Anticipating future storylines: considering possible directions in Australian literacy education.

Ewing, Robyn

Some conference themes

From my perspective aNTicipating New Territories in Darwin in 2014 was a conference rich with challenges and opportunities for reflection. Space constrains any substantive discussion of these conference themes separately but, interestingly, many noted below are relevant to some of the prominent features in Storyline 2 described below. The themes listed are not only related to English and literacy--they are important for the alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment more generally (Freebody, 2014). Those themes that I found particularly significant include:

* Social justice and equity

* The importance of story and storying in becoming literate

* The role of the Arts in creative and imaginative literacy pedagogies

* Inquiry: asking genuine questions

* Listening to student voices

* Listening to research

* The activist educator

* Playing, collaborating, engaging to rethink, reshape, renew, transform conservative understandings of learning

* Authentic assessment for learning.

Why storylines?

When we talk about a 'story' there is usually a suggestion of some kind of resolution. In writing about the concept of a 'storyline' (Ewing, 2014) I suggested the use of this term signals an ambiguity or incompleteness in or around the actions and events, the development of the character(s), or the resolution of issues in the plot or themes and alongside that the possibility for change. Both stories and storylines have the capacity to interweave with each other, to disappear for some time and then re-emerge, perhaps in a different guise. The first storyline outlined below has been around in some form for the whole of my teaching career but is becoming more powerful in the current neoliberal climate. It is an outdated storyline not supported by research but it continues to wield power amongst bureaucrats, policymakers and the popular media perhaps because of its simplicity and relatively lower costs economically.

Storyline 1: A conservative, shallow auditing approach to literacy

Story or narrative is a powerful way of communicating. Here is an excerpt from Glenda Millard and Stephen Michael King's (2014) recent picture book, The Duck and the Darklings that encapsulates Storyline 1: Dark was a sorry, spoiled place: a broken and battered place. It had been that way for so long that sunups and sundowns, yesterdays and tomorrows and almost everything in them had been disremembered by each ...

Storyline 1 envisages an education future that is characterised by:

* continued populist, conservative presumptions about the teaching of literacy and English;

* a privileging of standardised and high stakes testing and benchmarking;

* a highly differentiated and inequitable capacity in families and school communities to support education;

* an ongoing culture of blame through constant discussion of the inadequacies of teachers and teacher education, often specifically focused on the teaching of literacy and numeracy;

* an outdated, fragmented, conservative competitive academic curriculum; and

* the mandating of particular teaching and learning 'recipes' e.g., direct instruction; synthetic phonics etc.

In my view we don't need to imagine far beyond what is currently happening in Australia as well as in many western countries to envisage this storyline: the 'Kingdom of Dark' is at hand. Large education bureaucracies with schools organised under hierarchical administrative systems continue to prescribe very conservative, limited and often outmoded literacy pedagogy. Curriculum content and outcomes remain highly prescriptive and organised in specific, traditional discipline areas, the so-called 'academic curriculum' (Connell, Ashenden, Kesler & Dowsett, 1982) that many school students find demotivating and irrelevant (Wyn, 2009). Literacy achievement is measured superficially through high stakes multiple choice testing. Prescriptive recipes are repeatedly held up as the way forward to ensure success for all students. Many teachers feel obliged to use these outdated strategies and to 'teach to the test' rather than meet the individual needs of their students often against their better judgement and long experience.

The intensification of what teachers and schools are expected to do continues to expand as society demands more and expects teachers to be responsible for fixing all society's problems. This denies the reality that social and economic inequality are much greater determinants of children's life chances (McDermott, 2011; Vinson, 2007). There is little recognition of the sophisticated knowledge, skills and expertise that teachers possess and inadequate support for the increasing number of students diagnosed with special needs. Young teachers continue to exit the profession in the first three to five years (Buchanon, Prescott, Schuck, Aubusson & Burke, 2013; Fantilli & McDougall, 2009; Ewing & Manuel, 2005).

Over time, this storyline envisages the 'meltdown' or collapse of schools.

