpt from Belkys' interview occurred when beginning to discuss her writing

about A Life Cycle of a Frog (Figure 6-7 Lines 8-13):

Researcher: Where did you get the idea for that sentence?

Belkys: I didn't find that sentence in here (pointing to Life Cycle of a Frog). It is a topic
sentence. It was going to be about the parts of [the life cycle] and then I tell about the parts
of it.

Researcher: How did you decide to write a topic sentence?

Belkys: I decided to write a topic sentence because I wanted to say that my topic sentence
is what my whole section is going to be about.

This excerpt demonstrates Belkys' understanding of the purpose of topic sentences. Throughout

her writing, each section began with a topic sentence that was telling the reader what her section

was "going to be about." In addition, like the example of her writing in the section A Life Cycle

of a Frog, her writing included several details focused on the main topic and often ended with a

concluding sentence summarizing the idea discussed within the paragraph. In this case, her last

sentence about metamorphosis was her concluding sentence summarizing the life cycle of a frog.

As Belkys discussed her writing sentence-by-sentence, she explained where she found the

ideas within her writing and illustrations which were mainly from Life Cycle of a Frog (Kalman,









2002). Although many of Belkys' facts came from the main text of the book, a significant

portion of the facts included within her book came from close examination of the illustrations

within the nonfiction book about frogs. The illustrations within the nonfiction text appeared to

be particularly helpful in her ability to understand the meaning of the text. As an English as a

Second Language Learner and a reader of nonfiction, Belkys heavily relied upon the pictures as

sources of meaning which likely influenced how she crafted her diagrams and illustrations for

her reader's understanding. Belkys' understanding of nonfiction writing and illustrations

facilitated her writing and reading of nonfiction texts.

Belkys explained how the nonfiction books about frogs were reflected in her writing and

illustrations. When discussing where she found a particular idea within her writing, Belkys

explained, "I didn't copy the words....I put them in my own words. If I copied the words, that

would be copying, but what I did was like... Say this sentence-They need water to keep their

thin skin from drying out. I would say like Frogs need water to keep their skin wet and not

dry." Similarly, Belkys explained when discussing an illustration, "I came up with the idea from

here (pointing to an illustration in Life Cycle of a Frog), but I didn't do it the same."

To summarize, Belkys' nonfiction book, Frogs, was significantly influenced by and

embedded within the context of the nonfiction interactive read alouds and mini-lessons

conducted within her collaborative literacy community. Although Belkys' writing and

illustrations reflected Gail Gibbons' writing and illustrations within the mentor texts, it more

accurately reflected the interactive examinations of the mentor texts by the teacher and students

within writing workshop. Furthermore, Belkys' writing was shaped by mentor relationships with

children's literature authors, the teacher during conferences, and by other knowledgeable young










authors in the classroom. Belkys was a thoughtful reader of nonfiction who understood the

purpose of nonfiction text features and purposefully crafted her writing for and like a reader.

Sentence Structure Unit: Sweet 16

During the sentence structure unit, Belkys wrote three fiction stories, one personal

narrative, and one nonfiction book. Her three fiction stories included: The Witch, The Modeling

.\/Vii', and Sweet 16. Belkys also wrote one nonfiction book titled Butterflies and a personal

narrative AtMy Grandma's Housefor 15 Days. Belkys' writings were written on yellow

notepad paper and collected in her writing folder. Although most of her writings for this unit

were approximately two pages long, the rough draft of the book that Belkys chose to publish was

five pages long.








I T,



A' A











Figure 6-9. Cover of Belkys' Book titled Sweet 16

Belkys' book, Sweet 16, was six pages long and written on publishing paper (Figure 6-9).

During publishing, Belkys said that she chose to publish Sweet 16 (Figure 6-10) "because this

was one of my best books and I was interested in it. This was the one I put a lot of details in and












1 One day, Camile was at her house planning h
2 and was making invitations for Camile's party.
3
4 Then after a little while Michelle, Britney, an
5 supper. Then she said "girls time for dinner." T
6 kitchen. While they were eating Michelle and B
7 upstairs because her phone rang. While Camile
8 the dishes. They started to whisper about mini
9
10 It was the next day, Camile's party. She was
11 she was going downstairs she saw Michelle and
12 said "thank you." They really were just trying t
13 invitations.


14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
Figure


@@@
Camile came from delivering her invitations. She asked her mother "Mom are we going to buy
the dress and the other stuff we need." Her mother said "lets go" (So they went.)
***
They got to the place where they sell lots of dresses. Her manager looked and got 4 or 7
dresses to try on and pick 2 (One for performance and entrance). Then when she got out... her
dress was horribly ugly. Her mother says "that's ugly." Camile said "Yeah I know that this dress
look ugly." They picked a dress that was open in the stomach.
@@@@
They went to get high heels at the shoe store. She said to the manager "can you find me a size
6 white high heels. The manager nodded yes. Then she tried them on. Camile said, "Yep, they
do." And they left.
***
Then they got to the hair salon. Camile and her mom. She was going to do curls blowdried in
the back and her hair in the front apart.
@@@
Then she got ready for the party.

Next she was so exited she could not help it. She got out of the car... she had a big smile on her
face. Everybody screamed "CAMILE." Then in that moment everyone went inside.

Brittany and Michelle were going to change the cake. They said "1,2,3, go!". They had to go
as fast as they could. Britney said "Get the other cake." The cake was vanilla and chocolate ice
cream cake and threw away the regular cake.
@@@
After a little while they went into the room and saw the cake. People at the party sang happy
birthday.. When everybody got a piece of cake and she tasted it. She called the cake lady. "I told
you a regular cake with frosting not an ice cream cake." Camile said. The lady said "I did what."
She clicked.

Britney and Michelle changed the clothes for her performance. Camile said "I thought it was
not going to be blue." "Well, too bad I like it!" said Camile.

After Camile did her performance, she said, "Let dance." Britney and Michelle were going to
change the CD to opera. So Britney went to the DJ and said "Put this on." The DJ said "but
Camile said put this on right now" said DJ. So he put it on everybody "boooooo." "Take this off'
Camile said "Fix it" the DJ said ok.

A little second later Britney and Michelle was so mad so were going to confess they did it.
"We're sorry for doing all those things." "It was you" said Camile. "We were just jealous."
"Friends" they said. Camile said "friend." They promised not to ever get jealous again.
THE END

6-10. Belkys' Fiction Story Sweet 16


Sweet 16
er sweet 16, with her friend Michelle and Britney,
They had to do over 100 Invitations.
@@@
d Camile were done. Jenifer (Mom) was cooking
hey said "coming." Then they went to the
ritney started to get jealous. Then Camile went
went upstairs Michelle and Britney began to wash
ng the party.
***
brushing her teeth to go downstairs. Then when
Britney. They said "happy birthday!" Camile
o ruin her party. Then she went upstairs to deliver









didn't rush through it." Belkys later explained, "I decided to write about a birthday party

because I said, 'Oh maybe I can write about a birthday party...I rarely write about parties or

other stuff like that.' This is my first one. I decided to write a fiction one. I know that I have

[written] a lot of fiction books but I decided to make this one. In this one, I added a lot of

punctuation and capitalization. I used all my hard work on that book." She further explained, "I

wanted to write about [a 16th birthday] and know how it feels because my sister, she's gonna be

16." Belkys' book included detailed illustrations on the cover and at the top of each of her pages

of writing.

Belkys make intertextual connections to numerous texts within her book, Sweet 16. Within

the content of her realistic fiction story, Belkys made intertextual connections to various texts

she previously experienced including the texts of life experiences and conversations with family

and friends, television shows, as well as books read independently and read aloud. However,

Belkys consciously crafted her writing including her use of varied sentence lengths, dialogue,

and punctuation based on the socially constructed understanding of the purpose of the author's

craft that was developed as the mentor texts were interactively read aloud and examined during

mini-lessons. Within each of her sentences, Belkys made intertextual connections to several

texts. The following discussion of Belkys' writing includes excerpts from her semi-structured

interview at the end of the sentence structure unit.

During the interview at the end of the unit, Belkys holistically explained how the mentor

texts, her teacher, and her classmates influenced her writing. To begin with, Belkys explained

how the authors' writing in the three mentor texts, Henry the Dog n i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007),

Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and Animal Dads (Collard, 1997), helped her with her writing. She

explained, "[Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail] helped me add more descriptions...and it helped me









add more commas and stuff like that." Then she began looking through the book as she added,

"Short sentences, length of sentences...Like here, this is a long sentence. (Paraphrases sentence

from the book) His owners saw how sad he was so they sent him in search of a tail. (Reads

directly from book and points to words) And naturally comma when a dog goes in search of a tail

comma he goes to the tailors. Hello comma said Henry. Hello comma said the tailor." In

addition, Belkys also explained "[Scarecrow] helped me add more descriptions. ...Descriptions

and commas too. And lengths of sentences." She further explained that Animal Dads helped her

to "add more stuff to my writing. It helped me add commas too because it had commas AND

word choice." Belkys also discussed how the lessons at the beginning of writing workshop

influenced her writing. "It helped me by learning my mistakes and fixing them. My mistakes-I

did not capitalize. I did not put punctuation. I did not have word choice. I did not have sentence

length. I did not have no commas." After the daily lesson, Belkys explained, "I would go fix my

writing...I would fix it and then see if I could add more." She added that each day when writing

that she would "use all [of the lessons] that I learned each day in workshop." Furthermore,

Belkys explained, [my classmates] helped me by adding things like descriptions, powerful

words..." She also added that sharing writing at the end of writing workshop "helped me add

stuff in my books." Belkys' explanations demonstrate the many ways in which her writing was

influenced by the texts within the context of writing workshop. Specifically, Belkys' reading of

the text within Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail emphasizing the commas directly reflected the

reading and examination of the text during the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons.

When discussing her writing sentence-by sentence, Belkys explained the various

connections within her writing as well as explained how and why she crafted her writing in

particular ways. In the following excerpt, the main characters, Michelle, Britney, and Camile,









were preparing for Camile's 16th birthday party (Figure 6-10 Lines 1-2). Belkys had just

finished explaining that Camile was the name of her sister's best friend, Britney was both the

name of someone on a TV show and the name of a girl at her old school, and Michelle was also

the name of a girl from her previous school. She then added, "But I didn't write they were old

girls from my old school." The following excerpt is typical of the conversations that surrounded

each of the sentences within Belkys' writing:

Researcher: (Reading writing.) One day, Camile was at her house planning her sweet 16,
with her friend Michelle and Britney, and was making invitations for Camile's party. So
tell me about this sentence. Where did you get this idea?

Belkys: I put one day comma-I got that from this book (pointing to book), Henry the Dog
11 ith No Tail, and I was describing where she was and what they were doing like Henry the
Dog 1' ithi No Tail.

Researcher: So you were being descriptive?

Belkys: Umm humm... a long sentence.

Researcher: Why did you decide to write a long sentence?

Belkys:... I did that because I really wanted to describe my characters and what they were
doing.

Researcher: Where did you learn about making long sentences that are descriptive?

Belkys: Henry the Dog ii ith No Tail.

Researcher: From the teacher's reading it or the lessons?

Belkys: The lessons.

Within this brief excerpt, Belkys explained how this one sentence was connected to multiple

texts. First, she explained how the names of the main characters in her story reflected either the

names of girls that she knew, previously knew, or had seen on television. However, Belkys

further explained how she purposefully crafted her writing in a way that was linked to the mentor

texts that were interactively read and examined during mini-lessons. Therefore, Belkys' writing

was not only intertextually linked to the mentor texts but to the understanding of the author's









craft socially constructed by the teacher, students, and the children's book authors when

interactively reading and examining the mentor texts during writing workshop.

Throughout the interview, Belkys explained how and why she used different sentence

lengths, dialogue, and punctuation which intertextually linked her writing to the dialogue

surrounding the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons. For example, Belkys wrote the

following sentence at the end of her paragraph (Figure 6-10 Line 2 Sentence 1), "They had to do

over 100 invitations." Belkys explained, "I wrote a medium sentence there because I think it

would be very good like Henry the Deg i i/h No Tail, if you end with a medium sentence. I

think [Kate Feiffer] ended her book with a medium sentence too...it is important to have clear

sentences." Belkys' explanation of medium length sentences being clear for the reader reflected

the understanding of medium sentences socially constructed during the mini-lessons. In

addition, Belkys explained how and why she used dialogue within her story. She used dialogue

within her story for the first time when Camile's mom spoke to the main characters in the

following sentence (Figure 6-10 Line 5 Sentence 1): Then she said "girls time for dinner."

Belkys explained that she used dialogue "because in some books that I read they don't have

dialogue. And then I decided that if I put some dialogue-because at first I had no dialogue-I

thought that I could add people talking....I would add dialogue to my story if I wanted to

describe somebody's talking. I put the dialogue in it so they can see that person is talking."

Although there was not a specific mini-lesson focusing on dialogue, the dialogue within Henry

the Deg i i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007) was repeatedly noticed and examined during the interactive

read alouds and subsequent mini-lessons. Belkys continued by explaining that she added the

dialogue to help the reader visualize the characters talking to each other. In addition, Belkys

understood the purpose of different length sentences and the need to punctuate sentences that









were too long. For example, within her rough draft she had written a long sentence: "Camile

came from delivering invitation and then she asked he mother "Mom lets buy the dress and the

other stuff we need." Within her published book, she broke up this long sentence into two

shorter sentences (Figure 6-10 Line 15 Sentences 1 & 2). She explained, "(Pointing to sentences

in Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail & her own writing.) I broke up that sentence because like in

Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail there's like a sentence from all the way over here to over there. But

my story sentence was from all the way over here to all the way right there. My sentence was

too long and then I decided that I should write a period by making the reader's voice stop at a

period."

Throughout Sweet 16, Belkys made intertextual connections to texts outside of the context

of writing workshop. To begin with, the content of Belkys' writing was heavily influenced by

the texts of her personal experiences and conversations with her family and friends. Frequently,

Belkys explained that what the characters were doing or saying reflected personal experiences

that she similarly experienced. For instance, when Camile brushed her teeth before going down

stairs (Figure 6-10 Line 10 Sentence 2), Belkys explained that she lived in a triple-decker house

and that she similarly brushed her teeth before going down stairs to eat breakfast. In addition,

much of the dialogue within her story reflected phrases her mother or sisters typically used such

as "Yeah, I know that," "Well, too bad," and "1, 2, 3, Go!" (Figure 6-10 Lines 20, 45, & 35

respectively). Belkys' writing also included numerous intertextual connections to television

shows including MTV, Nickelodeon's Zoey 101, How Do I Look, and America's Next Top Model.

She also made intertextual connections to other televisions shows; however she could not

remember the specific titles. Lastly, Belkys made intertextual connections to trade books she

read during reading workshop when explaining her use of various punctuation including









parentheses and swirls within her writing. Belkys used parenthesis twice within her story to

clarify information for the reader. For example she wrote, "Jenifer (Mom) was cooking supper"

(Figure 6-10 Line 4 Sentence 2). She explained, "I wanted my reader to know who Jenifer was."

She had previously seen parentheses in the book Dear Dumb Diary that she read independently

during reading workshop. In addition, Belkys was one of the first students to use swirls (@@@)

in her writing in between paragraphs to show that the writing "was changing to another setting."

During the previous school year in Ms. Daniels' second grade class, Belkys saw swirls between

paragraphs when she was reading Judy Moody in her guided reading group. Belkys asked Ms.

Daniels about the swirls and she explained that they showed a change in setting. Belkys, as well

as several other students, used swirls in between paragraphs throughout her writing.

At the end of the interview, Belkys explained that she considered herself both a reader and

a writer during writing workshop. She lively explained, "I'm a writer, I'm a writer, I'm a

writer-And a reader." Belkys added, "I write my books and I go back and revise and read

them." Belkys explained that reading and writing were connected "because when you write you

have to read to make sure your sentences are clear...then when you read it, it helps you write

because when you read, it makes sense after that to write." Belkys' explanations also provide

insights into her thinking process as a reader and a writer. Belkys explained that reading helps

her to become a better writer, "Because when you read [your writing]-you know how you have

mistakes-and then when you are writing you go back and fix it." Then she further explained,

"When I read a book sometimes, well not copy, I can put it in my own descriptions and stuff like

that and I put them in my stories...I also get words-powerful words....and a lot of

descriptions." Finally when asked how writing helped her to become a better reader, Belkys

explained, "Oh man (whispers). I really have to think about that really hard (quietly)...Because









when I write I read. And when I read my writing, I learn more about reading my books during

workshop..."

Finally, Belkys' book, Sweet 16, was interwoven with numerous texts that had been

borrowed, appropriated, and transformed into her writing. Belkys made intertextual connections

within the content of her writing to the texts of her personal experiences, conversations, and

television shows. However, she thoughtfully and purposefully crafted her writing including her

use of varied sentence lengths, description, punctuation, and dialogue based on the understanding

of the purpose of author's craft socially constructed by the teacher, students, and the children's

book authors during the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons.

Osarhu

Osarhu was a witty, friendly African-American male who clearly articulated his thinking.

He was considered by his teacher to have high reading abilities and average writing abilities.

Osahru was an engaged learner who thoughtfully reflected on his learning. Osahru was outgoing

and often volunteered to contribute to class discussions.

Osharu had a keen awareness of the reader of his writing and focused on how his writing

influenced the reader's understanding. For example, the following excerpt (Field notes, October

6, 2008) occurred during the nonfiction research unit when Osahru was rearranging the order of

the paragraphs within his writing for his reader's understanding:

Osahru is sitting at the back table with Keith during writing time. He explains that during
a conference, he and Ms. Daniels found that his writing might confuse a reader because he
tells about grown up bats and then tells about baby bats at the end.

Researcher: When you write, how do you think about the reader?

Osahru: I think about if the reader might understand, because if it's kind of hard for me [to
understand] then I think the reader might not understand so I try to fix it in a way so if I
can understand it and I think a reader can, then I just keep on writing. But when I start a
new paragraph I just like to think if the reader will understand if I put it in a certain way. I









think about which way is easier for the reader to understand so they won't be confused in
my book.

Researcher: So you think about the reader a lot when you're writing?

Osahru: Yeah. ...I look at myself as a reader and I think that if I write notes down,
important notes, and then I write down my notes-I think to myself that I want to make it
in the same order as the writer so I can understand my book and the reader can understand
my book, too.

In addition to being aware of the reader of his writing, he also considered himself an author and

consciously made choices as an author. When writing the ending of his personal narrative titled

Football, Osahru was deciding between ending his story with a theme like sportsmanship or "in a

way a reader will understand the last shot and how they missed the ball" (Fieldnotes, January 7,

2009). The next day Osahru explained during an informal interview (Fieldnotes, January 8,

2009), "I finished my story...I decided today that I didn't want to end it with sportsmanship but

how Mark caught the touchdown. I was thinking as an author that I didn't want to do it. I didn't

think we showed much sportsmanship, so I didn't want to end it that way."

Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Bats

During the nonfiction research unit, Osahru researched bats and then wrote a nonfiction

book titled Bats. His book bin included three nonfiction books about bats including AllAbout

Bats (Jacobson, 1996), Bats (Gail Gibbons, 2000), and Bats: Night Flyers (Maestro, 1994).

Although it was obvious from his interview that he had thoroughly read all of the books in the

bat book bin, he said that most of the facts included within his writing were from Bats (Gibbons,

2000) and Bats: Night Flyers (Maestro, 1994). Osahru recorded facts on 28 note cards including

one note card with a diagram of a bat's body. Osahru's note cards each included a fact, the title

of the book, and the author's name so he "knows where the facts came from."










19 -~














Figure 6-11. Cover of Osahru's Nonfiction Book titled Bats

Osahru's book, Bats, was eight pages long and written on publishing paper. His cover

included the title Bats at the top with a bat flying beside a fruit tree (Figure 6-11). Osahru

explained, "Well, I looked at all of the bat books I had and I really saw like a bunch of bats... like

at least one bat on every cover and flying in the dark. But then I saw the All About Bats by

Jennifer Jacobson and I didn't think her cover was very interesting. It was like two bats, but I

was thinking about Betsy's Bat Night Flyer book and I was thinking that there were a bunch of

bats in the sky like up in space. I know bats can't really fly that high, so I didn't think it would

match my book but when I looked at Gail Gibbons' [Bats book] I saw that she had like trees and

a dark sky and a moon and some bats flying and she had trees so I decided to do like hers."

Osahru's book included the following headings: Table of Contents, Introduction, About Bats and

Their Bodies, How Bats Have Babies, Bat Survival, Fun Facts, and Glossary. Each page of his

book included one or two paragraphs as well as an illustration with a caption, a diagram, or a

divided and/or labeled illustration. Osahru's writing within his nonfiction book, Bats, is included

in Figure 6-12.










Bats
1 Introduction
2 Bats are the only warm blooded mammals that can fly. In this book you will learn about bats
3 and what they do.
4
5 Not all bats fly some bats crawl because their food is on land or trees. Almost one half of the
6 bats are endangered. Because farmers kill them for eating their fruit but bats do it because it is too
7 ripe to be sold. Vandals and cave explorers usually disturb or kill bats causing thousands of bats
8 dead. Also snakes, owls, raccoons, and hawks eat bats and sometimes humans kill bats on
9 accident but mostly on purpose.
10
11 About Bats and Their Bodies
12 There are two main kinds of bats. The Megabats and Microbats. There are different kinds of
13 bats the Vampire bat, Flying Fox bat, Butterfly bat, Sword nose bat, Horseshoe bat, Leafnose bat,
14 Red bat, Fruit bat, Ghost bat, Hog nose bat, Bumble bee bat. Those are some of the mega bats.
15 The Woolyfalse Vampire bat, Pallid bat, Funnelear bat, and the Bistel bat. Those are some of the
16 microbats.
17
18 Bats are different from birds in many different ways. Bats have pouches and birds don't. Bats
19 have ears but birds don't. Bats have fingers but birds don't Bats have fur and birds don't.
20
21 How Bats Have Babies
22 Microbats give birth twice in a year but mostly in cooler places. Bats are born late in spring or
23 early summer. A bunch of microbats should be expected to have babies together in a cave.
24
25 Bat Survival
26 Bats need to survive winter in many different ways. Some bats hibernate until spring but
27 before that they need to eat a lots of food. They adapt to the dark to find their prey.
28
29 Fun Facts
30 Some fly 10,000 feet high for 15 miles. If you touch a bat on the floor it can die. The biggest
31 bat is the Flying Fox bat.
Figure 6-12. Osahru's Nonfiction Book Bats

Within Osahru's nonfiction book, he made intertextual connections to the mentor texts as

well as demonstrated an understanding of the purpose of nonfiction text features which

intertextually connected his writing to the collaborative discussions surrounding the mentor texts.

Furthermore, Osahru's writing reflected conversations that he personally had with his classmates

and Ms. Daniels. In addition, the content of Osahru's writing was significantly influenced by the

nonfiction bat books within his book bin. The following discussion of Osahru's writing includes

excerpts from his semi-structured interview at the end of the nonfiction research unit.









Osahru considered his writing and illustrations to be similar to Gail Gibbons' Spiders

(1994) and Bicycle Book (2001) "because it has diagrams and captions. I added some of the

boxes like when she adds 4 boxes to show how one thing goes to another thing....My writing is

similar because I kind of stayed on one topic and I added some of the most interesting facts, not

just the small details..." Osahru explained the purpose of various nonfiction text features,

including table of contents, captions, labels, diagrams, and glossaries, as well as how he

intentionally crafted his writing for his nonfiction reader. His book, like his explanations,

reflected the dialogue that occurred among the teacher, students, and the children's book authors

during the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons.

During the semi-structured interview, Osahru explained his understanding of the purpose

of nonfiction text features, including table of contents, captions, labels, diagrams, and glossaries,

as well as how he intentionally crafted his writing for his nonfiction reader. His book, like his

explanations, reflected the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality within

the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons. When discussing his table of contents, Osahru

explained the purpose and noted that Gail Gibbons' books did not contain either a table of

contents or headings. Osahru stated, "The purpose of the table of contents is to tell the reader.

Cause if Gail Gibbons' book, if it had a heading or table of contents like some other books, you

won't have to read the whole book unless you wanna do really good research. But if you want to

find out about a particular topic about the topic, then you should just go to the section that really

helps you. And it can really help guide the reader to where they want to go." On the following

page, the introduction to his book, Osahru's illustration included a caption. When asked where

he had seen captions previously, he explained, "I've seen captions in a bunch of books and I

think one of them was in Gail Gibbons' books. Yeah, she really adds details and diagrams. I









notice that a lot, but in this one she added a caption (Reading caption from Gail Gibbons' Bats

book). Bats hibernate when they sleep for long periods of time... I thought that I could really use

captions because some of my pictures the reader could get, but like some of my other pages it

was kind of hard-like the surviving pages it was kind of hard for the reader to understand what

the pictures were because the bat was hanging upside down, so I wrote a caption." In addition,

Osahru bolded several words throughout his book, including the word vandal in his introduction,

and explained that he included the definitions of these words at the end of his book "because I

know that some people might not know what megabats or microbats, vandal, fur, hibernate,

migrate orprey, so I wanted them to know what it was so I added a glossary."













Figure 6-13. Osahru's Diagram of a Little Brown Bat

The next section of Osahru's book, About Bats and their Bodies, included a diagram of a

little brown bat (Figure 6-13). Osahru explained, "I got the idea for most of my diagrams from

Gail Gibbons' books because if you like really go in deeply into her books, you can see that there

are a bunch of DIAGRAMS and CAPTIONS. So I really thought that it would be kind of good to

draw a diagram of the bats since I am talking about the bats and their bodies." When asked what

Gail Gibbons' books he was referring to, Osahru added, "A BUNCH of her books. If you like

pick out a book, sometimes you might just look at the cover and might say this book might not

be interesting, but if you look IN you can see a BUNCH of pages with diagrams and captions.









(Flipping through Gail Gibbons' Bats book and pointing.) There's one diagram here. One there.

And I think there's about three or at least one or two in every one of her books. Gail Gibbons

likes to really explain her pictures and show diagrams." Osahru's explanations demonstrated

that he had become familiar with Gail Gibbons as a nonfiction author and considered her a

mentor for his nonfiction writing.


---



.___ ,_____ I






Figure 6-14. Osahru's Divided Illustration

On the following page with the heading How Bats Have Babies, Osahru divided his

illustration into three boxes (Figure 6-14) and explained, "Because in Gail Gibbons' Spiders

book, right here (locates picture within the Spiders book) and one of these pages...I saw that she

divided it in two when she was doing it and when she was saying how they make their webs, like

this one, she divided it 4 to explain how they make the round part [of the web], then they go to

the inside, then they do the ribs, and the outside." Osahru then added that the illustration within

each of the three boxes was influenced by the three different bat books within his book bin.

