Adolescent learners and reading: exploring a collaborative, community approach.
Barton, Georgina ; McKay, Loraine
Introduction
A consistent issue identified in contemporary educational theory
and practice concerns itself with adolescents who struggle with literacy
learning (Alvermann, 2001; Barton & Freebody, 2014; Moje, 2002; Ryan
& Barton, 2014). Of particular concern is the need for educators to
develop effective and appropriate strategies that respond to an
increasing number of adolescents struggling to develop adequate literacy
skills necessary for life beyond school.
Teaching reading in the secondary school context has largely been
the responsibility of English and/or learning support teachers, yet much
research points to the need for all teachers to be literacy teachers;
with a particular focus on curriculum area reading and writing
(Freebody, Chan & Barton, 2013; Unsworth, 2001). Additionally, there
is evidence to suggest that more and more young adolescents are entering
high school needing support in reading generally (Cashen, 2012; Clary,
Feez, Garvey & Partridge, 2015; Murphy, 2015).
Research shows a 'rush to teaching' (McDermott, 2005)
occurs rather than well-considered and thoughtful approaches in order to
improve literacy standards for adolescent learners. Reactive, quick-fix
approaches tend to be impacted on by institutional mandates to raise
achievement levels on standardised tests, such as the National
Assessment Program--Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) in Australia, rather
than taking a holistic view of the factors that may be contributing to
the difficulties being experienced. Manuel and Carter (2015) for
example, note that the challenges associated with student diversity are
magnified due to high stakes testing, often impacting negatively on
students' enjoyment of reading. Comber's (2012) research in
Australia argues a distinct pedagogical shift in teaching has occurred;
what she terms an 'audit culture'. This reductionist approach
to teaching often impacts more on socio-disadvantaged schools and
students (Comber, 2012; Comber & Cormack, 2011).
This paper presents data from two secondary schools from low
socio-economic areas that reported an increasing numbers of adolescents
entering high school who needed support in reading. It provides evidence
to validate a student-centred, collaborative approach to improve reading
strategies via a model of shared practice.
Adolescents and literacy learning
Adolescence is a time of great change and uncertainty as 11 to 15
year olds experience extreme physical, emotional and intellectual
growth; all at differing rates of change. Consequently, students present
with specific, individual needs. Moll, Amanti, Neff and Gonzalez (1992)
and Moje et al. (2004) note each student comes to school with their own
funds of knowledge and highlight the importance of including
students' prior learning and life experiences in programs designed
to support adolescent literacy learning, and in particular reading.
Strong evidence suggests if teachers have not taken the time to
become familiar with students' funds of knowledge and the ways in
which they take to text (Hill, 2012), there is potential for literacy
teaching to be narrowed in response to student shortcomings (Westwood,
2008). Adolescent students who have difficulty in certain areas of
reading often have experienced ongoing lack of school success and
therefore focusing on students' strengths and interests is even
more important with regard to student engagement. Further, Merga (2014)
notes that adolescents are often not identified as keen readers and that
multiple dimensions need to be examined; not just students'
attitude towards reading. A deficit lens may overlook pedagogical,
social, technological and cultural factors influencing literacy learning
(Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003; Rennie & Patterson, 2008; Rennie
& Ortlieb, 2013). Therefore, it is important a holistic view informs
literacy programs for adolescents as their past experiences are likely
to be more diverse than those of younger students and the demands of
reading in the secondary years becomes more complex.
Additionally, Watson and Gable (2013) suggest particular
maturational changes that occur in the brain during adolescence may help
to overcome certain areas of reading difficulty. Significant cognitive
growth may contribute to the acceleration of information processing
ability, and an increased capacity in short-term memory and reasoning.
While these factors may assist the development of reading skills in the
adolescent, the accumulated lack of success in reading in previous years
means attitudinal factors often play a significant role in future
successes. Teaching self-regulation strategies to students with limited
school success is significant for the positive effects on behavioural
and academic outcomes (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1998).
Similarly, social interaction is also important for adolescents and
the school culture and friends become extremely influential in learning.
The relationship between social and academic needs and their influence
on learning links closely with elements of Fullan, Hill and
Crevola's (2006) Breakthrough model. The basis of their model is a
whole school approach to improving student outcomes through
personalisation, precision, and professional learning.
The Breakthrough Model (Fullan et al., 2006) puts moral purpose at
the core of teaching and learning practice; that is, making a positive
difference to the lives of students by being attuned to their needs. The
model takes into account three Ps: 1. Personalisation includes
addressing motivation as well as academic requirements to meet the needs
of the learner in a holistic manner; 2. Precision supports
personalisation using data and feedback to inform teaching and improve
learning outcomes; and 3. Professional learning abets teachers to
facilitate personalised learning. The school culture plays a notable
role in how professional learning communities are enacted. Time to
reflect on one's practice, to observe the work of colleagues, and
to provide and receive collegial feedback are key ingredients to
initiate change or develop more responsive practices as teachers work
towards moral goals. Clearly, beliefs of stakeholders play a significant
role in the Breakthrough Model which is premised on Hill and
Crevola's (1999) theorising:
* All students can achieve high standards given sufficient time and
support
* All teachers can teach to high standards given the right
conditions
* High expectations and early intervention is necessary
* Teachers need to be able to articulate what they do and why they
do it (pp. 2-3).
The importance of a whole school approach
A whole school approach, driven by strong leadership, has long been
associated with quality student outcomes (Ainscow & Sandhill, 2010;
Fullan et al., 2006; Hill & Crevola, 1999). The beliefs of leaders
and teachers play a significant role in how they respond to students who
experience difficulties with learning. Moreover, Silverman (2007)
contends because beliefs influence behaviour, and therefore
teachers' decision-making, they have the potential to affect
classroom climate and student outcomes. However, beliefs are not
developed in isolation; they form through the interactions individuals
encounter within their distinct context.
