|
|
Australian Schooling Monograph Series No. 1/1998
© Commonwealth of Australia 1998
This work is Commonwealth Copyright. It may be reproduced in whole or in part for study or training purposes, subject to the inclusion of an acknowledgement of the source and no commercial usage or sale. Reproduction for purposes other than those indicated above requires the written permission of the Australian Government Publishing Service. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction rights should be addressed to the Manager, Commonwealth Information Services, Australian Government Publishing Service, GPO Box 84, Canberra, ACT 2601.
Title Literacy for All: The Challenge for Australian Schools
ISBN 0 642 23684 2
Library classification information
1. Authorship - Department of Employment, Education, Training
and Youth Affairs
2. Subject - Literacy - Australia
This monograph was prepared with the assistance of Marion Meiers, formerly the Executive Liaison Officer of the Australian Literacy Federation and currently working as a literacy consultant to the Literacy Section in Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs.
DEETYA No: 5954.STEQ97A
The Commonwealth’s literacy and numeracy policies are directed towards strengthening the literacy and numeracy achievements of all Australian school children. The focus of this policy paper is primarily on literacy: numeracy will be the subject of a later paper
In Australia the delivery of school education rests with the State and Territory government and non-government authorities. The Commonwealth Government is a key partner in setting and achieving our national goals and priorities. A major policy objective of this Government is to achieve real improvements in literacy and numeracy skills for Australian children which will better fit them for their futures. The National Literacy and Numeracy Plan provides a blueprint for all Australian governments to work collaboratively to achieve this objective.
The Commonwealth is committed to developing a broad policy framework for improving quality in schooling and enhancing educational outcomes for all students. This approach takes into account the importance of parental choice in schooling and the need for diversity in education provision. Key principles which underpin the Commonwealth Government’s literacy policies are:
The Government wants to see improved accountability. Educational accountability should be undertaken co-operatively, not imposed from above, and in ways which collect information of real use to schools, teachers and parents as well as governments. As a nation we need to determine the extent of improvement in broad terms by collecting data about how students are accessing schooling, the ways they are participating in it, where they are going after they leave school and how they are achieving at school, especially in key areas such as literacy and numeracy.
Providing parents with clear information about literacy and numeracy outcomes at their child’s school will strengthen the capacity of parents to support the teaching at the school. The provision of clear information about educational outcomes is central to building parental and community support for schools. This information will help schools to know that they are meeting community expectations and will encourage adequate community recognition of the role of the teaching profession
Schools should be allowed to respond more effectively to the strengths and needs of their students and to encourage innovation. This can be achieved through diversity of schools - schools should be able to develop their own distinctive identity and expertise - and diversity within schools - programmes, methods of teaching and school organisation will vary to suit students’ needs. Schools must be able to develop their own particular strengths, teaching styles, institutional ethos and activities if they are to match parents’ values and children’s educational strengths or needs.
Choice is an important value in a democratic society and an essential foundation for school improvement, allowing programmes to be matched with particular learning needs. Choice facilitates innovation and provides for greater involvement and commitment of both parents and students. Ideally, choice encourages schools to improve and respond to the needs of their students, making schools more accountable to students and parents.
In order to assist students to successfully make the school-to-work transition, schools will need to take increasing responsibility for the graduate outcomes of all their students, not just those who go to tertiary education. Preparation of students for participation in the world of work is an essential element of the education mission of a school. In the future, schools will be able to take advantage of the recent reforms to the labour market programmes and act as job placement agencies if they choose.
If schooling fails to overcome educational disadvantage the Commonwealth bears the cost of this failure through its budgetary provision for unemployment benefits and social programmes. The Commonwealth will continue to provide targeted funding for educationally disadvantaged students by supplementing the funding of Australian schools to achieve specific national objectives. The major factors which are usually seen as placing educational outcomes at risk include socioeconomic disadvantage, poverty, low parental expectation, disability, language background other than English, family or personal difficulties, geographic isolation, Indigenous background and gender.
Many school systems have been moving for some time towards greater self management at the school level because it is recognised that if effective leadership is to be encouraged at this level, there must be authority to match responsibility. Greater autonomy creates the freedom for schools to improve their teaching and learning that they do not have under centralised systems. Flexibility at the school level will assist schools to enter into arrangements that will build a bridge from the classroom to employment.
We need to find new ways to encourage and support teachers in their task of educating our children and to allow decisions to be made at individual school level in response to the needs of school communities. Australian schools and their students will be best served by innovation and flexibility and not by the imposition of bureaucratic registration requirements. By developing high standards teachers can demonstrate their willingness to be accountable to parents and the education community, as well as making their work more transparent to the public.
The Government believes that schools should equip all children who enter education with basic literacy and numeracy skills. It is in the first years of school that all children can be helped to acquire the foundation skills which will set them on the path of success in reading and writing. Based on this, Government policy for improvement of literacy levels in Australia focuses on the early years of schooling.
Australia will go a long way towards countering other forms of educational and social disadvantage if strong foundational literacy and numeracy skills are successfully taught to all children.
A major policy objective of the Government is to provide all young people in Australia with strong foundational literacy skills.
The Government’s approach to education policies for schools focuses on the central importance of literacy and numeracy in school education, and is directed towards a national effort to improve literacy and numeracy skills for all young Australians. It recognises that effective literacy and numeracy are key skills which enable all Australians to successfully participate in schooling until the completion of Year 12, and in further study, training or work.
In Australian society proficiency in English literacy is of major importance for every Australian’s personal, social and cultural development. For a modern democratic society, high levels of literacy are crucial to the quality of civic, cultural and economic activity. High levels of literacy for all Australians are required so that each individual can deal confidently with the broadening scope and multiple uses of literacy in all spheres of society.
The following definition of literacy, which clearly describes the breadth and purposefulness of literacy, has been widely used in Australia in recent years: "Effective literacy is intrinsically purposeful, flexible and dynamic and involves the integration of speaking, listening and critical thinking with reading and writing." (DEET, 1991: 5).
This definition draws attention to the significance of effective literacy which requires the ability to read and use written information, to write appropriately, in a wide range of contexts, for many different purposes, and to communicate with a variety of audiences. Literacy is integrally related to learning in all areas of the curriculum, and enables all individuals to develop knowledge and understanding. Reading and writing, when integrated with speaking, listening, viewing and critical thinking, constitute valued aspects of literacy in modern life. This comprehensive view of literacy reflects current use of the term in the professional literature. A review of the use of the word “literacy” in documents entered in the Educational Resources Information Centre (ERIC) database indicates that “literacy is more than just being able to read and write; it is the ability to comprehend, interpret, analyse, respond, and interact with the growing variety of complex sources of information” (Sensborough, 1990). Purposeful, flexible and dynamic literacy developed in the early years of schooling provides the foundation for continued development throughout an individual’s lifetime.
The importance of acquiring mastery of literacy skills during school is highlighted in a recent study reported by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). This study found, from longitudinal data, that boys with very low literacy and numeracy achievement have more than twice the chance of being out of work at the age of 19 than those with average to above average achievement (23 percent for very low achievers as against 11 per cent for high achievers) (ACER, 1997a).
Research has shown that it is the early years of schooling which are the most important for providing children with appropriate educational experiences that foster the development of strong foundational literacy and numeracy skills. If children have not achieved appropriate literacy and numeracy skills by the end of primary school, they are unlikely to make up the gap through the rest of their schooling.
Based on this, improvement of literacy levels in Australia is most likely to be achieved by a focus on the complex processes of literacy acquisition. The majority of children acquire foundational literacy in the early years of schooling. Teachers in these years have a crucial role to play in developing basic literacy and numeracy skills. Principals have a critical role in creating a school climate and organisational arrangements which support effective programmes. It is essential that the early primary school curriculum is designed and organised to provide sufficient time and opportunity for all children to acquire effective literacy.
Insufficient time devoted to teaching children how to read and write can be a significant reason for their lack of progress in the first two years of schooling. Frequent interruptions within the school day, and the over-crowding of the curriculum, restrict the time available for literacy teaching (Crevola and Hill, 1997: 22). Literacy teaching and learning must be the first priority in the management of the whole curriculum, with specific provision of time fully committed to literacy teaching, and the integration of literacy learning opportunities in all curriculum activities.