Every detail within his illustrations was purposeful and intentionally included. For example, in

the upper right corner of the divided illustration is a moon with a label. Osahru explained that he

labeled the moon, "Because I think that sometimes the moon, when I colored it yellow, can look

yellow and I thought it would be best for midnight and some people might kind of get

confused... if it is yellow and think it is the sun. I wanted to really explain it so I wrote it."









Osahru's explanations of his illustrations and nonfiction text features indicated that he

understood how these features conveyed meaning and supported the written text within

nonfiction writing.

In addition, Osahru understood the structure of nonfiction writing including the use of

introductions and main ideas and supporting details within nonfiction paragraphs (Figure 6-12).

For instance, the first part of Osahru's introduction read: "Bats are the only warm blooded

mammals that can fly. In this book you will learn about bats and what they do" (Figure 6-12

Lines 1-3). Osahru explained, "Well, when I write nonfiction, I usually explain about what they

do, so I thought about my book and my rough draft and I knew that I was talking about what bats

do and about bats, so I thought that when I was explaining it I should add what bats do, so the

reader can know what they are going to read before they read the book." He understood that the

introductions within nonfiction texts get the reader's mind ready for reading about a particular

topic. Furthermore, each of his paragraphs included a main idea or topic sentence and several

supporting details. For example, Osahru's writing in the section About Bats and Their Bodies

demonstrated how he used main idea sentences and detail sentences within his nonfiction

paragraphs (Figure 6-12 Lines 11-16). Both paragraphs within this section began with a topic

sentence and then were followed by at least three sentences that included supporting details.

Although Osahru explained that he got the idea for the first sentence about the two main kinds of

bats from Bats: Night Flyers (Maestro, 1994), he also added that it was his topic sentence for his

paragraph. In addition, Osahru made several revisions to his writing between the rough draft and

final draft of his nonfiction book. When asked about his revisions, he explained, "I decided to

change my writing because some of the parts didn't make sense and I thought I could add some

more details and I could really take some away."









As Osahru discussed his writing, he located and explained where he found the ideas that he

included within his writing and illustrations. The ideas and facts within the content of his

writing typically came from the main text of the three nonfiction books about bats; however, his

writing also included his close examination of the illustrations and reading of labeled

illustrations within the books. For example, Osahru explained that he found the fact, "Not all

bats fly some bats crawl because their food is on land or trees" (Figure 6-12 Line 5), from both

the main text and the illustrations within Bats: Night Flyers (Maestro, 1994). He added,

"Because on this page there was a bat, a vampire bat... (Flips to the page in the book.) Here it

says...It says: Vampire bats often hop on the ground. And if you really closely look at the

picture it doesn't really have wings to fly, so it takes blood from birds and cattle-those are

mostly on the ground when they are trying to get their food..." Furthermore, on several

occasions, Osahru explained that a sentence contained information from several books; therefore,

the sentences reflected connections to various sources and demonstrated his cumulative

knowledge about bats.

Osahru also explained how he borrowed, appropriated, and transformed ideas from the

nonfiction books about bats into his writing and illustrations. Osahru understood the need to

write the facts in his own words when he explained, "Ms. Daniels said that we should practice

not to use plagiarism because when you grow up you can get sued for that, so we need to practice

a lot so when we grow up and write stuff we won't do that. So, I thought that-it is hard to

explain some of my sentences that I get from the books-so I take away some words and I just

replace them with other words that people will still understand...like (Begins reading Bats: Night

Flyers) Vandals often disturb or destroy bats. I wrote causing instead of results in the death of

thousands of bats. I wrote: causing thousands of bats to die. So I took some of those words and









I replaced it with a word." Osahru not only knew about plagiarism and its repercussions, but had

also begun to develop a way to paraphrase information written by another author.

To summarize, Osahru's nonfiction book, Bats, and his explanations of his writing and

illustrations reflected the discussions surrounding the mentor texts. Although the content of his

writing and illustrations were from the nonfiction bat books, Osahru developed an in-depth

understanding of the purpose of various nonfiction text features during the nonfiction research

unit and crafted his writing and illustrations in particular ways for his reader.

Sentence Structure Unit: The NYBook Thief

During the sentence structure unit, Osahru wrote two fiction stories, one personal narrative,

and one nonfiction book. His two fiction stories included The Party and The Book Thief in New

York. Osahru also wrote one personal narrative titled Football and one nonfiction book titled

The Birds ofPrey. Osahru's writings were all approximately two pages long, written on yellow

notepad paper, and organized in his writing folder with his planning sheets.








i








Figure 6-15. Cover of Osahru's Book titled The NY Book Thief

Osahru's book, The NY Book Thief was four pages long and written on publishing paper

(Figure 6-15). When Osahru was planning and beginning to write this story he explained, "I was









thinking that I wanted to write a fiction book and then I thought about all the books that I've

written-Many personal narratives last year in 2nd grade and then at the beginning of this year

and then lots of nonfiction. So I wanted to try something new like a mystery." He added that he

didn't necessarily like mysteries since they "kind of trick you in the book a lot." Then he said,

"I'm going to try to trick the reader...as the reader reads on, they will get fooled, and then it will

give the villain a chance to get away" (Field notes, January, 13, 2009). Osahru chose to publish

the mystery The NY Book Thief because he had "never published a mystery story before" (Figure

6-16). Osahru's book included an illustration on the cover as well as at the top of each of his

pages of writing.

The NY Book Thief
1 It was the first day of school, Zack and Cody noticed all the books were missing. So after
2 school they started to walk to a store to buy spy gadgets. They planned the day, they loosened the
3 vent, and they prepared their gadgets for the next day. That's the day they were going to solve the
4 crime. They had to figure out where the books went or else the school will close.
5 @@@
6 School was over and the doors were locked but Zack and Cody were lucky that they were
7 locked inside! So the vent they loosened they climbed in. Cody said "remember the janitor is still
8 in here. They looked in the library for clues. Then they saw it. Zack said "look a clip board".
9 "Then it must be a teacher" Cody said. "Well all the teachers have one so we just should go
10 home" Cody said. Zack said "lets go before the janitor locks us.
11 @@@
12 The principal realized that Zack and Cody are getting on her trail. So she thought, thought, and
13 thought. Then it just popped in her mind. "So if I fool those rotten kids they'll never figure out
14 the case" whispered the principal. So she snuck in their bag and saw the next place they were
15 checking.
16
17 Class was over they saw the address and went to it. They waited over an hour and knew it was
18 a false clue. So they went home.
19 @@@
20 Then they go to the principals office. "Do you have anything to do with the crime?" Zack said.
21 "No!" she snapped. Well, do you know any suspects? "No" she said. "Do you know who did it?"
22 said Cody. "Yes" the janitor.
23 @@@
24 Then the phone rang so Zack picked it up. Somebody said "can I talk to the principal I'm ready
25 to pay for the books." So Zack and Cody called the cops and arrested the principal.
Figure 6-16. Osahru's Mystery Book The NYBook Thief

Osahru made intertextual connections to multiple texts within his book, The NYBook

Thief. Within the content of his mystery, Osahru made intertextual connections to various texts









that he previously experienced including television shows, life experiences, his classmates'

writing, books read independently, and books read aloud in class. However, Osahru consciously

crafted his writing including his use of varied sentence lengths, punctuation, and dialogue based

on the socially constructed understanding of the purpose of the author's craft. Within each

sentence, Osahru also made intertextual connections to several texts.

During Osahru's semi-structured interview, he holistically explained how the mentor texts,

his teacher, and his classmates influenced his writing. To begin with, Osahru explained how the

author's writing in the three mentor texts, Henry the Dog i i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), Scarecrow

(Rylant, 1998), and AnimalDads (Collard, 1997), helped him with his writing. He explained,

"[Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail] helped me become a better writer because the book had a lot of

short, medium, and long sentences so it helped me with my sentences while I was writing them."

Furthermore, Osahru added, "Because [in Scarecrow] she mixed the sentences up a lot like [Kate

Feiffer] did in Henry the Dog i/ i/h No Tail. It had a couple of long sentences but Scarecrow had

a lot of different kinds of sentences." In addition, Osahru explained, "[AnimalDads] helped me

because it helped me figure out how to write in different punctuations and how I could describe

stuff more." Osahru also discussed how the lessons at the beginning of writing workshop

influenced his writing. The students typically considered any writing related activity, including

reading mentor texts aloud or examining an author's craft within a mentor text, as a mini-lesson

since it occurred on the carpet prior to writing time. "I would always DO the mini-lessons and it

helped me become a better writer... [without the mini-lessons], I probably would have just been

writing a lot of short sentences." Osahru's explanations of the influence of the mentor texts on

his writing reflected the interactive discussions about the author's craft that the students and

teacher noticed during the interactive read alouds and subsequent mini-lessons. Osahru further









explained that he would always try to incorporate the author's craft that was discussed into his

writing which explicitly linked his writing with the interactive reading and examining of the

mentor texts at the beginning of writing workshop. In addition, Osahru explained that his

classmates influenced his writing "because some of them wrote stories that I was thinking about

when I was writing-like Kingston's. Well, I was writing a mystery book and he wrote about

spy gadgets and I wrote about them too, so he helped me because of his writing" (Figure 6-16

Lines 1-4). As evident in these excerpts, Osahru's writing was influenced by his teacher,

classmates, and children's book authors. The interactive reading and examining of the mentor

texts integrated these texts and enabled the social construction of a shared understanding of the

author's craft

As we discussed his writing sentence-by-sentence, Osahru explained how various texts

were interwoven within his writing as well as explained how and why he crafted his writing in

particular ways. To begin with, Zack and Cody, the main characters in Osahru's mystery book,

noticed that all of the books were missing on the first day of school and went to buy spy gadgets

after school. Osahru explained that the main characters' names were from the television show,

The Suite Life of Zack and Cody on the Disney Channel. The following excerpt is typical of the

conversations that surrounded each of the sentences within Osahru's writing:

Researcher: (Reading writing.) They planned the day, they loosened the vent, and they
prepared their gadget for the next day.

Osahru: I wrote that sentence because I thought it would be important because if they were
on the ground because on the show, sometimes [Zack and Cody] think and when they get
in trouble, they usually go through the vents because it makes it hard for people who are
looking for them to find them.

Researcher: So where have you seen people go through vents before?

Osahru: The Suite Life of Zack & Cody.









Researcher: And you have: They planned the day comma they loosened the vent comma
and they prepared their gadgets for the next day. Did you combine your sentences?

Osahru: Yep.

Researcher: Where did you get the idea to combine your sentences?

Osahru: Because I noticed that it was going to be my last couple of sentences before my
next paragraph. I was thinking that if I'm going to start a new paragraph, I might as well
put them together to make a long sentence. And so I can mix my sentences up like Ms.
Daniels says.

Researcher: So in writing workshop you learned about combining sentences?

Osahru: Yep. In Henry the Dog ni ith No Tail, there were lots of long sentences, short
sentences, and medium sentences. ...And in Animal Dads, too.

Within the previous excerpt, Osahru began by explaining how the ideas within his sentence came

from the television show, The Suite Life of Zack and Cody. After discussing the content of his

sentence, Osahru explained why and how he crafted his sentence. Although Osahru did not

explicitly state that he used commas to combine the short sentences together, he implicitly

acknowledged his use of commas when he added that he "put them together to make a long

sentence." Osahru's writing as well as his explanation demonstrated that he understood that

combining short sentences together helped make his writing flow and helped him to add variety

to his sentence lengths. Osahru's writing was superficially linked to the television show, The

Suite Life of Zack and Cody; however, further discussion of his writing revealed a deeper level of

thought that intertextually connected his writing to the collaborative reading and examining of

the mentor texts.

Throughout the interview, Osahru explained how and why he used different sentence

lengths, punctuation, combining sentences, dialogue, and repetition. To begin with, Osahru

wrote the following long sentence, "School was over and the doors were locked but Zack and

Cody were lucky that they were locked inside!" (Figure 6-16 Line 6). He explained, "That was a









LONG sentence... A VERY descriptive sentence." Then he added, "I got [the conjunctions]

from word study when we were learning about them. Ms. Daniels said we could use them in our

writing to connect sentences to be medium sentences and long sentences." Osahru crafted his

sentence with several hands and buts which reflected the mini-lesson explaining how some writers

like to write interesting sentences by combining sentences or parts of sentences with

conjunctions (FAN BOYS). In addition, because conjunctions were introduced in word study

prior to writing workshop, Osahru's writing was also intertextually connected to the interactive

discussions surrounding conjunctions in word study. In addition, Osahru also understood the

purpose of short sentences. Osahru wrote, "Then they saw it" (Figure 6-16 Line 8 Sentence 2).

He explained, "I didn't want to tell the reader exactly what they saw and I wanted to describe it

in the next sentence. So I said, "Then they saw it" to get the readers attention. ... A LOT of

[sentences like these] are in Henry the Deg in ith No Tail." Osahru's understanding of short

sentences to catch the reader's attention reflected the understanding of short sentences socially

constructed during the interactive reading and examination of the mentor texts particularly Henry

the Deg 11 ith No Tail.

Furthermore, as Zack and Cody were exploring the school with their spy equipment,

Osahru wrote: "Well all the teachers have one so we just should go home" Cody said (Figure 6-

16 Line 9 Sentence 2). Osahru explained, "I wanted to use dialogue because I really wanted

people to know what [Zack & Cody] were thinking...and what they wanted to say. I was

thinking that if they didn't say anything in the story probably before this part the reader would

probably give up because he probably wouldn't understand the book if the characters didn't

describe how they were feeling." Osahru understood the importance of dialogue within fiction









books and how meaningful dialogue between characters helped the reader to better understand

the characters as well as the story.

Furthermore, once the principal, who had stolen the books, realized that Zack and Cody

were on her trail, Osahru wrote: So she thought, thought, and thought (Figure 6-16 Line 12

Sentence 2). Osahru explained that it was a "short sentence with repeating like Henry the Dog

ii ith No Tail to show the reader how hard [the principal] was thinking." He referred to the

discussion of Kate Feiffer's use of repetition in the sentence: He moped and he moped.

Together, during the reading of Henry the Dog ni ith No Tail, Ms. Daniels and the students

noticed this sentence, particularly how Feiffer crafted this sentence (Transcription, October 30,

2008). Renesha liked the word moped and thought it was a good describing word, then Denise

clarified the meaning of moped, and Ms. Daniels demonstrated how someone would look who

was moping. Ms. Daniels then guided students to notice that Feiffer used repetition and noted

that "[Henry] didn't mope for a minute, he kept moping." This led Nakota, Yomary, and Mishka

to intertextually connect Feiffer's use of repetition with Langston Hughes' repetition in his poem

titled Dreams. At the conclusion of this discussion of the repetition within this sentence, Ms.

Daniels and the students developed an understanding of the use of repetition-to show the reader

that something happens repeatedly and to emphasize particular points for the reader. This

socially constructed understanding of the use of repetition was reflected in Osahru's repetition of

"thought, thought, and thought" and when he explained that he wanted to "show the reader how

hard [the principal] was thinking."

In addition to understanding the purpose of author's craft, Osahru demonstrated an

understanding of the pattern of fiction writing which guided the students' planning of their

stories. The first sentence within his story read, "It was the first day of school, Zack & Cody









noticed all the books were missing" (Figure 6-16 Line 1). After discussing his characters,

Osahru added, "I decided to start with [this sentence] I got right to the problem." Osahru

understood that fiction books follow a pattern with author's telling the reader about the main

characters and setting and then sharing the conflict within the story.

From the previous discussion of Osahru's writing, it is evident that he also made numerous

intertextual connections to texts outside of the context of writing workshop. To begin with,

Osahru made connections within his writing to popular media including television shows and

movies. For instance, in addition to his characters being influenced by The Suite Life ofZack

and Cody, the following sentence was intertextually linked to the cartoon Scooby Doo. Osahru

wrote the following sentence: "So if I fool those rotten kids they'll never figure out the case"

whispered the principal (Figure 6-16 Line 13 Sentence 2). Osahru explained, "...when people

are trying to get away with something and people are getting on their trail and are about to figure

it out they want to fool them and when they are talking or thinking about fooling them, they talk

about them in a MEAN way. ... When I was little I watched Scooby Doo and they would say

"those rotten kids or dog." Mostly "dog." I connected that to my writing ..." In addition he

explained that he made connections to the Simpsons, mystery movies, the news, and crime

shows. Throughout his story, Osahru made connections to the texts of his personal experiences

including going places after school to buy stuff for his aunt, teachers using clipboards, and the

female principals at both of his elementary schools. His writing also reflected books that were

read aloud in class, such as Chet Gecko and Stink, and mystery books that he read in small

groups during reading workshop, including Cam Jansen and the Mystery of the Dinosaur Bones.

Like Belkys, Osahru used swirls within his writing; however, he explained, "I got it from Stink

but I think it was like big circles, but Ms. Daniels said it was swirls. And that's for the next day.









So when I say that was the day they were going to solve the crime, I meant the next day, so that

is why I put those swirls there."

Osahru considered himself both a reader and a writer during writing workshop. He

thoughtfully explained, "Because sometimes I pretend that the reader is myself so I can kind of

get used to knowing that I make mistakes. And I kind of help my classmates, because when

Yomary (Osahru's writing partner) was checking my writing, she said everything was perfect,

but since I was practicing being honest with myself and showing integrity about how my writing

is not always perfect-I saw a mistake on my writing I said 'Yomary, you should probably

highlight that [with highlighting tape] so I can fix it in my story'..." Osahru further explained

that reading and writing were connected "because in writing you have to read what you wrote

and in reading you have to read what all authors wrote and learn how to describe in your stories."

Osahru's explanation demonstrated that he firmly understood the interconnected and

communicative nature of reading and writing. He also explained, "When I write it makes me a

better reader because I read my stories when I am done and it helps me read better and it helps

me learn and understand how to use bigger words." Finally, Osahru explained, "Reading makes

me a better writer because when I read I can understand and add more description that I learn and

add more words and different kind of structures and paragraph structures." Osahru's

explanations suggest that integrating reading and writing events, particularly interactive read

alouds of mentor texts within writing workshop, helped him to view reading and writing as a

combined literacy process, think critically about his reading and writing, and develop an

understanding of how reading and writing mutually influence one another.

To conclude, Osahru's book, The NY Book Thief was intertextually connected to many

texts that he borrowed, appropriated, and transformed into his writing. The content and ideas









within his writing came from television shows, personal experiences, as well as books read aloud

and independently in class. Osahru was aware of how particular craft choices would influence

his reader and purposefully crafted each sentence within his writing based on the understanding

of author's craft that was socially constructed during the read alouds and mini-lessons.

Samone

Samone was a well-versed, outgoing Asian female who was an avid reader and writer.

Samone was considered by her teacher to have high reading and writing abilities. Samone was a

thoughtful, focused student who considered herself and her classmates as authors. Samone was

immersed in her reading and writing and frequently mentioned how she thought about her

writing throughout the day at school as well as at home. For instance, one day when Samone

was writing a book about four teenagers stranded on an island, she was aware that some of her

classmates were also writing about people and animals stranded on islands and explained "At

lunch sometimes we talk about what is going on in our books" (Field notes, December 16, 2008).

In addition, on the same day that Samone decided to include an afterword in her nonfiction

penguin book suggesting her readers to also read Yomary's Penguin book, she was walking

around the classroom with a pencil behind her right ear. When one of her classmates mentioned

the pencil, she responded, "It makes me feel more like a writer" (Field notes, October 15, 2008).

The following excerpt from the field notes (December 16, 2008) illustrates Samone's

typical stance when composing during writing time:

Samone is sitting on a bean bag chair on the carpet intently writing on her yellow note pad.
Writing appears to flow out of Samone's pencil. Rarely during writing time is her pencil
idle. Her pencil is in hand, her eyes on the paper appearing to try and capture her thoughts
on paper. She rereads the last sentence she wrote and adds a more specific verb with a
carat to "had lots of food" "had brought lots of food." When asking Samone about how
she writes, she explains, "I have a story in my mind and then I just write what is in my
mind. ... The dialogue happens as I'm thinking about my story and writing it." "If my
hand hurts, I'll stop and reread my writing and revise." Then she further elaborates,









"When I write, I don't really look at what I do. I never stop when I'm writing. I'll stop
when my hand hurts and go back and revise."

Samone proceeded idiosyncratically through the composing process. Although Samone was

eager to capture her thoughts on paper, she regularly reread her writing and made revisions as

part of her process of writing. Samone was an engaged, purposeful writer who intentionally

crafted her writing for her reader. Samone's writing was intertextually connected in many ways

to her extensive reading experiences.

Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Penguins

During the nonfiction research unit, Samone researched penguins and then wrote a

nonfiction book titled Penguins!. Her book bin included five nonfiction books about penguins

including Penguins (Zoehfeld, 2002), Polar Animals (Cooper, 2007 ), Penguins! (Gibbons,

1998), Emperor Penguins (Edwards, 2007), and This Bird Can't Fly (Canizares & Moreton,

1998). Samone recorded facts on 21 note cards including one note card with a diagram of a

penguin's life cycle. Samone's note cards included a fact as well as the title and author of the

book. After completing her nonfiction book about penguins, Samone went on to research and

write about bears.















Figure 6-17. Cover of Samone's Nonfiction Book titled Penguins!









Samone's book, Penguins!, was nine pages long and written on publishing paper. Her

cover included the title Penguins! in the top left corner with a detailed illustration of penguins

doing various activities on and around icebergs surrounded by water (Figure 6-17). Samone

explained that she got the idea for her illustration from Gail Gibbons' Penguins! (1998) and

included other facts that she learned about penguins into the cover illustration. Samone

explained, "I was reading [Gail Gibbons' Penguins!] and I thought that it was a scene and it

looked nice because it showed there was a penguin in there. So I wanted to do it like her to make

it like a scene to make my readers know what they are going to learn in the book. So what I did

was that I chose some penguins, some penguins that are having babies on rocks and stuff and I

drew a penguin sliding down, and a penguin swimming." Samone's book included the following

headings: Table of Contents, Introduction, Adult Penguins Stay with Young, Where Penguins

Live, Penguins Underwater, Penguin Facts!, Afterword, and Glossary. Each page of her writing

included a detailed illustration with a caption, a diagram, or a divided and/or labeled illustration.

Several sections of her book included two or three paragraphs of information. Samone's writing

within her nonfiction book, Penguins!, is included in Figure 6-18.

Within her nonfiction book, Samone made connections to various texts including the

mentor texts read aloud, nonfiction and fiction books independently read during reading

workshop, a website, and the penguin books within her book bin. Samone's understanding of the

purpose of nonfiction text features, evident in her writing, illustrations, and explanations of her

craft, was connected to the interactive read alouds of Gail Gibbons' writing in Spiders (1994)

and Bicycle Book (2001) and the literature-based mini-lessons. Samone's book also reflected

aspects of conversations that she had with her classmates and Ms. Daniels.










Penguins!
1 Introduction
2 Penguins come in different sizes and look different. There are seventeen different types of
3 penguins. The largest is the Emperor. The smallest is the Little Blue also called Fairy Penguin.
4 In this book you'll learn about penguins and what penguins do. They really are amazing animals.
5 Even though they can't fly they can do many things birds that fly can't do. These birds can dive
6 slide and do other things so find out what they do. By the end of this book you'll be able to
7 answer these questions (Where do they live? What do they eat?).
8
9 Adult Penguins Stay with Young
10 Adult penguins stay with their young until they are grown up to protect themselves from
11 predators. A bird called South Polar Skua sometimes take baby chicks when they are at a young
12 age. Fur seals and leopard seals, sea lions, sharks, and killer whales eat penguins.
13
14 Adult penguins stay with their young until December t protect them. Penguins mostly lay two
15 eggs, but the Emperor and the King penguin lay one. Emperor penguins that are fathers keep their
16 egg in a pouch for more than sixty days.
17
18 In a penguins life cycle what happens first is the egg comes out. Then it hatches. The chick
19 has grey feathers. After a chick loses those feathers it is now called a fledgling. That fledgling
20 will now become an adult penguin.
21
22 Where Penguins Live
23 Penguins live in many different places around the world. They live in cold weather and some
24 live in hot weather. Other penguins live in New Zealand, Australia, South America, and South
25 Africa. All the penguins except Galapagos penguins live south of the equator.
26
27 Penguins Underwater
28 Penguins do many different things underwater to help them survive and for other important
29 things. Penguins eat krill. Krill is like small shrimp. Penguins also eat fish and squid.
30
31 Penguins can stay underwater for almost twenty minutes. Penguins leap out of the water for
32 air. The Emperor penguins dive deeper than all the penguins they dive about one thousand five
33 hundred feet underwater. Penguins dive deep underwater. Some penguins swim up to twenty five
34 miles an hour.
35
36 Penguin Facts!
37 1. Penguins don't exactly sleep they take long naps at night together.
38 2. Penguins have different positions when they sleep like standing up in a group.
39 3. Penguins used to fly, but lost the ability long ago.
40 4. Now and days there are oil spills and it gets on their feathers and they can die from the oil.
41 5. Emperor penguins can weigh up to ninety pounds!
42 6. King Penguins can grow up to be twenty years old!
43
44 Afterword
45 If you liked this book read another by Yomary called Penguins. (Remember to go back to the
46 introduction to answer the questions.) And you can go to websites or aquariums to learn more
47 about penguins. You can also read more books about penguins and make a book!
Figure 6-18. Samone's Nonfiction Book Penguins!









During the semi-structured interview, Samone explained how the interactive read alouds of

Gail Gibbons' books, Spiders (1994) and Bicycle Book (2001), mentored her nonfiction book.

"This mentored my writing because it showed me a lot of things that I could do. Even though I

am not doing things about spiders, it still showed me that I could do different things with my

writing. [Bicycle Book] mentored my writing because it had labels and stuff." Samone

considered her writing and illustrations to be similar to Gail Gibbons' mentor texts. She

explained "I think that it is similar because I did things like-I got ideas from her. I got ideas

from her books since I got facts from her and stuff.... And I think it is similar because I know

that Gail Gibbons had in most of her books she includes lots of detail into her book to make it

more interesting."

Samone explained her use and purpose of various nonfiction text features, including table

of contents, captions, labels, divided illustrations, and diagrams as well as how she purposefully

crafted her writing for her nonfiction reader. Like the other students in the class, Samone's book

and her explanations reflected the understanding of nonfiction texts socially constructed during

the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons. When discussing her table of contents, Samone

explained, "... all of us learned that readers need a table of contents because when a reader wants

to know where something is and [the book] doesn't have a table of contents then they don't

know where to find the things that they want. We learned this in writing workshop." She then

added that she had seen table of contents in some of the penguin books in her book bin and also

in fiction books. The illustration at the top of her introduction included two penguins on a light

green iceberg with a caption that said, "Some icebergs are light green." Although Samone

located the fact that some icebergs are light green in the Polar Animals (Cooper, 2007) book and

borrowed ideas for her illustration from Penguins! (Gibbons, 1998), she further explained, "I









wrote that the ice bergs are light green just in case if [the reader] didn't want to read the

introduction. If they didn't like read the introduction, I just wanted to make sure that...because

Ms. Daniels told me earlier that I should say that the icebergs are light green because if I just put

it green here they might think that it was grass."