Two current international examples of this storyline are briefly outlined below:

1a Impact of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policy, United States of America

While many US educators agree this legislation, introduced by the Bush government in 2002, was well intentioned, it has not proved to be effective. Characterised by a heavy phonics first reading program, Reading First; mandated reading national literacy targets; excessive reliance on annual standardised tests for all children in grades 3-8 and reporting requirements that judged school performance on the percentage of students who passed these culturally biased tests rather than improvement in learning by student cohorts. School and teacher decision-making has been compromised and Darling-Hammond (2011) asserts that there has been a narrowing of the curriculum with the role of the teacher reduced to one of a technician expected to implement externally imposed decisions.

Impact studies of the program have shown no gains by students in either state or national reading tests (Dee & Jacob, 2011). Some low performing schools that don't reach Annual Yearly Progress goals have been closed down mostly in disadvantaged areas where families are vulnerable. Engberg, Gill, Zamarro and Zimmer (2012) suggest these kinds of school closures further undermine student achievement.

In addition, Kohn suggests (in Harris et al., 2011) that the hidden curriculum of standardised tests is that shallow, superficial thinking is being rewarded. Similarly Haberman's (1991) account of a Pedagogy of Poverty claimed that many low income American children were being taught with mind-numbing worksheets and drill and practice followed up with testing. Creativity, critical thinking, resilience, motivation, persistence, curiosity, empathy, self-awareness and self-discipline cannot be measured by multiple choice test items. Ravitch (2012), an early advocate of NCLB comments:

   I had never imagined that the test would someday be
   turned into a blunt instrument to close school--or
   to say whether teachers are good teachers or not because
   I always knew children's test scores are far
   more complicated than the way they're being received
   today.

1b. Twenty years of national curriculum and national testing, England

The final report of the six-year-long independent Cambridge Primary Review (2009), led by Alexander, found that two decades of a standards agenda with national testing had compromised primary children's right to a balanced approach to learning. Memorisation and simple factual recall had been privileged over deep learning and understanding. Learning in the arts and the humanities had been restricted and consequently devalued as had 'those kinds of learning in all subjects which require time for talking, problem solving and the extended exploration of ideas.' As a result the report claimed that students' creativity was at risk.

In addition, several analyses of twenty years of national testing in England's classrooms strongly suggest that it has not improved student outcomes in primary English (Hilton, 2006). Indeed Hilton asserted that in the United Kingdom it is now widely believed that league tables based on test results are not conducive to enabling students to develop deep understanding of text. Further:

when test items are apparently drained of cultural specificity through trialling and elimination, they are in fact also leached of intrinsic interest, comprehensibility, and vitality ... test constructors also eliminate the kind of literary depth that would enable inferential and evaluative questions of real quality (Hilton, 2006, p. 824).

It is clear that this storyline is already gathering momentum in Australia. Yet it is hard to justify given its antecedents demonstrate failing literacy principles and practices in both the USA and the UK. As literacy teachers and tertiary educators we should do everything possible to prevent its further development in this country.

The second storyline resonates strongly with the conference themes listed earlier.

Storyline 2: Creative literacy pedagogies

In this storyline early childhood centres and preschools, schools and communities work closely together in education or learning centres that are re-shaped and renewed to meet lifelong student literacy needs more effectively. Learning is defined broadly and effort is made to ensure that quality, innovative and flexible learning environments are created with shared resources. The school day often extends way beyond mid-afternoon and school facilities and spaces are used creatively by the community almost round the clock.

Teachers are held in high regard and work closely with a range of other professionals to ensure that responsibilities for student wellbeing are shared and expertise in different areas is valued. The establishment of trust between teachers and learners and families is regarded as a high priority. Assessment is rich, often formative and multi-dimensional and regarded as integral to student learning rather than solely based on what can be easily measured quantitatively at the lowest financial cost. Ongoing career long teacher professional learning controlled by teachers is a given. Inclusive curricula mean that equity and social justice issues are at the heart of storyline 2 with all student backgrounds and experiences acknowledged as relevant--and there is no talk of deficit teachers or students. The curricula developed and implemented are relevant to learners' lives and students are more actively engaged in both curriculum design and implementation.