The National Literacy and Numeracy Plan, focused on the literacy and numeracy needs of Australia’s young people, reflects the commitment of the Commonwealth, State and Territory Education Ministers to literacy and numeracy as essential for all learning. The Plan also makes it extremely clear that it is crucial for children to develop these foundational skills at the earliest possible time in the school years.
In March 1997 Commonwealth, State and Territory Education Ministers agreed to a national literacy and numeracy goal:
That every child leaving primary school should be numerate, and be able to read, write and spell at an appropriate level.
The Ministers also adopted a sub goal:
That every child commencing school from 1998 will achieve a minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standard within four years.
These national goals represent community expectations for all schools in literacy and numeracy. The goal and sub goal are inclusive of all children, but recognise that a very small percentage of students have severe educational difficulties.
The National Plan, as agreed by the Education Ministers, provides
a coherent framework for improvement in literacy standards, and
a clear commitment to the achievement of the national literacy
and numeracy goal and sub goal.
The essential purposes of the National Plan in relation to literacy
and numeracy in Australian schools are to:
The literacy and numeracy goals will be achieved through the National Plan, which calls for a coordinated approach by the Commonwealth and the States and Territories to improving literacy and numeracy standards. The Plan, which focuses on the crucial early years of schooling, comprises the following key, interrelated elements:
The National Plan represents a focused national effort which will build on existing State and Territory initiatives. Efforts to lift literacy skills in the early years of schooling are already a priority in every State and Territory. The Plan recognises the range of valid approaches to raising literacy and numeracy standards across the country, this diversity reflecting:
Facilitating access to appropriate educational opportunities for all Australian students is a key part of the Commonwealth Government’s policies for schools. The Commonwealth Government supplements the funding of Australian schools to achieve specific national objectives, complementing that provided by State and Territory governments.
The Commonwealth’s role in achieving the national literacy and numeracy goals includes promoting national collaboration and coordination to achieve overall improvements in literacy and numeracy levels among Australian school children. The delivery of literacy and numeracy education in schools, including the assessment and the identification of students at risk, intervention to meet their needs, and the assessment of student achievement, are essentially responsibilities of education authorities and school principals, but are of concern to all Governments.
The Commonwealth makes a significant financial contribution to schools of more than $3.7 billion a year through specific purpose payments, more than $160 million of which is provided annually through the Literacy Programme. In addition, a substantial proportion of the Commonwealth’s Financial Assistance Grants to States is applied to school education by the States. This amounts to an estimated $4.1 billion annually.
The acquisition of literacy skills by all children is the core business of schools, and as such should have priority in terms of educational expenditure.
The aim of the Commonwealth Literacy Programme is to foster the acquisition by all students of appropriate literacy and numeracy skills. The programme combines funding provided under the former Disadvantaged Schools and English as a Second Language (ESL) - General Support programmes, and also includes additional funding of $50 million over three years for a National Literacy and Numeracy Strategy. It is expected that funds will be directed particularly to schools with a high proportion of students educationally disadvantaged in terms of their literacy and numeracy outcomes. The Literacy Programme has two funding strands.
This strand provides $650 million over 1997 to 2000 to be paid to government and non-government education authorities to support appropriate strategies and programmes to achieve the Literacy Programme objective.
This strand will provide $19 million over the 1997 to 1999 period to identify, research and implement strategic national initiatives and developments in literacy and numeracy. The focus of the $6.2 million provided in the 1997 programme year was to assist with the implementation of the National Literacy and Numeracy Plan.
Funding for priority literacy research and national strategies is not a grant programme directed at individual schools, although education authorities may apply to undertake projects through a tender process.
From 1998, in order to receive funding under the Literacy Programme, government and non-government school authorities are required to provide a detailed plan outlining how these funds will be used to achieve measurable improvements in literacy and numeracy outcomes.
For funds identified to assist students in the primary years, authorities are asked to describe how these funds will be used to support the realisation of the agreed National Literacy and Numeracy Goal. The plan should include details of diagnostic, intervention and assessment strategies, and proposed professional development activities.
For funds identified to assist students who have progressed to secondary schooling without meeting minimum acceptable literacy standards, authorities are asked to describe in detail what action schools will take to improve their skills. The plan should include information about intervention strategies to be used, and about the measures which will be used to monitor improved outcomes.
It is expected that, in allocating funds to schools, education authorities will take account of school and system level data on literacy and numeracy achievement, wherever this is available. It is recognised that moving towards allocating funds to schools on the basis of literacy and numeracy outcomes may occur progressively in the context of an increased national focus on the collection and reporting of outcomes data.
Funding from the National Strategies and Projects strand of the Commonwealth’s Literacy Programme will be available to:
The National Plan aims to give all children a good start in school, while recognising that there is a wide gap between those who enter school well prepared for learning, and those who are least prepared. Unless this gap is closed in the first years of school, it will widen, limiting the opportunities for some children to fully participate in education.
The diversity of children’s experiences in language learning in the first five years of life, before they enter school, is a significant factor in relation to their later literacy achievement.
In Australia, responsibility for pre-school provision rests with States and Territories, except under the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy, where the Commonwealth has responsibility. A number of programmes designed to foster the development of children’s skills prior to entering school have been introduced in the States and Territories.
Professor Bridie Raban, Chair of Early Childhood Studies, University of Melbourne, notes that “it is from birth to 8 years of age that the period of fastest development takes place during any lifespan” (Raban, 1995). This period encompasses the years prior to schooling, when the acquisition of language is a key aspect of children’s development. The oral language competence which develops in these years supports the acquisition of literacy in the first years of school. In Raban’s view, it is crucial that parents, members of families, carers and teachers employed within child care centres and pre-schools have access to education and training that will enable them to facilitate and enhance the emergent literacy knowledge of children prior to their K-12 schooling.
Recent research (Breen, M. P., Louden, W., Barratt-Pugh, C., Rivalland, J., Rohl, M., Rhydwen, M., Lloyd, S., and Carr, T., 1994; Cairney, T.H., Ruge, J., Buchanan, J., Lowe, K., and Munsie, L., 1995) reports a great variety of home literacy practices, for example, in the amount of time parents or caregivers spend reading story books to children, and in the resources for literacy available to children in the home. Gunn (1996) notes the consistency of this research with overseas research that identifies differences between the language and literacy of school and that of home and community as a significant factor in students’ achievement at school.
Many variables influence the pre-school experience of Australian children, including socioeconomic status, and whether or not English is the first language. Not only does this highlight the importance for schools and teachers of recognising and building on the diversity of children’s early language and literacy experiences, but it also has implications for valuing the language repertoires of all children:
displacement of the linguistic and literacy resources which children bring to school not only discriminates against NESB pupils but also pupils who, for example, speak other dialects of Australian English, whose previous experiences differ from those valued in school, or whose culture reflects a strong oral rather than literate tradition (Breen et al, 1994: 35-6).
The National School English Literacy Survey (NSELS) (ACER, 1997b) illustrated how diversity of achievement is apparent in the school years. The most significant finding for the nationally representative main sample of students in the Survey was the wide range of achievement among Australian school children at Years 3 and 5 (ACER, 1997b: v). This wide range of achievement highlights the complexity of the task of teachers in planning and conducting classroom programmes which provide appropriate learning opportunities for all children.
There is clear evidence from a number of sources that, while the majority of students successfully achieve appropriate levels of literacy in their first years of schooling, there are groups of students who currently do not achieve a level of literacy which will enable them to make further progress in their education. The main findings of the NSELS, reported in Mapping Literacy Achievement (ACER, 1997b), match existing research in demonstrating that there are differences in achievement according to socioeconomic status and gender, and for students who have a language background other than English.
Analysis by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) of other data spanning 1975-1995 shows that there has been a decline in the percentage of 14-year-old boys attaining mastery of basic reading comprehension. There has also been a widening of the gap between boys and girls, from a 3% gap in 1975 to an 8% gap in 1995 (ACER, 1997a).
This study also showed that for students whose home language is not English, mastery was considerably lower than for other students, and that higher achievement in reading is associated with higher socioeconomic status.
