So we have taught them to read. Is it enough?

Author(s):

Jo FletcherJaninka GreenwoodFaye Fiona Parkhill

Conference:

ECER 2008

Network:

27. Didactics - Learning and Teaching

Format:

Paper

Session Information

27 SES 01C, Reading/ Writing as Learning

Paper Session

Time:

2008-09-10

09:15-10:45

Room:

B3 333

Chair:

Bernard Schneuwly

Contribution

This paper examines the “dip” in students’ literacy learning progress that is reported internationally to occur in years 9 to 13. It reports current research that analyses the match (or lack of it) between learning needs and classroom strategies and proposes shifts in current practice. International reports attest that most students learn to read successfully in their first two years of schooling (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2007; Myrberg & Rosén, 2007; OECD, 2001). However there is a growing body of research evidence internationally (Brozo, Shiel & Topping, 2007; Farstrup, 2005; Hattie, 2007; Hirsch, 2003) to support that reading progress drops off as students move through the schooling system and that reading is often not effectively taught at the 9 to 13 year old age level. For example, recent research in New Zealand (McNaughton, Amituanai-Toloa and Lei, 2007; Hattie 2007) indicates that there appears to be a “tapering off”’ of progress in reading for a significant number of students in low socio-economic schools despite successful interventions at an earlier level. Reading holds a position of central importance in students’ secondary schooling, their critical response to society and community and their own personal development. Ownership of learning and access to career pathways are expected products of successful reading competencies. Critical literacy approaches (Lankshear & Knobel, 2003; Leu, Kinzer, Coiro & Cammack, 2004; New London Group, 2000; Unsworth, 2002) are central to the needs of 9 to 13 year old students. Our paper aligns these internationally recognised literacy learning needs with research we are currently conducting in New Zealand to examine current reading practices, pedagogy and resources and the development of models that will enhance literacy achievement across a wide range of schools. Clay (2001) emphasizes that all children have the ability to become literate and that no single approach is sufficient in itself to ensure that all children become literate because one size does not fit all. Other reading theorists (Everatt, Smythe, Ocampo & Gyamathy, 2004; Gillon, 2007; Pressley, 2002) discuss the need for children to develop phonological awareness, word level strategies, vocabulary knowledge and comprehension strategies. Further research (Fletcher, Parkhill & Fa’afoi, 2005; Fletcher, Parkhill, Fa’afoi & Taleni, 2006; Parkhill, Fletcher & Fa’afoi, 2005; Taleni, Parkhill, Fa’afoi & Fletcher, in press; Greenwood & Wilson, 2005; Andreotti & DeSouza, 2007) emphasises the need for sociocultural relevance of reading resources, contexts and tasks. Successful literacy instruction builds on the knowledge and understandings that children bring to the learning environment from their diverse cultural and language backgrounds (Alton-Lee 2003; Au and Raphael, 2000; McNaughton, 2002). Literacy instruction will also be more effective where partnerships are developed between family and school and where cognisance is taken of the divergence between home and school expectations (Gee, 1990). Allington (2003) and Hattie (1999) remind us that all children need explicit instruction about some aspects of literacy processes and not every child ‘gets it’ after a single lesson. Meaningful lessons to teach strategies cannot be scripted from textbooks but need to be customised in richly contextual instructional settings.

Method

Our project initially interrogated the literature to collate reports of learning outcomes and models of effective practice. We then surveyed schools within a large regional district in NZ. We also conducted in-depth case studies of particular schools that had effective literacy programmes, as identified by literacy experts/stakeholders, included one to two day observations and interviews with teachers, students, principals, literacy lead teachers and parents. From our analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data we are in the process of developing theoretical models of critical literacy for this age group including teaching strategies.

Expected Outcomes

Our project expects to identify unmet needs in literacy learning as well as sound effective practices. From the findings we expect to develop models that integrate elements of current best practice along with further strategies to develop critical literacies. We believe this project has important implications for international awarenesses of literacy.