A ,\I
.. ., *< -^, D 7"

( i ~ ~. 1 -




Figure 6-19. Samone's Diagram of the Life Cycle of a Penguin

On the following page, Adult Penguin Stay with Young, Samone included her note card of

the penguin life cycle that she meticulously copied from Yomary, who also studied and wrote

about penguins. The diagram of a penguin's life cycle included arrows from one stage to another

with captions below each stage (Figure 6-19). The following example demonstrates the students'

shared understanding of nonfiction text features as well as the collaborative nature of the

classroom. Samone explained, "I asked Yomary to borrow her card because she had done her

own life cycle and I wanted to include the life cycle cause she said, Did you do a life cycle?'

and I said 'no.' And she said that I should do it so the reader knows how the penguins grow up."

The next page of Samone's book, Where Penguins Live, included a divided illustration. One

half of the illustration included a penguin on an iceberg with Antarctica and Climate: Cold at the

top. The other half of the illustration included a picture of an island surrounded by water with

Galapagos Island and Climate: Hot, warm. Samone stated that she divided the illustration,









"Because I thought that if I didn't like divide it maybe they would think that these two places

were beside each other." After this explanation, Samone found similarly divided illustrations in

Gibbons' Spiders (1994) book and compared them to her own.


-----------














Figure 6-20. Samone's Labeled Illustration of Penguins Underwater

Samone understood that nonfiction books conveyed information through their illustrations,

so she included details within her illustrations which complemented her writing and shared

additional information with her reader. For instance, the Penguins Underwater illustration

included three penguins underwater with labels beside each penguin rather than just one caption

under the illustration (Figure 6-20). Samone explained, "I came up with that because I knew the

things that [the penguins] did so I wanted to show...to help the reader imagine what it would

look like." Samone then added, "I've seen [labels] in books and we've talked about it in a

lesson." Samone's understanding of diagrams within nonfiction reflected the discussion

surrounding the mentor texts as well as Ms. Daniels explanation of the dual importance of

diagrams, "to help us with our research and we can use them to communicate our research to our

readers" (Bicycle Book, Transcription, September 18, 2008).









In addition to understanding the purpose of nonfiction text features, Samone understood

the structure and format of nonfiction writing. She understood the importance of introduction

paragraphs as well as the use of main ideas and supporting details within nonfiction paragraphs

(Figure 6-18). Each of Samone's paragraphs included a topic sentence followed by supporting

details. For example, Samone's introduction (Figure 6-18 Lines 1-7) was influenced by her

understanding of the purpose of nonfiction writing socially constructed during the interactive

read alouds and literature-based mini-lessons. During an informal interview, when beginning to

write the first draft of her introduction, Samone wrote the purpose of her book in her writing

notebook (Field notes, September 25, 2008):

Samone writes, "I am writing this non-fiction all about book called penguins because I
want readers to know more about penguins." She then titles her yellow notepad -
Introduction and begins writing. "Penguins come in different sizes and look different."
She explains that her first sentence in her introduction is about penguins in general.

During the interview at the end of the unit, Samone explained each sentence in her introduction

and demonstrated how her writing was intertextually connected to various texts. Samone said

that the first sentence was an introductory sentence that came from all of her research on

penguins (Figure 6-18 Line 2 Sentence 1). She then located and explained where she found the

three facts within the following three sentences in Gail Gibbons' Penguins! (1998). The

following sentence read, "In this book you'll learn about penguins and what penguins do"

(Figure 6-18 Line 3 Sentence 3). Samone stated, "I knew that I needed to say something about

what the reader would learn. I knew that they were going to learn about penguins and what they

do.... [we learned that] we should include a sentence about what our topic was and what the

reader would learn about." The following sentence read, "They really are amazing animals"

(Figure 6-18 Line 4 Sentence 1). When asked where she got the idea for this sentence, she

explained, "When we were writing our introduction down on our pads, Ms. Daniels gave us









some ideas and then I got it from her." Like Keith and several other students, Samone's sentence

about her research topic being amazing was mentored by Ms. Daniels' modeling of an

introduction which included the sentence, "Bikes are amazing!" In addition, Samone explained

that she found the ideas within her following two sentences in the book This Bird Can't Fly

(Canizares & Moreton, 1998). The final sentence within her introduction paragraph read, "By

the end of this book you'll be able to answer these questions (Where do they live? What do they

eat?)" (Figure 6-18 Lines 6-7). Samone explained, "I wrote this because I wanted my reader to

be excited to read my book. And I thought that if somebody read this-that after reading the

book so that they could answer these questions." In the Afterword at the end of her book (Figure

6-18 Lines 44-47), she suggested to the reader, "Remember to go back to the introduction to

answer the questions." This discussion of Samone's introduction paragraph illustrates her

understanding of the purpose and organization of nonfiction writing and is representative of the

various connections Samone made within her nonfiction writing.

As Samone continued to discuss her writing, she explained where she got the ideas within

her writing and illustrations. The facts about penguins frequently came from the nonfiction

books about penguins in her book bin. However, Samone also included facts from the book My

Season i/ ith the Penguins (Webb, 2000) that she was reading independently during reading

workshop, a website that she found with Ms. Daniels, and life cycle information from the note

card that Yomary shared with her. In addition, Samone got the idea to include an afterword in

her nonfiction book because the book that she was independently reading in reading workshop,

The Secret Garden, had a foreword. She explained, "I got the idea for [an afterword] from the

book that I was reading cause I thought that there was a foreword and I thought that if that

person could do a foreword that I could do an afterword because I thought like maybe my









introduction was LIKE a foreword." She also referred to her cumulative reading experiences

when explaining the sentence that read, "If you liked this book read another by Yomary called

Penguins." Samone explained, "I got that idea because in a lot of books that I've read...they

mention other books that people can read."

Samone explained how she borrowed, appropriated, and transformed ideas from the

nonfiction books about penguins into her writing and illustrations. She explained how she put

information into her own words, "What I did was I had the same thing (referring to the fact) but I

had to change the words. And instead of using like, one of my facts was, when I said from the

book that some penguins can go up to 20 miles an hour, it was different from that. I had to

change it because, wait... Some can go 25 miles an hour.... So what I had to do was that, I kept

the thing about 25 miles an hour and I had changed go to swim and I added penguins instead of

they." In addition, like how Samone interwove ideas from various sources into her cover

illustration, she similarly borrowed, appropriated, and transformed the ideas within the penguin

books' text and illustrations in order to develop her other illustrations.

Finally, Samone's nonfiction book, Penguins!, embodied traces of numerous texts that she

appropriated and transformed including Gail Gibbons' mentor texts, the dialogue surrounding the

interactive read alouds and mini-lessons, conversations with her teacher and classmates, as well

as the penguin books within her book bin. During the nonfiction research unit, Samone

developed an understanding of how nonfiction writing can be crafted to most effectively convey

information to the reader. Although Samone made connections within her nonfiction book to a

variety of previous reading experiences, she demonstrated a similar understanding of the purpose

of nonfiction text features to the class as a whole. It appears that Samone's literary









understanding enabled her to craft her writing purposefully for her reader as well as interconnect

her prior reading experiences into her writing.

Sentence Structure Unit: The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess

During the sentence structure unit, Samone wrote four fiction stories, two personal

narratives, and four nonfiction books. Her four fiction writings included: The Prince & Dragon

Who Saved the Princess at the Dawn ofLight, a thirteen-chapter fairy tale; Glenda's Back, an

eleven-chapter sequel to The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess at the Dawn ofLight;

The MaskedBoy an eight-chapter fiction story; and a six page fiction story about friends stranded

on an island. Samone also wrote two personal narratives titled AnI k i/th the Littles and The Trip

as well as four nonfiction books titled Frogs, AllAbout My Cat, Butterflies, and Turtles. Samone

planned portions of three stories that were never written. The writings for this unit were neatly

organized in Samone's writing folder. Each of her writings, written on yellow notepad paper,

was paper clipped together with her planning page on the top.

Samone's book, The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess, was eighteen pages long

and written on publishing paper. Her book included a two-page table of contents listing the

chapter titles and their corresponding page numbers. Samone chose to publish the thirteen-

chapter fairytale titled The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess at the Dawn of Light

(Figure 6-21). She explained, "I chose to publish this because it is my longest book and I am

most proud of it. She adds that Frenia really liked it and said it was really good and that I should

publish it" (Field notes, January 20, 2009). She shortened the title during publishing to The

Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess, "Because I thought that my title was too long and if a

person picked it up and as soon as they read it they would have thought that it was boring or

something." When writing the rough draft of this story, Samone explained how she wrote her

chapters (Field notes, November 18, 2008):









... the beginning and ending of the "chapters" of her writing are indicated with long,
vertical brackets surrounding her text in the left margin. Samone explains that she starts a
chapter with something important and then ends a chapter with something exciting to make
the reader read on. "Because in a lot of the books I read the author ends a chapter with
really exciting events so I want to continue reading."

Samone's explanations of the chapters within her writing illustrate her understanding of the

concept of anticipation for the reader. Her chapter titles included: Birth, Growing Up, New

Wagon, Bad News, More Bad News, Doomed for Life, Plans, Surrounded By Men, Problems,

Life In The Tower, More Contestants, I'm Saved, and A Happy Ending. During the interview at

the end of the unit, when asked where she got the ideas for her chapter titles, Samone explained,

"I got the ideas...in every chapter there is something happening so I just like think of what the

main thing that is happening in there and then I make a title out of it." Furthermore, she added

that she had previously read "The Great Good Thing and I've read The Secret Garden and they

have lots of chapters..." Samone illustrated each page of writing within her book (Figure 6-22);

however, since recopying her book took a majority of publishing time she was unable to

illustrate her cover.

The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess
1 Chapter 1 Birth
2 Once upon a time a king and his wife the queen longed for a baby. Then one day the queen
3 gave birth to a royal baby girl. They had a party and invited all of the royal families and fairy
4 godmothers. The fairy godmother named Weather fairy gave the gift of emotion. Beauty fairy
5 gave the gifts to be kind and beautiful. Locks of gold gave the gift to have locks of brown hair
6 like her mother. Everyone crowded around the beautiful baby princess named Elizabeth.
7
8 Chapter 2 Growing Up
9 As Elizabeth grew older she grew more kind, beautiful, and emotional. Her hair was wavy, but
10 was as soft as velvet. She was always curious. She roamed the kingdom to see what were behind
11 the open and closed doors. On her eleventh birthday she got a kitten and named it Sophie. They
12 always went to the Wald Forest. They went in the middle and Elizabeth would sing. She sang
13 soft, but it was beautiful to even hear it.
14
15 Chapter 3 New Wagon
16 On her twelfth birthday she told her parents, "Daddy I want to have a wagon made out of gold.
17 I want it to have a seat for me and Sophie." "Yes my darling" said King Arthur the III. "Oh and
18 something to hold a drink and food" said Elizabeth. "Yes anything for you" he said. That
19 afternoon Elizabeth got her wagon made out of gold. And pulled it to the middle of the forest.










20
21 Chapter 4 Bad News
22 When she got to the middle there was a old woman. The old woman was really a evil witch in
23 disguise trying to rule the kingdom. In order to rule the kingdom she had to get Princess Elizabeth
24 out of the way. "Hello" said the evil witch. "Hello" said Elizabeth. "Would you like water? You
25 look very thirsty mam," said Elizabeth. "Yes Thank you," said the evil witch kindly. "In return
26 would you like this apple?" said the evil witch. 'Yes," said Elizabeth who was hungry from
27 pulling the wagon. "Here" said the witch who handed the apple over. As soon as Elizabeth took a
28 bite she fell to the ground with a thud. The apple had a poison that would put people to sleep if
29 they ate it and would erase all that person's memory and would sleep for about an hour. "Ha, ha,
30 ha" said the evil witch as she took the disguise off. "Nice try Glenda Glinka" said one of the
31 fairies who was at the party for Elizabeth. "Well, well, well. It looks like the tooth fairies want to
32 save the princess. Too bad she's in a deep sleep. She'll forget everything" said Glenda Glinka.
33 She then vanished in a puff of smoke.
34
35 The fairies carried Elizabeth to a cottage where they would care and protect her. One fairy
36 carried Sophie. The Weather fairy was sent to tell the king and queen they would take care of
37 Elizabeth and protect her until she was old enough to get married, and rule the kingdom. This way
38 Glenda Glinka wouldn't tray to harm Elizabeth.
39
40 Chapter 5 More Bad News
41 Four years later, it was Elizabeth's 16th birthday, the fairies sent her out for fruits while they got
42 ready for a surprise birthday party. When she left there was a young woman sitting on a rock. She
43 was really the evil witch Glenda Glinka trying to be the queen again. She knew that if the princess
44 was gone she could be the queen.
45
46 "Hello" said Elizabeth. Ever since Elizabeth ate the apple she forgot what happened with the
47 disguised evil witch. "Would you like to see a tower?" said Glenda Glinka. "Yes. But I can't be
48 with strangers" Elizabeth said. "Well... I'm not a stranger because we are now friends" said
49 Glenda Glinka. "Okay" responded Elizabeth. "Let's go on this witch broom" said Glenda.
50 "Sure" said Elizabeth.
51
52 Chapter 6 Doomed for Life
53 When they got to the window of the tower Glenda pushed her and said "Ha, ha." "You may
54 not remember me, but I'm an evil witch. Your trapped forever" said Glenda as she took the
55 disguise off. "Oh and those fairies can't save you. There is a field that shocks only fairies." "But
56 today's my sixteenth birthday. Please let me out you twit of a witch" said Elizabeth. "No. Don't
57 you get it I will rule the kingdom not you" said Glenda. "I don't know what you mean I'm not a
58 princess" said Elizabeth. "Let's just say those fairies didn't say you are a princess" said Glenda as
59 she flew away. "I'm doomed" said Elizabeth in great depression.
60
**Due to the length of Samone's Fairytale, only six chapters are included in this figure. Samone's
complete fairy tale is included in Appendix C.
Figure 6-21. Samone's Fairytale The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess















9., i ,I, ,r- .*- ;-7,, ,,' .-h, fl
*h 11 IF 1r I





B~- -a,
....
'*; .~-i---- ..---- .- (j






Figure 6-22. Samone's Illustrations for Chapters 1, 2, & 3

Samone made connections to multiple texts within her book, The Prince & Dragon Who

Saved the Princess. Within the content of her fairy tale, Samone made intertextual connections

to various texts experienced in the past including books independently read at school and at

home, shared reading experiences at school, conversations, life experiences, and movies.

However, Samone consciously crafted her writing including her use of varied sentence lengths,

word choice, description, punctuation, and dialogue based on the socially constructed

understanding of the purpose of the author's craft that developed as the mentor texts were

interactively read aloud and examined during mini-lessons. Within one sentence, Samone made

connections to multiple texts.

During the interview at the end of the unit, Samone holistically explained how the mentor

texts, her teacher, and her classmates influenced her writing. To begin with, Samone explained

how the author's writing in the three mentor texts, Henry the Dv g n i/h No Tail (Feiffer, 2007),

Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and Animal Dads (Collard, 1997), helped her to become a better

writer. She explained, "I think [Henry the Deg ni i/h No Tail] helped me become a better writer









because her book, it had long and short sentences and medium sentences so that gave me an idea

to make my sentences long and short and medium. She also had a lot of dialogue so I think that

really helped me." Furthermore, she added, "I think that [Scarecrow] really helped me because

this was really descriptive and it gave me ideas how I should make my book really descriptive."

Then Samone explained, "I think Animal Dads helped me too because it was like Kate Feiffer's

book with different sentences and it had one short sentence at the top of what the animal dad did

like babysit or something." Samone also discussed how the lessons at the beginning of writing

workshop influenced her writing. "I think that [the lessons] influenced my writing because

before I didn't know about these books and when Ms. Daniels read these to us and we like saw

how they were descriptive and different lengths of sentences and lots of dialogue like helped me

to like really understand their books to understand my own-the books that I would write."

Samone's explanation of the influence of the interactive read alouds and mini-lessons at the

beginning of writing workshop captures the essence of the grounded theory presented in the

previous chapter. Together, the teacher and students read and examined the mentor texts in a

way that helped them to better understand how authors' craft their writing in order for the

students to better understand how to craft their own writing. In addition, Samone explained, "I

think my classmates helped me because some of them gave me names and when I read [my

book] to Ms. Daniels during a conference and they laughed I think that that meant that my book

was funny and enjoyable." As these excerpts suggest, Samone's writing was influenced by

several texts within the context of writing workshop; however, the interactive reading and

examining of the mentor texts was the essential component that integrated the texts and

developed a shared understanding of the author's craft.









During her interview as we discussed her writing sentence-by-sentence, Samone explained

how various texts were interwoven within her writing as well as explained how and why she

crafted her writing in particular ways. For example, the following discussion of a sentence

within Samone's first chapter is typical of the conversations surrounding each sentence of her

writing (Figure 6-21 Line 3 Sentence 1):

Researcher: Your next sentence says: They had a party and invited all of the royal families
and fairy godmothers. Where did you get the idea for that sentence?

Samone: From Sleeping Beauty (Disney Book). It's a long sentence.

Researcher: So you have a long sentence. Why did you choose to write your sentence like
that?

Samone: Because I knew that we were like trying-that in class we were studying long and
short sentences in the books that we've read for examples and stuff. I wanted to make my
book like a grown up would do. I didn't want to just say one time a king and a queen lived
together or something like that.

Researcher: I notice that you used several ands. You have (Rereading sentence): They had
a royal party AND invited all of the royal families AND fairy godmothers. So did you try
to combine parts of your sentences together?

Samone: Yeah.

Researcher: So where did you learn about combining parts of sentences?

Samone: In writing. Henry the Dog i i/h no Tail has sentences like that.

Within the previous excerpt, Samone explained that the idea of the royal family and godmothers

gathering together for a party was connected to her previous reading of Disney's Sleeping

Beauty. However, that was not the extent of the connections she consciously made between her

reading and writing. Samone further explained that she purposefully crafted her writing in a way

that was similar to one of the mentor texts, Henry the Dog ni ith No Tail. Samone's writing

reflected both the mentor text as well as the understanding of author's craft developed during the

reading and examining of the mentor texts.









Samone explained the purpose of different sentence lengths, combining sentences, and

dialogue which also linked her writing to the dialogue between the teacher, students, and

children's book author's during the read alouds and mini-lessons. Furthermore, Samone

explained her craft choices based on her literary understanding of the purpose of various craft

choices. For example, Samone wrote the following medium sentence, "The fairy godmother

named Weather fairy gave the gift of emotion" (Figure 6-21 Line 4 Sentence 1). She first

explained that she got the idea for the fairies from Sleeping Beauty and the word emotional from

her brother because he "calls me emotional when I cry and stuff." She explained that she chose

to write this medium sentence, "Because I didn't really want to make a long, boring sentence.

Because long sentences are usually for like explaining or description..."

As she continued to discuss her writing, Samone explained how and why she crafted the

following long sentence, "On her eleventh birthday she got a kitten and named it Sophie" (Figure

6-21 Line 11 Sentence 1). Samone began by explaining that she had a friend named Sophie and

that she recently received a cat for her birthday. Then she added, "I think that was kind of long.

... I wanted to be descriptive. I didn't just want to say birthday. And I didn't want to just say

kitten. I wanted to name it." In addition to understanding the purpose of crafting different

length sentences, Samone understood how combining sentences together within her writing

helped her writing to flow better for the reader. According to Samone's fairy tale, the main

character Elizabeth and her cat Sophie would always go into the Wald Forest where "They went

in the middle and Elizabeth would sing" (Figure 6-21 Line 12). Samone began by explaining

that she got the idea for Elizabeth to sing in the forest from Island ofAunts, a chapter book she

read in reading workshop, which included mermaids singing softly. Then Samone explained that

she combined two sentences together because "if I just said they went in the middle I thought that









would be confusing for the reader. The reader wouldn't really understand what Elizabeth was

doing in the forest.... I put these 2 sentences together because in class we learned that when there

are 2 sentences that go together that instead of making one short sentence or one that is medium.

That if they make sense together, that we should put them together."

Samone also explained her use of dialogue within her book. The first two chapters of

Samone's book descriptively introduced her main characters and the setting of her fairy tale. At

the beginning of Chapter 3, Samone used dialogue for the first time in the following sentence

(Figure 6-21 Line 16): "On her twelfth birthday she told her parents, "Daddy I want to have a

wagon made out of gold. I want it to have a seat for me and Sophie." She explained, "I got the

idea to use dialogue because if I just put no dialogue in my book that it would just sound like I

was retelling a book so I wanted to add dialogue." She further explained, "I learned about

dialogue in writing workshop in 1st and 2nd grade and we're doing it again this year," and added

that "Henry the Deg i i/h No Tail was the only book with dialogue, but Scarecrow had

thoughts." Within Chapter 7 titled Plans, the king, queen, and fairy godmothers decided to begin

a contest to find someone to get Elizabeth out of the tower. Samone explained that she used a

great deal of dialogue between characters because, "I thought dialogue was like really, that it

makes readers not get bored of the books. It is like explaining what is happening, but characters

explaining. And I think by writing what they say, it makes the readers better understand the

characters." Throughout the interview, Samone referred to Henry the Deg i i//h No Tail and

explained that it helped her write the dialogue within her fairy tale. The following excerpt

occurred at the end of the interview:

Researcher: You said that Henry the Deg i ih No Tail helped you with your dialogue.
You are a huge reader and you read a ton of books. Why did this book help you so much
with your dialogue?









Samone: Because Henry the Deg iilh No Tail had so much dialogue that it really helped
me put dialogue into MY book.

Although there was not a specific lesson on dialogue, the dialogue within Henry the Dg n/ ith No

Tail (Feiffer, 2007) was noticed and examined throughout the interactive read alouds and the

mini-lessons for various reasons. The collaborative examination of the mentor texts during

writing workshop developed an understanding of Feiffer's effective use of dialogue within her

book which helped Samone to successfully use dialogue within her book.

From the previous discussion of Samone's fairy tale, it is evident that she made many

connections to texts outside of the context of writing workshop. Like many of the students,

Samone made connections within her writing to books previously read aloud by the teacher,

articles read during shared reading, and books read independently during reading workshop. For

instance, one of the fairies gave Elizabeth the gift of "locks of brown hair" which Samone

explained was connected to a shared reading article about Locks of Love and a little girl who had

cancer (Figure 6-21 Line 5). In addition, the ideas and word choice within Samone's writing

were significantly influenced by her authentic, independent reading of trade books during

reading workshop. Specifically, Samone mentioned Diary of a Fairy Godmother, Island of

Aunts, Cinderella and the Glass Hill, The Great God Thing and Sammy Keyes. Samone also

made connections within her writing to popular media including television shows and movies.

Samone referred to the movies Enchanted, Aragon, Willy Wonka, Nancy Drew, Snow White,

Sleeping Beauty, Rapunzel, and Cinderella. She also cited the television shows Wizards of

Waverly Place and Finneus andFern. Lastly, Samone's writing was interwoven with the texts

of her personal experiences and conversations with family and friends.

At the end of the interview, Samone explained that she considered herself both a reader

and writer during writing workshop because "I get ideas from reading books and when I write









books it sometimes helps me to read to better understand my books." When asked if she thought

reading and writing were connected Samone further explained, "I think that reading and writing

ARE connected... Like authors get ideas from other books they've read and when authors write

books, I think that when they read books they study what other authors do and that really helps

them with their writing." She also explained, "I think that writing helps me to be a better reader

because when I learn things about writing like how the dialogue and stuff I think that helps me as

a reader because when I do that. I take what I learn from writing and I do reading workshop and

I come across something that I've learned during writing, I think about what I learned in writing

and I use it as a reader." Finally, Samone explained, "I think reading helps me to be a better

writer because I can see what REAL authors do and how like they make their books really

descriptive and stuff so it really helps me during writing to get some ideas from reading authors."

Samone's explanations suggest that integrating reading and writing events, particularly

interactive reading and examining of mentor texts within writing workshop, helps students to

perceive reading and writing as a combined literacy process and develop an understanding of

how reading and writing mutually influence one another.

In conclusion, Samone's book, The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess, was

imbued with a multitude of texts that she had borrowed, appropriated, and transformed into her

writing. Although the content and ideas within her writing came from a wide variety of textual

sources, Samone crafted her writing based on the socially constructed understanding of the

purpose of author's craft which intertextually connected her writing to the interactive reading

and examining of the three mentor texts during writing workshop. Samone understood the

purpose of author's craft as well as how the particular craft elicited a response in the reader.

Reading experiences clearly enriched Samone's writing and provided her with a broad range of









possibilities for her writing; however, it appeared that her literary understanding facilitated her

ability to intertextually connect her previous reading experiences purposefully into her writing.

Samone's explanations of her writing demonstrate how she appropriated and transformed her

understanding of various craft features socially constructed during writing workshop into her

own writing.

Summary

This chapter focused on, Keith, Belkys, Osahru, and Samone, four young writers in Ms

Daniels' third-grade classroom. This chapter presented case studies of these four students'

writing abilities and processes. Furthermore, this chapter examined how the understanding of

nonfiction text features and author's craft socially constructed by the teacher, students, and

children's book authors during interactive read alouds and mini-lessons influenced each

student's writing. Multiple data sources including informal and semi-structured student

interviews, student artifacts, field notes, and observational transcriptions contributed to

developing an understanding of these young writers within the context of their third-grade

collaborative literacy environment.

Although Keith, Belkys, Osahru, and Samone had differing ability levels, backgrounds,

and writing processes, each student's writing and explanations clearly demonstrated a shared

understanding of how and why authors craft their writing in particular ways for their reader.

While the students had some difficulty including particular craft features within their writing,

these findings suggest that less proficient writers have developed an understanding of the

purpose of author's craft which will benefit them as they grow and develop as writers.

Regardless of reading and writing ability, these students demonstrated an advanced literary

understanding. Integrating interactive read alouds into writing workshop appear to have

facilitated the development of students' literary understanding (Sipe, 2008) as well as their









ability to read like writers and write like readers and perceive reading and writing as a combined

literacy process.

Keith, Belkys, Osahru, and Samone made intertextual connections within both of their

published writings to multiple texts. The content of their writing was intertextually connected to

various texts that they experienced in the past including written texts, conversations, life

experiences, websites, television shows, and movies. However, these students consciously

crafted their writing based on the understanding of author's craft socially constructed during the

interactive read alouds and mini-lessons.