The cultural influence embedded within structural features of
society and governed by various social, political, and economic factors
(Thompson, 2011) sustain certain expectations within education. Schools
and students from low socioeconomic backgrounds have traditionally been
positioned by lower expectations regarding academic performance than
those of their wealthier counterparts (Lingard, Sellar & Savage,
2014; Polesel, Rice & Dulfer, 2014; Westwood, 2008), often
transferring to students' self-expectations.
Beliefs about students who experience difficulties with literacy
skills are often supported through deficit discourse (Corbett &
Slee, 2000). These beliefs sanction ideological assumptions in
education, such as the links between poverty and learning. Fixed ability
mindset, supported by deficit discourse, assumes adolescents from
disadvantaged backgrounds cannot make up the gaps in learning once they
reach high school and this has consequences on learning to read (Centre
for Youth Literature, 2009). In contrast, beliefs drawing on broader
conceptualisations of difference consider what is needed to support
learning, particularly in the area of literacy (Manuel & Brindley,
2012). Similarly, beliefs supporting a growth mindset suggest abilities
can be developed and acknowledge the important role motivation plays in
students' academic improvement (Dweck, 2007; Fletcher, 2013).
Contesting school beliefs is important for professional growth and
transformation (Le Fevre, 2014). Fullan et al.'s Breakthrough Model
(2006) includes challenging enculturated and personal beliefs linked
with classroom practice and positive school culture.
This paper, therefore, seeks to address the following research
question: How can secondary schools support adolescents, who have not
developed decoding and comprehension skills necessary to engage with the
curriculum, develop these skills to a level where they can apply them
within and beyond the classroom? We do this by discussing two secondary
schools' approaches to improving literacy for young adolescents.
Background to the studies
Case Study 1: Treetops State High
Treetops State High School is located in a coastal region in
Queensland, Australia with approximately 900 students between Years 8
and 12. According to the myschool website the school comprises of
families from low to mid socio-economic backgrounds with approximately
40% of students belonging to the bottom quarter and 7% to the top
quarter of the ICSEA1 scale. Transience of students is an issue although
staffing is stable. The school has acknowledged a large increase in
young adolescents entering junior secondary with limited reading skills
and has therefore implemented a multi-faceted approach for improvement.
The approach included: targeted learning support involving phonics,
spelling and comprehension programs, a bridging English class and a
community volunteer program.
The school initially approached the authors to collect qualitative
data to illuminate the impact of their multi-faceted approach to
improving literacy learning outcomes. We conducted individual interviews
and focus groups with staff, students and community members. The initial
data collection commenced at the start of the school year with
subsequent data collection six months later. Details of participants and
the timing of interviews is summarised in Table 1. Sample questions are
provided in Appendix A.
Case Study 2: Open Fields State High
Open Fields State High School is located in a semi-rural area in
Queensland, Australia experiencing high unemployment. The school has a
population of around 560 students from Year 8-12. According to the
myschool website the school comprises of families from low to mid
socio-economic backgrounds with approximately 60% of students belonging
to the bottom quarter and 3% to the top quarter of the ICSEA scale.
Transience and poor attendance are characteristics of the student
population. Staff retention, especially experienced teachers, has been
problematic at this school.
During 2013, a literacy improvement strategy was developed as part
of the school reform process. The literacy focus was in response to an
identified increase in the number of students entering Year 8 with low
literacy levels. In 2014, a targeted reading program was developed for
Year 8 and 9 students in the Special Education Program (SEP). In the
Year 8 class sixteen students worked with one teacher for an average of
three lessons per day on modified curriculum that focused on literacy
skills. After 10 weeks they re-entered their regular classes where
additional support from a teacher aide was available in some lessons. In
the SEP class, fourteen students worked with two teachers on a modified
curriculum for an average of three lessons per day for the entire school
year.
This paper reports only on interview data collected during 2014 at
Open Fields High. The extended data collection period allowed for
changing perceptions and practices to be identified. Data collection
methods included interviews with students, parents, teachers and teacher
aides involved in the learning support classes, mainstream teachers and
teacher aides, and school administrators. Classroom observations of the
learning support classes and reflective diaries completed by the
teachers were also collected. Table 2 presents a summary of the entire
data collection. See Appendix B for sample of interview questions.
Analysing the data
The interviews and focus groups from both schools were transcribed
and analysed over two phases involving: 1. individual case study
analysis using thematic analysis and 2. cross-case analysis between the
two schools using emerging themes as well as theoretical frameworks
informed by the literature. Each author categorised data into these
themes continually checking and re-checking the emergent understandings
as well as clarifying these with each other. Once a familiarity was
established the documents were imported as text files into the software
package NVivo 10 (NVivo assists with classifying, sorting and arranging
information. Nodes (categories) were defined, refined and expanded
during subsequent coding and thematic analysis. Marshall and Rossman
(2011) state categories and sub-categories can be formed by identifying
prominent themes, recurring ideas, and people's beliefs expressed
through language and behaviour, linking people and settings together to
create a framework for organising segments of text.
Consequently, the themes identified were: 1. Students' needs,
2. Teachers' pedagogical knowledge and skills, and 3. Beliefs.
Although the programs at each school were different, that is one
involving lesson modifications, the other program modifications, a
number of similarities were evident during cross-case analysis. Analysis
was carried out using aspects of the Breakthrough Model (Fullan et.al.,
2006) as a theoretical framework that takes into account a collaborative
and transformative literacy pedagogy; one that focuses on positive and
agentic discourse of the students' abilities and capacities for
learning within a whole school community.
Findings
Case Study 1: Treetops High School
Students' needs
Data at Treetops High School indicated students were cognisant of
the difficulties they experienced with reading and the impact of this on
their school achievement.
Well when I first came here, I couldn't read at all, so they
helped me with it. (Student)
Yeah because I used to be really dumb, but now [I'm] bright.
