The Case of the Mistaken Corpse

Chief Inspector Gatsinzi Basaninyenzi gathered his squad of detectives on the morning of 24 June 2003 in the AAMU Writing Project common room. Outside, the Alabama sun dried up the last of the magnolia tree’s regal blossoms. Inspector B. watched the brown-edged petal stutter to the ground and hoped that the current investigation into Joie D’Écrire’s murder did not mimic the flower’s downward path.

Inspector B. cleared his throat, asked for attention, and spoke to his colleagues: “The last three weeks we have worked diligently on this case. We have succeeded in identifying the corpse as that of one Joie D’Écrire, a vibrant and creative entity, as our informants have reported. However, we are a long way from finding Joie D’Écrire’s murderer. Let’s begin today with a report from our section facilitators.”

Inspectors Susan and Pam presented their research into the murder suspect called social promotion. In their round-table fashion of presenting information, the two detectives pointed out that depending on a student’s individual situation, social promotion can either undermine or affirm that student’s progress. Inspector Pam said that research indicated that retention any time after third grade became a social issue, and Inspector Susan said that teachers walk a “delicate tightwire between giving information and teaching social skills.”

Other detectives contributed to the evidence supporting social promotion’s complicity in Joie D’Écrire’s murder. Large class sizes and insufficient numbers of effective professional in-service workshops make the teacher’s task of attending to a wide variety of students’ learning styles and needs a daunting one. Inspector Mimi asked if the problem was identifying at-risk kids or reaching at-risk kids. Inspector Susan said that occasionally parents refused to have at-risk children tested. Inspector Mimi spoke passionately about the 15% of students in each of our classrooms who are dyslexic and how those students’ lives could be radically different. To an accusation that Prednizone might have affected her reasoning, Inspector Mimi replied, “Forget about the Prednizone. Let’s just collar this jerk who killed off Joie D’Écrire. And I’m tellin’ ya, wherever social promotion lurks, undiagnosed and untreated dyslexia isn’t far behind.”

As many in the squad room began to discuss this additional suspect, section leader Kim yelled out, “Wait! We’ve made an incredible discovery. The updated medical examiner’s report just came in, and we’ve found out that the dead person is not Joie D’Écrire, but a dastardly twin named Write R. S. Block. Joie D’Écrire is alive. Let me prove it to you!”

Inspector Kim then outlined her work, which consisted of a semester-long project with ninth graders called “Simply Me from A-Z: An Alphabetical Autobiography.” As all great ethical academics do, Inspector Kim credited the source of the idea and outlined her modifications. Using their own autobiographies as the topic, students wrote and illustrated a children’s A-Z book. An authentic audience was provided through a field trip to an elementary school, where the writers read their books to the children. Inspector Kim proved that Joie D’Écrire was alive and kicking when she spoke of specific writing prompts and teaching the craft of writing through narrative techniques such as the seesaw, the circular ending, interior monolog, and vibrant verbs. Inspector Sandy wondered if the use of children’s books in a ninth-grade classroom might kill Joie D’Écrire, but Inspector Kim and a chorus of other voices insisted that older students love picture books. And why not? The child in all of us is the most innocent and engaged artist.

The sections called response groups also added their evidence that Joie D’Écrire was still breathing. Daily response groups supported the consistent production of writing, underscored the importance of talking about writing, and emphasized that writing is best practiced with a group of concerned readers. Both the output of writing and the improvements in writers’ skills constituted irrefutable evidence that Joie D’Écrire animated group interaction.

Chief Inspector B. also called on Inspector Shay to contribute to the investigation by reading the daily journal. Inspector Shay’s entry elicited a round of applause since her words demonstrated Joie D’Écrire’s influence; Shay wrote with passion, insight, clarity, and humor. As an aside, Inspector Sandy notes here that no one has mentioned the unacknowledged challenge to write one’s best for the daily journal reading -- could there be any stronger proof of Joie D’Écrire’s presence? At the end of the long discussion, Chief Inspector B. congratulated his squad for top-notch investigative work. Before he dismissed them to carry on their committee responsibilities, he hesitated and said, “We know that through our efforts, Joie D’Écrire is alive and well. But we still have a corpse on our hands, and we don’t know who killed Write R. S. Block.”

In one voice, the detectives shouted, “We did!”