Examination of students' writing sentence-by-sentence provided a better understanding of

the numerous intertextual connections they made within their writing. Students' discussion of

their writing sentence-by-sentence provided insights into the complex thinking involved in

developing each of their sentences. The case studies illustrate that students are conscious of the

intertextual connections within their writing. In addition, the case studies demonstrate that

students are able to articulate how and why they crafted their writing in particular ways.









CHAPTER 7
CONCLUSION

The findings of this study are the result of a six-month descriptive, naturalistic study

investigating how interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced

students' writing. The study was conducted in a third-grade classroom in a predominantly low-

income, multicultural elementary school that was committed to academic excellence and

collaborative learning. The classroom teacher, who was in her fifth year of teaching,

implemented a balanced, integrated literacy curriculum with instructional practices that

encouraged students to make connections across texts, ideas, and experiences.

My broad research question was: How do the texts within interactive read alouds at the

beginning of writing workshop mentor children's writing? Three research questions guided this

study:

1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read
aloud into their own writing?

2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual
connections between reading and writing?

3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing?

In order to develop a comprehensive understanding of how students' writing reflected the texts

within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop, multiple data sources were

collected including participant observations, field notes and transcriptions, informal and semi-

structured interviews, and student and teacher artifacts. In addition, case studies of four

students' writing gained an in-depth understanding of the intertextual connections students

constructed within their writing to the interactive read alouds and literature-based mini-lessons.

The multiple data sources were analyzed recursively and iteratively according to Strauss and









Corbin's (1990) open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and Glaser and Strauss's (1967)

constant comparative method.

While Chapter 4 contextualized the findings of this study, Chapter 5, 6, and 7, respectively,

presented a grounded theory that emerged from the data, shared case studies of four young

writers, and examined how the teacher and literacy environment facilitated students to connect

their reading and writing experiences. This chapter summarizes the findings of this study and

discusses their significance in relation to intertextually-informed writing and read aloud research

as well as research on the interconnected nature of reading and writing. In addition, this chapter

addresses implications of this study for literacy teaching and learning. This chapter concludes

with a discussion of the questions that arose during the study and the implications for future

research suggested by the findings of this study.

Summary and Significance of the Findings

Reading like a Writer and Writing like a Reader

The grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader synthesized the

seven conceptual categories (noticing, examining, guiding, explaining, understanding,

mentoring, and crafting) that emerged from the analysis of the multiple data sources. The

grounded theory addressed the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding

during interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. Furthermore, the grounded

theory addressed my overarching research question as well as my three guiding questions.

According to Bakhtin (1981, 1986), Vygotsky (1978), and Bloome & Egan-Robertson (1993),

intertextuality is socially constructed as individuals act and react to each other through the use of

language or dialogue within a particular sociocultural environment. In addition, Short (1992a)

suggests that intertextuality is "situated in the dialogue between participants, even if one of the

participants is not physically present (such as when one reads a book)" (p. 316). During









interactive read alouds, students are encouraged to interact with the book, their peers, and their

teacher throughout the book reading (Barrentine, 1996); therefore, they are dialogue rich

environments facilitating the social construction of intertextual connections between and among

various texts. According to Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004), exemplary teachers commonly

conduct interactive read alouds by setting a clear purpose for the read aloud, modeling fluent

reading with expression, stopping periodically to discuss the text, and connecting the read aloud

to independent reading and writing occurring in the classroom. Furthermore, based on extensive

anecdotal reports, writing scholars support the integration of children's literature read alouds and

book discussions into writing workshop and suggest that it provides students with opportunities

to experience exemplary writing models, study the craft of professional authors, and read like

writers (Calkins, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999, 2004; Smith, 1983a). Examining children's

oral responses during interactive read alouds, Sipe identified five characteristic types of oral

responses demonstrating students' literary understanding (Sipe, 2000a, 2008), the importance

and various uses of intertextual connections during read alouds (Sipe, 2000b), and how

intertextual connections facilitate literary understanding and schema-building for traditional

stories (Sipe, 2001). Sipe (2008) alludes to the fact that students with a more developed literary

understanding are more likely to have the ability to read like writers (Smith, 1983a) and write

like readers.

Within the third-grade collaborative literacy environment where this study was conducted,

I found that the interactive nature of the read aloud significantly contributed to students'

understanding of how authors craft their writing for their readers. The dialogue that occurred

among the teacher, students, and children's book authors socially constructed an understanding

of the purpose of the author's craft which intertextually influenced students' writing. Students'









explanations of how they crafted their own writing further reflected this socially constructed

literary understanding. Through the interactive reading and examination of the author's craft

within the mentor texts, students developed an appreciation for how author's intentionally

crafted their writing to enrich their reader's understanding and they similarly crafted their writing

purposefully for their reader. Although the four case study students were disparate in their

writing abilities and processes, all of the students' writing and explanations clearly reflected a

shared understanding of how and why authors craft their writing in particular ways for their

reader. During writing workshop, students' writing was mentored by the children's book author

as well as mentored by their classmates and teacher. This finding is significant because it

provides empirical evidence of the intertextual connections students construct between

interactive read alouds of mentor texts and their writing within writing workshop. This finding

also suggests that the dialogue that occurs among teachers, students, and children's book

authors' during integrated reading and writing events significantly influences students' writing.

Most importantly, this finding provides empirical evidence demonstrating how students who

have a developed literary understanding, particularly an understanding of how author

purposefully craft their writing, facilitates students to read like writers and write like readers.

Intertextual Connections within Students' Writing

Students consciously made intertextual connections to multiple texts within each sentence

of their writing. The content of students' writing was intertextually connected to various texts

that they had previously experienced including written texts, conversations, life experiences,

websites, television shows, and movies; however, they consciously crafted their writing based on

the understanding of author's craft socially constructed during the interactive reading and

examining of the mentor texts during writing workshop. Similar to Pantaleo's recent (2006)

study, the students' writing was intertextually influenced by the children's books read during the









study as well as demonstrated intertextual links to various other texts. The students' writing was

interwoven with the texts of their personal experiences, conversations at home and at school,

websites, written texts, television shows, and movies which adds to research addressing how

students' complex social worlds and popular culture texts significantly shape their writing

(Dyson, 1993, 1997). In addition, students borrowed, appropriated, and transformed the textual

voices they experienced within their sociocultural environments including the language of their

parents, teachers, peers, books, television shows, and movies into their writing which supports

the claim that multiple voices resonate within written texts (Kamberelis and McGinley, 1992).

In addition, this study corroborates previous studies focused on the intertextual influence of

written texts on students' writing (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993).

Based on Vygotsky's sociocultural theory (1978), during interactive read alouds students

engaged in collaborative social interactions with participants in their classroom environment

including their teacher, peers, and children's book authors, they internalized the language of

these dialogues, made it part of their internal speech, and then use this internalized speech

independently in their writing as well as their explanations of their writing. Students' writing

was not only influenced by one participant's language within the interactive read alouds, the

students' writing and explanations demonstrated that they made intertextual connections to the

understanding of author's craft socially constructed by the teacher, students, and children's book

authors during the interactive reading of the mentor texts. Since the students were guided to

interactively read and examine the author's craft from the perspective of a reader with the

intention of writing afterward, the students were conscious of the intertextual connections within

their writing as well as able to articulate how they crafted their writing for their reader.









The third-grade students were conscious of the various intertextualities within the content

and craft of their writing. Students' consciousness of the intertextual connections within their

writing supports research that students are often aware of connections between the texts they

read and the texts they write (Caimey, 1990). However, this finding also suggests that teachers

can facilitate students to be more aware of the numerous intertextual connections within their

writing than previously reported (Bearse, 1992; Caimey, 1990). Although discussed in more

detail in the following section, the intertextual connections students made to the understanding of

author's craft that was socially constructed during the interactive discussions surrounding the

mentor texts contributes to a better understanding of the influence of collaborative literacy

environments on students' writing.

Finally, the method of analyzing students writing sentence-by-sentence during semi-

structured interviews combined and transformed the methods employed by several literacy

researchers (Cairney, 1990; Graves, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992;

Pantaleo, 2006). Examination of students' writing sentence-by-sentence provided a better

understanding of the numerous intertextual connections they made within their writing.

Students' discussions of their published writings sentence-by-sentence provided insights into the

complex thinking involved in developing each of their sentences. In addition, sentence-by-

sentence discussion of students' writing provided a specific understanding of the intertextualities

within students' writings as well as confirmed and clarified assumptions about the source of the

intertextual connection.

Intertextuality, the Teacher, and the Collaborative Literacy Environment

According to Vygotsky (1978) and Bakhtin (1981), individuals' sociocultural environment

significantly impacts their oral and written language, particularly their social interactions within

their families, communities, and schools. Rosenblatt adds (1938/1995) that readers' responses to









literature are significantly affected by the sociocultural context in which a transaction between a

reader and a text occurs. In addition, Lemke (1992) emphasizes that the discourse practices

within a community establish ways that texts are related to one another and establish kinds of

recognized relationships between texts or discourses. Furthermore, Bloome and Egan-Robertson

(1993) suggest that proposed intertextual connections must be recognized, acknowledged, and

have social significance in order for intertextuality to be established within reading and writing

events. Although research and theory suggest the significance of the sociocultural environment

on the social construction of intertextuality and the transactions that occur between a reader and

a text (Bakhtin, 1981; Bloome and Egan-Robertson, 1993; Lemke, 1992; Rosenblatt 1938/1995;

1978/1994; 1982; Vygotsky, 1978;), research addressing the characteristics of sociocultural

learning environments that facilitate the social construction of intertextuality has received little

attention (Short, 1992a). Short's (1992a) research on intertextuality within literature circles

suggested that collaborative learning environments provide a rich context for developing a better

understanding of intertextuality. This study which focused on interactive read alouds within

writing workshop contributed to understandings about the social construction of intertextuality

by describing the characteristics of one particular collaborative literacy environment that

facilitated students to intertextually connect their reading and writing experiences. Recently,

Pantaleo (2006) suggested the need for further classroom research on the social construction of

intertextuality.

Within this collaborative third-grade literacy environment, reading and writing were

viewed as a combined literacy process by the teacher and students. The units within the

integrated literacy curriculum conceptually built upon one another which facilitated students'

literacy learning and fostered critical thinking, purposeful readers and writers. Students









participated in many authentic literacy experiences that supported the social construction of

intertextuality and literary understanding including interactively reading children's books

multiple times each day, independently reading children's trade books during reading workshop,

and writing about topics that were important to them during writing workshop.

Interactive read alouds were collaborative, language rich literacy environments filled with

dialogic interactions among the teacher, students, and children's book authors. During

interactive read alouds, transactions between the readers and the mentor text continuously

influenced the construction of meaning. Interactive read alouds, like literature circles (Short,

1992a), significantly influenced the intertextual connections students were able to socially

construct. The dialogic interactions occurring during the interactive read alouds intertextually

influenced the third-grade students' writing as well as the oral language that they used to

describe how they crafted their writing. Interactive read alouds within writing workshop

integrated the language arts including reading, writing, speaking, and listening and demonstrated

how "reading and writing, to be understood and appreciated fully, should be viewed together,

learned together, and used together" (Tierney & Shanahan, 1991, p. 275).

This study contributes to intertextually-informed writing and read aloud research by

specifically describing how a teacher facilitated intertextual connections across and between

texts during integrated reading and writing events (Bearse, 1992; Caimey, 1990; Dyson, 1993,

1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Oyler and Barry, 1996; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993, 2000a,

2000b, 2001, 2008;). Although Pantaleo (2006) refers to Allington's (2001) research on

exemplary teachers' and their ability to "make connections across texts and across

conversations" (p. 96), this study fills a gap in empirical intertextuality-informed writing

research by specifically describing how a teacher facilitated students to intentionally draw upon









their previous textual experiences as they wrote during writing workshop. Findings from this

study suggest that the teacher's intentional literacy instruction was particularly influential in

facilitating students to intertextually connect their reading and writing experiences. To begin

with, when interactively reading and examining the mentor texts, the teacher explicitly connected

how the author crafted his/her writing within the mentor text and how it influenced the reader's

ability to understand or enjoy the book. In addition, the teacher explicitly guided the discussion

surrounding the mentor texts by acknowledging and extending students responses in various

ways including noticing other aspects of the author's craft, examining the text further, explaining

the significance of the author's craft, connecting the read aloud to previous literary experiences,

clarifying the meaning of the text, requesting further explanation of students' thinking, or

conceptually identifying students' responses. Furthermore, the teacher explicitly connected the

interactive reading and examining of the mentor texts with students' writing. Finally, throughout

writing workshop, the teacher encouraged students to think about the reader of their writing

which reinforced the students' understanding of the interconnected nature of reading and writing.

Implications for Literacy Teaching and Learning

This study examining the intertextual connections students constructed between interactive

read alouds of mentor texts and their writing during writing workshop was conducted in a school

and classroom that was likely to intensely manifest the social construction of intertextuality and

literary understanding within integrated reading and writing events. This site was selected in

order to "learn from those who are exemplars of good practice" (Patton, 2002, p. 234).

Therefore, this study is inherent with implications for literacy teaching and learning.

Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop

This study has demonstrated how interactive read alouds were collaborative, language

rich environments that facilitated the social construction of intertextuality and literary









understanding. When interactive read alouds were integrated within writing workshop, the

dialogue that occurred among the teacher, students, and children's book author's significantly

influenced students' writing. Therefore, the conversation that occurs between teachers and

students when interactively reading a children's book for any purpose needs to be carefully

considered. For interactive read alouds to be most effective, teachers must purposefully guide

the conversation and maintain "the balance between talk and text" (Barrentine, 1996). It also is

important for teachers to make the purpose of the read aloud explicit to the readers.

In order to facilitate students to read like writers and write like readers during writing

workshop, mentor texts were interactively read aloud with the purpose of noticing how the

authors crafted their writing for their reader. During the interactive read alouds, students were

guided to notice how authors crafted their writing and how the craft choices influenced them as

readers. During subsequent literature-based mini-lessons, the teacher guided the students to

think more deeply about the mentor texts by further noticing and examining the author's craft as

well as explicitly explaining the purpose of the author's craft. An understanding of the purpose

of the author's craft was socially constructed by the teacher, students, and children's book

authors as the mentor texts were interactively read aloud and examined during mini-lessons.

This understanding of the author's craft significantly influenced how the students crafted their

writing during writing workshop. Understanding the purpose of author's craft appeared to be

essential for students to be purposeful readers and writers and ultimately facilitated students to

read like writers and write like readers. In addition, the integration of interactive read alouds into

writing workshop encouraged students to understand the interrelated nature of reading and

writing as a communication process and perceive reading and writing as a combined literacy

process. Therefore, when integrating interactive read alouds within writing workshop, it is









important for teachers to thoughtfully guide the conversation surrounding the mentor texts by

extending students' responses and taking advantage of teachable moments in order to enhance

students' understanding of author's craft and the interconnected nature of reading and writing

(Table 7-1). In addition, teacher's knowledge of author's craft and writing is significant as they

guide their students to read like writers and write like readers.

Guiding Students' Understanding of Author's Craft
During interactive read alouds and mini-lessons, teachers can acknowledge and extend
students' responses by:
Noticing aspects of the author's craft
Examining the text further
Explaining the significance of the author's craft
Connecting the response to previous literary experiences
Clarifying the meaning of the text
Requesting further explanation of students' thinking
Conceptually identifying students' responses
Table 7-1. Guiding Students' Understanding of Author's Craft

Writing workshop was a supportive, collaborative literacy environment which provided

writers with several mentors for their writing. Students explained that their writing was

influenced by the children's literature mentor texts, the teacher, and/or classmates within the

context of writing workshop. Students' writing was not only intertextually influenced by the

mentor text but by the collaborative conversations surrounding the mentor texts. In addition, the

individual conversations students had with their teacher and classmates were reflected in

students' writing. The teacher and students were a community of writers who learned how to

craft their writing from published authors as well as from each other. Therefore, teachers should

help students to perceive themselves as writers and foster the various mentoring relationships

within the literacy classroom.









Literacy Instruction

The integrated literacy curriculum was collaboratively developed by the grade-level

teachers considering their students' strengths and weaknesses, the school standards, state

expectations, and their own personal experiences reading and writing. Together the teachers

crafted a literacy curriculum that systematically developed and reinforced students' literacy

knowledge and abilities. Rather than reading basals, the students read children's literature trade

books during reading workshop. In addition, students participated in at least two interactive read

alouds during each school day. Students were immersed in a rich environment for literacy

learning with many authentic reading, writing, speaking, and listening experiences throughout

the day. Within students writing, students made numerous intertextual connections to the

content, ideas, and craft within the books that they read independently during reading workshop.

Students' writing also reflected the interactive read alouds conducted throughout the day by their

teacher. Therefore, it is important for teachers to develop a literacy rich environment including

numerous authentic reading, writing, speaking, and listening experiences each day. Literacy rich

environments provide students with abundant textual resources that they can incorporate into

their writing.

The teacher in this study was explicit and systematic in her literacy instruction. In

addition, the teacher provided her students with a supportive, organized learning environment by

establishing clear expectations, routines, and procedures. Within this multicultural, urban third-

grade classroom, the teacher guided her students during writing workshop to develop an

understanding of the skills authors use to craft their writing for their readers. The students in

turn read like writers when reading and examining mentor texts and crafted their writing

purposefully to facilitate their reader's understanding. Reading and writing were viewed by the

teacher and students as a meaningful and interconnected process of communication. In many









ways, this literacy environment resembled the classrooms Delpit (1995/2006) describes as

empowering black and minority students by providing them with "useful and usable knowledge

which contributes to a student's ability to communicate effectively in standard, generally

accepted literary forms...best taught through meaningful communication, best learned in

meaningful contexts" (p. 18-19).

During writing workshop, like Calkins (1995) suggests, this teacher established a

predictable environment for writing. The routine for writing workshop was the same each day.

Writing workshop began with an interactive read aloud or mini-lesson, then students had 45-50

minutes of writing time while the teacher conferred, and finally students had 5-10 minutes to

share their writing. At all times, the students had a clear understanding of what they were

expected to do and had the freedom to write about any topic that interested or was meaningful to

them. The teacher regularly shared children's books as mentor texts during writing workshop

and students considered published authors as mentors for their writing.

The teacher's literacy instruction during writing workshop intentionally and explicitly

interconnected reading and writing. The teacher's instruction during the interactive read alouds

(Table 7-2) closely paralleled the practices Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004) found that

exemplary teachers commonly implemented during interactive read alouds. The systematic,

explicit, and intentional nature of the teacher's literacy instruction significantly influenced

students' ability to intertextually connect their reading and writing experiences. Therefore,

teachers should purposefully and explicitly make connections between students' reading and

writing experiences in order to help them read like writers and write like readers.









Integrating Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop
Before Read Alouds:
Select an engaging, age appropriate children's book as a mentor text.
Preview the book and notice the author's craft as a reader.
During Read Aloud:
Prepare the students for the literacy event.
o Request students to be quiet, focused, and sit still.
o Explicitly tell students where to place their materials.
Situate interactive read aloud within context of previous writing lessons.
o Connect the read aloud to what students already know about writing.
o "Writers, we know that... Yesterday, we..."
Set a clear purpose for read aloud.
o Focus on noticing how the author crafted his/ her writing within the mentor text.
o "Today, we are noticing how (author's name) crafted his/her writing in (title of
book)."
Model fluent reading expression and emphasis.
Model the process of noticing the author's craft.
Stop periodically for interactive discussion.
o Interactively respond to the mentor text.
o Encourage students to notice aspects of the author's craft.
o Guide students' responses.
Summarize the author's craft noticed and discussed during read aloud.
Link read aloud to students' writing during writing workshop.
Table 7-2. Integrating Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop

Future Research

The findings of this study have led to several questions for future research. Considering

the grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader how does the social

construction of intertextuality and literary understanding within interactive read alouds at the

beginning of writing workshop influence students' overall literacy learning? How does

developing an understanding of the purpose of author's craft influence students' independent

reading? In addition, what are the essential understandings that teachers should guide students to

understand about crafting effective writing? Furthermore, how does a student's ability to read

like a writer and write like a reader in elementary school promote their long-term literacy

learning in middle school and high school?









Concluding Thoughts

Ms. Daniels was a passionate, professional educator who encouraged the fourteen students

within her classroom to embrace reading and writing. The students enjoyed writing and sharing

their writing with readers as well as reading the works of published author's and each other's

writing. During the course of the study, the quality and quantity of students' writing steadily

increased. Students' sentences became longer and more complex and their literary

understanding became more advanced. The interconnected nature of the literacy curriculum

developed purposeful, critical thinking readers and writers who enjoyed reading like writers and

writing like readers.









APPENDIX A
INFORMED CONSENT AND ASSET FORMS

Parent Informed Consent Letter and Permission Form

Dear Parent/Guardian,

I am a former elementary school teacher and doctoral student in the College of Education

at the University of Florida. I am conducting research on the impact of reading aloud children's

literature on students' writing under the supervision of Dr. Linda L. Lamme at the University of

Florida. The purpose of this study is to examine how interactive read alouds at the beginning of

writing workshop impact students' writing. The results of the study may help teachers better

understand how reading aloud children's literature influences children's writing and allow them

to design instructional practices accordingly.

Ms. Daniels has agreed to allow me to conduct my study in her classroom during the 2008-

2009 school year. Throughout the year, I will observe students during writing workshop

including interactive read alouds, class discussions, and writing time. A few students will be

interviewed about their writing while engaged in the composing process and/or following writing

workshop. Interviews and classroom discussions will be audio recorded and occasionally

videotaped to capture the students' authentic language, dialogue, and interactions. Student work

samples will be collected and photocopied. Your child's privacy will be protected at all times.

You and your child's identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by the law. Real

names will be replaced with fictitious names. The data collected including the student work

samples, interviews, and interactive read aloud discussions may be shared in presentations at

professional conferences or in publications about this research. However, the identities of the

school, parents, and students will remain confidential.









With your permission, I would like to ask your child to volunteer for this research project.

Your child may benefit from being exposed to children's books as writing models and having the

opportunity to discuss books and his/her writing. This project may also benefit future students.

Results of this study will be available in June upon request. Participating in this study is

completely voluntary and will not affect your child's grade or academic placement in any way.

You and your child have the right to withdraw from this research project at any time

without consequence. There are no known risks to the students, and there is no compensation for

participating in this study. If you have any questions about this research project, please contact

me at (617) 276-3667. You may also contact my faculty supervisor, Dr. Linda L. Lamme, at

(352) 392-0751 x251 if you have any questions. Questions or concerns about your child's rights

as a research participant may be directed to the UFIRB office, University of Florida, Box

112250, Gainesville, FL 32611, (352) 392-0433.

I would like to thank those of you, in advance, who agree to let your child participate in

this study. I am very excited to be doing this research and appreciate the opportunity to learn

from your child. If you agree to allow your child to volunteer for this research project, please

sign the permission form attached to this letter and return it to school tomorrow with your child.

This letter is for you to keep as a reference.

Sincerely,

Jennifer A. Manak, M.Ed.











I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily give my consent for my child,

to participate in Jennifer A. Manak's study on the impact of reading aloud

children's literature on students' writing. I have received a copy of this description.



Parent / Guardian Date



2nd Parent / Witness Date









Assent Script for Children

Hello! I am Jenn Manak. I am a doctoral student at the University of Florida studying children's

literature and writing. I am also a teacher. I have taught first, fourth, and fifth grades. I am

interested in learning more about how reading aloud children's books impact your writing. I

would like you to help me learn about this by talking to me and sharing your writing with me.

Throughout the year, I will be collecting, photocopying, and reading your writing. Also, I may

ask you some questions about your writing during writing workshop. I will record our

conversations with each other so I can remember exactly what we said. Sometimes I will also

videotape our conversations and other discussions that you have in class. Being part of my study

will not affect your grade. You can stop at any time. Would you like to be part of my study?









Teacher Informed Consent

Study Title: Intertextual Connections: The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the Writing of

Third Graders during Writing Workshop

Purpose of the research study:

The purpose of this study is to examine how interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing

workshop impact students' writing.

What you will be asked to do in the study:

Throughout the study, I will visit your third grade classroom at least twice a week during writing

workshop. During all components of writing workshop including the interactive read aloud and

writing time, I will take detailed, descriptive field notes while observing the overall classroom

environment. Interactive read alouds, discussions, and interviews will be digitally recorded and

occasionally videotaped to capture the teacher's and students' authentic language, dialogue, and

interactions. Student artifacts such as writing samples and writer's notebooks will be collected

and photocopied for analysis. I will select four focal students from the classroom whom I will

closely observe and study their reading and writing processes in depth. Students will be

interviewed about their writing while engaged in the composing process and/or following writing

workshop. I will interview students about the content of their writing, their reasons for writing,

and inquire about the textual voices present in the writing. I will informally interview you once a

month concentrating on your observations of the students' reading and writing experiences

within the writing workshop. I will meet regularly with you to share my observations and

interpretations. In order to ensure the trustworthiness of my data, I will ask you throughout the

study to participate in independently analyzing portions of the data.









Risks and Benefits:

This study will provide participants with the opportunity to discuss their literacy learning which

may foster academic growth. Student participants may benefit from their exposure to children's

books as writing models. This study will also give you an opportunity to develop a better

understanding of how children socially construct intertextual links among integrated, authentic

reading and writing events. There is no more than minimal risk associated with your

participation in this study.

Time Required:

The research study will be conducted throughout the 2008-2009 school year.

Compensation:

There is no compensation for participating in this research.

Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. Teachers

and students will be given pseudonyms to protect their identity. The data collected including the

student work samples, interviews, and interactive read aloud discussions may be shared in

presentations at professional conferences or in publications about this research; however, the

participants' identities will remain confidential.

Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no

penalty for not participating or for refusing to answer any particular question or questions. You

have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence.

Contacts: If you have any questions about this research project, please contact Jennifer A.

Manak at (617) 276-3667. You may also contact my faculty supervisor, Dr. Linda L. Lamme, at

(352) 392-0751 x251 if you have any questions. Questions or concerns about your rights as a









research participant in this study may be directed to the UFIRB office, University of Florida,

Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611, (352) 392-0433.

Agreement: I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the

procedure and I have received a copy of this description for my information.