(Student)
At the beginning of the year students revealed their acceptance of
teachers making decisions in relation to their reading improvement
plans. Strategies included implementing a phonics and comprehension
program and learning support lessons in the support unit within the
school. There was evidence to suggest the students felt these lessons
were not necessarily engaging as they were repetitive and unvaried.
Too slow, because every lesson it's like deja vu. (Student)
They say the same thing and you think oh I've already learned
about this, can you take a level up ... But it feels you've done
three lessons, but it's exactly the same. So you know it off by
heart now, which is good but you can go up a level now. (Student)
Because they have these sheets on the table and we do it ... every
day and then they'll say oh the words on it are probably cat, dog,
Monday, Tuesday and that.. but then you do that the next day the exact
same thing. (Student)
Further, the data showed students' capacity to make decisions
about their own learning; although there was little evidence to suggest
the teachers utilised the students' decision making skills.
You want a variety of stuff, have different stuff, it goes easy
then if you've done that for two days or a week and then you go
harder another week and then harder. (Student)
Maybe you can pick your own topic and read it. Because I like
sport, I could read about sport, if someone likes games computer games
and that the can read about that ... they would get more into it and
maybe learn new stuff about that. (Student)
A positive outcome however, was the fact that students'
attitude towards themselves as readers dramatically changed within six
months of the project. They communicated a growing sense of
self-confidence and assuredness, particularly in relation to reading
aloud in front of their peers. This confidence was more prominent when
the students were given opportunities to show leadership in a peer
tutoring role.
When I was in primary I couldn't read or spell at all, so when
I came here it was just like a big jump saying I can do this now and ...
come to school every day and learn everything and like they helped me.
(Student)
I help [other students] with their word list if they're under
the level that I am. I help them write, I help them read and do their
book. I help them on the computer.
I really help wherever they need help really. Yeah. I've
learnt a lot since I've been--took over tutoring other people. So I
reckon that's an easier way for me to learn as well, like at the
same time. (Student)
I am on blue level now, some people need help and we get to be the
teacher at times. So we get to teach some new words. It's pretty
fun. (Student)
By the end of the six months the students had a clear idea about
what types of learning experiences were most beneficial for them. They
felt empowered when these focused on what they could do rather than on
what they could not do. Research on adolescents and literacy learning,
principally in learning support, signifies the importance of
acknowledging the students' funds of knowledge or personal
literacies (whether in or out of school) they already possess (Woods,
Dooley, Luke, & Exley, 2014). Taking a student-centred approach to
improving reading resulted in more positive outcomes for this school.
Teachers' pedagogical knowledge and skills
Early in the Treetops High's program, the teaching staff
demonstrated, to some extent, their uncertainty of what effective
reading pedagogy looked like for adolescent students--We all need a
little bit more in-service and need to be immersed ourselves in it
(Learning support teacher). As secondary school content area
specialists, many of the teachers did not have any training in the
teaching of reading. But it was more than just being able to teach
reading. A pedagogical approach that took into account an understanding
of students' interests and strengths and also their needs was
important for growth and confidence for both staff and students.
Everyone on the admin side of things are very positive, even though
some of them are unsure about what I do ... I know what I am doing ... I
think as the year progresses we'll get that clarity from ... the
rest of the school. (Volunteer coordinator)
The problem with plans is they're only as good as they're
actioned. The other issue is we're high school teachers, not
primary school teachers, so we're seeing an intake of children who
don't know how to read at all. That problems growing and it's
going to become insurmountable in a few years unless we do a fundamental
shift in the way we organise ourselves. (Head of Department)
After six months, the program had developed and changed
substantially, particularly for the teaching staff directly involved in
supporting the students but also for other teachers. These positive
perceptions were shared across learning support teachers and other
teaching staff including the teacher aides, volunteer coordinator and
volunteers. The following comments show the importance of the fluid
nature of the program and the impact it had on the students'
learning:
Well, from my perspective, I think it's morphed a lot.
It's really been quite transformational. (Volunteer coordinator)
All of a sudden, they're kind of like, yeah. They're just
starting to beam. So in terms of resilience, they're trying a
little bit harder, whereas before they might have given up. (Volunteer)
In addition, an English bridging program was offered for the
students who had completed the phonics and comprehension programs but
were not ready for the regular classroom curriculum. This showed the
school's willingness to take important risks such as not being
bound by curriculum demands. It also acknowledged the process to support
students to become better readers as a work in progress. (Learning
support teacher).
Beliefs
Generally the staff's beliefs showed a moral core (Fullan et.
al., 2006) of wanting to improve student learning outcomes, particularly
in the area of reading. These beliefs were influenced by the
stakeholders' role. In the first round of interviews for example,
systemic directives and constraints were highly influential on the
decisions being made by the leadership team. This included data from
both NAPLAN and ACER testing and the feeder primary school's
perception of the students.
I picked the teachers and the classes based on need, around their
NAPLAN Scores or they were identified as a modified program ... So we
had a literacy plan in action that was having results, ... NAPLAN data
shows that, but ... the problem with NAPLAN data is, with the kids we
know we cannot we always ask them to be withdrawn. So the data's
skewed from the beginning. (Head of Department)
There's so many agendas that the [Education Department's]
running that you've got to keep your eye on the ball ... and keep
those things moving along. (Deputy Principal)
In the second round of interviews however, key decisions about the
program were influenced more by a collaborative, community and team
approach comprising trust in the teaching staff's professionalism,
critical evaluation of programs, knowledge of the students'
learning needs, and community partners such as the volunteers.