A creative approach to pedagogy is highly valued because it connects with students social and emotional wellbeing, increases levels of attention, retention and enjoyment in the act of learning and facilitates deeper learning and understanding. Instead of working in isolation and ignorance, policymakers and bureaucrats work collegially with educators to explore how the country's social and economic resources can serve all of Australia's children. Equality of service and resourcing based on the educational needs of each student (Gonski, 2011) rather than equality of opportunity is envisioned (Connell, 2002). As Vinson has long asserted:

The surest sign of whether our nation has a soul is whether it cherishes all of its children ... Unless there is serious commitment to upholding every child's birthright to acquire the educational and personal foundations for a full and satisfying life, we fail the first test of any civilised community. That involves doing justice by the most vulnerable among us, our children, and especially socially disadvantaged children. (Vinson 2007)

In this second storyline the creative arts, rather than being marginalised, are seen as central to creative and innovative thinking (Blanchett, 2008) and are embedded in the core curriculum as critical, quality pedagogy (Ewing, 2010). No longer are the Arts relegated to extra-curricular activities only accessible by the privileged. Educators understand and embrace the international and national research (see for example, Martin, Mansour, Anderson, Gibson, Liem & Sudmalis, 2013; Winner, Goldstein & Vincent-Lancrin, 2013; Catterall, 2009; Seidel, Tishman, Winner, Hetland & Palmer, 2009; Gadsden, 2008; Wright & Palmer, 2007; Bamford, 2006; Deasey, 2002; Fiske, 1999) that unequivocally confirms that embedding quality arts processes, experiences and activities centrally in the curriculum and using artistic approaches to learning and teaching in other subjects have very positive effects on children's creativity, motivation, problem solving and academic learning outcomes. As Shirley Brice Heath (2000, p. 121) asserts:

   Current work in neurobiology and physics brings new
   understanding of just how important engaging with
   the visual arts can be for broadening neural circuitry
   involvement in the brain . our growing awareness of
   the ubiquitous power of visual images, moving and still.
   We somehow know schooling has to enable students
   to process and produce information more rapidly than
   ever and through simultaneous use of new forms and
   means.

Further, Martin et al.'s (2013) longitudinal research with 643 primary and secondary students demonstrates that there is a stronger correlation between arts education in school and academic outcomes than non-school factors.

Perhaps the reason for the empowering nature of the Arts stems from the creative processes inherent in all art forms (Winner, Goldstein & Vincent-Lancrin, 2013; Ewing, 2010; Eisner, 2002). Elliot Eisner has long argued that the thinking processes needed to create in arts disciplines (including the literary arts) are not only innately important for us as humans but are also relevant for helping us re-envision curriculum and teaching and learning pedagogies and practices. In their important OECD report Winner et al. (2013) examined the extent to which arts education fosters skills such as critical and creative thinking, self-confidence, motivation, cooperation and the ability to communicate. Two important conclusions include the strong evidence that classroom drama strengthens reading, writing and text understanding and that music education has a clear causal impact on verbal skills. In addition their analysis agrees with the assumption that different forms of arts education have an impact on creativity and critical thinking and habits of mind (Costa & Kallick, 2000). Although each arts discipline is an art form in its own right and are different ways of making meaning (hence, different kinds of literacies) all include the following elements:

* Play

* Design

* Experimentation

* Exploration

* Provocation

* Metaphor

* Expression or representation

* Communication

* Aesthetic shaping of the body or other media Martin Comte (2009, p. 60) argues that

   The Arts allow all of us to represent our reality in ways
   that words are often unable to do ... the Arts also allow
   us to hide behind masks--literal and metaphoric ones--as
   we express our thoughts, our needs and desires, as
   we explore relationships and deal with difficulties ...
   and in the process we are allowed, indeed encouraged
   to play. The Arts also allow us to express our dreams ...
   bring our dreams to life ... test our dreams in a safe and
   secure environment ...