Disparity in achievement among students of different demographic and socioeconomic groups is widely recognised as a significant problem. There is evidence that these disparities in achievement for different groups influence teachers’ expectations of students’ likely achievement, which in turn influences the learning opportunities available to students. One of the main findings of an Australian study of everyday literacy practices in and out of schools in low socioeconomic urban communities was that
Most school personnel clearly and persistently generated categorisations associated with socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, and general features of students’ home background as a point from which to interpret students’ literacy achievement … In schools within communities designated as disadvantaged, poor literacy achievement was accounted for by reference to the experience of poverty. The school’s organisation and activities were rarely held responsible by school personnel. The role and conventions of the school went unquestioned (Freebody and Ludwig, 1995: 4).
While noting the existence of the differential achievements of children in the early years of school, it is essential to avoid perspectives which confuse difference with deficit. The term ‘at risk’ implies a commitment to providing support when it is most needed, not a deficit view of students, nor a labelling and consequent reduction of expectations for students who, apart from the particular reasons for the ‘at risk’ identification, will be capable of significant levels of achievement. The literacy and numeracy benchmarks within the National Plan will set high expectations for ensuring that all children can succeed.
The setting of a national goal aimed at all children achieving a minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standard within four years is a means of addressing educational inequities. Within the National Literacy and Numeracy Plan, it is no longer accepted as inevitable that a significant proportion of students will not achieve literacy skills at the minimum level. The Plan sets unambiguous goals for all children, so that no child will be prevented from making progress in education at school because of inadequate competence in literacy.
In the first years of school all children can be taught how to acquire the knowledge and resources which will set them on a trajectory of success in reading and writing, rather than being caught in unsuccessful early reading and writing experiences which will hinder later achievement.
The focus of the National Plan on the early years takes account of a number of factors known to be critical in relation to the acquisition of literacy. These include:
There is strong and persuasive evidence of the differences in school achievement between children who get off to a good start in reading, and those who make a slow start. For example, Stanovich (1986), describes trying to read without the cognitive resources for understanding the meaning of the text as an unrewarding experience likely to lead to less involvement in reading-related activities, lack of the practice available to more skilled readers, and further delays in the development of automaticity and fluency.
On the other hand, children who quickly develop reading competence find reading enjoyable because they can concentrate on the meaning of the text.
The role of the family in literacy education is significant in the years prior to schooling, and also during the school years. Recent Australian research affirms the value of family literacy programmes in relation to children’s literacy learning in school:
there can be little doubt that family and community involvement in children’s literacy learning is potentially of great value. Both formal and informal evaluation of existing programs have yielded evidence to support the belief that family and community literacy programs contribute to improved literacy outcomes for large numbers of children (Cairney et al, 1995).
The importance of developing confidence and high self esteem in the early years of schooling is emphasised in recent studies, such as a UK study by Sylva (1994) which indicates that the most important impact of early education appears to be on children’s aspirations for education and employment, their motivations, and their commitment to school. These are the indicators of success that are frequently associated with young people securing jobs.
The National Plan emphasises the need for all students to be assessed as early as possible in the first years of schooling, in order to identify those students at risk of not making adequate progress. Classroom teachers are in the best position to undertake assessment unobtrusively in settings which draw on experiences and contexts which are part of children’s everyday lives. Such assessment will be useful to teachers as it can provide understandings about individual children that will contribute to a variety of curriculum decisions.
It is important to identify students in the early years of schooling who might be at risk of falling behind their peers, because these three or four years constitute a vital phase in the acquisition of literacy. Lilian Katz (1997), in describing how understandings of the nature of child development can be used to generate basic principles for early childhood education practice, argues that
it is reasonable to assume that all children come to school with the dispositions to learn and to make the best sense they can of their experience, even though they might never have been read to, heard a story, looked at a book or held a pencil, or otherwise become “ready” for school (Katz, 1997: 6).
This being the case, it is important to identify those areas of experience which may not have been accessible to children in their first five years, and to provide “make up opportunities” which take account of the varied range of prior learning opportunities, in order to strengthen these dispositions.
The important function of assessment of students in early literacy acquisition is well documented in research findings, in Australia and internationally. In Australia, for example, work undertaken in Victoria as part of the Early Literacy Research Project draws attention to early identification:
The starting point for all comprehensive early literacy prevention and intervention strategies involves obtaining a detailed, systematic and on-going picture of young children’s literacy progress. This is essential in order to identify ‘at risk’ students and to guide teaching and learning for these students (Crevola and Hill, 1997: 2).
The United Kingdom’s White Paper, Excellence in Schools, (1997, Secretary of State for Education), and New Zealand’s School Entry Assessment (SEA) (Ministry of Education, NZ, 1997) introduced to all primary schools in 1997, reflect similar research findings.
Assessment by classroom teachers requires a strengthening of teachers’ knowledge of what it is that, learned early, makes a difference to children’s continuing progression in learning. Recently developed State and Territory programmes such as The Keys to Life (Department of Education, Victoria 1997), and Cornerstones (Department for Education and Children’s Services, SA, 1995) are examples of programmes, which as an integral feature of their design, focus on strengthening this knowledge.
The National Plan acknowledges that a variety of approaches may be used effectively for early assessment and related teacher support. School authorities and principals will determine the most appropriate way of providing support for teachers in the early identification of children who might need intervention to prevent literacy difficulties.
The major focus of the National Plan on early intervention is based on the conviction that it is essential for Australian schools to set in place strategies to ensure that no child will fall dangerously behind his or her peer group. In order to achieve this, intervention must occur, and it must occur early.
For children who may, for a variety of reasons, be identified as being at risk of not making sufficient progress, appropriate intervention strategies are particularly significant. Research demonstrates that early literacy intervention programmes with a focus on learning and on authentic reading and writing tasks can prevent many first-grade children from failing to learn to read (Hiebert, E. H. and Taylor, B. M. (eds), 1994).
Crevola and Hill have drawn attention to the narrow ‘window of opportunity’ which schools have to make a difference, as reading programmes designed to correct reading problems beyond the second year of schooling frequently have limited success. According to Pikulski, except for a very small proportion of children, failure to make satisfactory progress in literacy is preventable (Pikulski, 1994).
The nature of appropriate intervention will vary according to the needs and experiences of the child:
Students may be placed at risk for many reasons, among which are low socio-economic status, minority status, and limited English proficiency, if they attend schools that are not prepared to build on their strengths (Fashola and Slavin, 1997: 1).
A common theme in recent Australian research in children’s literacy relates to the need for intervention programmes, whether for small groups or across schools, which take account of the diversity of students’ needs. Breen et al (1994) found that “there was a similarity of purposes to which literacy was put in schools regardless of the location or type of school population, whereas there was a wide diversity of home literacy practices amongst communities.” Cairney et al (1995) noted the need for “further exploration of the matches and mismatches between the literacy practices of schools and their communities” (Cairney et al, 1995:156).
The National Plan recognises that a wide range of intervention strategies may be used successfully to assist students who might be experiencing learning difficulties. Two examples of such strategies are Reading Recovery, and Success for All.
In Australia, Reading Recovery is a commonly adopted intervention strategy for increasing the possibility of success for the lowest achieving children in the early years. Reading Recovery is used in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, ACT and is being piloted in South Australia (MCEETYA, 1996).
Success for All is a coherent school-wide programme, developed in the United States, which is proving to be successful in redressing differential literacy achievement in the early years. The Success for All model is currently being explored in Australia. The Victorian Early Literacy Research Project (Crevola and Hill, 1997) comprises the same design elements as Success for All, including one-to-one tutoring; ongoing monitoring and evaluation of student progress; a balanced classroom programme; the involvement of a school-based programme coordinator; professional development for teachers; home/school/community programmes; and pre-school programmes. Progress reports from this study indicate that the Success for All strategies
offer encouragement for those wanting to achieve quantum improvements in student early literacy learning, especially for students from educationally disadvantaged backgrounds (Crevola and Hill, 1997).