Participant: Date:

Principal Investigator: Date:









APPENDIX B
SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT OF AN INTERACTIVE READ ALOUD (EXCERPT)


Name Observation Site
Jenn Manak EWBCS
Date Observation number
Oct. 30, 2008 Obs. 14 Henry The Dog i i/h No Tail (Day 1)
Research Topic Intertextual Connections: The Impact of Interactive Read Alouds on the
Writing of Third Graders during Writing Workshop


1 LD I thought that was really interesting because now I
2 really can see that he must have moped and moped...it just
3 kinda kept going. He didn't just mope for a minute, he
4 kept moping. Yes, Nakota.
5
6 Nakota Remember that author who was writing that
7 poem called Dreams? (From Poetry)
8
9 LD Langston Hughes.
10
11 Nakota Yeah, like how he repeated...
12 /Yomary Yeah, like how he repeated.../
13 /Mishka Yeah, he repeated a word/
14
15 LD He repeated the whole lines, right? Hold fast to your
16 dreams. Right, because we know that that makes a point
17 even stronger.
18 /Belkys Yeah, he repeated dreams.../
19
20 LD Shhh. I'm going to wait until we sound like Brooke
21 Scholars. This gets really good and quite funny I think
22 (referring to the book).
23
24 (LD continues reading aloud)
25 Henry's owners saw how sad he was so they told him
26 he should go find a tail
27 /Students What! /
28 Henry thought this was a fine idea and left home in
29 search of a tail.
30 /Students What! (Students start commenting out loud)/
31
32 LD This is the part where it gets a bit silly.
33 /Yomary How can he get a tail?/
34
35









1 LD Shhh. I know we're all thinking, "WHAT?" but
2 let's keep that in our head. (Silent hand sign used by LD)
3 And naturally, when a dog goes in search of a tail, he
4 goes to the
5 /LD & Students Tailors!/
6 /Osahru Cause it has tail./
7
8 LD Why do you think they used the word tailors,
9 Osahru?
10
11 Osahru Because it has the word tail.
12
13 LD Because it has the word tail in it.
14 /Jermaine Yeah, look if you chunk it out./
15
16 LD Yeah, if you chunk it out like he's saying, you can
17 take off the or and you see
18 /Students Tail./
19
20 LD What do tailors really do?
21
22 Student They make clothes.
23
24 LD Thank you. They make clothes. Now, hold your
25 thoughts please. Please raise our hands ... Shhh. (In a
26 whisper) I know you're really excited.
27
28 (Continues Reading)
29 "I am here for a tail," said Henry. (LD apologizes for
30 missing writing at the top of the page) Oh, I'm sorry.
31
32 "Hello," said Henry. "Hello," said the tailor. "I am
33 here for a tail," said Henry. "As you can see, I do not
34 have one. Perhaps you have an extra." "I don't have
35 tails here, but I could try to make you one," replied the
36 tailor.
37
38 /Students Oh my gosh! What!/
39
40 The tailor worked all day and all night
41 /Students (gasping)/
42 and made a tail for
43 /Students & LD Henry./
44
45
46










APPENDIX C
SAMONE'S FAIRYTALE

The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess
1 Chapter 1 Birth
2 Once upon a time a king and his wife the queen longed for a baby. Then one day the queen
3 gave birth to a royal baby girl. They had a party and invited all of the royal families and fairy
4 godmothers. The fairy godmother named Weather fairy gave the gift of emotion. Beauty fairy
5 gave the gifts to be kind and beautiful. Locks of gold gave the gift to have locks of brown hair
6 like her mother. Everyone crowded around the beautiful baby princess named Elizabeth.
7
8 Chapter 2 Growing Up
9 As Elizabeth grew older she grew more kind, beautiful, and emotional. Her hair was wavy, but
10 was as soft as velvet. She was always curious. She roamed the kingdom to see what were behind
11 the open and closed doors. On her eleventh birthday she got a kitten and named it Sophie. They
12 always went to the Wald Forest. They went in the middle and Elizabeth would sing. She sang
13 soft, but it was beautiful to even hear it.
14
15 Chapter 3 New Wagon
16 On her twelfth birthday she told her parents, "Daddy I want to have a wagon made out of gold.
17 I want it to have a seat for me and Sophie." "Yes my darling" said King Arthur the III. "Oh and
18 something to hold a drink and food" said Elizabeth. "Yes anything for you" he said. That
19 afternoon Elizabeth got her wagon made out of gold. And pulled it to the middle of the forest.
20
21 Chapter 4 Bad News
22 When she got to the middle there was a old woman. The old woman was really a evil witch in
23 disguise trying to rule the kingdom. In order to rule the kingdom she had to get Princess Elizabeth
24 out of the way. "Hello" said the evil witch. "Hello" said Elizabeth. "Would you like water? You
25 look very thirsty mam," said Elizabeth. 'Yes Thank you," said the evil witch kindly. "In return
26 would you like this apple?" said the evil witch. 'Yes," said Elizabeth who was hungry from
27 pulling the wagon. "Here" said the witch who handed the apple over. As soon as Elizabeth took a
28 bite she fell to the ground with a thud. The apple had a poison that would put people to sleep if
29 they ate it and would erase all that person's memory and would sleep for about an hour. "Ha, ha,
30 ha" said the evil witch as she took the disguise off. "Nice try Glenda Glinka" said one of the
31 fairies who was at the party for Elizabeth. "Well, well, well. It looks like the tooth fairies want to
32 save the princess. Too bad she's in a deep sleep. She'll forget everything" said Glenda Glinka.
33 She then vanished in a puff of smoke.
34
35 The fairies carried Elizabeth to a cottage where they would care and protect her. One fairy
36 carried Sophie. The Weather fairy was sent to tell the king and queen they would take care of
37 Elizabeth and protect her until she was old enough to get married, and rule the kingdom. This way
38 Glenda Glinka wouldn't tray to harm Elizabeth.
39
40 Chapter 5 More Bad News
41 Four years later, it was Elizabeth's 16th birthday, the fairies sent her out for fruits while they got
42 ready for a surprise birthday party. When she left there was a young woman sitting on a rock. She
43 was really the evil witch Glenda Glinka trying to be the queen again. She knew that if the princess
44 was gone she could be the queen.
45
46 "Hello" said Elizabeth. Ever since Elizabeth ate the apple she forgot what happened with the










47 disguised evil witch. "Would you like to see a tower?" said Glenda Glinka. "Yes. But I can't be
48 with strangers" Elizabeth said. "Well... I'm not a stranger because we are now friends" said
49 Glenda Glinka. "Okay" responded Elizabeth. "Let's go on this witch broom" said Glenda.
50 "Sure" said Elizabeth.
51
52 Chapter 6 Doomed for Life
53 When they got to the window of the tower Glenda pushed her and said "Ha, ha." "You may
54 not remember me, but I'm an evil witch. Your trapped forever" said Glenda as she took the
55 disguise off. "Oh and those fairies can't save you. There is a field that shocks only fairies." "But
56 today's my sixteenth birthday. Please let me out you twit of a witch" said Elizabeth. "No. Don't
57 you get it I will rule the kingdom not you" said Glenda. "I don't know what you mean I'm not a
58 princess" said Elizabeth. "Let's just say those fairies didn't say you are a princess" said Glenda as
59 she flew away. "I'm doomed" said Elizabeth in great depression.
60
61 Chapter 7 Plans
62 When the fairies got the news they went to the tower very quickly. When they got there
63 Elizabeth told them not to go flying up to see if she was okay or they'd get shocked by a field.
64 They stored tons of clothes, food, and water. "Thanks I know I am a princess" said Elizabeth.
65 "Send my parents now" ordered Elizabeth. When her parents got there, the queen said "Hi
66 sweetie, I'm your mother. You'll be queen soon." "I kind of figured that out" said Elizabeth.
67 "Oh, I just thought of an idea whoever gets you out of there will be your husband and will rule the
68 kingdom with you" said King Arthur the III. "Yes. But the men will get shocked" said the fairies.
69 "No it only shocks fairies" said Elizabeth. "Then it is settled, send royal papers to each
70 gentlemen" said the king. "The contest will begin tomorrow" said the king.
71
72 Chapter 8 Surrounded By Men
73 The next day, thousands of men were there. But all failed. All week, all Elizabeth saw was
74 knights, farm lads, princes trying to go up the tower. But each day, they all failed. For months
75 men tried and tried, but failed with a loud thud. "Oh Papa" said Elizabeth one day, "I don't like
76 this I am very lonely". "We will send up Sophie your cat" said the king. "Try to catch her" said
77 the king. When Elizabeth caught Sophie, she made a little bed out of a basket.
78
79 Chapter 9 Problems
80 One day, everyone had a chance in the village and kingdom. "Oh my" said Elizabeth. "What
81 shall we do now?" said the queen. "Your father is trying to find that evil witch Glenda Glinka and
82 everybody has had a chance" said the queen in fury nobody could save her daughter.
83
84 "What will we do now?" said a fairy. "I don't know?" yelled Elizabeth from the tower
85 window. "Too many problems. And too many fairies" whispered the queen to herself. "Pardon
86 me" said the fairy. "Oh nothing" replied the queen.
87
88 Chapter 10 Life in the Tower
89 "I guess I'll never get down from here" yelled Elizabeth. "Good night mother" said Elizabeth.
90 "Ms. Weather fairy can you make a blanket for me and one for Sophie?" asked Elizabeth. "Oh
91 yes" said Weather fairy and waved her wand. When she finished making the blankets she sent
92 them up. "Thank you" said Elizabeth. She put the small blanket on Sophie and wrapped herself
93 in the other blanket and fell asleep.
94
95 Chapter 11 More Contestants
96 The next day, there was a knight, two princes, and an ogre. They were from different places.
97 The knight named Oscar tried first by trying to climb the wall but he fell. A prince from France










98 named Jaque tried to throw a rope on the roof, but it fell. The ogre tried jumping to get the
99 princess, but there were complaints so he had to leave. The other prince tried to make his knights
100 stand on each other but most refused. "Oh my. What little weird ideas and people" said the queen.
101
102 Chapter 12 I'm Saved
103 One day, while Elizabeth was making something to eat, her mother yelled "Elizabeth,
104 Elizabeth. There is a dragon." Elizabeth went to the window. She saw that it was the dawn of
105 light. There was the sound of flapping wings. There was a dragon. When the dragon came closer
106 she saw a prince. "Mama it is a prince on a dragon" said Elizabeth who was astonished. "Another
107 contestant" said the queen. When the prince came closer he told the princess "Get on the dragon."
108 When she heard this she got Sophie. She went on and landed on the ground. "Thank you for
109 saving my daughter" said the king. "Papa you came back" said Elizabeth. "Yes when I heard that
110 there was another contestant I came here" said the king. "Did you get Glenda Glinka?" asked the
111 queen hugging the king. "Yes. She is in a place where she can't leave" said the king. "Where?"
112 said Elizabeth. "In a tower where magic can't be used said the king. "Now what is your name?"
113 asked the king to the prince. "I am Prince Ellis" said the prince. "Since you saved my daughter
114 and I trust you. You will marry my daughter and rule the kingdom with her." So Ellis got down
115 on his knees and said "Will you marry me?" "Yes" said Elizabeth.
116
117 Chapter 13 A Happy Ending
118 The next day, Prince Ellis and Princess Elizabeth got married and ruled the kingdom. And
119 lived happily ever after!
120 The End!









LIST OF REFERENCES

Anderson, R.C., Hiebert, E.H., Scott, J.A., & Wilkinson, I.A.G. (1985). Becoming a nation of
readers: The report of the commission on reading. Washington, DC: National Institute
of Education.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M.M. Bakhtin. Austin, TX:
University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas
Press.

Barrentine, S. (1996). Engaging with reading through interactive read-alouds. The Reading
Teacher, 50, 1, 36-43.

Beach, R. (1995). Constructing cultural models through response to literature. English Journal,
84 (6), 87-94.

Bearse, C. (1992). The fairy tale connection in children's stories: Cinderella meets Sleeping
Beauty. The Reading Teacher, 45 (9), 688-695.

Beck, I.L. & McKeown, M.G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of read-aloud
experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher, 55 (1), 10-20.

Bloome, D. & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in
classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28 (4), 305-333.

Bogdan, R. (1973). Participant observation. Peabody Journal ofEducation, 50 (4), 302-308.

Cai, M. (2008). Transactional theory and the study of multicultural literature. Language Arts,
85 (3), 212-220.

Cairney, T. (1990). Intertextuality: Infectious echoes from the past. The Reading Teacher, 43,
478-484.

Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Collins, K. (2004). Growing readers: Units of study in the primary classroom. Portland, ME:
Stenhouse Publishers.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

DeFord, D. (1981). Literacy: Reading, writing, and other essentials. Language Arts, 58 (6),
652-658.

Delpit, L. (1995/2006). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York:
The New Press.









Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N.
Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd Edition), (pp. 1-29).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Dresang, E. (1999). Radical change: Books for youth in a digital age. New York: The H.W.
Wilson Company.

Dyson, A. H. (1993). Social worlds of children learning to write in an urban primary school.
New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Dyson, A. H. (1997). Writing superheroes: Contemporary childhood, popular culture, and
classroom literacy. New York: Teachers College Press.

Eckhoff, B. (1983). How reading affects children's writing. Language Arts, 60 (5), 607-616.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Intertextuality in critical discourse analysis. Linguistics andEducation,
4, 269-293.

Fisher, D., Flood, J., Lapp, D., and Frey, N. (2004). Interactive read-alouds: Is there a common
set of implementation practices? The Reading Teacher, 10 8-17.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry,
12 (2), 219-245.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative
research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.

Glasswell, K. & Parr, J. M. (2009). Teachable moments: Linking assessment and teaching in
talk around writing. Language Arts, 86, 5, 352-361.

Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York:
Longman.

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

Graves, D. (1994). Afresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N.K.
Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1982). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic
inquiry. Educational Communication and Technology, 30, 4, 233-252.

Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981.










Hansen, J. (2001). When writers read. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hartman, D. (1992). Intertextuality and reading: The text, the reader, the author, and the context.
Linguistics and Education, 4, 295-311.

Harwayne, S. (2001). Writing through childhood. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Harwayne, S. (1992). Lasting impressions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Harvey, S. & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension to enhance
understanding. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways n i/h words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms.
Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Kamberelis, G. and McGinley, W. (1992). One writer's construction of text and self: The role
of voice. In C.K. Kinzer and D.J. Lev (Eds.), Literacy research, theory, andpractice:
Views from many perspectives (pp.199-214). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.

Keene, E.O. & Zimmerman, S. (1997). Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a
reader's workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kristeva, J. (1980). The bounded text. In T. Gora, A. Jardine, and L.S. Roudiiez (Trans.),
Desire in language. A semiotic approach to literature and art (pp. 36-63). New York:
Columbia University Press.

Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lehr, S. & Thompson, D. (2000). The dynamic nature of response: Children reading and
responding to Maniac Magee and Friendship. The Reading Teacher, 53 (6), 480-493.

Lemke, J.L. (1992). Intertextuality and educational research. Linguistics andEducation, 4,
257-267.

Martinez, M. & Teale, W. (1993). Teacher storybook reading style: A comparison of six
teachers. Research in the Teaching ofEnglish, 27,_175-199.

Morrow, L.M. (2000). Literature-based reading instruction. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal,
P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. III, pp. 563-586).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Murray, D. (1968). A writer teaches writing: A practical method of teaching composition.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin.









Morrow, L.M. (2003). Motivating lifelong voluntary readers. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. Squire, &
J. Jensen (Eds.), Handbook of research on teaching the English language arts (2n ed.,
pp. 857-867). Mahwah, NJ; Erlbaum.

Newkirk, T. (1989). More than stories: The range of children's writing. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.

Oyler, C. & Barry, A. (1996). Intertextual connections in read alouds of information books.
Language Arts, 73, 324-329.

Pantaleo, S. (2006). Readers and writers as intertexts: Exploring the intertextualities in student
writing. Australian Journal ofLanguage and Literacy, 29, 2, 163-181.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.) Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.

Pearson, P.D. & Tiemey, R.J. (1984). On becoming a thoughtful reader: Learning to read like a
writer. In A.C. Purves & O.S. Niles (Eds.), Becoming readers in a complex society (pp.
144-173). Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.

Ray, K.W. (2004). About the authors: Writing workshop i/th our youngest writers.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ray, K.W. (2001). The writing workshop: Working through the hard parts (and they're all hard
parts). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Ray, K.W. (1999). Wondrous words: Writers and writing in the elementary classroom. Urbana,
IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Rosenblatt, L. (1938/1995). Literature as exploration (revised). NY: Modem Language
Association of America.

Rosenblatt, L.M. (1978/1994). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the
literary work. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Rosenblatt, L.M. (1982). The literary transaction: Evocation and response. Theory into
Practice, 21 (4), 268-277.

Rosenblatt, L.M. (1985). The transactional theory of the literary work: Implications for research.
In C.R. Cooper (Ed.), Researching response to literature and the teaching of literature:
Points of departure (pp. 33-53). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.









Ruddin, L.P. (2006). You can generalize stupid! Social scientists, Ben Flyvbjerg, and case
study methodology. Qualitative Inquiry, 12 (4), 797-812.

Sadler, W.A. (1969). Existence and love: A new approach in existential phenomenology. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons.

Shanahan, T. & Tierney, R. J. (1990). Reading-Writing connections: The relations among three
perspectives. Literacy Theory and Research, 39, 13-34.

Sinclair, J.& Coulthard, M. (1992). Towards an analysis of discourse. In Coulthard, M. (Ed.),
Advances in Spoken Discourse Analysis (pp. 1-34). London: Routledge.

Short, K. (1992a). Researching intertextuality within collaborative classroom learning
environments. Linguistics and Education, 4, 313-333.

Short, K. (1992b). Intertextuality: Searching for patterns that connect. In C.K. Kinzer and D.J.
Lev (Eds.), Literacy research, theory, andpractice: Views from many perspectives
(pp.187-197).

Sipe, L. (2000a). The construction of literary understanding by first and second graders in oral
response to picture storybook read-alouds. Reading Research Quarterly, 35 (2), 252-275.

Sipe, L. (2000b). "Those two gingerbread boys could be brothers": How children use
intertextual connections during storybook readalouds. Children's Literature in
Education, 31, 2, 73-90.

Sipe, L. (1999). Children's response to literature: Author, text, reader, context. Theory into
Practice, 38 (3), 120-129.

Sipe, L. (2001). A palimpsest of stories: Young children's construction of intertextual links
among fairytale variants. Reading Research andInstruction, 40, 4, 333-352.

Sipe, L. (1993). Using transformations of traditional stories: Making the reading-writing
connection. The Reading Teacher, 47 (1), 18-26.

Siu-Runyan, Y. (1996). Connecting writing, talk, and literature. In A. McClure &
J. Kristo, Books that invite talk, wonder, and play (pp.119-139). Urbana, IL: National
Council of Teachers of English.

Sloan, G. (2002). Reader response in perspective. Journal of Children's Literature, 28 (1), 22-
29.

Smith, F. (1983a). Reading like a writer. Language Arts, 60 (5), 558-567.









Smith, F. (1983b). The language arts and the learner's mind & Myths of writing. In F. Smith,
Essays into literacy: Selected papers and some afterthoughts (pp.71-88). Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.

Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth/Thomson
Learning.

Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory
procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, S. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (2nd Edition). Thousand Oaks : Sage Publications.

Tiemey, R.J. & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions,
transactions, and outcomes. Handbook ofReading Research, 2, 246-280.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard: Boston, MA.

Yolen, J. (1981). Touch magic: Fantasy, faerie and folklore in the literature of childhood. New
York: Philomel.

CHILDREN'S LITERATURE CITED

Collard, S.B. (1997). Animal dads. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Feiffer, K. (2007). Henry the dg in ith no tail. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Gibbons, G. (1994). Spiders. New York: Scholastic.

Gibbons, G. (2001). Bicycle book. New York: Holiday House.

Rylant, C. (1998). Scarecrow. New York: Harcourt.









BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Jennifer Manak completed her bachelor's degree in elementary education with a minor in

anthropology and her master's degree in reading from the University of Florida. After

completing her master's degree, Jennifer taught primary and intermediate grades at Hidden Oak

Elementary School in Gainesville, Florida for five years. While teaching at Hidden Oak, she

conducted professional development as well as received grants to support writing instruction and

integrate children's literature into the content areas. As a full-time teacher, Jennifer returned to

the University of Florida as a doctoral student in curriculum and instruction within the Language,

Literacy, and Culture Program under the advisement of Dr. Linda Lamme. During her doctoral

studies, Jennifer taught Children's Literature at the University of Florida.

After completing her doctoral coursework, Jennifer moved with her husband to Boston,

Massachusetts and completed her doctoral research. During her time in Boston, Jennifer was a

literacy consultant in a public elementary school and taught literacy courses at Lesley University

as an adjunct faculty in Cambridge, Massachusetts. After obtaining her doctoral degree, Jennifer

accepted a position as Assistant Professor in the Department of Elementary and Early Childhood

Education at Bridgewater State University in Bridgewater, Massachusetts.





PAGE 1

1 INTERTEXTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE IMPACT OF INTERACTIVE READ ALOUDS ON THE WRITING OF THIRD GRADER S DURING WRITING WORKSHOP By JENNIFER AMY MANAK A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2009

PAGE 2

2 2009 Jennifer Amy Manak

PAGE 3

3 To My Boys

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS It is a pleasure to acknowledge the m any pe ople that provided me with guidance, love, and support throughout my journey writing this di ssertation. I have been fortunate to be surrounded by many wonderful peop le who have encouraged me developed my thinking, and brightened my days throughout this study. To begi n with, I am very gratef ul to my dissertation committee members, Dr. Linda Lamme, Dr. Danling Fu, Dr. Zhihui Fang, Dr. Ruth Lowery, Dr. Mary Brownell, and Dr. Martha Horn, who guided, mentored, and shared their expertise with me throughout this journey. I would like to thank Ms. Liz Daniels for giving me the privilege of conducting my research in her classroom. I also wish to th ank the third-grade readers and writers in Ms. Daniels class, Keith, Belkys, Osahru, Samone, Kingston, Jermai ne, Frenia, Yomary, Renesha, Nakota, Denise, Mark, Michael, and Mishka who eagerly shared their wr iting and thinking with me each day. Thank you for welcoming me so warmly into your classroom. I want to thank my family for their unendi ng love, support, and strength throughout this arduous journey. Most of all, I want to thank Michael, my husband, best friend, cheerleader, and guide, who gladly engaged in discussions about my study, helped me navigate the seas of formatting, and provided me with loving encouragement every step of the way as I completed this dissertation. I am thankful that we are on ou r life journey together. I also want to thank my little love bug, Gabriel, who ensured that my da ys were full of joy and laughter. I wish to express my deepest thanks to Linda and Paul w ho have loved me like a daughter and cheered me on throughout this journey. I par ticularly want to thank Linda who was always ready to listen, share stories, and enthusiastically read my writin g. In addition, I wish to thank my grandparents, Mimi and Bebe, who believed in th eir little girl and told me th at anything was possible with a

PAGE 5

5 little hard work. Finally, I want to acknowle dge Aurora who has supported my efforts for the past two years by taking the very best care of Gabriel while Mommy was working.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 4 LIST OF TABLES ...........................................................................................................................9 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................10 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................10 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... .............12 CHAP TER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 14 Introduction .................................................................................................................. ...........14 Purpose and Research Questions ............................................................................................15 Rationale for the Study ...........................................................................................................15 Summary of Methodology ......................................................................................................19 Scope & Limitations ........................................................................................................... ....21 Significance of the Study ........................................................................................................22 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................23 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................................................25 Intertextuality ............................................................................................................... ...........25 Social Nature of Intertextuality .............................................................................................. 26 Intertextuality as a Transactional Process .......................................................................28 Intertextuality in Classroo m Learning Environments .....................................................31 Intertextuality-Informed Writing Research ..................................................................... 34 Interactive Read Alouds .................................................................................................. 38 Integrating the Language Arts ................................................................................................43 Reading and Writing Relationships ................................................................................. 43 Nurturing Young Writers: Reading Aloud in Writing Workshop ................................... 44 Summary ....................................................................................................................... ..........46 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 48 The Constructivist Research Paradigm ...................................................................................49 Description of the Research Site ............................................................................................. 52 The Research Site: Site Selection and Access ................................................................. 52 The School .......................................................................................................................53 The Classroom Teacher ................................................................................................... 55 The Students ....................................................................................................................55 Data Collection Methods ........................................................................................................56

PAGE 7

7 Participant-Observations ................................................................................................. 57 Field Notes and Transcriptions ........................................................................................ 60 Informal and Semi-Structured Interviews ....................................................................... 63 Collection of Student and Teacher Artifacts ................................................................... 68 Data Analysis ..........................................................................................................................69 Issues of Credibility, Trustwor thiness, and Ge neralizability .................................................. 74 Summary ....................................................................................................................... ..........76 4 INTERTEXTUALLY CONNECTING READIN G AND WR ITING: THE CONTEXT, THE TEACHER, & THE LI TERACY ENVIRONMENT ....................................................78 Literacy Education in an Urban Charter School .....................................................................79 The School Context .........................................................................................................79 The Teacher .....................................................................................................................81 The Classroom Context ................................................................................................... 85 Intertextually Connecting Reading and Writing: The Teacher ............................................... 92 Expectations, Routines, & Procedures ............................................................................ 92 Literacy Instruction ......................................................................................................... 95 Pedagogical Choices, Resources, & Teacher Influence ................................................ 102 Intertextually Connecting Reading and W riting: The Literacy Environment ...................... 104 Summary ....................................................................................................................... ........106 5 FINDINGS ...................................................................................................................... ......108 Reading Like a Writer & Writing Like a Reader ................................................................. 108 Henry the Dog with No Tail ..................................................................................................109 Summary of Reading Like a Write r and Writing Like a Reader .......................................... 114 Categories of Reading Like a Wr iter and Writing Like a Reader ........................................ 119 Noticing the Authors Craft ........................................................................................... 120 Examining the Authors Craft ....................................................................................... 124 Guiding Students Understanding of Authors Craft .....................................................132 Explaining the Authors Craft ....................................................................................... 137 Understanding the Purpose of Authors Craft ...............................................................143 Mentoring Students Writing ......................................................................................... 148 Crafting Writing Purposef ully for a Reader .................................................................. 153 Summary ....................................................................................................................... ........157 6 CASE STUDIES OF FOUR THIR D-GRADE READERS & W RITERS ............................... 161 Keith ......................................................................................................................... ............161 Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Sharks ...................................... 162 Sentence Structure Unit: Lost in New York ...................................................................170 Belkys ........................................................................................................................ ...........178 Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Frogs ........................................ 179 Sentence Structure Unit: Sweet 16 ................................................................................187 Osarhu ........................................................................................................................ ...........195

PAGE 8

8 Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Bats .......................................... 196 Sentence Structure Unit: The NY Boo k Thief ................................................................204 Samone .................................................................................................................................213 Nonfiction Research Unit: Reading & Writing About Penguins .................................. 214 Sentence Structure Unit: The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess ....................223 Summary ....................................................................................................................... ........233 7 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... .235 Summary and Significance of the Findings ..........................................................................236 Reading like a Writer and W riting like a Reader .......................................................... 236 Intertextual Connections within Stud ents Writing ....................................................... 238 Intertextuality, the Teacher, and the Collaborative Literacy E nvironment ................... 240 Implications for Literacy Teaching and Learning ................................................................ 243 Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop ...................................................... 243 Literacy Instruction ....................................................................................................... 246 Future Research ....................................................................................................................248 Concluding Thoughts ........................................................................................................... .249 APPENDIX A INFORMED CONSENT AND ASSET FORMS ................................................................. 250 Parent Informed Consent Letter and Permission Form ........................................................ 250 Assent Script for Children ....................................................................................................253 Teacher Informed Consent ................................................................................................... 254 B SAMPLE TRANSCRIPT OF AN INTERAC TI VE READ ALOUD (EXCERPT) ............ 257 C SAMONES FAIRYTALE ...................................................................................................259 LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................................................262 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................268