It's more about the work of a whole lot of other people and me
encouraging them to keep on going forward . my level of influence is
diluted, but the influences are still there. (Principal)
There's a top down, so if your principal and leaders are
strong then that usually filters down to the student population ... we
foster a real collaborative community, we are family kind of
approach--or try to. So everything we do is about respecting each other
and trying to instil that value of pride in all of our kids, so
it's from both ends. (Head of Department)
While the moral purpose for the school was to raise expectations
and standards in supporting students, there were a number of external
factors still impacting on progress, including funds, time and
organisation.
[There are] financial constraints with staffing, with timetabling,
rooming ... waiting for day 8 numbers and not knowing whether or not we
were going to get learning support. (Deputy Principal)
Communication is always a big thing, just in terms of even
organising the kids coming out of classes ... I didn't communicate
the message necessarily clearly enough to start with, but there's
been a little bit of to-ing and fro-ing in terms of getting the kids out
on time ... it's actually quite hard to organise that. (Learning
support teacher)
However, through a collaborative community approach creative
solutions were actioned with positive results.
It's consolidated in our current school environment. You can
see that with the breadth of teachers accessing the resource of
volunteers . these children are getting supported with their reading
then they're getting supported in their classroom environment.
(Head of Department)
We have moved from a conversation of low morale to what we're
proud of what we do. We work together and we like what we do and I love
coming to work. (Principal)
Over the six-month period a cohesive group developed and worked
collaboratively to plan, implement, and reflect on the various
initiatives introduced. The learning support teacher and volunteer
coordinator were reportedly key drivers of this program. The role of the
volunteers in the literacy program and the regular classroom appears to
have been instrumental in building a shared responsibility. The
collaborative approach to addressing adolescent literacy skills provides
success in at least two areas. First, collegiality at all levels of the
school appears to have increased and resulted in a supportive,
professional work environment with shared, data-driven decision making
and reflective practice. Second, the students' confidence levels
appeared to have been enhanced creating more positive perceptions of
their own ability. Increasing self-confidence transferred to their
willingness to seek support. Early indications from school data and
anecdotal evidence suggested students are showing real gains in basic
reading skills. How this transfers into their everyday studies and the
long-term impact, such as school retention and employability, will
require ongoing monitoring.
You get a lot of kids that say they're dumb. Then you have a
volunteer saying to them, well you're not actually. Look at how
much you've improved. (Teacher Aide)
Very focused on what the problems and the issues were, very
concerned about the declining rate of literacy and the kids coming
through, and how potentially that could be managed in years to come .
it's about breaking that cycle. (Community partner)
Case Study 2: Open Fields High School
Students' needs
At Open Fields High School all teachers were expected to implement
a six step pedagogical framework, based on an explicit teaching model.
Resulting from the data, some teachers rejected the prescriptive nature
of the framework and chose a more flexible approach in response to
students' needs, while others adopted the approach to satisfy the
expectation of adherence to the whole school approach.
That's where I mould the warm-up and the starter together.
I'm happy for that. I would rather [the students] have thorough
understanding. (Teacher)
I guess it puts you on edge a little bit though. You know
they're coming in to look at your [explicit] teaching framework ...
I better have all of the bits that tick all the boxes there if
there's somebody in power coming in. (Teacher)
The literature highlights that some risks are worth taking (Le
Fevre, 2014); just as the staff and community at Treetops found. A
systematic pedagogical approach across the school is beneficial in
helping teachers set expectations and manage behaviour. It also provided
routine, which helped enhance time on task.
In response to students' over-reliance on the teacher and
displays of learned-helplessness, the learning support teachers
attempted to embed activities to encourage independence and build
teamwork into classroom tasks.
I changed the focus a lot more to them being self-regulating and
getting the strategies, the reading strategies. So the goal was for them
to be able to understand and be more independent when they can't
understand what they have to do . So we've been really working on
that, listening to instructions and then working out what to do without
having to just be the victim and the learned helplessness. We're
trying to get rid of that. (Learning support teacher)
The learning support teachers realised they needed to 'move
away from [their] personal style of heavily structured lessons and
activities and move toward more engaging and less structured
approach' but noted the challenges this presented.
I am realising that lessons with more student freedom still require
structure (particularly for ASD students and their need for routine) in
order to have the classroom running smoothly. (Learning support teacher)
However, personalising programs through differentiation of content,
assessment and teaching strategies underpinned by student data was
important for change and positive results to occur at Open Fields.
There was still some way to go however, as the data suggested
students were still not included in the planning process or content
choices and there were limited opportunities for setting personal goals
for learning.
The other thing is that I'm trying to really aim the content
at them. So for example, the English is all about them. The novel that
I've chosen I think some of them will relate to because it's
about young teenagers in difficult situations and, some of these have
come from difficult situations. It's about young children young
teenagers taking control of their own lives so I'm hoping that will
motivate them as well. (Learning support teacher)
Teachers' pedagogical knowledge and skills
The administration recognised the need and importance of developing
teachers' capacity across the school in all discipline areas.
We haven't been trained ... to teach kids how to read. So
straightaway those children who don't have those skills or
don't even know where to start, they're not being scaffolded
in a subject-based class. Then they're disengaged and then there
becomes a behavioural problem, and therein they're highly at risk
of leaving school. (Principal)
Teachers found catering for the diverse needs of students
challenging and expressed concern over their ability to differentiate
teaching strategies adequately especially within constraints related to
assessment practices.
I don't want to hear strategies I want to actually see some
examples. Here's a classroom, there you are. This is what
you're going to do. (Teacher)
I would love to do more PD on reading intervention . I know that
these kids have to improve their reading and I know some blanket
strategies ... but ... for a kid who doesn't know how to read their
own name, I wouldn't even know where to begin. So reading
intervention ... modifying to their level as well. (Teacher)
Informal collegial sharing was helpful in developing knowledge and
skills for some teachers, although lack of time limited this practice.
While additional teacher aide time in the classroom gave some teachers
the confidence to develop lessons where students were more active in the
learning process, the teacher aides also acknowledged they needed
additional support and skills to meet the demands of supporting
adolescent learners.