The National Plan recognises the importance of measuring students’ progress towards the achievement of the national goal. This will be done by setting agreed national benchmarks, or standards, in literacy and numeracy, against which all children’s achievements in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 can be measured. All State and Territory Education Ministers have agreed to work towards national reporting against the benchmarks, in all education sectors.
Assessment against benchmarks is an essential element in the process of gauging progress towards achievement of the national goal, “that every child leaving primary school should be numerate and be able to read, write and spell at an appropriate level”, and the related sub goal, “that every child entering Year 1 from 1998 will achieve a minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standard within four years”.
The primary objective of benchmarks is to provide a nationally agreed standard to measure system success in improving performance in relation to the goals. It is intended that assessment of performance will use state-based procedures. Reporting, which is expected to commence in 1999 in respect to 1998, will be on a nationally comparable basis.
The focus on measuring student achievement in literacy and numeracy relates to the major purpose of the Plan, to enable all students to successfully achieve literacy competence. The measuring of results, distinguishing success from failure, allows both the possibility of correcting failure, and learning from success. The benchmarks are an important aspect of the overall improvement focus of the Plan. Clearly stated and agreed standards, to inform teaching and learning will provide a lever to improve the overall quality of literacy education.
It is interesting to note that other countries with a high focus on achievement in literacy and numeracy are also giving priority to measuring performance to raise standards. The 1997 UK White Paper, Excellence in Schools, states that “the publication of performance data benefits parents and acts as a spur to improve performance” (Secretary of State, 1997: 25). In the US, the 1994 Goals 2000 initiative sought to encourage the states to adopt performance standards, defined as “concrete examples and explicit definitions of what students have to know and be able to do to demonstrate that such students are proficient in the skills and knowledge framed by the content standards” (Goals 2000, 1994).
The July 1996 meeting of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) resolved that work should commence on the development of agreed national frameworks for reporting achievement in literacy and numeracy. These frameworks would be limited to essential elements assented to by all States and Territories, and benchmarked to particular years in a child’s schooling.
Council agreed to the development of benchmarks for literacy and numeracy at Years 3, 5, 7 and 9.
The March 1997 meeting of MCEETYA endorsed the National Literacy and Numeracy Plan, and adopted the new national goal and sub goal. At this meeting it was agreed that assessment of students against the Year 3 benchmark should occur from 1998 onwards, using rigorous state-based assessment procedures, and that students should be assessed against the Year 5 benchmark as soon as possible.
Agreement was also reached in relation to all States and Territories moving to universal assessment. MCEETYA agreed that progress is to be made towards national reporting by systems and school authorities on student achievements in numeracy, reading, writing and spelling against the Year 3 and Year 5 benchmarks from 1999, data provided being comparable by State and Territory.
The Commonwealth believes that parents must be fully informed about their children’s education. The dissemination of information about educational outcomes is central to building the parental and community support for schools, without which schools cannot meet the expectations placed on them, and without which there will never be adequate community recognition of the role of the teaching profession. Assessments of literacy and numeracy achievement against nationally agreed benchmarks will allow parents to learn about their child’s achievement.
Systematic assessment information, through the establishment of benchmarks, assessment and reporting, is the feature of the National Plan which provides an accountability framework for reporting on expenditure on public education, and on student learning outcomes. Within this framework, schools and systems will be able to provide objective outcomes information in relation to national standards, to parents and caregivers in order to help inform their choices. Schools and systems will also be assisted in planning and evaluating programmes.
The National Plan acknowledges and seeks to build on a range of systematic processes for gathering information about students’ literacy achievements, currently in place at all levels of education. These will be complemented by the emphasis of the National Plan on measuring students’ progress.
Curriculum Corporation is developing the benchmarks under the direction of the MCEETYA Benchmarking Taskforce in accordance with MCEETYA decisions. Consultation has been critical to this developmental work. Consultation processes were initiated by Curriculum Corporation in January 1997, when two-day conferences were held for groups of experts in literacy and numeracy from systems, sectors, universities and professional associations. The members of these expert groups, and a wide range of other representatives of key stakeholders, including parents, provided advice on successive drafts, in order to inform the work of the project officers. This extensive and continuous consultation is regarded by the Commonwealth as an important aspect of the development of the benchmarks.
Draft Year 3 and 5 benchmarks for literacy in English were endorsed at the June 1997 MCEETYA meeting. The draft literacy benchmarks included the modes of reading, writing and spelling. At this time, preliminary work had also been done on the development of benchmarks for the modes of speaking, listening and viewing.
The benchmark at each year level is intended to set a minimum acceptable standard: a critical level of literacy and numeracy without which a student will have difficulty in making sufficient progress at school. The benchmarks therefore identify the essential aspects of literacy and numeracy. The level of the actual standard will be determined after consultation with education systems, assessment experts, principals, teachers, national parent groups, national business groups, and Aboriginal Education Consultative Groups.
The setting of the draft standards has been assisted by reference to current levels of achievement, as demonstrated in national surveys such as the National School English Literacy Survey and in State and Territory assessment programmes. Reference has also been made to curriculum frameworks in the States and Territories, including Statements and Profiles and their variants, and to professional judgement about appropriate and necessary standards. The relationship between the achievement data from the NSELS and the draft versions of the Years 3 and 5 benchmarks for reading and writing was explored as part of the analysis process of the Survey, using a methodology developed by ACER (ACER, 1997b).
The benchmarks are distinct from progress maps like the Profiles. Profiles set out a continuum showing the typical development in the learning area, and ask where a student’s achievement lies on that continuum. The benchmarks can be used to answer the question of whether or not at a particular point in a child’s schooling, the position on the continuum is adequate for making satisfactory progress at school.
It is intended that the benchmarks will be expressed in plain, accessible English, clearly understandable by a community audience. A professional elaboration is also expected to assist teachers and other education professionals to assess and report student progress against the benchmarks, where States and Territories choose to use them in this way.
An important part of a benchmarking process is the establishment of the level or levels of achievement at which the benchmark or benchmarks should be set for a Year group of students. The process by which children develop a skill such as literacy is inherently complex. Over time, children will acquire progressively greater skills. Different members of a given cohort will develop skills at different speeds. The process of establishing the benchmark levels of achievement is to be informed by widespread consultation within the profession and with key stakeholders, and by reference to available nationally comparable data.
In December 1997, Education Ministers approved progress towards a set of benchmarks on literacy for Years 3 and 5 with a final sign off expected in April 1998. Ministers are also expected to consider the final draft numeracy benchmarks for Years 3 and 5 at the April 1998 MCEETYA meeting.
Other recent national data sources include the Longitudinal Surveys of Australian Youth (LSAY) conducted by the ACER in 1975, 1980 and 1995, which measured levels of mastery in literacy and numeracy. The data from this study indicate a decline in the percentage of 14-year-old boys attaining mastery of reading and a widening of the gap between boys and girls (ACER, 1997a). The Survey of Aspects of Literacy, conducted in 1996 by the Australian Bureau of Statistics collected information about adult literacy levels (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997).
The National School English Literacy Survey (NSELS) was conducted in 1996 by the ACER on behalf of the Commonwealth at Years 3 and 5. It assessed students’ ability in each of the strands of the English curriculum statement and profile, ie reading and viewing, writing, speaking and listening. The NSELS also collected information about personal and group variables that may be positively or negatively correlated with literacy achievement. NSELS therefore constitutes a valuable data source (ACER, 1997b).
One of the broad aims of the NSELS was to provide baseline data for the establishment of national benchmarks against which teachers, schools and systems can assess the effectiveness of current programmes and can adjust their goals and programmes to improve literacy levels. The NSELS used an assessment methodology which was valuable in linking classroom assessment practices into a reliable national data gathering process. Teacher judgement of student achievement was integral to this methodology, as was quality professional development about the assessment framework prior to the survey. The NSELS methodology had the support of government and non-government education authorities, professional literacy associations, teacher unions, parents and the business sector.
