Creative Writing Practices in Primary School
A Qualitative Analysis of Gender Stereotype Reworking Processes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4454/graphos.155Keywords:
creative writing, gender stereotypes, qualitative research, educational narration, primary schoolAbstract
This paper presents a qualitative case study conducted in two fifth-grade primary school classes, aimed at exploring the pedagogical potential of creative writing as a device for the symbolic renegotiation of gender stereotypes. Through a workshop-based pathway grounded in the narrative reversal of traditional roles, pupils were engaged in the production of “reverse stories,” complemented by reflective activities and visual representations. The intervention, structured in four phases, approached writing as a transformative and meaning-generative practice, valuing narration as a space for identity construction and for the exploration of possible worlds. Qualitative analysis of students’ written and graphic productions reveals processes of imaginative restructuring, characterised by a progressive dissociation between competence, care, and gender affiliation, as well as by the emergence of alternative configurations of family and professional roles. Findings suggest that creative writing, when conceived as an exploratory practice, can foster early forms of critical thinking already in childhood, configuring itself as a generative pedagogical environment. The paper also discusses the role of school as a privileged space for symbolic elaboration and highlights writing as an educational tool capable of intertwining individual reflection, social imagination, and openness to change.
References
Alfani F., Berruti G., Rogora C. (2016). Sul setting. Studi Junghiani, pp. 43–61. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Bian L., Leslie S.J., Cimpian A. (2017). Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests. Science, n. 355, pp. 389–391.
Biesta G.J. (2015). The beautiful risk of education. London: Routledge.
Bruner J. (2009). La mente a più dimensioni. Roma-Bari: Laterza (opera originale pubblicata nel 1986).
Buccini F. (2020). L’educazione di genere tra teoria e prassi: itinerari di ricerca per l’infanzia. Education Sciences & Society, n. 2, pp. 355–366.
Calkins L.M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth (NH): Heinemann.
Carraro L., Castelli L., Matteoli S., Pascoletti E., Gawronski B. (2011). Di padre in figlio. La trasmissione degli stereotipi di genere all’interno della famiglia. Psicologia sociale, n. 6, pp. 153–170.
Coccimiglio C., Morani R.M. (2025). Laboratori di scrittura creativa a scuola: suggerimenti operativi da una ricerca INDIRE. Graphos. Rivista internazionale di pedagogia e didattica della scrittura, pp. 143–157.
Davies B. (1993). Shards of glass: Children reading and writing beyond gendered identities. Cresskill (NJ): Hampton Press.
D’Souza R. (2021). What characterises creativity in narrative writing, and how do we assess it? Research findings from a systematic literature search. Thinking Skills and Creativity, n. 42, p. 100949.
Egan K. (2005). An imaginative approach to teaching. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
Freire P. (2022). Pedagogia degli oppressi (trad. it.). Torino: EGA Edizioni Gruppo Abele (opera originale pubblicata nel 1970).
Giroux H. (2011). Rejecting academic labor as a subaltern class: Learning from Paulo Freire and the politics of critical pedagogy. Fast Capitalism, n. 8, pp. 35–40.
Grainger T., Goouch K., Lambirth A. (2005). Creativity and writing: Developing voice and verve in the classroom. London: Routledge.
Gulla A.N., Fairbank H.C., Noonan S.M. (2022). Maxine Greene: an approach to aesthetic education and a vision of social imagination. Beijing International Review of Education, n. 4, pp. 479–490.
Lensmire T.J. (1994). Writing for critical democracy: Student voice and teacher practice in the writing workshop. San Diego: National Reading Conference.
Leone G. (2016). Le parole volano: invito alla scrittura creativa. Napoli: Rogiosi.
Lewison M., Flint A.S., Van Sluys K. (2002). Taking on critical literacy: The journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts, n. 79, pp. 382–392.
Lichtner M. (1999). La qualità delle azioni formative: criteri di valutazione tra esigenze di funzionalità e costruzione del significato. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Martin C.L., Ruble D.N. (2010). Patterns of gender development. Annual Review of Psychology, n. 61, pp. 353–381.
Martínez-García L., Rodríguez-Álvarez M., Virgós Sánchez M. (2023). Stories with the characters reversed: Children’s opinions of feminist children’s stories in early education. Early Childhood Education Journal, n. 51, pp. 593–603.
Melchiori R. (2012). La metodologia qualitativa nella valutazione: gli studi di caso sugli interventi socioeducativi. Roma: Edizioni Nuova Cultura.
Nussbaum M.C. (2016). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Paechter C. (2007). Being boys, being girls: Learning masculinities and femininities. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Serravalle Porzio E. (2000). Saperi e libertà: maschile e femminile nei libri, nella scuola e nella vita. Milano: Associazione Italiana Editori.
Travaglini R. (2017). Un bene comune da non perdere: la scrittura. Il piacere naturale di scrivere a mano, raccontandosi. MeTis. Mondi educativi. Temi, indagini, suggestioni, n. 7, pp. 225–240.
Travaglini R. (2020). Pedagogia della creatività. Roma: Aracne.
Whitford A. (2024). I had a deep-down stereotype: Pairing critical literacy practices to examine explicit and implicit gender stereotypes with elementary students. The Reading Teacher, n. 77, pp. 736–744.
Wolf M. (2018). Reader, come home: The reading brain in a digital world. New York: Harper.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The content is released under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence (Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International).
Edizioni ETS s.r.l. LUNGARNO MEDICEO 16 - 56127 - PISA