Storyline 2 emphasises the need to carefully evaluate where children are on any learning continuum and how their learning styles and approaches inform the creation of meaningful activities. Comparisons between students and schools are not over-valued. Assessment for learning is an integral part of curriculum and pedagogy planning and implementation. Students' achievements and capabilities are celebrated and used as a starting point for the next learning tasks. Assessment criteria are explicit and processes to ensure students' understanding of their meaning are central to teaching and learning. Criteria are not biased in relation to gender, ethnicity, socio economic status or cultural capital. Risk taking and failure are embedded in supportive learning contexts because

they can foster persistence, discipline and resilience. As award winning author Markus Zusak (2012) reminds us in his TED talk, The Failurist:

   Failure. It's the grit that creativity turns into a pearl.
   Failure can often motivate us towards our greatest
   successes. Learning from our failed efforts and overcoming
   our insecurities is what makes us stronger and
   better, and gives success much greater meaning.

There are many powerful case studies that demonstrate the positive social impact of the features elaborated here as part of Storyline 2. It is interesting that many of these case studies are being undertaken in communities where children and/or their parents and caregivers are likely to be at risk (Ewing, 2010). Two Australian examples are briefly sketched below. Both are currently dependent on philanthropic funding.

2a. Sydney Story Factory (SSF), Redfern, NSW

Much anecdotal evidence suggests that creative writing has all but disappeared from some classrooms. Yet it is so important for students to have opportunities to explore their own writing agendas with confidence and develop writing skills in meaningful contexts of their own choosing. Inspired by the original not for profit organisation dedicated to enabling young people develop their writing skills, 826 Valencia in San Francisco, a Martian Embassy was built in 2012 in the inner Sydney suburb of Redfern. This Embassy provides the shopfront for The Sydney Story Factory (SSF) incorporated in 2011. Its website suggests the purpose of The Sydney Story Factory (2015) is to offer:

   A safe, welcoming environment to develop and celebrate
   students' creative thinking, creative writing,
   creative production (of 'products' in a wide range of
   media and forms) and creative collaboration.

Led by storytellers, term-long after school and short holiday workshops as well as in-school creative writing sessions are offered free to all children and young people. Volunteers work one-to-one with students to support their developing creative writing potential. Since it opened its doors the SSF has captured the hearts of many prominent authors as well as journalists, educators and general community members attracting more than 800 volunteers to support students develop their storying potential.

The evaluation of SSF's work with students began in 2013 and is ongoing. Five descriptive indicators of creativity have been identified from a comprehensive review of the literature as pertinent to evaluating the processes and activities underway at SSF. These are:

Imaginative

Inquisitive, wondering, questioning, exploring, tolerating ambiguity

Persistent in the face of difficulty, resilience

Disciplined

Collaborative

(Smith & Manuel, 2013)

Self-report questionnaires, focus groups, interviews with students, volunteers and, where possible, parents and SSF storytellers confirm almost unanimously that students enjoy participating in SSF workshops, believe that SSF provides opportunities for them to write creatively and that SSF personnel provide them with help and support. Case study students' experience and approach to creative writing is also analysed using a newly developed writing framework (Manuel, 2014). Observations of the case study participants during the workshops are also used to help frame the analysis of the writing development of case study students (Smith and Manuel, 2013). Careful analysis of the data for the case study students suggest they have made impressive gains in their creative writing as well as their understanding of their creative selves (Ewing, Manuel & Mortimer, 2015). More detail about SSF can be found at: http://www.sydneystoryfactory.org.au

2b. School Drama

School Drama is an initiative developed by the Sydney Theatre Company in partnership with the Faculty of Education and Social Work at the University of Sydney. The program focuses on developing primary teachers' professional knowledge of and expertise in the use of educational or process drama strategies (O'Neill, 1995) with quality literature to enhance students' English and literacy outcomes. The essence of process or educational drama includes

* enactment and embodiment--having an opportunity to walk in someone else's shoes to develop an understanding of different perspectives and motivations;

* capturing participants' intrinsic motivation and engaging the imagination to explore possibilities, dilemmas and different perspectives;

* enabling choice & ownership--a sense of control, empowerment and autonomy; and

* exploring and improvising alternatives.