Student achievement in relation to the draft benchmarks was explored in more detail at the request of the Federal Minister for Schools, Vocational Education and Training, who asked the Australian Council for Educational Research to prepare Literacy Standards in Australia (ACER, 1997c). Literacy Standards in Australia is intended to be of value to the benchmarks process, and to provide information to the Australian community which shows clearly how Australian school children achieved in relation to performance standards. Literacy Standards in Australia states that approximately 70% of all students in Years 3 and 5 met the identified performance standards in reading and writing. Slightly more Year 3 students met the Year 3 standards than Year 5 students met the Year 5 standards, and more than 30% of Year 3 students met the Year 5 performance standards, while slightly fewer than 10% of Year 5 students did not meet the Year 3 standards (ACER, 1997c: 22).
All State and Territory education systems currently use a range of state wide testing processes in primary schools. These testing processes include centrally marked multiple choice and pen and paper tests, and more complex assessments which involve teacher judgement of all aspects of literacy - reading and viewing, speaking and listening, and writing. New programmes and processes are currently being developed in some States for use in secondary schools. It is expected that state-based assessment processes will play a key role in national reporting against the benchmarks.
In schools, classroom teachers regularly and consistently collect assessment information about individual students’ achievement which assists them to make decisions about individual students, about what happens in their classrooms, and what is best for the class as a whole. The benchmarks will inform these important assessment processes.
The wide range of school practices of literacy assessment and reporting of students’ levels of achievement in English was described in a major Australian literacy research study on ‘whole school’ approaches to literacy assessment (Dilena and Van Kraayenoord, 1996). Analysis of the data generated by this study reveals that teaching and assessment practices are integrated in a cyclical, dynamic process involving planning. The data demonstrated that schools and teachers share the responsibility for assessment with their students, and that the system of assessment and the criteria for assessment are made open and explicit. The variety of ways in which teachers record information about their students’ progress in literacy for communication to the major stakeholders - students, parents or care-givers - was also identified.
Measurement of basic skills and comparisons against national performance standards will provide useful information for teachers. The information on literacy standards of performance which will be derived from the benchmarks will complement and extend the assessment processes, described above, which are already in place at the school, system and national levels.
All teachers, including beginning teachers, must have appropriate skills, knowledge and understanding to enable them to improve literacy levels of Australian school students. They need to be well-equipped to meet the responsibility that all teachers of students at all levels of schooling, and in all curriculum areas, share for the development of literacy and numeracy skills.
It is essential that considerable support for the National Plan emerges through pre-service and inservice training, as well as through research. The challenge of ensuring education equity for those Australian school students who are not at the moment acquiring adequate literacy or numeracy skills is an important aspect of teacher education.
Teacher education courses should emphasise the fundamental relationship between literacy achievement and success in all learning areas. Graduates should have developed a varied repertoire of literacy teaching approaches, and intervention strategies which will enable them to meet the diverse needs of students.
Teacher educators will also play a critical role in the provision of the kinds of high quality professional development and research which underpins effective literacy teaching and learning. There is a need to explore new ways of enhancing literacy outcomes for all children.
The Commonwealth Government is funding the Australian Council of Deans of Education to conduct a project to develop National Standards and Guidelines for Initial Teacher Education, which will include a focus on literacy and numeracy teaching.
Teacher professional development will be crucial to the success of the National Plan. Implementing the National Plan will require education authorities to provide support for teachers in their task of addressing the literacy learning needs of all students.
The primary responsibility for professional development lies with system authorities; the Commonwealth has announced grants totalling $7 million over three years to improve the literacy teaching skills of teachers in government and non-government schools.
This funding will assist State and Territory education authorities to implement strategic professional development initiatives to support the implementation of the National Plan. It is expected that initiatives will demonstrate best practice professional development, and will have linkages with teacher professional associations, networks and providers. The availability of funds over three years demonstrates the Commonwealth’s commitment to support the delivery of the National Plan.
This funding supports the provision of professional development
initiatives focused on:
To ensure that resources are available and that funds are used in the most effective way to provide teachers with the skills needed to meet the literacy needs of every child, the professional development funding will be tied to a commitment by education authorities to the National Plan. The Government will provide the funding on the condition that education authorities deliver all elements of the National Literacy and Numeracy Plan within the time frames set out in the Plan.
There are some common characteristics in the activities which have been funded. Firstly, the strategies are committed to best practice, comprehensiveness and innovation. A second feature is the extent of collaboration across sectors and the strengthening of existing educational partnerships to assist teachers to maximise the literacy outcomes for students. Another feature is a commitment to ensure that teachers have the skills to enable their students to achieve the national literacy and numeracy goal.
Research such as that conducted by Crevola and Hill (1997), in the Early Literacy Research Project, shows the links between successful early assessment, intervention and enhanced literacy achievement, and professional development for teachers. The design of the project recognises that the most important element in any programme aimed at improving teaching and learning in schools is effective ongoing professional development (Crevola and Hill, 1997: 20).
In an ongoing study examining the quality of early childhood education in England and Wales (Blenkin and Yue, 1994), knowledge of child development was cited as the most influential factor in professional development of practitioners who work with children under 8 years.
In her research map of the field of children’s literacy, Gunn (1996) draws out the common and recurring themes of the main findings and recommendations of a range of national research projects. It is interesting to note that one of five recurring themes relates to the need for increased opportunity for teachers to have access to meaningful professional development:
Nearly all the projects emphasised the need for professional development opportunities for teachers in various facets of their professional life. Clearly, the professional and academic preparation and inservice development of classroom teachers should include the study of disadvantage, cultural differences and other diversities to ensure a response, and acknowledgment of diversity (Cairney et al, 1995; Breen et al, 1994). It was also clear that provision of adequate professional development for teachers is also essential when implementing new strategies and programmes. For example, Lokan, J. et al, (1995) suggested that implementation strategies and support for teachers should be planned from the outset of the introduction of new assessment or other strategies/programmes. Professional development opportunities for teachers are essential with supporting material prepared as an adjunct to professional development programs (Gunn, 1996: 62).
The Government’s provision of funding for teacher professional development recognises the importance of professional development strategies to support the National Plan.
Implementation of the National Plan will be supported by a programme of national literacy research projects. Under the Literacy Programme - Grants for National Strategies and Projects, it is estimated that some $5 million will be available for the promotion and funding of literacy research over three years from 1997 - 1999.
A strong and ongoing research programme will provide support for the National Plan. Action to improve literacy education must be based on sound research, and the Plan includes commitments to a coordinated programme of national research projects.
The Commonwealth will call for expressions of interest to conduct literacy research projects identified as current key research priorities. There will also be an opportunity for the submission of proposals which address key areas of Commonwealth interest from appropriately qualified individuals, institutions and/or collaborative groups. Competitive selection processes will be used to assess and approve research projects.
There are a number of key aspects of the National Literacy Plan which require research support:
Further research priorities will be determined in relation to the National School English Literacy Survey, and the benchmark development process.
Within these broad areas a variety of initiatives could be considered including action research models involving educational institutions and teacher networks in the planning and implementation of these strategic national initiatives.
The National Literacy and Numeracy Plan for Schools is comprehensive in its scope, and has implications for many aspects of literacy education across the years of schooling.
The variety of children’s experience of literacy-related activities prior to school entry, and in their individual dispositions to learning, means that no single approach to teaching literacy will be appropriate for all learners. The high expectation of success in achieving literacy competence means that consideration must be given to the diverse needs of different groups of children, including those who speak English as their second language, bilingual students, and Indigenous students.
Home literacy programmes, in both pre-school and school settings, can play a significant role in enhancing literacy education.
The Plan highlights the central role of literacy in schooling, and thus requires that literacy be seen as a ‘whole school’ issue. The initial emphasis in the Plan is on achievement of strong foundational literacy skills within the first four years of schooling. However, work on the establishment of literacy benchmarks at Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 which commenced in 1997 indicates the importance of maintaining and extending these foundational skills throughout the years of schooling, and understanding the central place of literacy in life-long learning.
By setting high expectations for all students, the Plan draws attention to the multiple uses of literacy and the changing nature of literate practices in modern society. New electronic communication technologies bring new literacy demands; the relationship between literacy and technology is an area for active professional investigation.
There is no single commonly accepted approach to teaching literacy across school systems in Australia; that is, no State or Territory specifies a preferred methodology for literacy instruction. It is clear that effective pedagogy and practices in the early years of schooling will be central to the achievement of the national goal and sub goal.