[One of the other teachers] has given me some really good ideas.
... I've made lots of mistakes with activities that I've done
... and I get frustrated, but at the end of the day ... that's
okay, because I'm still learning that I need to change things.
(Teacher)
Another major issue I am encountering is the balance between the
skills the students need (phonics, blends, very basic skills) and the
age appropriateness of the resources or activities. I am finding there
is very little I can think to do to disguise the 'baby-ness'
of certain skills and concepts. (Teacher)
The teachers recognised the learning process was as much about them
as it was about the students. Teachers attributed the lack of success
for some students to teacher inexperience, a limited range of strategies
and inappropriate task choices, poor behaviour management,
students' lack of group work skills, and students' attitude to
learning. However, the following comment illustrates early signs of
challenge to the deficit discourse surrounding students with learning
difficulties and a shift towards the development of a positive school
culture.
There is very much scope to say these students have improved in
this area from here to here, whereas in the past it was always,
there's still a need. So that's a big difference. (Teacher)
Beliefs
It was apparent to the leadership team and staff that a different
approach to improve student outcomes was necessary.
It's not that people aren't working hard. There's
certainly not the reason why we've flat lined across a lot of our
data. It's just that it wasn't the right type of work to get
the improvements needed. (Principal)
The Year 8 and SEP programs, which focused on literacy outcomes
rather than curriculum outcomes, were introduced as part of a
multi-pronged school-wide strategy. The following comment was indicative
of the staffs' moral purpose in making these changes.
The whole point of doing the reading intervention program ... is to
give the kids ... first and foremost ... confidence and the feeling that
they are able to do things and can have some success at high school.
(Principal)
For students at Open Fields High School learning prior to
commencing Year 8 impacted on the perceptions they held about themselves
as learners.
I was actually ... really nervous and panicking. I was really sad
and kind of crying. I was really panicking because I know I'm not
that smart and people--last year in grade seven, people would laugh at
me if I got an answer wrong. It was just like, I'm scared to go
into high school because I know the teacher is going to think I'm
stupid. (Student)
Despite these views the students valued being in the learning
support classes which emphasised the school's belief that each
child could improve given the right conditions. Further, in relation to
Fullan et. al's (2006) emphasis on the involvement of community,
comments from parents and students recognised the support, pastoral care
and the opportunities for success the school was providing.
Now that we've got over the hurdle of his confidence,
it's just how far behind he is, because it's taken till grade
8 for him to get this help. He started seeing himself go bad ... about
grade 5. ... I know that his level is below grade 5 with reading. So
it's now just catching up basically. (Parent)
She was scared that she'd get picked on, because they were
thinking she was dumb. Now she's ... said, I feel more confident,
Mum, that if I don't understand something I ask Mrs L and
she'll help me to understand what I'm trying to do. (Parent)
I never used to know how to spell or read properly but now I'm
getting really good at my spelling and reading and Miss, now she
actually understands me for what I want. (Student)
At the end of each term there was a mixed reaction from the
students returning to the regular program, which illustrates the
fragility of their newfound confidence. Social and academic concerns
were raised.
I feel scared to go back there. Everyone just stares at you.
It's like you're new. (Student)
She's really concerned about ... going back into her
mainstream group. She's really worried ... she said, 'I
don't know if I am going to be able to cope.' (Parent)
Having noticed positive behaviours in their children, such as
reading at home for the first time, completing homework without having
emotional outbursts, and generally being happier and more confident to
attend school, parents expressed concerns about the ongoing support
available in regular classes and the possibility of regression.
It's made a huge difference already and I feel like it's
going to be for nothing, because he's going to fall through the
cracks for now. (Parent)
I think I'd rather keep her in those support classes just for
now. I know she is struggling with her school work and stuff. (Parent)
Discussion and implications
Revisiting Fullan et al.'s (2006) Breakthrough Model we apply
the core moral purpose of potentially powerful change for
adolescents' literacy learning: First, that all students can
achieve high standards given sufficient time and support. At the heart
of this statement are the ways in which key stakeholders view young
people who need extra support with reading. The current study found
beliefs of each stakeholder--leaders, teachers, students and
community--were distinct and therefore impacted in different ways on
programs aimed to improve literacy learning in each school. A definite
gap in each of these school's approaches was the lack of student,
as well as parent, input. Many of the practices implemented in both
schools were decided predominantly by staff and imposed on the students
with little attention given to their individual funds of knowledge
(Moje, 2002).
Figure 1 illustrates a common 'top-down' approach taken
by both schools in regard to supporting literacy learning of their
junior secondary students:
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
The model shows how each school's approach to improving
literacy (particularly at the beginning of each program) was ultimately
driven by the leadership and learning support teams, with limited input
by the students, parents and community. Further, the literacy learning
support programs were essentially separate to the work of general
classroom teachers. Also decisions about these programs were made by the
teachers. Similarities in both programs include the teacher driven
nature of the literacy support programs, general teachers' limited
pedagogical knowledge related to the teaching of reading. In regard to
the students there was limited attention to developing self-regulation
and their oral language. However, over a period of six months (in the
case of Treetops) or one year (in the case of Open Fields) there were
some positive changes happening with the students' attitude to
learning and their self-perceptions improving. Additionally, the
involvement of community members such as the volunteers at Treetops High
was pivotal to this success. A positive attitudinal shift as well as a
collaborative approach is critical for literacy improvement for
adolescents.
Further, at Treetops High the voice of parents was silent and the
wider community at Open Fields were not actively included in the
literacy programs. The potential loss here is that schools will not be
aware of, or draw on strengths of the students such as diverse
literacies, which may be present in the home environment. Consequently,
a deficit model of learning and teaching perpetuates as these schools
tended to focus on what needs to be fixed rather than beginning with a
sociological and cultural view of learning.