   Participating teachers are first introduced to a range
   of educational process drama strategies (Ewing
   & Simons, 2004; O'Neill, 1995) with contemporary
   literary texts. Actors or teaching artists work
   alongside classroom teachers using a co-mentoring
   professional learning model (Ewing, 2002, 2006)
   to plan a program focused on a particular English
   or literacy outcome identified by the teacher. The
   teaching artist then team teaches with the class
   teacher once a week for up to seven weeks in either
   term two or three of the school year. The teaching
   artist initially models the use of drama strategies
   (for example, 'hotseating', 'sculpting', 'depiction',
   'conscience alley,' 'readers' theatre') with the chosen
   texts with the class teacher often modelling for other
   teachers. Over the timeframe the class teacher gains
   confidence and expertise in using drama strategies,
   choosing quality literature and authentically
   assessing students' literacy and English outcomes
   in the selected area. At the same time the teaching
   artist develops an understanding of the classroom
   context. The students' literacy learning is enhanced.
   (For a more detailed outline of the program itself
   see: https://www.sydneytheatre.com.au/community/
   education/teacher-learning/school-drama)

The first year of the pilot program involved 11 teachers, 250 students and 2 teaching artists in 2009 in five disadvantaged inner city Sydney primary schools. By 2014 the program included nearly 90 teachers, 10 teaching artists and over 2000 children across 40 schools in the greater Sydney region and one rural and remote context. In addition in 2013-2014 a successful pilot program was undertaken by the State Theatre Company in Adelaide working with teachers in 5 schools.

   The meta-analysis of the first five years of evaluation
   of the SD program (Gibson & Smith, 2013) validates
   unequivocally the success of the co-mentoring professional
   learning model in developing teacher understanding
   and skills in using process drama strategies
   to impact student literacy learning in participant
   schools. In turn there is very strong evidence that
   the students gain an understanding of process drama
   strategies and increasing self confidence in using
   these across the curriculum. Currently case studies
   are exploring the long term sustainability of the initiative
   in teachers' pedagogy and professional practice.

Concluding comments

It is my firm belief that Australian literacy educators have the knowledge and expertise underpinned by a strong research basis for ensuring that the first storyline described above is not permitted to continue to gather momentum. To take a stand in this way needs courage, conviction, resilience and persistent effort given the strength underpinning the current narrow reductionist neoliberal agenda.

Returning then to Millard and King's The Duck and the Darklings (2014):

   Courage gave Peterboy a voice. He cried out from his
   lofty perch. One day I found a scrap of wonderfulness.
   Her wings were wounded but in her heart there was
   hope.

Our responsibility as educators is to teach literacy (and research) imaginatively (not solely with tests in mind!) to provide opportunities for our students to continue to develop their imaginations and creative potential and enable the ongoing development of their wonderfulness. Our children need to be in the flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Imagination or 'what if', 'I wonder', 'suppose ...' is the centrepiece for all learning whether they are scientific or artistic (Bennett, 1991). Similarly a decade later Maxine Greene (2001, p. 146) exhorted educators to remain open to the mysteries, wonders and questions that are part of all our lives as we try to make sense of a world that is rapidly changing.

If we are to make a start in seeking a way to realise Storyline 2, we must begin by understanding the current context and be open and optimistic about the potential for reform. We must listen to our children and our students and our community members in diverse Australian educational contexts, especially those for whom the current curriculum and assessment storylines are not working effectively. We need to find ways to respect and include their voices and their storylines in our thinking and planning for tomorrow.

It is my strong conviction that we as creative literacy and English educators must find a way to break through the traditional, bureaucratic and policy rhetoric characterised by storyline 1 to ensure that all children are able to engage meaningfully in their educational experiences. Children need to feel imaginatively infused continually, ready to ask the big questions and to challenge their perceived boundaries.

Dedicated to the visionary educators Elliot Eisner and Maxine Greene whose thinking, research and scholarship has had an enormous impact on education and who both passed over in 2014.

Robyn Ewing

The University of Sydney

References

Alexander, R. (Ed.) (2009). Children, their world, their education: Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review. London: Routledge.

Bamford, A. (2006). The WOW factor: Global compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York: Waxman.

Bennett, J. (1991). Learning to read with picture books (4th ed.). Stroud, Gloucester: The Thimble Press.