References

References Allington, R. (2003). Foreword in: G.G. Duffy, Explaining reading: A resource for teaching concepts, skills and strategies. New York: The Guilford Press. Alton-Lee, A. (2003). Quality teaching for diverse students in schooling: Best evidence synthesis. Wellington: Ministry of Education. Andreotti, V. & DeSouza, L. M. (2007). Through other eyes. Retrieved on February 15, 2008. http://www.throughothereyes.org.uk/images/docs/methodology.pdf Au, K.H. and Raphael, T.E. (2000). Equity and Literacy in the next millennium. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 1, pp 170-188. Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism Great Britain: Biddles Ltd. Brozo, W.G., Shiel, G., & Topping, K. (2007, December). Engagement in Reading: Lessons Learned From Three PISA Countries. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(4), 304–315. Clay, M. M. (2001). Change over time in children’s literacy development. Portsmouth, NH: Hienneman. Cullen, J. (2001). An introduction to understanding learning. In V. Carpenter, H. Dixon, E. Rata, & C. Rawlinson (Eds.), Theory in practice for educators (pp. 47–51). Palmerston North: Dunmore Press. Everatt, J., Smythe, I., Ocampo, D. & Gyarmathy, E. (2004). Issues in the assessment of literacy related difficulties across language backgrounds: A cross-linguistic comparison. Journal of Research in Reading, 27 (2), 1412 -151. Farstrup, A. (2005). Qualified reading specialists: More important ever. (Dec, 2005). Reading Today, 23, 318. Fletcher, J., Parkhill, F., & Fa’afoi, A. (2005). What factors promote and support Pasifika students in reading and writing? Set: Research Information for Teachers, 2, 2–8. Fletcher, J., Parkhill, F., Taleni, T., & Fa’afoi. A. (2006). Pasifika students’ perceptions of barriers and support to reading and writing achievement in New Zealand schools. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies. 41 (2) 163 -182. Gee, J. P (1990). Social linguistics and literacy. London: Falmer Press. Gillon, G. (2007). Phonological Awareness: From Research to Practice. Challenges in Language and Literacy. New York: Guilford Press. Hattie, J. (1999). Influences on Student Learning. Inaugural Lecture: Professor of Education, Auckland University. Hattie, J. (2007). The status of reading in New Zealand schools: The upper primary plateau. Reading Forum NZ, 22, 3, 25-39. Hirsch, E.D., Jr. (2003). Reading comprehension requires knowledge – of words and the world: Scientific insights into the fourth-grade slump and the Nation’s stagnant comprehension scores. American Educator, 27 (1), 10 - 45. Greenwood, J. & Wilson, A. M. (2006). Te Mauri Pakeaka: A journey into the third space. Auckland: Auckland University Press. Lankshear, C. & Knobel, M. (2006). New literacies: everyday practices and classroom learning. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press. Leu, D. J., Jr., Kinzer, C. L., Coiro, J. I. & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Towards the theories of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N.L. Unrau (Eds). Theoretical models and processes of reading. 5th ed. Newark, D.E.: International Reading Association, 1570 -1613. McNaughton, S., Amituanai-Toloa, M. & and Lei, M. (2007). Drawing Implications for the Literacy Strategy from Two Schooling Improvement Projects. Paper delivered at Literacy Symposium. Christchurch, August 2007. Auckland Uniservices Limited: University of Auckland. McNaughton, S. (2002). Meeting of minds. Wellington: Learning Media. Myrberg, E., & Rosén, M. (2007). A cross-country comparison of direct and indirect effects of parents’ level of education on students’ reading achievement. In: The Second IEA research conference: Proceedings of the IEA IRC-2006 (Vol. 2, pp. 307–318). Amsterdam: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2007). Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS): Retrieved February 12, 2008. http://timss.bc.edu/PDF/P06_IR_Ch1.pdf New Zealand Ministry of Education. (2001). Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS): A summary of New Zealand’s Year 5 student achievement 2001. Retrieved August 7, 2007 from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document&documentid=4349&data=l OECD, (2001). Knowledge and Skills for Life: First Results from PISA, 2000. Paris: OECD. Parkhill, F., Fletcher, J., & Fa’afoi, A. (2005). What makes for success? Current literacy practices and the impact of family and community on Pasifika students’ literacy learning. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 40 (1&2), 61–84. Pressley, M., (1998). Literacy Instruction that Works: The Case for Balanced Teaching. New York: Guildford Press. Snow, C.E., Burns, M.S. & Griffin, P. (Eds.), (1998). Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children. Washington DC: National Academy Press. Taleni, L. T., Parkhill, F., Fa’afoi, A. & Fletcher, J. (in press). Pasifika students voice their classroom realities on what supports or hinders their literacy learning? Pacific-Asian Education Journal.

Author Information

Jo Fletcher

University of Canterbury

School of Literacies and Arts in Education

Christchurch

162

Janinka Greenwood

University of Canterbury

Christchurch

162

Faye Fiona Parkhill

University of Canterbury

School of Literacies and Arts in Education

Christchurch

162

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER.

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.

Session Information

Contribution

Method

Expected Outcomes

References

Author Information

Update Modus of this Database

Search the ECER Programme

Navigation

Info for