According to Fullan et al.'s (2006) model all teachers can
teach to high standards given the right conditions and assistance. While
each of these schools had improved outcomes as a key goal there was
still some way to go in terms of creating an environment with the most
effective conditions required to address individual students'
needs. At Treetops High however, there was some evidence the school was
beginning to innovate including an alternative model to
timetabling--something initially considered a constraint. Open Fields,
on a broader scale, made major modification to classroom organisation,
arrangements for effective provision of support staff and curriculum
delivery by seeking innovative ways to work within institutional
boundaries. Both schools were willing to consider different ways and
innovate to address the students' needs. However, ongoing support
for teachers, such as allocated time and space, is crucial to maintain
their confidence and develop the necessary skills given the magnitude of
the task each school faces.
Third the notion that high expectations and early intervention are
necessary is critical in terms of literacy learning for young
adolescents. When students enter high school with limited literacy
skills preventing them from accessing the curriculum--intensive
intervention is needed. Holistic interventions should involve
personalised and targeted programs drawing on the strengths of the
learner and relevance to life outside of school. In this way, high
expectations are reasonable as the data suggests when students were
successful, and had an opportunity to lead positive outcomes resulted.
Ultimately, the entire school context needs to be able to articulate
what they do and why they do it in regard to the teaching of reading. In
order for a whole school approach to be effective it is critical
leaders, teachers, support staff, students and the wider community
develop a professional learning community with time and space to
critically reflect on and develop practice. The two case studies
presented in this paper have demonstrated the challenges of not having
an overarching framework for focused strategies in their efforts to
addressing reading improvement. It was clear that there were still gaps
emerging through the distinct approaches of each school. Ongoing support
and coaching for all stakeholders is necessary for student-centred
practices to be sustained.
Consequently, in Figure 2, the authors propose a model for
effective teaching of reading for adolescent learners, resulting from
these studies. The model places students at the centre of the learning
and illustrates the complex nature of the literacy process for young
people in secondary schools. Complexities include the cognitive,
affective and sociocultural elements. Managing these influences on
adolescents, who are experiencing difficulties mastering literacy
skills, requires a complex set of technical and interpersonal skills.
Additional support may also be required in classrooms, not to remove
teacher responsibility but to enhance the classroom culture and
complement strong teaching. Effective and ongoing professional learning,
therefore, is necessary for all stakeholders involved. A collaborative
and community approach is encouraged.
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
The four petals surrounding the centre identify key stakeholders in
the process of developing adolescent literacy skills and present a
timely reminder of the value of a community approach. All
stakeholders--the leadership team, the teaching team, support inside the
school including the learning support team and teacher aides, and
support outside of the school including parents, volunteers, community
partners and organisations --have an integral role in supporting young
people to achieve positive results in their schooling and beyond. The
tendency is for each of these units to work in isolation of each other
or be underutilised. Unlike the teachers of young children, most
secondary teachers, support staff and leaders in the secondary context
have not had training in the teaching of reading so it is vital all
teachers, including the leadership team, are provided this opportunity.
As stated previously the beliefs of all stakeholders as well as a
whole school approach to improving literacy for all students is vital in
the progress of any school's literacy plan. Rather than
constructing a model or approach which aims to fix literacy problems, we
suggest schools firstly, ask the students what they are good at and
build a program around these strengths, interests and individual
literacies. A SWOT analysis investigates students' strengths,
weaknesses and the opportunities or threats to learning. Completing a
SWOT analysis of each student to help identify important topics in
students' lives is likely to provide a hook for learning, as well
as highlighting areas needing improvement.
Figure 3 highlights the two key features at the centre of the
model: adolescent-specific considerations and the 'big six' of
effective teaching of reading--phonics, phonological awareness, oral
language, fluency, vocabulary and comprehension. While the 'big
six' of teaching reading are integral to effective reading, for
adolescent learners these must be addressed in conjunction with highly
influential sociocultural and personal factors. These factors include
self-worth and resilience, cultural and social aspects, relationships
with peers and family and community, self-regulation, affect, and
motivation and engagement.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
The proposed model illustrates the multitude of context-specific
factors related to adolescent learning. It is validated in both
literature and empirical research, but should be considered as a work in
progress to be refined through additional research. Schools looking to
develop literacy programs for their own adolescent learners should
consider how various aspects of the model are played out in their own
contexts and reflect, plan, and enact accordingly.
This paper has attempted to highlight the strengths and areas for
improvement of ongoing literacy programs at two secondary schools. The
results show notable progress for these schools in a short period of
time in terms of improving reading and student outcomes. Time and
commitment of staff and students at each school has been integral to
this progress. It is hoped implementing a student centred, collaborative
and community approach to literacy improvement will support the schools
even more in reaching their goal to help students learn to read
effectively and reaching their potential in schooling and beyond.
Georgina Barton and Loraine McKay
Griffith University
Notes
(1) ICSEA--Index of community socio-educational advantage.
References
Ainscow, M., & Sandill, A. (2010). Developing inclusive
education systems: The role of organizational cultures and leadership.
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14, 410-416. doi:
10.1080/13603110802504903.
Alvermann, D. (2001). Reading adolescents' reading identities:
Looking back to see ahead. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44
(8), 676-690.
Barton, G.M., & Freebody, P. (2014). Literacy and knowledge:
Classroom practice in the arts. In G.M. Barton (Ed.). Literacy in the
arts: Retheorising learning and teaching, (pp. 93-110). Switzerland:
Springer International Publishing.
Cashen, P. (2012). Adolescent literacy project report. South
Australian Secondary Schools Principals' Association. South
Australia: Government of South Australia.
Centre for Youth Literature (2009). Keeping young Australians
reading. State Library of Victoria.
Clary, D., Feez, S., Garvey, A., & Partridge, R. (2015) From
little things big things grow: Enhancing literacy learning for secondary
students in rural and regional Australia. Australian and International
Journal of Rural Education, 25 (1), 25-37.