PAGE 9

9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Demographics of City, School District, and Project School ..............................................544-1 Ms. Daniels Third-Grade Schedule ..................................................................................885-1 Noticing the Authors Craft ............................................................................................. 1205-2 Understanding Nonfic tion Text Features .........................................................................1465-3 Understanding Authors Craft.......................................................................................... 1487-1 Guiding Students Understanding of Authors Craft .......................................................2457-2 Integrating Interactive Read Alouds within Writing Workshop ...................................... 248

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 4-1 Big Ideas for the Writing Works hop: Sentence Structure Unit ......................................... 95 5-1 The Interrelated Nature of the Conceptual Categories involved in Reading Like a W riter ........................................................................................................................ .......119 6-1 Cover of Keiths Nonfiction Book titled Sharks! ............................................................163 6-2 Keiths Nonfiction Book Sharks! .....................................................................................164 6-3 Keiths Illustration Comparing th e Size of a W hale Shark to a Bus ............................... 170 6-4 Cover of Keiths Book Lost in New York ........................................................................171 6-5 Keiths Fiction Story Lost in New York ...........................................................................172 6-6 Cover of Belkys Nonfiction Book titled Frogs ..............................................................180 6-7 Belkys Nonfiction Book Frogs .......................................................................................181 6-8 Belkys Labeled Illustration of Life Cycle of a Frog .......................................................184 6-9 Cover of Belkys Book titled Sweet 1 6 ............................................................................187 6-10 Belkys Fiction Story Sw eet 16 ........................................................................................188 6-11 Cover of Osahrus Nonfiction Book titled Bats ...............................................................197 6-12 Osahrus Nonfiction Book Bats .......................................................................................198 6-13 Osahrus Diagram of a Little Brown Bat ......................................................................... 200 6-14 Osahrus Divided Illustration ...........................................................................................201 6-15 Cover of Osahrus Book titled The N Y Book Thief ..........................................................204 6-16 Osahrus Mystery Book The NY Boo k Thief ....................................................................205 6-17 Cover of Samones Nonfiction Book titled Penguins! ....................................................214 6-18 Samones Nonfiction Book Penguins! .............................................................................216 6-19 Samones Diagram of the Life Cycle of a Penguin .........................................................218 6-20 Samones Labeled Illustra tion of Penguins Underwater .................................................219

PAGE 11

11 6-21 Samones Fairytale The Prince & Dragon Who Saved the Princess ...............................225 6-22 Samones Illustrations for Chapters 1, 2, & 3 .................................................................. 226

PAGE 12

12 Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy INTERTEXTUAL CONNECTIONS: THE IMPACT OF INTERACTIVE READ ALOUDS ON THE WRITING OF THIRD GRADER S DURING WRITING WORKSHOP By Jennifer Amy Manak August 2009 Chair: Linda L. Lamme Major: Curriculum and Instruction Teachers frequently read aloud as a part of writing instruction so that childrens book authors can serve as mentors for students writin g. Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of the significance of reading aloud child rens literature within writ ing workshop, the intertextual connections students construct be tween interactive read alouds and their writing within writing workshop has received little atte ntion. This descriptiv e, naturalistic stud y conducted in a thirdgrade collaborative learning environment examined how interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop influenced students writin g. Specifically, this study examined how the dialogue occurring among the teacher, students, and the childrens book authors during the interactive read alouds infl uenced students writing. Over six months, multiple data sources we re collected including observational field notes, transcriptions, informal and semi-structured interviews, and student and teacher artifacts. The data sources were analyzed according to the process of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding and by the constant comparative method. A grounded theory of reading like a writer and writing like a reader emerged from the data and addr essed the social construction of intertextuality and lite rary understanding within interactiv e read alouds at the beginning of

PAGE 13

13 writing workshop. This grounded theory was compos ed of seven conceptual categories which included: noticing examining guiding explaining understanding mentoring, and crafting The literary understanding socia lly constructed by the teach er, students, and childrens book authors during the in teractive read alouds significantly influenced students writing. Within each sentence of their writing, students made intertextual connections to multiple texts. The content and ideas within students writing were intertextually connected to a wide variety of texts they had previously experienced; however, the students c onsciously crafted their writing based on the socially constructed understandi ng of the purpose of authors craft which intertextually connected their wr iting to the interactive readin g and examining of the mentor texts. The teacher facilitated the social construction of literary understanding and intertextuality during the interactive read al ouds by guiding the discussion a nd explicitly discussing the interconnected nature of reading and writing.

PAGE 14

14 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction When we wr ite, we compose a written text that consciously and unconsciously embodies traces of the many texts we have previously experienced during our lives. Our writing not only reflects literary and written texts experienced in the past but also the texts of our previous conversations, popular culture, and life experiences. This interrelated nature of texts is referred to as intertextuality (Kristeva, 1980). Fairclough (1992) asserts that all written texts and spoken utterances are inherently inte rtextual, constituted by elements of other texts (p. 270). Therefore, a text is never simply the product of a single writer or speaker but is interwoven with traces of many previous texts that have been borrowed, adapted, appropriated, and transformed (Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). In composing a text there are a multiplicity of textual voices available to a writer. A ccording to Hartman (1992), a writer is a multidimensional space through which the ut terances of others speak (p. 300). Intertextuality is a social construction located in the social interacti ons between individuals (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993). Short (1992a) sugge sts that intertextuality is situated in the dialogue between participants, even if one of the participants is not physic ally present (such as when one reads a book) (p. 316). With these views in mind, intertex tuality is socially constructed as students, teachers, and childre ns book authors with differing sociopolitical and cultural histories interact within a particular le arning environment. Furthermore, intertextuality can be considered a transactional process between a reader and a text in a particular sociocultural environment when students make connections to previous textual ex periences to actively construct meaning from the text they are reading (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1978/1994). Moreover, Lemke (1992) claims that the social and cultural practices of a learning environment

PAGE 15

15 determine the intertextual connections recognized and available in that particular social context. Collaborative learning environments that provi de opportunities for so cial interaction and dialogue influence the intertextual connections students are able to co nstruct (Short, 1992a). Purpose and Research Questions In order to gain a broader unde rstanding of how children soci ally construct intertextual links am ong integrated reading and writing events this study naturalistically investigated intertextuality within a thirdgrade collaborative learning e nvironment. This six-month descriptive, qualitative study focused on examini ng how interactive read alouds including reader response and discussion of authors craft at the beginning of writing workshop influenced students subsequent writing. This study employed a broad definition of text including linguistic and nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meaning with others such as an utterance, an oral story, a conversation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a work of art, or a poem (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1992; Sipe, 2001). My broad research question was: How do the texts within interactive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop mentor childrens writing? Three research questions guided this study: 1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read aloud into their own writing? 2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual connections between reading and writing? 3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing? Rationale for the Study During the p ast two decades, intertextually-i nformed writing studies have illustrated that students writing reflects traces of the many written, conversational, and p opular culture texts they have previously experienced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis

PAGE 16

16 & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993). Furthermore, these studies demonstrate the multiplicity of textual resource s available to young writers. While some studies have focused on the influence of a written text on students writing (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993) others have addressed the impact of a wide variety of texts on students writing (Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). Cairney (1990) examined the impact of sixth-grade studen ts prior experiences with written texts on their writing and found that a majority of students are aware of intert extual links between the texts they read and the texts they write. Bearses (1992) study of third-gr aders found that students consciously and unconsciously borrow elements and language from the fairy tales they read and blend them into their own stories. Also focusi ng on the fairy tale genre, Sipe (1993) described the connections sixth-grade stude nts made when reading traditi onal and modern fairy tales and writing transformative fairy tales of their ow n. Pantaleo (2006) examined how reading childrens literature with Radical Change characteristics influe nced one fifth-grade students writing. Pantaleo found that the student made inte rtextual links in her writing to books used in the study as well as to other texts. Studies conducted by Dyson (1993, 1997) and Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) employed a broader definition of text including literary and written texts and the texts of previous conversations, popular culture, and life experiences. Dysons (1993, 1997) research with primary grade children demonstrated how students complex social worlds and popular culture texts significantly shape their writing. Kamberelis and McGinl eys (1992) case-study examined the textual voices dialogi cally interacting within five 4th graders writing. Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) reported th at writers synthesize the text ual voices they experience including the language of their parents, teachers, peers, books, television, and movies as they

PAGE 17

17 develop their own voices as writers. Although we know that students consciously and unconsciously borrow, appropriate, and transform aspects of various texts they have previously experienced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dy son, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993), studies have not examin ed how the texts within a classroom reading event, such as a read aloud, ar e appropriated and transformed into students writing. Studies need to determine how dialogic interactions between particip ants within a read aloud are reflected in students writing. Read alouds, particularly inte ractive read alouds, appear to be intertextually-rich collaborative learning environments (Oyler & Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000a, 2000b, 2001). Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004) suggest that duri ng interactive read al ouds, teachers select interesting and developmentally appropriate books that they ha ve previously previewed and practiced. Teachers set a clear purpose for th e read aloud, model fluent oral reading with expression, and stop periodically to discuss the text asking both effe rent and aesthetic questions. Furthermore, teachers make connections between the read aloud and students independent reading and writing (Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey, 2004). Duri ng interactive read alouds, students are encouraged to intera ct with the book, their peers, and their teacher throughout the book reading (Barrentine, 1996); thus, facilitating the social construction of intertextual connections between and among texts as well as th e social construction of literary understanding. Intertextually-informed studies on read alouds ha ve identified characteristic types of oral responses (Sipe, 2000a, 2008), the importance and various uses of intertextual connections during read alouds (Sipe, 2000b), and how intertextual connec tions facilitate literary understanding and schema-building for traditional stories (Sipe, 2001). As students dialogically interact with one another, their teacher, and th e text during interactive read alouds, students are

PAGE 18

18 immersed in a language-rich environment filled with texts that they can borrow, appropriate, and transform into their subsequent writing. Although research has shed light on the significance of oral responses and intertextual connections during interactive r ead alouds in the development of students literary understanding and meaning making, none of these studies have addressed how these responses during read alouds might impact students writing. Furtherm ore, future research needs to address how interactive read alouds empha sizing particular types of responses, such as personal or analytical responses may influence students writing. Read alouds are frequently becoming integr ated into the literacy curriculum for instructional purposes. Writing schol ars suggest that integrating ch ildrens literature read alouds into writing instruction, particularly writing workshop, provides students with opportunities to experience exemplary writing models, study the cr aft of professional au thors, and read like writers (Calkins, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999, 2004; Smith, 1983b). In addition, writing scholars suggest that as childre n listen to and discuss litera ture during read alouds, they internalize the features of quality writing and begin to use these features in their own writing (Harwayne, 2001; Ray, 1999, 2004). Book discussions help students focus on aspects of the authors craft including the authors techniques, style, and language as well as the content and themes within the literature (Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999, 2004; Siu-Runyan, 1996; Smith, 1983). Despite extensive anecdotal reporting of th e significance of read ing aloud childrens literature within writing works hop, surprisingly no empirical studies have been conducted on the intertextual connections students construct between read alouds and their writing within writing workshop. Empirical studies need to determine how dialogic interactions between participants within a read aloud event impact students subse quent written texts, particularly when read

PAGE 19

19 alouds are integrated within writing instruction. Specifically, research needs to investigate how dialogic interactions within interactive read alouds are reflected in students writing during writing workshop. Furthermore, research is need ed in classrooms where students flourish as readers and writers in order to better understand the characterist ics of literacy environments which facilitate students to make intertex tual connections between reading and writing. Summary of Methodology This qualitative, naturalistic study, situated in the constructivist research paradigm examined the intertextual influence of intera ctive read alouds at th e beginning of writing workshop on students writing. The study was c onducted in a third-grade classroom in a predominantly low-income, multicultural school th at is committed to academic excellence and collaborative learning. The teacher implemented a balanced approach to literacy and integrated language arts instruction. Although the teacher read aloud to her students several times each day, this study focused on the interactive read al ouds of mentor texts a nd literature-based minilessons at the beginning of writing workshop. My stance as a researcher ranged on the c ontinuum of participant observation from a participant as observer to an observer as participant (Glesne, 1999; Spradley, 1980). During the course of this six-month study, I observed two writing workshop units: a Nonfiction Research Unit and a Sentence Structure Unit. The Nonficti on Research Unit included the reading of two mentor texts, Spiders (Gibbons, 1994) and Bicycle Book (Gibbons, 2001). The Sentence Structure Unit included the read ing of three mentor texts, Henry the Dog with No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and Animal Dads (Collard, 1997). Multiple data collection methods used in this study include participan t observations, field no tes and transcriptions, informal and semi-structured interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts in order to better understand how childrens writing reflected the texts within interactive read

PAGE 20

20 alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. Inte ractive read alouds, l iterature-based minilessons, and semi-structured inte rviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Participant observations were recorded in field notes a nd used to annotate observation transcriptions. Student artifacts, included students completed writings, planning sheets, and published writings from each unit, and teacher arti facts, included writing workshop lesson plans, unit overviews, and the third-grade curriculum plan, were collected. Informal and semistructured interviews were conducted with all 14 students focusing on the purpose of their writing, the content of their wri ting, and how they decided to craft various aspects of their writing. In addition, the teacher was informally interviewed throughout the study. Detailed case studies of four students writing (2 males and 2 females) gained an in-depth understanding of the intertextual connections students constructed within their writi ng to the interactive read aloud events. The multiple data sources were analyzed recursively and iteratively according to Strauss and Corbins (1990) open coding, axial coding, a nd selective coding and Glaser and Strausss (1967) constant comparative method as a means to better understand how students writing was mentored by the various texts within the intera ctive read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop. Additionally, analysis of multiple data sources provided insights into the characteristics of a literacy environment and the teachers instruct ion that encouraged intertextual connections between reading and writing. A grounde d theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) of reading like a writer and writing like a reader specifically the so cial construction of intertextuality and litera ry understanding within integrated reading and writing events, emerged from the conceptual relationships I constructed from my data. A detailed description of the research methodology is discussed in Chapter 3.

PAGE 21

21 Scope & Limitations The social construction of in tertextuality and literary unde rstanding within integrated reading and writing even ts, such as interactive read alouds at the begi nning of writing workshop, are best studied in a collaborative learning environment with an integr ated literacy curriculum where authentic reading and writi ng are an integral part of liter acy instruction. The purpose of this study was to examine how interactive read alouds influenced students writing within an established literacy curriculum. The selection of this school and classr oom was an instance of intensity sampling (Patton, 1990, 2002) because the site was likely to intensely manifest the phenomenon that I was studying, the social cons truction of intertextuality and literary understanding within integrated reading and writing events. Patton (2002) suggests that purposive intensity sampling can help researcher s learn from those who are exemplars of good practice (p. 234). The school was selected for its academic focus on literacy, particularly the philosophy that reading and writing were a combin ed literacy process. The classroom teacher was selected because of her commitment to effectiv e literacy instruction, her strong belief in the integration of reading and wr iting, and her pedagogical knowledge. The students in this study were from low-income families as indicated by 93% of the students qualified for the schools free or reduced-price lunch program. The 14 studen ts in this classroom, from culturally diverse, urban backgrounds, included 1 Asian, 3 Hispanic, and 10 African-American students. The multiple data sources collected in this study dem onstrate rich examples of how interactive read alouds conducted at the beginning of writing wo rkshop can influence young writers. Together, these factors enabled the researcher to examin e how students from diverse backgrounds socially constructed intertextual ity and literary understanding within a literacy curri culum focused on fostering purposeful, critical thinking readers and writers.

PAGE 22

22 This study is limited, similar to all descriptive case studies, since it examines how 14 students and one teacher within a particular classroom socially construct intertextuality and literary understanding between r eading and writing events. Th is qualitative study seeks to provide readers with sufficient detailed, concrete descriptions or thick descriptions (Geertz, 1973) of the students, teacher, and the classroom setting in order for readers to understand the phenomenon studied and draw [their] own inte rpretations about meanings and significance (Patton, 2002). Therefore, it is the readers responsibility to determine how this study can be generalized to other students, teachers, and classroom contexts (Ruddin, 2006). Researcher subjectivity is another limitation of qualitative, descriptive studies sin ce it plays an important role in the methodology. Chapter 3 addresses the m easures taken to satisfy issues of credibility, trustworthiness, and the generalizabi lity of the findings in this study. Significance of the Study This study is significan t because it broadens cu rrent understandings about the social nature of intertextuality and literary understanding by describing the char acteristics of a collaborative third-grade literacy environment that integrates reading and writing, partic ularly interactive read alouds into writing workshop. This study simultane ously intertwines and extends intertextuallyinformed writing and read aloud research by de scribing how third-grade students socially construct intertextual connections between interactive r ead alouds and their writing during writing workshop. This study not only extends intertextuality research but also provides empirical evidence to su pport the integration of childrens lit erature read alouds into writing workshop. Additionally, this study extends curr ent understandings of how integrating the language arts (i.e. reading, writing, speaking, and listening) impacts students writing. Finally, the educational significance of this study is demons trated in its implications for literacy teaching and learning discussed in Chapter 8.

PAGE 23

23 Definition of Terms In order to facilitate the r eaders understanding, the following term s used throughout the study are defined below: Authors Craft : The particular way an au thor writes including their sp ecial skill and techniques (Ray, 1999) Conversational Turn : Individual turns taken by one partic ipant or another in a conversation (Glasswell & Parr, 2009). Interactive Read Aloud : Reading aloud a book for instructional purposes by engaging students in natural interactions with the story, their teache r, and their peers. In struction and conversation are interwoven during th e reading of the book (B arrentine, 1996). Intertextuality : The interrelated nature of current and past texts (Kristeva, 1980). Mentor Text: An authors published writing that is read aloud several times and carefully examined in order to learn how the author craf ted the language and struct ure of the text (Ray, 1999). Mini-Lesson : A short, whole group teacher-directed lesson conducted on the reading carpet at the beginning of writing workshop. Lessons were instructive and part of broader writing workshop units of study (Calkins, 1994; Ray, 2001). Social Construction : A phenomenon constructed by particip ants in a particular sociocultural environment. Within this st udy, intertextuality and literary understanding were constructed during the read alouds and literatur e-based mini-lessons as the part icipants, including the teacher, students, and childrens book au thor, interacted through the use of dialogue. Teachable Moment : An unplanned moment during instruct ion when a teacher takes advantage of an authentic opportunity to teach students a particular concept, sk ill, or strategy. Teaching Point : A concept that is being taught and reinforced over multiple lessons as part of the overall goals of a particular unit. Text-to-Text Connection : When readers are reminded of text s they have previously read and connecting ideas and themes across texts (Keene & Zimmerman, 1997; Harvey & Goudvis, 2000). Turn & Talk: During read alouds, the teacher asked th e students to turn and talk to their partners about a particular aspect of the story. During turn and talks the teacher listened to several conversations between partners and th en led a whole group disc ussion briefly sharing what was discussed during the turn and talks between partners (Collins, 2004). During the interactive read alouds and mini -lessons within this study, turn & talks were employed as a collaborative learning strategy in order for students to share their thinking with their peers. The

PAGE 24

24 conversations between partners during turn and talks focused on discussing what they noticed about how the author crafted his/her writing within the mentor text.

PAGE 25

25 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter reviews a v ariety of theoretical perspectives and empirical findings that are relevant to this study. This review of research can be envisioned as a series of c oncentric circles moving from the broad concept of intertextuality to a more focused study of theory and research relevant to the phenomenon of intertextual connections students construct between interactive read alouds and their writing during writing workshop. It begi ns by describing and discussing the understandings of intert extuality, then more specifically the social nature of intertextuality, which forms the theoretical basis for this study. Based on a sociolinguist ic view of language (Bakhtin, 1981, 1986), this review of theory and research addresse s how intertextual connections are socially constructed within dialogic, coll aborative literacy environments. The review considers intertextuality a transactional process and therefore reviews reader response theory (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1978/1994). The review continues with an overview of intertextuality research in the areas of writi ng and oral discourse and discu sses the relationships between reading and writing and the signi ficance of integrated reading and writing instruction on intertextual connections. In th e last section, the study is situat ed within the cu rrent literacy research employing the construct of intertextuality and demonstr ating the importance of building upon current conceptions of intertextual connections that students construct between integrated reading and writing events. Fi nally, this study not only contri butes to research regarding intertextuality but also enables further consid eration of how students writing reflects their overall literacy environment. Intertextuality When writin g about the work of Bakhtin in th e late 1960s, Kristeva (1980) coined the term intertextuality to refer to the interrelated nature of current and past texts. According to

PAGE 26

26 Kristeva (1980), a text is a permut ation of texts, an in tertextuality: in the space of a given text, several utterances, taken from other texts, intersec t and neutralize one anothe r (p. 36). Kristeva (1980) suggested texts may include literary and visual texts, which include works of art, as well as texts of an individuals life experiences. Ther efore, all written texts and spoken utterances are inherently intertextual, constituted by elemen ts of other texts (Fairclough, 1992, p. 270) and interwoven with traces of many previous texts that have been borrowed, adapted, appropriated, and transformed (Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). Within scholarship on intertextuality, text s have been broadly defined. Although we typically consider a text to be printed language that can be rea d, we need not limit our notion of texts to simply literary or written texts. A text can be comprised of both linguistic and nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meaning with others such as an utterance, an oral story, a conversation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a dance, a work of art, or a poem (Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1986, 1992; Sipe, 2001). With this more inclusive conception of text, the concept of intertextuality extends to the interrelated nature of the many linguistic a nd nonlinguistic texts an individu al has previously experienced during their lives. With this broad definition, Sh ort (1992a) proposed that intertextuality can be viewed as a metaphor for learninga central process of making meaning through connections across present and past texts constructed from a wide variety of life experiences (Short, 1992a, p. 315). Social Nature of Intertextuality Inter textuality is a social construction locat ed in the interactions between individuals within a particular social context (Bloome & Egan-Roberts on, 1993; Lemke, 1992). Based on Bakhtins sociolinguistic view of language and Vygotskys sociocultu ral theory, intertextuality is socially constructed as individua ls act and react to each other through the use of language or

PAGE 27

27 dialogue within a particular sociocultural environment (Bakhtin, 1981, 1986; Bloome & EganRobertson, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978;). Bakhtin (1986) asserts that each individuals language is uniquely shaped and developed in continuous and constant intera ction with others individual utterances (p.89). According to Bakhtin (1981), over half the words an individual uses in everyday speech are actually someone elses word s from a previous interaction. For Bakhtin (1981), all language is considered to be social since any uttera nce an individual makes is in response to previous utterances and anticipates the utterances of others. Therefore, all spoken and written texts are shaped by texts they are responding to and texts th at they anticipate. Furthermore, Bakhtin considers language to be socio-ideological embodyi ng individuals social, cultural, and political ideologies. Texts are comprised of multiple utterances which each embody multiple voices and ideologies that are transf ormed when used by another speaker or writer (Bakhtin, 1981; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). Ther efore, all texts are inherently intertextual. Bakhtin explained: Our speechis filled with others words, varying degrees of otherness and varying degrees of our-own-ness, varying degrees of awaren ess and detachment. These words of others carry with them their own e xpression, their own evaluative tone, which we assimilate, rework, and reaccentuate (Bakhtin, 1986, p. 89). Bakhtin (1981) proposed that we borrow and transform the voices of others in order to create our own voice. Researchers and theorists in intertextuality also contend that no oral or written text is the result of a single speaker or writer; rather, it is the result of multiple voices interacting that an individual has borrowed and adapted to construct one s own text (Fairclough, 1992; Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992) From this perspective, texts are polyphonic consisting of many voices that dialogically interact within texts (Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). Hartman (1992) suggests that a text can be viewed as a patchwork intertext resembli ng a collage of others voices (p. 297). Since all texts are

PAGE 28

28 composed of traces of multiple texts or textual resources, texts can be fragmented into constituent elements to determine how individuals construct their own te xts by appropriating and transforming the voices of others (Har tman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992). The social nature of intertextuality emphasi zes the significant role of students social interactions and environments on their oral and written language development. Considering the significance of social interactions in an i ndividuals learning and development, learning environments should be rich with integrated lite racy events in order to take advantage of the inherent intertextual connections within thes e events. Research and theory surrounding the social nature of intertextuality suggest that more studies are needed to determine how particular classroom environments facilitate intertex tual connections betw een and among texts. Furthermore, studies are needed to address how in tertextually rich learni ng environments impact students written texts. In the following section, intertextuality is discu ssed as a transactional process between a reader and a text. Intertextuality as a Transactional Process From the 1930s through the early 1970s, th e New Criticism movement influenced the study of literature by advocating obje ctive critical analysis or cl ose reading of texts. New Critics rejected readers personal, subjective interpretations of te xts and considered the author's intention as well as the historical and social c ontext of the text to be irrelevant. New Critics proposed that literature was autonomous and had an exact meaning that could be determined by closely analyzing the text (Rose nblatt, 1938/1995; Sloan, 2002). In part as a response to the New Criticism Movement, theorists moved toward ex amining the reading of texts by considering both the reader and the text. R eader response theory emphasizes the significance of the readers role in interpreting texts and creating meaning.