Blanchett, C. (2008). Opening address, 'Towards a creative Australia' strand, Opening address presented at the Prime Minister's 2020 Summit, Canberra.

Buchanon, J., Prescott, A., Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Burke, P. & Louviere, J. (2013). Teacher Retention and Attrition: Views of Early Career Teachers, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38 (3) 112-127.

Campbell, V., Ewing, R. & Gibson, R. (2010). Evaluation of School Drama pilot study. Unpublished report. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Catterall, J. (2002). The arts and the transfer of learning. In R. Deasy (Ed.), Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development (pp. 151-7). Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.

Catterall, J. (2009). Doing well and doing good by doing art: The long term effects of sustained involvement in the visual and performing arts during high school. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Imagination Group.

Connell, R. (2002). Making the Difference, then and now. Discourse, 23 (3), 319-327.

Connell, R., Ashenden, D., Kessler, S. & Dowsett, F. (1982). Making the Difference. Schools, families and social division. Sydney: George Allen & Unwin.

Costa, A. & Kallick, B. (2000). Assessing and reporting on habits of mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity, flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2011, May). Improving learning: What can we learn from reforms around the world? Keynote presented at University of Sydney.

Davies, M. & Edwards, G. (2001). Will the curriculum caterpillar ever learn to fly? In M. Fielding (Ed.) Taking education really seriously: four years hard Labour. London: Routledge, Falmer.

Deasey, R. (2002). Critical Links. Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington DC: Arts Education Partnership.

Dee, T., & Jacob, B. (2011). The impact of no Child Left Behind on student achievement, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 30 (3), 418-446.

Eisner, E. (2002). What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education? John Dewey Lecture, Stanford University. Retrieved from, http:www.infed.org. biblio/Eisner_arts_and_the_practice_of_education.hm

Engberg, J. Gill, B., Zamarro, G., Zimmer, R. (2012). Closing schools in a shrinking district: Do student outcomes depend on which schools are closed? Journal of Urban Economics, 71,(2), 189-203.

Ewing, R. (2014). Curriculum and Assessment: Storylines. (2nd edn). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Ewing, R. (2010). The Arts and Australian education: Realising potential. Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.

Ewing, R. (2006). Reading to allow spaces to play. In R. Ewing (Ed.). Beyond the reading wars: Towards a balanced approach to helping children learn to read (171-182). Sydney: Primary English Teaching Association.

Ewing, R, Hristofski, H., Gibson, R., Campbell,V. & Robinson, A. (2011). Using drama to enhance literacy: The School Drama Initiative. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 19 (3), 33-39.

Ewing, R., & Manuel, J. (2005). Retaining quality early teachers in the profession: new teacher narratives. Change: Transformations in Education, 8 (1), 1-16.

Ewing, R. & Simons J. (2004). Beyond the script: Drama in the classroom. Take two. Sydney: PETA.

Fiske, E. (Ed.) (1999). Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership & President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.

Freebody, P. (2014, July). Authentic literacy assessment. A conversation with Robyn Ewing, Paper presented at the ALEA /AATE National Literacy Conference, Darwin.

Gadsden, V. 2008. The arts and education: knowledge generation, pedagogy and the discourse of learning. Review of Research in Education 32, 29-61.

Gibson, R. (2011). Evaluation of School Drama, 2010. Unpublished Report. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Gibson, R. (2012). Evaluation of School Drama 2011.Unpublished Report. Sydney: University of Sydney.

Gibson, R. & Ewing, R. (2011). Transforming the curriculum through the arts. Melbourne: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gibson, R. & Smith, D. (2013). School Drama: A meta-analysis 2009-14, Unpublished report: University of Sydney.

Gonski, D. (2011). Review of Funding for Schooling--Final Report. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar: The Lincoln lectures in aesthetic education. New York: Teachers College Press.

Haberman, M. (1991). The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 290-294.

Harris,P., Smith, B. & Harris, J. (2011).The Myths of Standardized Tests: Why They Don't Tell You What You Think They Do. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.

Heath, S.B. (2001). Three's not a crowd: Plans, roles and focus in the Arts. Educational Researcher, October 2001, 10-16.