Comber, B. (2012). Mandated literacy assessment and the
reorganisation of teachers' work: Federal policy, local effects.
Critical Studies in Education, 53 (2), 119-136.
Comber, B., & Cormack, P. (2011). Education policy mediation:
Principals' work with mandated literacy assessment. English in
Australia, 46 (2), 77-86.
Corbett, J., & Slee, R. (2000). An international conversation
on inclusive education, In F. Armstrong, D. Armstrong & L. Barton
(Eds.), Inclusive education: Policy, contexts and comparative
perspectives. London: David Fulton.
Dweck, C.S. (2007). Boosting achievement with messages that
motivate. Education Canada 47(2), 6-10.
Fletcher, J. (2013). A review of 'effective' reading
literacy practices for young adolescent 11 to 13 year old students.
Educational Review, 66 (3), 2014, 293-310.
Freebody, P., Chan, E. & Barton, G.M. (2013). Literacy and
curriculum: Language and knowledge in the classroom. In T. Cremin, B.
Comber, K. Hall, & L. Moll (Eds.) International handbook of research
in children's literacy, learning and culture, (pp. 304-318). Maiden
Mass: Wiley-Blackwell.
Fullan, M., Hill, P., & Crevola, C. (2006). Breakthrough.
Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Gutierrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning:
Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32
(5), 19-25.
Hill, P.W., & Crevola, C.A. (1999). Key features of a
whole-school, design approach to literacy teaching in schools. ACER
Research Conference October 1999: Improving Literacy Learning.
Melbourne.
Hill, S. (2012). Developing early literacy: Teaching and
assessment, 2nd Ed. Victoria, Australia: Eleanor Curtain Publishers.
Le Fevre, D.M. (2014). Barriers to implementing pedagogical change:
The role of teachers' perceptions of risks. Teaching and teacher
education, 38, 56-64.
Lingard, B., Sellar, S., & Savage, G.C. (2014). Re-articulating
social justice as equity in schooling policy: The effects of testing and
data infrastructures. British Journal of Sociology of Education, Special
Issue: Educational Inclusion, 35 (5), 710-730.
McDermott, R. (2005). 'An entry into further language':
Contra mystification by language hierarchies. In T.L. McCarthy (Ed.),
(pp. 111-124). Language, literacy, and power in schooling.
Manuel, J., & Brindley, S. (Eds.). (2012). Teenagers and
reading: Literary heritages, cultural contexts and contemporary reading
practices. South Australia: Wakefield Press.
Manuel, J., Carter, J. (2015). Current and historical perspectives
on Australian teenagers' reading practices and preferences
[online]. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 38 (2), 115-128.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. (2011). Designing qualitative
research (5th ed.). London, England: Sage.
Merga, M.K. (2014). Are Western Australian adolescents keen book
readers? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 37(3), 161-170.
Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds
of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes
and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31 (2), 132-141. Special Issue:
Qualitative Issues in Educational Research.
Moje, E.B. (2002). Re-framing adolescent literacy research for new
times: Studying youth as a resource. Reading Research and Instruction,
41 (3), 211-228.
Moje, E., Ciechanowski, K., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R.
& Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area
literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse.
Reading Research Quarterly, 39 (1), 38-70.
Murphy, S.L. (2015). How do we teach them to read if they
can't pay attention? Change in literacy teaching practice through
collaborative learning. Language and Literacy, 17 (1), 83-105.
NVivo software package: http://www.qsrinternational.com//
products_nvivo.aspx.
Polesel, J., Rice, S., Dulfer, N. (2014). The impact of high-stakes
testing on curriculum and pedagogy: a teacher perspective from
Australia. Journal of Education Policy, 29 (5), 640-657.
Rennie, J., & Patterson, A. (2008). Reading and identity: The
Google generation. Literacy learning: The Middle Years, 16 (2), 53-58.
Rennie, J., & Ortlieb, E. (2013). Diverse literacy learners:
Deficit versus productive pedagogies, in E. Ortlieb, E.H. Cheek (Eds.),
School-Based Interventions for Struggling Readers, K-8 (Literacy
Research, Practice and Evaluation, Vol. 3), (pp. 203-218). UK: Emerald
Group Publishing Limited.
Ryan, M. & Barton, G.M. (2014). The spatialised practices of
teaching writing: Shaping the discoursal self. Research in the Teaching
of English, 48 (3), 303-329. Special Issue.
Schunk, D., & Zimmerman, B. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated
learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Silverman, J.C. (2007). Epistemological beliefs and attitudes
toward inclusion in pre-service teachers. Teacher Education and Special
Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council
for Exceptional Children, 30 (1), 42-51.
Thompson, N. (2011). Promoting equity: Working with diversity and
difference (3rd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Unsworth, L. (2001). Teaching multiliteracies across the
curriculum: Changing contexts of text and image in classroom practice.
Buckingham: Oxford University Press.
Watson, S.M., & Gable, R. (2013). Cognitive development of
adolescents at risk or with learning and/or emotional problems:
Implications for teachers. Intervention School and Clinic. 49, 108-112.
Westwood, P. (2008). What do teachers need to know about learning
difficulties? Camberwell: ACER Press.
Woods, A., Dooley, K., Luke, A., & Exley, B. (2014). School
leadership, literacy and social justice: The place of local school
curriculum planning and reform. In I. Bogotch & C.M. Shields (Eds.),
International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Social (In)Justice
(pp. 509-520), Dordrecht: Springer Publishers.
Georgina Barton is a lecturer in the School of Education and
Professional Studies at Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland,
Australia. She has been a teacher in both primary and secondary schools
for over twenty years. Her experience has been mainly in
socio-disadvantaged areas in improving literacy outcomes for students.