PAGE 29

29 In 1938, Louise Rosenblatt first postulated a transactional theory ar guing that the reading of literature involves a transact ion between the reader, the au thor, and the text. Based on Rosenblatts transactional theory (1938/1995; 1978/1994; 1982), in tertextuality, the process of making connections between past and current texts within a particular soci ocultural environment, can be considered a transactional process between a reader and a text in a particular social context. Rather than usi ng the term interaction, Rose nblatt (1938/1995) used the term transaction to emphasize the in fluence of both the reader an d the text in the making of meaning. Therefore, reading is a transacti on during which the reader and the text are continuously affecting one another. During a reading transaction, a reader and text come together at a particular time under specific circumstances. Since readers bring different literary, cultural, and social experiences to their literary transact ions, Rosenblatt (1938/1995) proposed that reading experiences and literary works are unique for each reader. At the heart of reader response literature is Rosenblatts transactional theory and literary evocation, the process in whic h the reader selects out ideas, sensations, feelings, and images drawn from his past linguistic, literary, and life experience, and synthesizes them into a new experience (Ros enblatt, 1985, p.40). Readers employ previous textual experiences to actively construct meaning from the text they are reading. A readers understanding of past texts will be changed becaus e of new connections with the current text and the current text will be changed by intertextual connections with previous texts. Rosenblatt (1938/1995) suggests that a poem or new ev ent arises out of these transactions. According to Rosenblatts transactional th eory (1938/1995, 1982), a readers stance or purpose for reading significantly influences a re ading transaction. Read ers approach a reading event from one or a combination of both aesth etic and efferent stances depending on their

PAGE 30

30 purpose for reading. Similarly, the same text can be read from either an aesthetic or efferent stance yet is often a blend of both. Although aesthetic and effere nt reading are not opposites, they lie on either end of a continuum with most reading occurring somewhere between the two stances. Rosenblatt points out that readers typically adopt either a predominantly efferent or predominantly aesthetic stance, meaning that they are usually toward one e nd or the other of the continuum. Efferent reading occurs when readers read a text in order to gain knowledge. When reading from a predominantly efferent stance, a reader primarily focuses on analyzing and extracting information from the text. On the ot her hand, aesthetic reading occurs when readers approach a literary work for pl easure rather than to find information. When reading from a predominantly aesthetic stan ce, readers actively employ th eir experiential background knowledge to virtually experience and live through the text (Ros enblatt, 1938/1995). Rosenblatt advocates the teaching of both efferent and aesth etic reading because she believes that it is necessary for readers to make distinctions between the two st ances including how and why they are reading a particular text. Making the purpose for reading exp licit enables readers to approach a text from the appropriate stance and attend primarily to either informational or experiential aspects (Rosenblatt, 1982). Readers responses to literatu re are significantly affected by the sociocultural context in which a reading event occurs (Ros enblatt, 1938/1995). Learning environments that help children develop as responsive readers pr ovide them with numerous expe riences to read and respond to quality literature, encourage a wide variety of responses, and promote interactive discussions surrounding literature (Barrentine, 1996; Sipe, 1999). Classroo ms that foster aesthetic evocations and responses develop childrens enjo yment and appreciation of literature. Aesthetic transactions with texts and lit erary discussions surrounding litera ture help readers to recognize

PAGE 31

31 that writing has meaning. According to Cai (200 8) readers must aesthet ically respond to a book before they are fully prepared to begin exam ining its content in greater depth. Students aesthetic responses and personal connections la y the foundation for furt her examination of a book. In order to clearly understand readers respon ses to a particular te xt, we must know how various factors influence read ers construction of meani ng. Readers backgrounds and experiences, what is being read, who wrote the text, the purpose for reading, and the sociocultural factors surr ounding the reading event must be taken into consideration. With these factors in mind, questions arise about how student s aesthetic and effere nt responses to read alouds influence their intertextual construction of meaning and, in turn, impact subsequent texts students compose. The following section addresses the intertextu al significance of the social interactions students experience within their classroom learning environments. Intertextuality in Classroom Learning Environments As e mphasized within the previous disc ussions, the sociocultural environments surrounding individuals have a sign ificant impact on their oral and written language (Bakhtin, 1981; Vygotsky, 1978). Language is unable to be separated from th e social context where it takes place (Bakhtin, 1981; Bloome & Egan-R obertson, 1993; Vygotsky, 1978). Individuals language is considerably shaped by social interac tions within the primary socialization settings of their family, community, and school (Vygotsky, 1978). Lemke (1992) emphasizes the significance of in tertextuality in the way language is used within social communities. Lemke (1992) asserts that the social and cultu ral practices within a community determine the meanings and intertex tual connections individuals can make and which connections will be recognized and acknow ledged. In addition, the discourse practices within a community establish ways that texts ar e related to one another and establish kinds of

PAGE 32

32 recognized relationships between texts or discourses (Lemke, 1992). Bloome and EganRobertsons (1993) microanalysis of the social construction of intertex tuality during a fifteen minute 1st grade reading lesson suggested that pro posed intertextual connections must be recognized, acknowledged, and have social significance in orde r for intertextuality to be established within reading and writing events. With a focus on classroom learning communities, students language is daily transformed through their social, cultural, a nd conversational experi ences occurring within the classroom. Depending on the social and cultural practices within the classroom environment, some classroom contexts encourage more intertextual connections than others (Lemke, 1992; Short, 1992a, 1992b). Short (1992a) examined the ways in which literature circles, one particular collaborative classroom learning environment, f acilitated intertextual connections across texts and learners. She found that the classroom l earning environment significantly impacted the intertextual connections students were able to socially construc t. Short (1992a) further argued that hierarchical learning environments, unlike more collaborative learning environments, limit the intertextual connections available to students because of the social relationships between and among students and teachers. Within these trad itional classroom enviro nments, the teachers voice typically dominates discussions with students seeking the right answers to their teachers questions. Collaborative learning environments s upport more democratic social relationships by encouraging students to work t ogether interactively and to va lue each others diverse voices, connections, and perspectives (Short, 1992a). Collaborative classroom learning environments provide opportunities for social interaction and dialogue which support intertextuality and, in turn, the development of student s oral and written language.

PAGE 33

33 Within collaborative learning environments students socially construct their own intertextual voices as they dialogi cally interact with diverse voices in the classroom environment. Intertextuality is not only situated in the di alogue between and among students and teachers but is also situated in the dialogue with the divers e social speech, language, voices, and ideas within an authors written text (Short, 1992a ; Vygotsky, 1978). Therefore, intertextuality is socially constructed as students, teachers, and childre ns book authors with differing sociopolitical and cultural histories interact within a classroom learning environment. Since individuals utterances always contain traces of others utterances that they have previously experienced, traces of the oral and written texts students experience in the classroom will remain with them throughout the rest of their lives. As students dialogically interact and experi ence the language of others, they accumulate words, phrases, expressions, styles, and structures and integrate them to form what Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) consider their individuality as language users (p. 201). Students internalization and transformation of the diverse voices they enc ounter within their environment act as a zone of proximal development (V ygotsky, 1978). According to Vygotsky, learning awakens a variety of internal developmental pro cesses that are able to operate only when the child is interacting with people in his [or her] environment and in cooperation with his [or her] peers. Once these processes are internalized, they become part of the childs independent developmental achievement (Vygotsky 1978, p. 90). That is to say, as students engage in collaborative social interactions with particip ants in their classroom environment including teachers, peers, and childrens book authors, th ey internalize the language of these dialogues, make it part of their internal sp eech, and then use this internali zed speech independently in oral and written texts (Vygotsky, 1978). Although we know that collaborative environments support

PAGE 34

34 the social construction of intert extual connections between and among texts, we need to better understand the characteristics of learning environments that speci fically encourage intertextual connections between literacy even ts. Specifically, we need to fu rther explore how teachers can facilitate students to intenti onally draw upon their previous text ual experiences as they write. Intertextuality-Informed Writing Research During the p ast twenty years, literacy schol ars have widely employed the construct of intertextuality in writing research. Several studies focus on the influence of written texts on students writing (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe 1993) while others address the impact of a broader definition of texts on students composing (Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). T ogether, these writing studies demonstrate the multiplicity of textual resources available to young writers. Furthermore, these studies suggest that students writing embodies traces of the many texts they have previo usly experienced during their lives. Cairney (1990) examined how 6th grade students prior expe riences with narrative texts impacted their story writing. Through analysis of semi-structured student interviews, Cairney (1990) found that a majority (90%) of students are aware of intertextual links between the texts they read and the texts they write. Students re sponses demonstrated various ways they borrow, adapt, appropriate, and transform the written texts they previously experienced including: reproducing a genre they were r eading, using a strong ch aracter and characterization as a model for their own characters, borrowing ideas and/ or the plot from books they were reading, transferring expository c ontent into narrative stories, and cr eating a narrative by combining the elements of several narratives. In a similar stud y focusing on fairy tales, Bearse (1992) explored how the fairy tales read by 3rd graders influenced the fairy tale s that they wrote. After the students wrote their fairy tales, Bearse administered a questionna ire inquiring about intertextual

PAGE 35

35 connections that the students consciously made between their reading and writing. Like early studies of reading-writing c onnections (DeFord, 1981; Eckhoff, 1983), Bearse found that the students writing reflected the langu age of the genre they were read ing. Bearse also reported that students consciously and unconsci ously borrowed elements and la nguage from the fairy tales they had read and blended them into their own st ories. The studies of Cairney (1990) and Bearse (1992) lead to questions about how other texts including conversa tions and personal experiences influence students writing. Also focusing on th e fairy tale genre, Sipe (1993) described the reading-writing connections 6th grade students made when readi ng traditional and modern fairy tales and writing transformative fairy tales of their own. Although this study also focused on the impact of written texts on students writing, Sipe noted the bene fits of social interactions between and within groups of students as they engaged in writing their transformative stories. Grounded in theories of intertextuality, so cial constructivism, and Radical Change, Pantaleo (2006) examined how one fifth-grad e students writing was influenced by reading childrens literature with Radical Change characteristics. According to Dresang (1999), the interactive, connective nature of recently published childrens lit erature reflects changing forms, changing perspectives, and changing formats. As part of a larger study exploring how students read and understand literature with Radical Cha nge characteristics, Pantaleo collected multiple data sources including field notes observational transcriptions, student artifacts, and student interviews. In order to examine the intertex tualities within one st udents writing, Pantaleo (2006) focuses on the analysis of a students writing and interview transcriptions. Pantaleo found that the students writing was significantly in fluenced by several of the picture books with Radical Change characteristics as well as demonstrated intertextual links to various other texts. Pantaleo concludes that individual s make intertextual connections to their previous literary and

PAGE 36

36 life experiences while reading, wr iting, listening, and viewing. In addition, Pantaleo (2006) emphasizes that individuals knowledge and understanding of the complex intertextual relationships between texts affects their trans actions with, and enjoym ent, interpretation, and appreciation of texts (p. 177). Although Pantal eo suggests that is necessary for teachers to model making intertextual conne ctions between and within texts and discuss how these connections can enrich students literacy experiences, further res earch is needed in exemplary teachers classrooms in order to provide specific examples of how a teacher can facilitate these intertextual connections whic h enrich literacy learning. Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) examin ed the interplay of voices within 4th graders writing by conducting a case study of five students as they wrote about themselves, their families, their communities, and their cultural hi stories. Kamberelis and McGinley collected multiple sources of data including particip ant observations, field notes, semi-structured interviews, and student writing in order to develop an understanding of the source, type and function of the voices present in eac h students writing. Kambere lis and McGinley segmented each students writing into utterances by who is speaking (p. 206). Then, they used their observational and interview data to trace the source of the voice (e.g. teacher, peers, parents), the type of voice appropriation, and the function of each utterance embodi ed in the text. Although there are many ways individuals appropriate a nd transform others voices, Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) employed five forms of voice appropriation and transformation emphasized by Bakhtin (1981) including: direct quotation, im itation, stylization, par ody, and hidden polemic. Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) found that the writings of all fi ve case study students revealed multiple voices resonating within their texts. Kamberelis and McGinley (1992) reported that writers synthesize the textual vo ices they experience including the language of their parents,

PAGE 37

37 teachers, peers, books, television, and movies. Ka mberelis and McGinley suggest voice as an intertextual, social, and politic al process since students appr opriation and transformation of various voices help them form their own personal, social, and political identities. They argue that a writers voice is constructed out of the voices of the individuals and communities to which the writer has formed various social a nd political alignments (p. 213). Since we know writers appropriate and transform the voices of their social environments, we must better understand how the diverse voices interacting with in a classroom influe nce students writing. More specifically, we must consider how the texts, broa dly defined, within learning environments are reflected in and mentor students writing. Also addressing the interplay of multiple voi ces, Dysons (1993, 1997) studies of primary grade children, guided by Bakhtins sociolinguistic theories, demonstrate how students complex social worlds and popular culture texts significantly shape their or al and written texts. Dyson found that texts students composed in their offi cial school world were imbued with themes, discourse structures, and styles from the uno fficial worlds of their peers, families, and communities. Dyson suggests attention must be given to texts of students sociocultural worlds as well as to the official texts provided in school. Short (1992a) reported that when interviewing 1st graders about the stories they had written, students made intertextual connections to a variety of books, each others stories, personal expe riences, movies, television, objects in the environment, visual texts, texts in their heads, and stories they yet had to tell (p. 320). Although Short (1992a) only briefly mentions the intertextu al connections students made in their writing, this study recognized the wide variety of textual resources that can influe nce students writing. Together, these intertextually -informed writing studies suggest that students writing reflects various features of th e written, conversational, and po pular culture texts they have

PAGE 38

38 previously experienced. We know that students make intertex tual connections between the texts they read and the texts they write (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993). We also know that students consciously and unc onsciously borrow, appropriate, and transform aspects of previously experienced text s (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pa ntaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a; Sipe, 1993). In addition, studies suggest that students are capable of articulating intertextual connections between their writing and previously experienced texts through interv iews (Cairney, 1990; Ka mberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a). Research employing multiple data collection methods is needed to determine how dialog ic interactions surrounding written texts influence the textual resources reflected in students wr iting. Studies of this nature will add to the literature on how integrating the language arts (i .e. reading, writing, speaking, a nd listening) impacts students writing. With these studies in mind, interactiv e read alouds are proposed as a collaborative learning environment facilitati ng intertextual connections be tween and among various texts. Interactive Read Alouds Educational research and current teaching pr actices support the im por tance of interactive read alouds in the elementary literacy cu rriculum (Morrow, 2000; Ray, 2004, 1999; Sipe, 2000, 2008). Anderson, Hiebert, Scott, and Wilkinson ( 1985) state that the single most important activity for building knowledge re quired for eventual success in reading is reading aloud to children (p. 23). Reading aloud introduces childr en to the enjoyment of reading as well as motivates students to read voluntarily (Morrow, 2003). Additional benefits of reading aloud include familiarizing students with the written language of various genres (Calkins, 1994; Ray, 1999; Smith, 1993b), enhancing childrens langu age and comprehension abilities (Beck & McKeown, 2001), and developi ng students literary unde rstanding (Sipe, 2000, 2008). According to Morrow (2000), [r]eading stories as an act in itself does not necessarily promote

PAGE 39

39 literacy; however, the re search suggests that certain met hods, environmental influences, and interactive behaviors apparently enhance the potentia l of the read-aloud event for promoting literacy development (p. 568). Interactive read alouds occurring within a collaborative learning community provide a dialogue rich environment for the social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding. During read alouds students become immersed in the sights and sounds of childrens literature and in the discussions surrounding books. Teachers have differing read aloud styles (Martinez & Teale, 1993) yet implem ent many similar read aloud practices (Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey, 2004). Martinez and Teales (1993) study of the read aloud styles of six teachers found that each teacher ha d a distinctive reading style that varied based on the type of teacher talk that occurred, th e type of information discussed during the reading, and the instructional strategies implemented by the teacher. Fisher, Flood, Lapp, and Frey (2004) suggest that exemplary teachers commonly implem ent seven practices during interactive read alouds. Teachers: Select interesting and deve lopmentally appropriate books. Preview and practice reading the book. Set a clear purpose for the read aloud. Model fluent oral reading. Read with expression and animation. Stop periodically to discuss the text as king both efferent and aesthetic questions. Make connections between the read al oud and independent reading and writing occurring in the classroom. Some teachers prefer to read aloud with lim ited dialogue during the reading and conduct an in-depth discussion afterward. These teachers c onsider dialogue during read alouds to interfere with literature by disrupting the flow of the story and, in turn, the students enjoyment of the book being read aloud. There is al so a concern that excessive di alogue during a read aloud will

PAGE 40

40 reduce students comprehension of the story. Af ter reading discussions provide opportunities for teachers and students to discuss, explore, and re flect on personal connections they made to the story. Furthermore, after readi ng discussions provide students w ith opportunities to clarify ideas and learn about different aspects of literature. On the other hand, some teachers prefer to inte ractively read aloud encouraging students to dialogically interact with the book, their peers, and their teacher throughout the book reading (Barrentine, 1996). Inter active read alouds encourage students to socially construct meaning as well as personally respond thr oughout the reading of the book. When implementing interactive read alouds, teachers must develop a balance between talk and text in order for interactive read alouds to be successful. As students engage in dialogue during a read aloud, they collaboratively construct intertextual connections to previ ous written texts, conve rsations, and personal experiences. Intertextually-Informed Re search on Oral Discourse during Read Alouds Although read-alouds are one of the most comm on contexts for responses to literature, only a few studies have explored the intertextual connections students make during read alouds (Oyler & Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000a, 2000b, 2001). Th ese studies explore how primary grade students socially construct intertextual conne ctions during read alouds in order to better understand students meaning-making and constructi on of literary understanding. Within most of these studies, intertextually ha s been narrowly defined as connections between the read aloud texts and other texts such as books, movies, videos, advertising, television programs (Oyler & Barry, 1996; Sipe, 2000b) and student writing (Sipe, 2000a). Only Sipes (2001) study of intertextual connections among fairytale variants employed a more inclusive conception of text including the texts of stud ents personal experiences.

PAGE 41

41 Oyler and Barry (1996) studied the intertextual connections 1st grade students made during informational book read alouds and was the only ex amination of intertextu al connections during read alouds prior to Sipes studies (2000a, 2000b, 2001, 2008). Oyler and Barry found that students juxtapose informational books read al oud with various other texts including life experiences; however, the article focused on texts other than life experien ces. Oyler and Barry noted the significance of the classroom community on the social constructi on of intertextuality. Although this study focused on informational read alouds, this study left many unanswered questions about the general use and nature of intertextual connections during read alouds. Sipe (2000a) examined 1st and 2nd graders social construction of literary understanding by analyzing students talk during in teractive storybook read alouds. By analyzing students talk by the unit of the conversati onal turn, Sipe developed a five facet ed theory of literary understanding including: analytical, intertex tual, personal, transparent, a nd performative responses. Sipe categorized these five aspects of literary understanding into three ba sic literary impulses including: (1) the hermeneutic impulse (analytical & intertextual responses), (2) the personalizing impulse (personal response), a nd (3) the aesthetic impulse (transparent & performative responses). Sipes (2000a) study sh eds light on how students socially construct literary understanding during storybook read alouds; however, questions remain about how this social construction of literary understanding ma y influence students writing. For instance, Sipes (2000a) study leads to questions about how emphasizing one or more of the three literary impulses, such as the hermeneutic and persona lizing impulses, during interactive read alouds would influence students subsequent writing. As an extension of his previous work, Sipe (2000b) investigated th e use of intertextual connections, one of the five aspects of literary understanding, by 1st and 2nd graders during

PAGE 42

42 storybook read alouds. Sipe found that students us ed intertextual connections for hermeneutic and aesthetic purposes. He sugge sted that the hermeneutic uses of intertextual connections include (1) interpreting and an alyzing the story and (2) maki ng generalizations about the characteristics of literary genres, while the aesthetic uses of intertextual connections include (1) entering the story and/or persona lizing it for creative purposes and (2) creating new stories or linking stories together. This st udy demonstrates the importance and various uses of intertextual connections within oral responses to read alouds but leads to questions about the relationship between these intertextual connectio ns and students writing. In addition, further research needs to be conducted on the characteri stics of literacy environments that encourage intertextual connections within and betw een read alouds and writing. Considering a broader definition of text than in previous studies, Si pe (2001) studied how 1st and 2nd grade students used intertextual connections (text-to-text and text -to-life connections) during picture book read alouds of fairy tale vari ants to develop their literary understanding. Through this investigation, Sipe identified and divide d seven types of intertex tual links into three categories including personal, text -to-text, and schema-building responses. Using these three types of responses, Sipe devel oped a grounded theory of schemabuilding for traditional stories suggesting that students build story schema by (1) personalizing the story, (2) making connections to other stories, and (3) analyzi ng the story. Sipe (2001) noted that although intertextual connections were th e focus of the study that analytical responses formed the necessary backdrop to the intertextual discussion (p. 347). This study of related texts leads to further research on how students schema building for traditional stories correlates with schema building for other literary genres. Moreover, th is study generates questions about how students various responses during read alouds are reflected in their writing.

PAGE 43

43 All of the previously menti oned intertextually-informed r ead aloud studies emphasize the importance of openly discussing literature and ar ranging experiences for children that encourage intertextual connections in order to develop students literary unders tanding and encourage meaning-making. Read alouds, particularly interactive read alouds, appear to be intertextually rich learning environments. More studies need to be conduc ted on students intertextual connections during read alouds in grades above the primary grades. Furthermore, research needs to determine how Sipes grounded theories of l iterary understanding and schema-building relate to read alouds of other genres and how these theo ries may change with grade level. Furthermore, research needs to be conducted on how students oral responses during read alouds impact their writing. Integrating the Language Arts Reading and Writing Relationships In our society, at this poi nt in history, reading and writing, to be understood and appreciated fully, should be view ed together, learned together, and used together (Tierney & Shanahan, 1991, p. 275). During the past twenty y ears, literacy researchers have exam ined reading and writing connections from various perspectives and have formulated an understanding of how and why these processe s develop together (Pearson & Tierney, 1984; Shanahan & Tierney, 1990; Tierney & Shanah an, 1991). Reading and writing are both constructive processes. Pearson and Tierney (1984) suggest that reading is a composing process that resembles the composing process proposed by writing scholars such as Murray (1968), Graves (1983), and Calkins (1994). Readers an d writers are both composers of meaning that proceed idiosyncratically through four stages: planner composer, editor, and monitor (Pearson & Tierney, 1984). Furthermore, reading and wr iting share similar kinds of knowledge and processes. Although researcher s have determined several si milarities between reading and

PAGE 44

44 writing, they are not ab solutely identical (Shanahan & Tierney, 1990; Tierney & Shanahan, 1991). However, integrating r eading and writing improves lite racy instruction by fostering communication and critical thi nking (Tierney & Shanahan, 1991). Even though many studies have been conducted on the relationships between reading and writing, more research needs to be conducted on the examination of reading and writing together. Future research needs to address how student s idiosyncratically compose meaning and make intertextual connections within a nd between their reading and writing. Nurturing Young Writers: Reading Aloud in Writing Workshop Authors such as Jane Yolen and J.R.R. To lkien have long recognized the intertextual nature of texts. This understanding is exem p lified in the following two quotes: Stories lean on stories (Yolen, 1981, p.15) there are no new stories, only a cauld ron of stories into which we dip as we write (J.R.R. Tolken, as cited in Cairney, 1990, p.478). An author borrows, adapts, appropriates, and transforms textual resources that come to hi m secondhand and stylized, already imbued with the utterances of others (Hartman, 1992, p. 300). As authors write they synthesize the various texts they have previously experience d into a collage of textual voices that in turn will be borrowed and transformed by other author s. As children read, respond, and discuss wellwritten literature, they develop a reservoir of knowledge about literature that they can then employ when developing their own writing. Writing workshop is a model of teaching writ ing that focuses on students as writers (Calkins, 1994; Ray, 1999, 2001). Although writing workshops differ slightly from classroom to classroom, there are several essential character istics of writing workshops. Writing workshops focus on nurturing young writers to use writing in personally meaningful ways. Therefore, students are given choice about wh at they want to write, yet th eir writing may be focused on a particular genre of study. Within writing work shops, predictable blocks of writing time are

PAGE 45

45 provided each day to give students experience writing. During writing workshop, students are taught about writing in whole-group and sma ll-group mini lessons focusing on particular strategies and techniques In addition, students are taught during one-on-one writing conferences with their teacher and peers. According to Calkins (1994), conferences are at the heart of teaching in writing workshop. Additionally, writing workshops provide writers with opportunities to talk about and shar e their writing. During this time, writers have listeners and readers responding to their writing which supports their development as writers. Finally, writing workshops include publication rituals or celebra tions where writers cele brate their published writing. Although these characteristics may be st ructured differently or referred to using different terminology, writing workshop is a framework for writing instruction focusing on developing young writers not simply completing the process of writing. Writing scholars encourage literature to be read aloud as part of writing instruction, particularly writing workshop, in order to e xpose students to exemplary writing models, study the craft of professional author s, and facilitate students to read like writers (Calkins, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Ray, 1999; Smith, 1983a). Children s literature is a powerful resource for nurturing young writers. Calkins (1994) consid ers young writers apprentices of childrens literature authors in writing workshop. She advo cates that good books impr ove the quality of a writing workshop. Furthermore, Ray (1999) sugges ts that by studying professional authors and their craft, young writers can learn many things including: where authors get their ideas, how they deliberately arrange words to get a part icular meaning across to the reader, how they structure their writing, and how they make their writing sing with beauty (1999, p. 28). When childrens literature is woven into a writing workshop it not only makes lasting impressions on

PAGE 46

46 young writers and inspires their writing but al so develops a supportive classroom community (Harwayne, 1992). Summary This study extends the work previously review ed above in several ways. Research and theory addressing the social na ture of intertextual ity suggest more studies are needed to determ ine how particular classroom environments facilitate intertextual connections between and among texts and how these environments impact students written te xts (Bakhtin, 1981, 1986; Hartman, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Lemke, 1992; Vygotsky, 1978). This study broadens current understandings about the soci al nature of intertextuality and literary understanding by examining the characteristics of a collaborative th ird-grade literacy environment that integrates interactive read alouds into writing workshop. Considering intertextuality as a transa ctional process (Rosenblatt, 1938/1995, 1878/1994, 1982), this study explores how students aesthetic and efferent responses during in teractive read alouds influence their intertextual construction of meaning and imp act subsequent texts they compose in writing workshop. Although we know that collaborative learning environments support the social construction of intertextual connections be tween and among texts (Short, 1992a, 1992b), this study describes the instructional pr actices within these environments that encourage students to intentionally draw upon their pr evious textual experiences as they write. By examining intertextual connections students made between integrated literacy events within a collaborative learning environment, this study adds to the body of intertextuality research and builds upon current conceptions of intertextuality. This study not only contributes to research regarding intertex tuality but will also enable further consideration of how st udents writing reflects their overall literacy environment. Research suggests that students consciously and unconsciously borro w, appropriate, and

PAGE 47

47 transform features of texts th ey have previously experien ced (Bearse, 1992; Cairney, 1990; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Sipe, 1993; Short, 1992a). Employing a broad definition of text, this study ex tends intertextually-inf ormed writing research by using multiple data collection methods, including participant observations, semi-structured interviews, and the collection of student and teacher artifacts, to determine how students appropriate and transform the text ual resources interacting within the literacy environment (i.e. the voices of their teacher, peers, and book authors) into their writing (Dyson, 1993, 1997; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a). Furthermore, this study intertwines intertextually-informed writing and read aloud research by describing how students social construction of literary understanding suggested by their oral responses during interactive read alouds influences their writing during writing wo rkshop. Even though numerous studies have been conducted on relationships between readin g and writing, this study adds to previous research on reading-writing rela tionships by examining readi ng and writing together and addressing how integrating the language arts impacts students writing.