Different individual learning styles, different motivations for learning, and differences in learning contexts all contribute to the complexity of the role of teachers in providing opportunities for all children to learn. There are many characteristic variations in literacy teaching and learning practice: in ways of grouping children for effective teaching; in the provision of explicit attention to teaching oral language; in the balance of whole language and phonic approaches. There are also many different approaches to the identification of literacy learning difficulties, and to early intervention to prevent future problems.
The relative contribution to literacy learning of different approaches, such as phonics and whole language need to be seen in the overall context of this varied, strategic teaching repertoire. Adams and Bruck (1995) draw on extensive research on the central role of decoding in reading, and conclude that
Over the last few decades, reading researchers developed a far better understanding of the nature of print processing and how it feeds into the rest of the reading system. They have learned why poor word recognition is a stumbling block for so many young readers and why, too, it is so frequently associated with poor comprehension. They have also learned much about how children learn to read words and how to help them to do so. Educators can and should keep the positive initiatives of the whole language revolution. But it is also time to put this knowledge about word recognition into college classrooms and into practice (Adams and Bruck, 1995: 19).
Attention must also be paid to the effective deployment of class time in order to allow for explicit literacy teaching, as well as the literacy teaching that is integrated with many other curriculum activities in the early years. This implies a balanced classroom language programme, and giving priority in the curriculum to time for literacy learning. The Victorian Early Literacy Research Project enabled teachers, by the second year of the project, to combine a number of approaches within a lesson, a day, or even the broader programme, as their understandings of their students’ strengths and weaknesses developed. These approaches included: reading to and writing with children; language experience; shared reading and writing; guided reading and writing; and independent reading (Crevola and Hill, 1997: 8).
Research indicates that readers learn most comfortably with materials that are selected as appropriate for their current reading level, and that slower readers benefit from being able to work with materials that accommodate the child’s learning speeds (Clark, F. L., Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Alley, G.R., and Warner, M.M., 1984). This suggests that effective programmes in the early years will give attention to careful selection of classroom materials.
A most useful evaluative framework in relation to considerations of the effectiveness of teaching and learning approaches is that developed by Freebody and Luke (1990), who, in relation to describing the conditions that are necessary for successful literate performance, argue that there are four components of success in reading, which draw attention away from
the question of “which method affords adequate literacy, or indeed which ‘literacies’ are offered or emphasised by various programs?” We develop these notions with particular reference to reading, although we would argue that many of our observations apply at least indirectly to writing as well. We will elaborate the position that a successful reader in our society needs to develop and sustain the resources to adopt four related roles: code breaker (‘how do I crack this?’), text participant (‘what does this mean?’), text user (‘what do I do with this, here and now?’) and text analyst (‘what does all this do to me?’) (Freebody and Luke, 1990: 7).
The use of this framework as a guide for literacy educators in deciding on what to provide in instructional programmes emphasises the importance of engaging students in particular forms of literacy which will enable them “to use texts effectively, in their own and collective interests, across a range of discourses, texts and tasks” (Freebody and Luke, 1990: 7-8).
Students whose first language is not English represent a significant, and extremely heterogenous, group within the total Australian school population. For these students, learning literacy in English involves learning a second language.
The 1996 National School English Literacy Survey provided further evidence that students from a language background other than English have, on average, lower English literacy levels than students from English-speaking backgrounds (ACER, 1997b: 20). The National Plan, in providing the impetus for improvement of literacy outcomes for all children, requires consideration of the needs of non-English speaking background students.
Recent Australian work on the development of assessment frameworks has provided support for teachers in understanding the skills and knowledge which students from language backgrounds other than English develop as they become more proficient in English in the context of school learning. The NLLIA ESL Bandscales (McKay, P. (ed), 1992) the ESL Scales (AEC, 1994), and state documents such as the ESL Companion to the CSF (Board of Studies, 1996) provide detailed indicators of development, and thus guidance in effective intervention for ESL learners. The work of Breen, M., Barratt-Pugh, C., Derewianka, B., House, H., Hudson, C., Lumley, T., and Rohl, M. (1997), has investigated, through detailed case studies, the pedagogical implications of using a variety of frameworks such as the ESL Scales in the early years of schooling. The project provides very useful insights into teachers’ achievements and difficulties in assessing and providing teaching and learning experiences for their ESL students.
A study of the relationship between first language development and second language acquisition as students begin learning English in the context of schooling (McKay, P., Davies, A., Devlin, B., Clayton, J., Oliver, R., and Zammit, S., 1997) indicates that “bilingualism should be viewed positively both for individuals and for schools, to be used as a resource where possible in the development of L2 literacy”.
The McKay project also identified some directions for further research into effective teaching practices for non-English speaking background students. The project looked at ways in which discourse practices are influenced by differences in classroom organisation, and ways in which bilingual support can facilitate cognitive development and effective learning practices in a range of learning contexts. It recommends that these areas should be investigated with a view to providing models of good practice for educators across the curriculum. The report suggests investigation of the possible advantages for learners of access to more coherent and consistent bilingual support as they progress through pre-school and junior primary schooling (McKay et al, 1997: 185).
This study also recommends that professional development for mainstream teachers, in conjunction with ESL specialists, should be implemented, so that
mainstream teachers will have a better understanding of the nature of second language acquisition in a classroom context (including the role of L1 and L2 culture in this), will employ more effective strategies to assist ESL learners in the classroom, and will recognise the progress and needs of second language learners in literacy assessment activities (McKay et al, 1997: xxii).
Students from Indigenous communities bring a diversity of language knowledge and experiences to school, in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages, in English, and in Aboriginal forms of English. This diversity needs to be recognised in programmes which seek to enhance literacy outcomes in English for these students.
Lo Bianco and Freebody, (1997) draw attention to low levels of literacy as a key educational disadvantage for Aboriginal people, and highlight some of the complexities and sensitivities of improving literacy achievement in English:
… ‘Western’ models of literacy and education may be out of tune with crucial aspects of Aboriginal cultures, beliefs and values. Literacy education for Aboriginal peoples has a regrettable history of cultural bias and deficit images, of remedial and inappropriate developmental approaches and assessment models in education resulting in damaging educational and social outcomes from schooling for indigenous people.
Moving away from deficit models involves embedding pluralism and diversity in all the structures of schooling, but also taking seriously the demands for academic achievement which parents are making (Lo Bianco and Freebody, 1997: 62).
The findings of the 1996 National School English Literacy Survey indicate low average levels of literacy achievement for students in the Special Indigenous Sample which was established for the Survey (ACER, 1997b). Of particular relevance is the finding that
At both Year 3 and Year 5, there is a considerable difference between the literacy achievements of the lowest and highest achieving students in the Special Indigenous Sample. Students with the highest levels of literacy skill in Year 3 appear to make good progress between Year 3 and Year 5, but there is consistent evidence across all aspects of literacy that students with very low levels of literacy skill in Year 3 make little or no progress over the following two years (ACER, 1997b: 21).
More specific information about the levels of literacy achievement for Indigenous students is presented in Literacy Standards in Australia (ACER, 1997c), which reported on the process of applying draft national literacy benchmarks to the National School English Literacy Survey results. For reading, 19% of Year 3 Indigenous students and 23% of Year 5 Indigenous students met the minimum acceptable standard. For writing, 29% of Year 3 Indigenous students and 24% of Year 5 Indigenous students met the minimum acceptable standard.
These findings clearly indicate the imperative for the identification, intervention and prevention of literacy difficulties in the earliest years of schooling which is integral to the National Plan.
The Government is responding to the low levels of literacy achievement for Indigenous students through a new initiative which from 1998 will provide intensive ESL assistance for Indigenous students from non-English speaking communities commencing school for the first time. Some $3000 per eligible student will be provided as supplementary support.
This programme, which will begin in the 1998 school year, will target students who have very limited exposure to English in their communities and are required to use English for the first time in a sustained manner when they attend school. It is planned as preparatory to any additional mainstream support required for literacy.
The programme will provide early intervention for students in the target group enabling them to achieve educational outcomes similar to those of other Indigenous and non-Indigenous students in the longer term. A key element of the programme will be the continued monitoring of students and their progress throughout their primary education.