Georgina's research focuses on English and literacy education, and
arts education. She has recently co-edited The Teaching of Writing with
Jan Turbill and Cynthia Brock for ALEA's 40th anniversary.
Loraine McKay was a primary school teacher for over twenty years
before moving into the tertiary sector. She has a strong interest in
social justice and currently lectures in inclusive education and reading
intervention at Griffith University. Her research areas include teacher
identity, critical pedagogy, and building the capacity of early career
teachers to support students positioned in the margins of education.
Appendix A
Staff interview Questions:
Demographics
1. Could you tell me a bit about yourself?
* How long have you been teaching?
* What curriculum areas are you qualified to teach in?
* What curriculum areas do you currently teach in?
* What year levels are you currently teaching?
* What are your qualifications?
* Where and when did you receive these?
Your school
2. How would you describe your current school?
3. What is the general philosophy at this school?
4. What about the students who attend here?
5. Tell me about the programs that are in place to support
students' literacy learning.
6. Can you tell me about the students in the literacy support
programs?
7. What aspects of the school's philosophy and planning impact
on these programs?
Current literacy program
* What are some literacy programs you have had experience in?
* Identify the differences, if any, between these and the current
literacy program at this school?
* Identify the strengths of the literacy program at your school.
* Identify how the literacy program works for you in implementing
it.
* Do you see reading and comprehension improvement in student
outcomes? If so, what?
* What do you feel needs further improvement in the development of
students' reading and comprehension skills?
* Identify key elements that will enable sustainability of literacy
support and learning programs at your school
Student interview questions:
Demographics
1. So INSERT NAME can you tell me a bit about yourself?
* What grade are you in?
* Which primary school did you go to?
* Do you have any brothers and sisters? Older? Younger?
I understand that you are involved in the literacy support program
here at Nerang SHS.
2. What types of support have you had in regard to your reading
throughout your schooling?
* Primary school?
* At home?
* Outside of school?
3. Is the literacy program at your school different to any of
these? If so, how?
4. What do you like about the literacy program at your school?
5. Do you think the literacy program at your school has improved
your reading and if so, in what ways and how?
6. What do you feel you need to further develop in regard to
reading and comprehension skills?
7. Any other comments about the literacy program at your school?
Post-Questions for Staff
1. Thinking back from where you started this year where is the
program now in relation to back then.
2. What elements of the program (general literacy in the school) do
you think have been successful?
3. What improvements have you seen in the students academically?
Emotionally? Socially?
4. What elements do you think need improvement?
5. What do you think needs to happen next to make this program
sustainable? And more effective?
* Program development
* Professional development
* Community development/partnerships
6. Where do the students need more work?
7. What aspects of the program have changed along the way?
8. How have they changed? And why did they change?
9. What has been the personal impact of program on you?
10. What do you feel you have contributed to the development of the
program?
11. What opportunities have been provided to you to contribute?
12. How do you feel about the outcomes of this program?
Post-questions for students
1. How do you feel about your reading?
2. What types of support do you have at school?
3. What is good about SSP?
* Socially
* Academically
* Emotionally
4. What is good about SM?
* Socially
* Academically
* Emotionally
5. What do you think you need to support or improve your reading?
6. How can the school help you with your learning/ reading?
7. Do you feel differently about school now than at the beginning
of the year as a result of the literacy program?
8. Has being part of the SSP and SM program made you feel
differently about school? In what ways? Why?
9. Do you feel you have a voice?
10. Have you helped the school make decisions about this program?
Appendix B
Sample Questions for Data Collection
Who When What
Year 8 students Feb and Dec 2014 Attitudinal and
(intervention) Interest Survey
Weekly during Oral Diaries
intervention (ipads)
Pre and post Student Focus
intervention Group
Intervention/ Pre Intervention 1 Semi structured
special Post Intervention 1 interviews
education Once during
teachers subsequent rounds
of intervention
Who Source or Sample Questions
Year 8 students Comprehensive Reading Inventory
(intervention) (Cooter, Cooter & Flynt, 2006)
Describe what you have done in class this week.
What did you like doing best?
What did you do really well?
What didn't you enjoy?
What did you learn about yourself as a learner?
What did you find challenging?
How might you overcome these challenges?
Tell me how you feel about school?
What challenges do you face?
How did you deal with them?
What do you like best/ least about school?
How do you learn best?
What do you do when school work is tough?
Intervention/ What is your role in supporting the teaching
special of literacy skills at this school?
education How supported do you feel in this role?
teachers What kinds of support do you receive?
What kinds of support do you find most useful?
How do the students respond to support?
What aspects of the whole school improvement
plan influence you and your work and the
outcomes for students?
What aspects of the intervention plan influence
you and your work and the outcomes for students?
Describe the students in the intervention program.
What aspects of the intervention are the most
effective? What evidence do you see to
support this?
What do you think prevents students from achieving
year level literacy standards?
What else could be done by the school, individual
students and families?
Table 1. Data collection sets--1 and 2
for Treetops High
1. Interviews at the beginning of the school year
Admin team Teaching team Students
Principal Learning Support Focus
Deputy Principal teacher Groups
Heads of Teacher Aide (x2)
Departments (x2) Volunteer coordinator n = 5
Volunteer n = 5
Community Partner
Focus group six months later
Group 1 Group 2 Students
Head of Learning support Focus
Department teacher groups
Community Volunteer coordinator (x2)
Partner Teacher Aide n = 5
Volunteer n = 5
Deputy Principal
Table 2. Data collection sets for Open Fields High
Learning Classroom Teacher Students in
support teachers aides SEP
teachers
Semi- n=6 n=1 n=14
structured
interviews
Reflective n=30
Diary
Focus n=2 n=3 n=4
Group
Students Student in Administration Parents
in Year Year 8 after
8 before intervention
intervention
Semi- n=24 n=4 n=9
structured
interviews
Reflective
Diary
Focus n=6
Group