Hilton, M. (2006). Measuring standards in primary English: issues of validity and accountability with respect to PIRLS and National Curriculum test scores British Educational Research Journal, 32 (6), 817-37.

McCarthy K., Ondaatje E., Zakaras L., & Brooks, A. (2004). Gifts of the Muse: Reframing the debate about the benefits of the Arts. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

McDermott, M. (2011). Capitalistic education 'reform': Democracy is the new socialism. Baltimore Education Reform, April 16, Retreived from http://www.examiner. com/education-reform-in-baltimore/capitalistic-educationreform-democracy-is-the-new-socialism-1

Manuel, J. (2014). Draft writing framework: Sydney Story Factory. Unpublished report, University of Sydney.

Martin, A.J., Mansour, M., Anderson, M., Gibson, R., Liem, G.A., & Sudmalis, D. (2013). The role of arts participation in students' academic and nonacademic outcomes: A longitudinal study of school, home, and community factors. Journal of Educational psychology, 105 (3), 709-727.

Millard, G. & King, S. (2014). The Duck and the Darklings. Crows Nest, Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Nilson, C., Fetherston, C.M., McMurray, A., & Fetherston, T. (2013). Creative Arts: An Essential Element in the Teacher's Toolkit When Developing Critical Thinking in Children. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38 (7). Retrieved from, http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n7.4

The Commission on No Child Left Behind, (2009). Beyond NCLB: Fulfilling the promise to our Nation's children. Washington DC: The Aspen Institute. Retrieved from http://www.aspeninstitute.org/publications/commissionno-child-left-behind-report

O'Neill, C., (1995). Drama worlds: A framework for process drama. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ravitch, D. (2012). Standardized Testing Undermines Teaching. Retrieved from, http://www.npr.org/2011/04 /2 8/135142 895/ravitch-standardized-testing underminesteaching?ps=cprs

Seidel, S., Tishman, S., Winner, E., Hetland, L., & Palmer, P. (2009). The Qualities of Quality. Understanding Excellence in Arts Education. Cambridge Mass: Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education and The Wallace Foundation.

Smith, D. & Manuel, J. (2013). Sydney Story Factory: Preliminary Evaluation Report. Unpublished report, University of Sydney.

Sydney Story Factory. (2015). Igniting the spark of creativity. Retrieved December 18, 2015, from http://www.sydneystoryfactory.org.au/ourpeople

Vinson, T. (2007). Dropping off the Edge. The distribution of disadvantage in Australia. Jesuit Social Services and Catholic Social Services, Australia.

Winner E., Goldstein, T., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Educational research and innovation and art for arts sake: The impact of arts education, OECD.

Wright, P., & Palmer, D. (2007). People now know me for something positive: An evaluation of Big hART's work at the John Northcott Estate. Perth: Murdoch University. Retrieved from, http://www.bighart.org/media/file/Evaluations/Northcott%20Evaluation%20Final%20Jan%2008. pdf?PHPSESSID=6012478b42967cd5e3c4d659c17fc414

Wyn, J. (2009).Touching the Future: Building skills for life and work. Australian Education Review, Camberwell, Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research Press.

Zusak, M. (2014). The Failurist. TedX Sydney talk, The Sydney Opera House. Retrieved from: http://tedxsydney. com/site/item.cfm?item=E6261BF7B6AEC7C4F8C3824 B7DB94460

Robyn Ewing is Professor of Teacher Education and the Arts, Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney. Robyn's research and writing has particularly focused on the use of educational or process drama with authentic literary texts to develop students' critical literacies. Robyn is immediate past president of the Australian Literacy Educators' Association, a council member of the Australian Film, Television and Radio School (AFTRS) and vice president of Sydney Story Factory. She was president of the Primary English Teaching Association Australian (PETAA) from 2001-2006. An experienced primary teacher and teacher educator, Robyn has a commitment to quality teaching and learning at all levels of education. She enjoys working collaboratively with classroom teachers interested in innovative curriculum practices. She has worked as an academic mentor with teachers at a range of Sydney primary and secondary schools with the major focus on transforming the curriculum using the Arts as critical, quality pedagogy.