Advice to be given to schools in regard to early assessment and intervention will come from school systems and authorities. A number of strategies are already being used in the States and Territories. The November 1996 MCEETYA Taskforce Report, Addressing Students’ Literacy and Learning Difficulties notes the differences between State and Territory approaches to supporting students experiencing literacy learning difficulties, and the clear priority currently being given to addressing the needs of students in the early years of schooling (MCEETYA, 1996: 6).
The titles of various State and Territory initiatives provide powerful metaphors for the importance accorded to literacy acquisition in the early years, and to the perception that literacy is the foundation for further progress in education: First Steps (Western Australia), Flying Start (Tasmania), Cornerstones (South Australia), Keys to Life (Victoria), the Year 2 Diagnostic Net (Queensland), and Getting the Foundation Right (New South Wales). These programmes draw, in a variety of ways, upon a range of strategies, including individualised instruction, accelerated learning and flexible groupings of students. Most programmes involve students in activities designed to develop oral language, emergent literacy, and automatic word recognition, as well as to improve reading fluency and comprehension skills.
Other strategies designed to strengthen emergent literacy skills involve interactive approaches such as shared reading, and specific teaching about the phonetic structure of language and the relation between phonemes and letters, in order to raise phonemic awareness.
Apart from the widely used Reading Recovery, and some adaptations of the school-wide programme, Success for All, the MCEETYA report notes a number of other ways in which additional assistance is provided, including the development of individual support plans, the allocation of additional school-based teachers, and the use of volunteers. Volunteer parents participate, for example, in programmes such as Parents as Teachers, Parents as Reading Teachers. Paraprofessionals are also used in programmes such as the Support a Reader programme, delivered by specially trained teacher aides. These programmes frequently involve the withdrawal of students from mainstream classes. However, this practice is not used in all States and Territories. The position adopted in Western Australia is to prefer mainstream intervention, with programmes which require withdrawal aiming at reintegration as soon as possible (MCEETYA, 1996: 6-7).
A significant finding of the descriptive and interpretive research study, Everyday literacy practices in and out of schools in low socio-economic communities (Freebody and Ludwig, 1995), points to the need for professional development to develop teachers’ understandings of the possibilities for successful intervention strategies. This study found that
Approved forms of cultural, intellectual and moral capital, material and experiential resources as well as emotional security were viewed as prerequisites for student success at school. If these resources were not available, it was asserted that the school could attempt to compensate, but it was considered a difficult, if not impossible, task to help students ‘catch up’ (Freebody and Ludwig, 1995).
This finding attests to the need for intervention strategies with a strong expectation of success to be part of comprehensive, collaborative initiatives within the school community. The National Plan encourages such collaboration.
Issues which must be considered in relation to intervention programmes include the cost-effectiveness of such programmes, and ways of coordinating these programmes with the environment of the regular classroom, so that students who are successfully discontinued from intervention programmes can continue to succeed in independent reading tasks when working with the mainstream group. Longitudinal studies are required in order to provide firm evidence of the long term effects of intervention programmes.
The role of home and school-parent partnerships is undoubtedly a significant influence on the acquisition of literacy. Recent research has indicated the potential value of the exploration and development of family literacy initiatives in Australia. The support of these partnerships will be invaluable in working towards the achievement of the national goals underpinning the National Plan.
Family literacy programmes have become one of the key areas of expansion of literacy provision in the USA, Canada and the UK. Despite the recent development of this approach, it is estimated that there may be over 1000 such programmes across the USA, and family literacy is gaining ground in the UK. A study of parent language and literacy initiatives in Australian schools collected data on approximately 260 programmes in Australia (Cairney et al, 1995). This study considered initiatives within a variety of community contexts designed to support school literacy through home support.
The terms family literacy or community literacy are used to describe (respectively) literacy practices which occur in either a family or a community context (Cairney et al, 1995). According to Cairney, family and community involvement in children’s literacy learning is potentially of great value. Both formal and informal evaluation of existing programmes has yielded evidence to support the belief that family and community literacy programmes contribute to improved literacy outcomes for large numbers of children. Research shows a positive correlation between family literacy and cultural practices, and children’s school achievement. While it is less clear to what extent matches and mismatches between literacy practices at home and school contribute to or impede school literacy and success, there appears to be strong evidence that such a relationship exists (Cairney et, 1995, p 31).
Cairney points out that case studies in particular show why parental help with reading is perhaps a better predictor of success in reading than the child’s intelligence. When the goals and practices of parents are in line with those of the school, problems seem to be reduced and achievement is optimised. Conversely, when the goals and practices of schools do not match those of children’s homes and communities, problems arise and academic achievements are jeopardised. In Cairney’s view:
The solution is not to view some families as somehow deficient and hence to institute ‘remedial’ action. Rather, there seems a strong case for the development of closer partnerships between home and school which enable teachers to gain insights into the literacy practices of their children’s families and hence change their practices at school to optimise all children’s chances of success. … such partnerships will permit families to gain a greater insight into the literacy practices of schooling and thus make choices concerning the forms of support they will offer their children at home (Cairney et al, 1995: 31-32).
The study by Freebody and Ludwig referred to above, which analysed home and classroom talk, made two recommendations which are specifically directed at improving the effectiveness of home-school relationships, in terms of processes that allow both teachers and parents to exchange educational information and experiences.
The first of these recommendations is that school communities investigate specific methods for teachers and members of their school community to plan for more effective literacy practices in increasingly complex social and cultural contexts. They suggested that processes and structures should be set up to:
Secondly, Freebody and Ludwig recommended that the expectations families hold for supporting their children’s education be examined, in a range of ways, including the exploration of home and school sites as interactive environments for learning about reading and writing. There should be a re-examination of assumptions that homework practices need to reflect those of the school, and that displays of pedagogical literacy equate with more sophisticated practices at home (Freebody and Ludwig, 1995).
Those elements of the National Plan intended to enhance the provision of information to parents offer a range of possibilities for generating the kinds of exchange of information and experiences described here.
Given the emphasis in the National Plan on responding to the literacy education needs of all students in the early years of school, it is clear that the interface between children’s experience in the first years of their lives, and in their first years at school, will be an area of considerable interest.
Professional understandings in this area will be considerably extended by a current national research project, Connections between literacy development in the prior to school period and the first year of schooling (Hill, Comber, Louden, Rivalland and Reid, 1997, in progress). This project is investigating three broad areas.
Firstly, the project will provide an overview of previous and current research on early literacy and numeracy and a short historical summary of pre-school, childcare and other prior to school experiences in Australia. A second aspect of the study involves a mapping of prior-to-school experiences - both formal and informal - for a range of children, indicating the number and quality of existing programmes and activities. Thirdly, the project will produce measurable outcomes data and a qualitative study of a sample group of children’s prior-to-school and first-year-of-school experiences, focusing on early literacy and numeracy development.
Literacy learning is a life long process. Learners, at all stages of education, need support in dealing with an array of literacy demands - with texts in the content areas of the curriculum, with texts of increasing abstraction, with texts which use technical language, and with those texts which are brought into being by new information technologies.
Literacy is not a static or discrete concept; it is a social practice best learned in the context of genuine communication. In our information-based society literacy requirements change and develop constantly, particularly through the accelerating expansion of information technology. Literacy is also influenced by a variety of contextual demands, such as the range of learning areas in the curriculum, involvement in a new technology, or in a workplace role which makes unfamiliar demands on existing literacy skills. These contextual demands can change and vary throughout life, and often necessitate the learning of new literacy skills, as for example in familiarisation with new technological language, or new workplace routines.
The establishment of national literacy benchmarks at four significant points of schooling will create a means of monitoring, through state-based assessment procedures, students’ performance in relation to these benchmarks. This will help to provide a clear picture of the extent to which students, throughout schooling, are extending and developing the foundational literacy skills developed in the early years.
In the case of ESL students, ongoing support for the further development of literacy skills is necessary. In many learning areas specialist language and forms of text are used; these must be explicitly taught and learned. New technological developments mean that students will need to learn to deal with new forms of text, such as Hypertext. Ways of accessing and using these texts need to be addressed directly in the classroom.