PAGE 48

48 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY Intertextually-inform ed research has been conducted using many different research methodologies. In order to gain a better unde rstanding of how students socially construct intertextual links among integrated reading and writing events, this naturalistic study investigated intertextuality within a collaborative third-gr ade learning environment. This qualitative, descriptive, naturalistic study, situated in the constructivist research paradigm, investigated the intertextual connections thirdgrade students constructed between interactive read alouds of mentor texts at the beginning of writing workshop and their writing during writing workshop. This six-month study focused on examining how interactive read alouds including reader response and discussion of authors craft at the beginning of writing workshop influenced childrens subsequent writing. This study em ployed a broad definition of text including linguistic and nonlinguistic signs intended to communicate meani ng with others such as an utterance, an oral story, a conve rsation, a life experience, a thought, a gesture, a movie, a work of art, or a poem (Bloome & Eg an-Robertson, 1993; Hartman, 1992; Short, 1992; Sipe, 2001). My overarching research question was: How do the te xts within interactiv e read alouds at the beginning of writing workshop mentor childrens wr iting? Three research questions guided this study: 1. How do children appropriate and transform texts from the context of an interactive read aloud into their own writing? 2. What are the characteristics of a literacy environment that encourage intertextual connections between reading and writing? 3. How does a teacher facilitate intertextual connections between reading and writing? This chapter begins by addressing the epis temological and methodol ogical foundations of the study. The following section describes the design of the research, the setting and

PAGE 49

49 participants, and the data collec tion and analysis methods that we re employed in this study. The last section presents how the credibility and trustw orthiness of the study were ensured and addresses the generalizability of the research (Guba & Lincoln, 1982). The Constructivist Research Paradigm Qualitative research is an inte rpretive, naturalistic field of inquiry where researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to ma ke sense of, or to interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them (Denzi n and Lincoln, 2000, p.3). Naturalistic inquiries are significantly influenced by the researche rs choice of research questions, paradigm, theoretical perspective, methods, data analysis, and context. In order to produce meaningful findings, the research problem, paradigm, theory, methods, and context of the inquiry must be congruent (Guba & Lincoln, 1982). Qualitative studies provide rese archers with contextualized, descriptive findings thro ugh the process of directly observi ng, interviewin g, and collecting documents and artifacts in natural settings. This qualitative study, situated in the cons tructivist research pa radigm, examined how childrens writing reflected the te xts within interactive read al ouds conducted at the beginning of writers workshop. This descriptive, naturalistic study also investigated how the overall literacy environment, including the teachers instruct ion, facilitated the so cial construction of intertextuality between reading and writing events. This study, theoretically grounded in intertextuality and reader response, employed qualitative research methods, including participant observation, semi-structured inte rviewing, and collection of student artifacts, to holistically examine and interpret the intertextual connect ions third-grade student s constructed between interactive read alouds and thei r writing during writing workshop. These qualitative methods captured the students and teachers social interac tions, their social construction of intertextuality and literary understanding during interactive read alouds and class discussions, and the influence

PAGE 50

50 of these interactions on the inte rtextual connections present within students writing. These qualitative methods provided rich, descriptive data regarding the literary and so cio-constructive experiences of young writers in a writing workshop. Epistemology is the branch of philosophy con cerned with what kinds of knowledge are possible and how knowledge is produced or h ow we know what we know (Crotty, 1998, p.8). There are a range of epistemologies including ob jectivism, constructivis m, and subjectivism. While objectivists believe that meaning is exte rnal to and independent of human consciousness and subjectivists believe that meaning is impos ed on the object by the subject, constructivists view knowledge and reality as socially construc ted from interactions between individuals and their social environments (Crotty, 1998; Gles ne, 1999; Guba & Lincoln, 1994). This study is framed within the constructivist research paradi gm. Constructivists believe that meanings are constructed by human beings as they engage with the world they are interpreting (Crotty, 1998, p.43). Furthermore, constructivis ts assert that different pe ople may construct meaning in different ways, even in relation to the same phenomenon (Crotty, 1998, p. 9). From this constructivist stance, knowledge is c onstructed as individuals make intertextual connections among present and past linguistic, literary, and life experi ences. Intertextuality is a socio-constructive process that is essentia l for learning. Knowledge is constructed interdependently as individuals in a particular community socially and di alogically interact with one another. Dialogic interactions include both social in teractions betwee n individuals and literary transactions occurring as individuals inte ract with an authors text. Thus, within a classroom community, knowledge is construc ted through dialogic in teractions between individuals and between readers and a written text. Although knowle dge is socially constructed,

PAGE 51

51 individuals construct th eir own knowledge as they make in tertextual connections to their previous experiences which make thei r construction of knowledge unique. As a primary and intermediate classroom t eacher, I have observed how writing curricula, like the writing workshops of Calkins (1994) and Graves (1983), facilita te the development of students authorship and readership by making intertextual links betw een reading and writing events. In these writing curriculums, students have daily opportunities to read and discuss literature as well as write and shar e their own writing. I believe th at these dialogic interactions form the foundation of children s literary lives. As students compose and become authors of meaningful texts, they conscious ly and unconsciously appropriate and transform aspects of prior literary experiences and dialogic interactions into their wr iting. Students do not simply appropriate and transform aspects of these inte ractions at one specifi c stage of the writing process but are influenced by th ese prior textual experiences th roughout their entire composing process which is idiosyncratic and varies daily for each writer. Therefore, this study examined how dialogical interactions occurring during writing workshop, including read-alouds and book discussions, influence the intertextual connec tions students construct within their writing. This qualitative inquiry focusing on childrens re sponses to literature and the social nature of childrens reading and writing development is philosophically grounded in the constructivist research paradigm. Guba and Lincoln (1994) asse rt that within the cons tructivist paradigm, the researchers voice is that of a p assionate participant that is actively engaged in facilitating the multivoice reconstruction of his or her own construction as well as those of all other participants (p.115). Similarly, Crotty (1998 ) suggests that within the constructivist epistemology, no object can be adequately desc ribed in isolation from the conscious being experiencing it, nor can any expe rience be adequately described in isolation from its object

PAGE 52

52 (p.45). Furthermore, research framed in the co nstructivist research pa radigm must provide a thick description (Geertz, 1973) of the social context in which the data were collected. Therefore this study not only examin ed the students writing and res ponses to literature but also described in detail the overall literacy envir onment including the teachers instruction and the students writing behaviors during writing workshop. Description of the Research Site The research site for this study was the third-grade classroom of Ms. Li z Daniels in a public charter school (kindergarten through eigh th-grade). This publ ic charter school was located in an urban school district in a large northeastern city in the United States. The selection of this school was an instance of intensity sampling (Patton, 1990, 2002) because the site was likely to intensely manifest the phenomenon that I was studying, the social construction of intertextuality within integrat ed reading and writing events. The following section begins by discussing the selection of and acces s to the research site and concludes with a description of the setting and participants. The Research Site: Site Selection and Access For several months before th is study, a rese arch site was sought in which a teacher integrated reading and writing ev ents, specifically read alouds of mentor text s at the beginning of writing workshop. During the spring prior to th e study, Ms. Daniels, a graduate student in a literacy course that I taught at a nearby university, invited me to visit and observe in classrooms at her school since her school employed a balanced literacy curriculum that integrated reading and writing. In the weeks following Ms. Daniel s invitation, I contacted the schools principal and arranged a meeting with her. During this meeting, the principal shared with me the philosophy of the school, the schools mission, and provided me with the opportunity to observe read alouds in kindergarten, firs t-, and second-grade cl assrooms. All of th e teachers observed

PAGE 53

53 during these observations clearly integrated reading and writi ng and approached them as a combined literacy process. One of the observe d read alouds was in Ms. Daniels second-grade classroom. Upon the conclusion of the observations, the principal inquired if I was interested in conducting my study at the school and mentioned that Ms. Daniel s would be looping up with her class to third-grade the following year. Since I had previously conducted a pilot study in a thirdgrade classroom, a third-grade cl assroom was ideal for this study. Furthermore, Ms. Daniels was interested in working with me and particip ating in my study the following school year. Accordingly, research protocol and inform ed consent letters were submitted to the University of Floridas Institutional Review Board and received approval (Appendix A). A copy of the approved protocol and informed consen t letters and my proposal were given to the principal and Ms. Daniels so they had a deta iled account of the procedures that would be employed in this study. At the beginning of the 2008-2009 school year, th e year in which the study was conducted, Ms. Daniels signed the teacher informed consent and provided me with the opportunity to read an oral script explaining the study to the student s. After the oral explanation, students received a copy of the approved inform ed consent letter which introduced myself and explained the purpose and procedures of the study to take home to their parents. Parents and guardians of all 14 students signed and returned the permission slips giving consent for their children to participate in the st udy. In order to protect the st udents privacy & identity, all students names are pseudonyms. Ms. Daniels requested that she be identified by her real name since she was interested in collaborating on conference pr esentations and/or journal articles. The School This study was conducted in a public charter school (kindergarten th rough eighthgrade) located in a large northe astern U.S. city. The school en rolled approxim ately 366 students with 182 students in the elementary school (kindergarte n through third-grade) a nd 184 students in the

PAGE 54

54 middle school (fifth through eighth-grade). A majority of the schools students (67%) came from low-income backgrounds as defined by fede ral guidelines and li ved in adjacent urban neighborhoods. The diverse population of the c ity, the multicultural enrollment of students within the surrounding urban school district, and the project school are illustrated in Table 3-1. Table 3-1. Demographics of City, School District, and Project School African American Asian/ Pacific Islander Hispanic White Native American Multi-race, nonHispanic City* 25.3% 7.6% 14.4% 54.5% 0.4% 4.4% Surrounding Urban School District (K12)** 39.3% 8.6% 36.7% 13.4% 0.4% 1.5% Project School** 75.7% 0.8% 21.3% 1.1% 0% 1.1% City data based on 2000 census. **S chool district and project school data by State Department of Education The teachers and administrators at this sc hool were firmly committed to providing the urban communitys underserved youths a quality college preparatory educa tion. The students at this school were encouraged to demonstrate the core values of focus, integrity, respect, selfdetermination, and teamwork. In order to incr ease students instructi onal time, the school had extended school days from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and an extended school year of 190 days. Due to increased instructional time, elementary students received at least 3 hours of literacy instruction daily. All teachers implemented a balanced literacy approach designed to he lp all students learn to read and write effectively. Furthermore, teacher s used an integrated approach to language arts instruction. Teachers used a vari ety of literacy instruc tion techniques and stra tegies within their classrooms including reading and writing workshops. All teachers had a scheduled time to read aloud to their students during the literacy block in addition to other times throughout the school day. Childrens literature trade books formed the foundation of literacy instruction and were

PAGE 55

55 frequently integrated within content area instru ction. Because the school did not purchase basal textbooks, money allotted for textbooks was spen t on trade books and other supplies for the classrooms. The faculty and staff were dedicated to professional development and collaboration. They regularly met to discuss professional books plan best practice in struction, and develop innovative units of study. The Classroom Teacher Ms. Liz Daniels, European-Am erican and in her twenties, was in her fifth year of teaching. Upon graduating from Brown University, she became a Teach for America corps member and taught thirdand fifth-grade in a low-income school in Atlanta. At the time of this study, Daniels was seeking her reading specialist degree at a nearby uni versity. Daniels implemented a balanced, integrated literacy curriculum with in structional practices that encouraged students to make connections across texts, ideas, and expe riences. The curriculum in this classroom was organized in a way that students expected to ma ke connections throughout various subject areas. On a typical day, Daniels read aloud to her stude nts multiple times as part of reading workshop, writing workshop, and vocabulary/word study in addi tion to the scheduled read aloud. Daniels believed it was essential to prov ide students with authentic lite racy experiencesreading real books and writing real texts. Furthermore, students were given multiple opportunities to independently read and write throughout the school day. The Students There were 14 students (8 girl s and 6 boys) in Ms. Daniels third grade classroom when the study was conducted. All 14 students looped up from secondto third-grade with Ms. Daniels. All 14 of the students parents gave pe rmission for their children to participate in this study. Of the 14 students, 10 were African-America n, 3 were Hispanic, and 1 student was Asian. 93% of the students qualified for the schools fr ee or reduced-price l unch program. 3 students

PAGE 56

56 were English as Second Language learners (ESL) and 1 student had an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP). Three students receiv ed additional assistance in reading and writing from a student support teacher. Although all 14 students participat ed in the study, 4 students (2 boys and 2 girls) were selected as focus students for more detailed case study. Since Ms. Da niels was most familiar with her students, I collaborated with her as I selected 4 focus stude nts for this study. Ms. Daniels and I discussed the stude nts reading and writing abilitie s as well as their ability to verbally express themselves. After observing an d conversing with all 14 students during writing workshop, focus students were selected during the fi rst week of the study. In order to develop a more in-depth understanding of the intertextu al connections students constructed between interactive read alouds and thei r writing, I selected 4 focus st udents who had different reading and writing abilities and diverse writing habits and procedures. Of the 4 focus students (2 girls and 2 boys), 2 were African-American, 1 was Hispanic, and 1 was Asian. Chapter 4 further contextualizes this study by pr oviding a more detailed description of the schools philosophy and environment, Ms. Daniels philosophy of teaching and learning, and the third-grade classroom environment including th e students, the physical arrangement of the classroom, the daily schedule and routines, and the integrated literacy curriculum. Data Collection Methods Over the pas t thirty years, researchers have employed a variety of qualitative methodologies to study childrens writing (C alkins, 1994; DeFord, 1981; Dyson, 1993, 1997; Eckhoff, 1983; Harwayne, 1992), reader respons e (Beach, 1995; Lehr & Thompson, 2000; Sipe, 2000a), and intertextuality (B earse, 1993; Bloome & Egan-Robertson, 1993; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 1993, 2000a, 2000b,2001, 2008). Literacy researchers rely on qualitative methodologi es to study the socio-c onstructive nature of

PAGE 57

57 childrens literacy learning w ithin their home and school environments (Bloome & EganRobertson, 1993; Calkins, 1994; Dyson, 1992, 1993; Harwayne, 1992; Heath, 1983; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 2000, 2008). Naturali stic qualitative inquiries enable researchers to holistically study and observe children in th eir natural educational settings with minimal interference. Educational research on intertextuality requires a variety of data coll ection procedures in order to determine intertextual relationships between texts (Lemke, 1992). In this study, I collected multiple data sources in order to identify, classify, and interpret the intertextual relationships students construc ted between interactive read alouds and their writing during writing workshop. Multiple data sources faci litated the development of a comprehensive understanding of how childrens wr iting reflected the textual resour ces within this particular research context. Short (1992a) emphasizes that although researchi ng intertextuality in collaborative classroom environments complicates data collection and an alysis, this type of research enables researchers to better understand how intertextual processes actually function in the human process of making sense of the world (p. 332). Participant-Observations Bogdan (1973) defines participant observation as a research m ethod characterized by a prolonged period of contact with subjects in the place in which they normally spend their time (p.303). While immersed in this social setting, researchers sy stematically and unobtrusively collect data through field notes, open-ended in terviews, and other documents in order to understand complex social environments and relationships (Bogdan, 1973; Glesne, 1999). Within the method of particip ant observation, there are vari ous degrees of researcher participation from being an observer who observe s without interacting to a full participant who actively participates in the community of study (Gle sne, 1999; Spradley, 1980).

PAGE 58

58 Literacy researchers have c onducted their studies from vari ous points on the participant observation continuum (Dyson 1993,1997; Heath, 1983; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Short, 1992a, 1992b; Sipe, 2000a). While Dyson (1993) conducted her study as a passive observer to observe the children as they we nt about their own social work (p.26), Heath (1983) completely immersed herself in the home and school commun ities of Roadville and Trackton in order to explore childrens socialization and language development within their communities. Qualitative researchers such as Kamberelis & McGinley (1992), Pantaleo (2006), Short (1992a, 1992b), and Sipe (2000) w ould be considered participants as observers (Glesne, 1999) since they actively participated in cla ssrooms and made their research intentions known to the teachers and students while observing the overall classr oom environment and l iteracy curriculum. My stance as a researcher ranged on the con tinuum of participant observation (Glesne, 1999; Spradley, 1980). From Septem ber through February, I visited the third-grade classroom at least twice a week during the literacy block to observe writing workshop. Writing workshop routinely occurred each day and in cluded interactive read alouds/li terature-based mini-lessons, writing time, conferring, and sharing. Over th e course of the study, I observed writing workshop a total of 33 times which does not include inform al observations prior to the beginning of the study nor publishing parties that I attended. 8 of the 33 observations were interactive read alouds of mentor texts with the remaining 25 observa tions writing workshop mini-lessons based on the mentor texts read aloud. During the course of this study, I observed two writing workshop units including a Nonfiction Research Unit and a Sentence Structure Unit. The Nonfiction Research Unit included the reading of two mentor texts, Spiders (Gibbons, 1994) and Bicycle Book (Gibbons, 2001), while the Sentence Structure Unit included the reading of three mentor texts,

PAGE 59

59 Henry the Dog with No Tail (Feiffer, 2007), Scarecrow (Rylant, 1998), and Animal Dads (Collard, 1997). Throughout writing workshop, I collected detaile d, descriptive field notes that included students responses and behaviors, the teachers interactions w ith the students, and the overall climate of the literacy classroom During interactive read alouds/literature -based mini-lessons and sharing time, I sat on a chair behind the stud ents on the reading carpet and took detailed field notes without participating in the discussion. Wh ile the students are writing and conferring with their teacher during writing time, I observed the students writing behavi ors and noted teacher and student discourse duri ng writing conferences. My role as a researcher shifted from being predominantly an observer of writing workshop to a participant as observer when conducting student and teacher interviews. Each week during writing time, I conducted brief informal interviews with all 14 students about their wri ting while they were engaged in the composing process. Semi-structured interviews were condu cted twice, at the end of each writing workshop unit, with all 14 students and focused on the wri ting the students chose to publish. Students looked forward to sharing their writing with me and periodically would ask me to meet with them because they wanted to share a particular story they wrote. While circulating around the classroom observing and conducting informal interviews, students would occasionally ask me questions about their writing includi ng the meaning of words, if their writing made sense, or if they should add more to a certain part of their story. Because I did not want to influence the students writing, I inte ntionally did not guide their writing but made brief comments encouraging students to be introspective. For example, when students asked, Should I add more details to this part of my st ory? I would reply, Why dont you read your story aloud to me and see if it needs more details? After reading their writing aloud, student s evaluated and made

PAGE 60

60 their own decision about adding details to th eir writing. As the study progressed, students realized that during writing time I was interest ed in observing them wr ite and learning about their writing and was not a second teacher in the classroom. Although informal teacher interviews or conversations about teaching and l earning in the classroom were conducted at least every other week, many questions I had following observations or during data analysis were answered by Ms. Daniels through em ail correspondences. I limited my active pa rticipation in the classroom because I was conscious of my influen ce on the childrens writing and did not want to interfere with the natural classroom environment including Ms. Daniels lit eracy instruction. As a researcher ranging on the participant observation continuum, I wa s able to develop a better understanding of the complex nature of intertex tuality within this co llaborative literacy environment as the teacher and students particip ated in integrated reading and writing events. The interactive read alouds/literature-based mi ni-lessons were digita lly recorded with a digital voice recorder on the days that I observed in the classr oom and video recorded two to three times per month. The digital voice recorder was placed on the radiator beside the reading carpet where the interactive read alouds/literature-based mini-lessons took place. Semistructured student interviews we re also digitally recorded. Photographs were taken of the students and teacher engaged in all portions of writing workshop in order to permanently document various aspects of the literacy environment. Digital and video r ecordings were able to capture the teachers and students authentic language, dialogue, and interactions. Video recordings of the teachers instruction and the st udents interactions and responses have become permanent observations that can be referre d back to repeatedly (Glesne, 1999). Field Notes and Transcriptions Field notes collected during participant obser vations should be descriptive, analytic, system atic, and detailed (Bogdan, 1973; Glesne, 1999). Complete field notes enable the

PAGE 61

61 researcher to accurately portray the social contex t and interactions of th e individuals they are observing. Field notes can be ta ken during the observation or wr itten up immediately after the observation. Either way, afte r the observation, field notes sh ould be read over, clarified, expanded, and reflected upon (Glesne, 1999). Qualitative research on childrens oral and wr itten language development and responses to literature utilized field notes to clarify and supplement other da ta collection methods such as audio recordings, video record ings, and other documentation (Dyson, 1993; Heath, 1983; Sipe, 2000, 2008). Similarly, my observational field notes clarified and supplemented digital recordings of writing workshop, stud ent and teacher interv iews, student artifact s, and other data collected during the study. Th roughout this study, over 150 pages of handwritten observational field notes were kept in a spiral-bound notebook. The obser vational field notes focused on descriptively portraying the read ing and writing activities in which the students were engaged, the teachers interactions with the students, the students inter actions with each other, and the overall climate of the literacy classroom. Fiel d notes also included a diagram of the classroom, lists of reading and writing partners, pseudonyms chosen by the students, and students seats on the carpet. Although the focus of this study was on writing workshop, field notes were taken on activities observed before a nd after writing workshop includi ng portions of shared reading, poetry and/or vocabulary read aloud. Field notes written during writing workshop were labeled and divided into 3 sections: In teractive Read Aloud or Mini-Lesson, Writing Time, and Sharing Time. During the interactive read aloud/literature -based mini-lesson and sharing time, I focused on capturing student and teacher behaviors and interactions an d noted the names of students responding to facilitate accurate tr anscriptions. Since I briefly met with students at their writing spots throughout writing time, this section of field notes included student writing observations,

PAGE 62

62 comments about the overall classroom environm ent, and a list of th e writing conferences conducted each day. Student writing observation s included the students name underlined and followed by a brief description of what and how the student was writing and notes about our conversation. Students comment s of particular interest were written verbatim and surrounded by quotation marks. Particular attention was gi ven to observing the four focus students at the beginning of each writing time. In addition, I obse rved and took field notes when one of the four focus students was in a writing conference with Ms. Daniels. Within th e margins of my field notes, I included analytic notes (Glesne, 1999) regarding my thoughts, speculations, questions, and preliminary conclusions. This notebook also included notes from informal conversations with the classroom teacher and th e principal regarding this study. Like Dyson (1993), I used my handwritten observational notes as I transcribed and annotated the digital recordi ngs of the dialogue occurring during writ ing workshop. Digital recordings were transcribed ve rbatim into field note forms with a large left hand margin for analysis (Appendix B). Transcriptions we re completed as soon as possible after each observation. All 33 observation transcriptions, like the field notes were divided into three sections: Writing Workshop Read Aloud or Mi ni-Lesson, Writing Time, and Sharing Time. Additional observational notes we re included at the end of the transcription. Field notes regarding the student writing observations were rewritten and expanded upon in the transcription. All observation transcriptions were labeled and organized in a four-inch three-ring binder. At the end of each writing unit, each students writing observations for the entire unit were copied from the observation transcriptions and collected t ogether to form a Summary of Observations/Informal Interviews that was placed in the center brads of the students data collection folder. This Summary of Observations provided a glimpse into each students writing

PAGE 63

63 process, particularly the four focus students who pa rticipated in at least two informal interviews each week. Informal and Semi-Structured Interviews Interviewing is a m ethod employed by quali tative researchers to gain a better understanding of a complex phe nomenon. According to Glesne (1999), interviews enable researchers to capture the unseen and learn how respondents think or feel about something; and how they explain or account for something (p. 93). Semi-structured interviews are less structured than formal interviews with a fixed written set of ques tions on a specific topic yet are more structured than informal interviews w ith open-ended questions (Glesne, 1999). Semistructured interviews include ope n-ended questions focused on specif ic topics or themes that can be flexibly sequenced and formed based on the conversation that evolves between the interviewer and interviewee. Semi-structured in terviews enable the researcher to probe the conversation in order to elicit more specific de scriptions, better understa nd the inte rviewees point of view, and clarify their interpretation of the conversation (Kvale 1996). Spradley (1979) expresses how interviews allow interviewers to learn from the interviewee when he writes: I want to understand the world from your poi nt of view. I want to know what you know and the way you know it. I want to understand the meaning of your experience, to walk in your shoes, to feel things as you feel them, to explain things as you explain them. Will you become my teacher and help me understand? (p.34) Spradley (1979) suggests that it is best to consider interviews as a series of friendly conversations in which the researcher slowly assists the interview ees in sharing their experiences. He emphasizes the need to develop rapport with the interviewees and warns against turning interviews into formal interrogations. Interviews can also be conducted informally in order to gain a better understanding of interviewees interpretations of what is happening at a particul ar time and place. Informal

PAGE 64

64 interviews do not rely on predetermined questions and are less structured than semi-structured interviews. Informal interviews include open-ended questions that can be asked in the context of an ongoing observation. Open-ended, informal inte rviews allow the researcher to adapt to a specific time and place and allow other issues re lated to a general topic to be addressed. Furthermore, informally interviewing students while they are engaged in the act of writing allows the researcher to learn about students writing processes when childrens memory and understanding of what they are doing is much more vi vid (Graves, 1994, p. 71). Literacy researchers frequently use interviews to gain insights into childrens writing processes, the content of their writing, and how their writing is intertextually related to previous texts (Cairney, 1990; Graves, 1994; Harwayne, 1992; Kamberelis & McGinley, 1992; Lemke, 1992; Pantaleo, 2006; Short, 1992a). Graves (1994) advises the use of interviews to learn more about students experien ces and interests as well as their writing processes and potential as a writer. Graves (1994) demonstrates a met hod of conducting semi-structured interviews by examining a piece of a childs writing and inqui ring about various aspects of the writing during the interview. According to Graves (1994), interviewing childr en in this manner helps the interviewer become sensitive to the potential ch ildren possess and begin to spot details in childrens writing that reflect knowledge of both content and pro cess (p.92). Broad open-ended interview questions can elicit information about students reading and wr iting experiences and the connections they make between the two proc esses. Harwayne (1992) suggests that when students bring writing samples and professional liter ature to their interviews it can serve as a point of departure for the conversation to fo llow (p.40). Much like the semi-structured interviews of Graves (1994) and Harwayne (1992), Kamberelis and McGinleys (1992) intertextual study of one writer s construction of text and self also employed semi-structured

PAGE 65

65 interviews focusing on students previous writings. Including a writing sample and/or a literature selection that has influenced a writer in the interview process enables the interviewer to gain a better understanding of the writers goals, what they envision as quality writing, and how previous textual experiences ha ve influenced their writing. Semi-structured and informal interviews enable researchers to clarify intertextu al relationships observed in childrens writing. During this study, I conducted informal and semi -structured interviews with all 14 students as well as informally interviewed the teacher Throughout this study, I focused on developing a rapport with the students and teacher so that th ey considered me a tr usted member of their literacy community and felt comfortable conversi ng during interviews. Each week, I conducted brief informal interviews with all 14 students ab out their writing while they were engaged in the composing process. Informal interviews were conducted more frequently, during each observation, with the four focus students. Inform al interviews were cond ucted at each students designated writing spot and last ed, on average, approximate ly 4 minutes. Although these informal interviews were initially digitally recorded, I found that a more natural conversation about the students writing ensued when I simply