This means that all teachers have responsibility for the development of literacy skills, and that although teachers of English as a specific curriculum area and teachers of English as a second language have obvious and historically grounded principal responsibilities to ensure that students become fully literate, all teachers of all students in all subjects or curriculum areas share this responsibility. The Australian Language and Literacy Council’s 1995 report, Teacher Education in English Language and Literacy clearly affirmed this position.
Encouraging cross-curricular support for literacy development is a pre-service training and a professional development issue, recognising the need for the development of teaching practices which deal with literacy issues in the context of different curriculum areas.
The traditional organisation of primary schooling means that literacy learning takes place in all curriculum areas. Principals and class teachers are aware of the literacy learning opportunities in integrated programmes which draw together a number of learning areas, or in specific learning areas, when explicit instruction in composing and comprehending texts relevant to that learning area can be provided.
Secondary school curriculum is often structured in discrete learning areas, taught by different teachers. This increases the number of teachers interacting with individual students, and spreads responsibility for ongoing literacy learning. There are implications for professional development here, particularly in the areas of extending the skills and understandings of secondary teachers in language and literacy and of encouraging ‘whole school’ approaches to literacy teaching and learning. Similarly, in post-compulsory education and training settings, professional development is needed for all teachers to increase understanding of literacy learning.
In 1996 the Australian Curriculum Studies Association conducted an investigation of students in the middle years of schooling, Years 5 - 8, who appear to lose motivation, and to become disengaged from learning. The study recommended “that greater cooperation within the education sector be developed to implement middle school policies and programs in the context of the early and the later years” (ACSA, 1996). The national benchmarks for Years 5, 7 and 9 will provide an excellent means of monitoring the achievements and progress of students throughout these middle years.
Changing Year 12 retention rates in recent years reflect the changing composition of school populations. There is a broader range of abilities and interests amongst students. Commonwealth initiatives, such as the incorporation of vocational education into school programmes will provide new contexts for literacy learning. Many students need explicit support in managing the literacy demands of the post-compulsory curriculum, and there is a need to monitor the extent to which literacy demands may be creating barriers to success for some students. Some research is being undertaken in this area in a national research project designed to develop insights into the complex literacy demands of the curriculum for the diverse cohort of students in Years 11 and 12 (Cumming and Wyatt-Smith, 1997, in progress).
Beyond the years of schooling, the focus on support for development of high levels of literacy competence remains an important consideration, for example, within the Modern Australian Apprenticeship and Traineeship System (MAATS).
There are equity issues related to the increasingly complex and often abstract forms of text which students encounter as they progress through school. Often, the school subjects most highly valued for purposes of tertiary entrance are those which are most demanding in terms of literacy requirements:
The subjects which offer the greatest potential for academic excellence are those whose internal organisation as a system of reference is most complete … subjects which have their own technical language, their own notational systems, their own problems and theories … These are the subjects which require a mental posture of abstraction from reality in order to deal with them on their own terms, the ability - inspired or enforced - to enter into a self-enclosed world whose points of reference are purely internal (Teese, 1994: 83).
It is important that teachers, at all levels of schooling, give consideration to the accessibility of classroom texts for all learners, and where necessary, provide explicit teaching to enable students to deal competently with these texts.
The issues raised in this section relate to maintaining and extending strong literacy skills throughout schooling, so that all students will reach the minimum acceptable standards defined by the national literacy benchmarks for Years 3, 5, 7 and 9. They are issues which will be explored through the professional development and research initiatives associated with the National Plan.
The Commonwealth’s commitment to the elements of the National Plan relating to professional development and to research, have particular relevance to the area of literacy and technology.
New literacy related issues emerge as the facilities of technology expand. There are a number of aspects to be considered. The main aim of the study carried out by Lankshear, Bigum, Durant, Green, Honan, Morgan, Murray, Snyder and Wild (1997) has been to investigate the connections and differences between literacy and the technology area of learning, literacy and technology across the curriculum, and technologies which impact on and intersect with literacy.
The report of this project highlights the relationships between literacy and technology:
We argue that written language is always-already technologised, in the sense that it comes into being only in and through available technologies of information and communication. As a distinctive social practice which is linked in complex ways to other social practices, literacy is best understood, historically, in terms of particular formations of language and technology. It only comes into being through available technologies of information and communication: such as marks on natural surfaces, the alphabet and other symbol systems, stylus and pencil, the printing press, and the digital electronic apparatus. Whatever the particular technologies involved in specific cases, technology is always necessarily inherent in literacy (Lankshear et al, 1997: 20).
New information technologies bring with them profound changes in the range and nature of texts, and to ways of accessing new information. Email, for example, creates a greater immediacy in written communication, reducing the temporal space so that often writing has some of the immediacy of speech. Hypertext allows readers to read text in non-linear ways, and to interact with texts. Students are using the Internet to communicate with learners around the globe, and to access information world-wide. Users of the new technology bring new literacy skills into play: composing texts appropriate for email communication and critically analysing information found through the Internet.
Information technology could offer new tools for literacy learning. Much of the software available to date has been limited in scope, doing only what can be done more effectively in print. Interest in accessing and creating electronic text could motivate some reluctant learners and open up new opportunities for students with learning difficulties. The interactive nature of communication through web sites and email networks offers alternative ways of learning. Just as students need support in learning to manage books or pens, so too do they need support in learning to manage word processors or electronic data bases, and other new technologies. In turn, teachers need support, through professional development, in using the new technologies. In this new territory, further research such as that currently being conducted in the Children’s Literacy Research project, Technology and Language and Literacy, is necessary.
The provision within the National Plan for professional development and research funding gives the Plan the flexibility to generate insights into potential ways of using information technologies to enhance the literacy skills of all young Australians.
The national literacy and numeracy goal and sub goal set challenging targets and incentives for improvement within Australian education systems and schools. It is clear that within the States and Territories, there are already a substantial range of initiatives in operation, or being planned, which will support schools and literacy educators in addressing this challenge. It is also clear that recent research supports the commitment of the goal to achieving successful literacy outcomes for all children.
The National Literacy and Numeracy Plan, as described in this monograph, provides a coherent and integrated strategy for enhancing literacy skills for all Australian children. The Plan, supported by the Literacy Programme, will put Australia, as a democratic nation, firmly on course for ensuring that all Australian children, with the exception of a very small proportion experiencing severe learning disabilities, will develop, in the early years of schooling, foundational literacy and numeracy skills. These skills must be sufficiently robust and durable to enable all students to make progress throughout school, and to fully participate in contemporary Australian society where strong literacy skills are essential for productive engagement in schooling, in post-secondary education and in the workforce.
The Plan calls for education systems to set priorities for resources which place the acquisition of effective literacy and numeracy at the centre of the whole enterprise of schooling. The Commonwealth has demonstrated its commitment to literacy and numeracy by identifying a series of funding arrangements for national literacy strategies and projects in 1997-1998 to support the National Plan.
The Plan has a clearly defined equity dimension, in that it sets out a national, strategic approach to meeting the needs of all children. The Plan recognises the diversity of experience, needs and interests which children bring with them when they enter school, and encourages a broad range of teaching approaches attuned to this diversity. Particular groups of children, including Indigenous children, children whose first language is not English, and children from some socioeconomic groups, will all have particular needs, to which schools and the schooling system must be responsive.
The identification of literacy difficulties as soon as possible after children enter school provides a means of addressing these difficulties, through appropriate intervention when it is most likely to make a difference.
The establishment, in the literacy benchmarks, of a set of standards broadly accepted by the whole community, opens the way for systems, schools and teachers to set targets for enhancing levels of literacy achievement for all children, and to measure, in systematic ways, progress towards achieving those goals. The benchmarks at Years 3, 5, 7 and 9 will mark achievement at key stages of schooling. The Year 3 benchmark will be a means of assessing progress towards the achievement of the sub goal, “that every child commencing school from 1998 will achieve a minimum acceptable literacy and numeracy standard within four years”. The benchmarks at Years 5, 7 and 9 will make it possible to monitor how effectively students are building on the foundational literacy skills acquired in the early years, and of how those skills are reinforced throughout schooling so that students are always in a position to make progress in all aspects of learning. <
