A literacy/learning rich environment.
This month schools are required to supply the Ministry of Education with National Standards data relating to literacy and numeracy achievement,
Seems sensible enough but the process is open to the law of
unintended consequences. The creations of comparative League Tables are an
obvious possibility. As the system beds in I’m betting that the Government will
insist on a more standardised system make school comparison easier. When this
occurs then New Zealand schools will line up with what is in place in the US
and the UK – both countries whose position on international testing tables are
well behind New Zealand’s.
Standardizing education is an ideological imperative – part
of the corporatisation of public services which requires simplistic ways of
measuring progress to create a competitive environment.
More worrying to me is pressure for teachers to narrow their
teaching to conform to school based requirements as schools do their best to
supply the Ministry with data and for teachers to interpret their roles
focussing on teaching literacy and numeracy.
All this compliance, conformity and associated surveillance
places teacher creativity and initiative at risk; schools will be under
pressure to implement approved ‘best practices’ in an attempt to keep up with
other schools.
The general assumption in our culture is that students need
to be taught to read – even to be taught to learn. When it comes to reading
there are a variety of approaches for schools to follow ranging from explicit
phonics teaching to what is called ‘whole language’. It seems the ‘evidence’ is
that reading needs to be taught. Huge amounts of time and effort goes into
teaching reading and there is a vast range of instructive materials for schools
to select from.
For all this reading emphasis reading achievement changes
little. In the UK, following imposed literacy and numeracy approaches, levels
rose but have since plateaued and are trending down. In the USA, for all their
intrusive stanardised testing little can be seen for the money spent.
I have always believed students will want to read (or learn
anything) if they see there is power to be gained. The key to good teaching is
to create the conditions to allow a wide range of ablities and talents
‘emerge’. As Jerome Bruner once wrote, ‘the canny art of the teachers is one of
intellectual temptation’. The desire to learn this has to be seen as an innate
ability – the default way of making sense of experiences. That student’s leave
school as failures – or unmotivated, must be seen as the result of being in the
wrong environment – at school or at home.
Back to schools. As a result of imposed pressure literacy
and numeracy seem to have gobbled up the entire curriculum.
When a teacher I placed student’s inquiry central to the
school day, integrating reading and other language skills, in the process. Due
to some parent (and student confusion) I had to ’educate’ parents that we were
actually teaching reading! As a principal I tried to encourage teachers to
‘reframe’ their reading programmes to teach the skills and cover content needed
in their inquiry programmes. This is not as easy as it sounds because many
teachers have been ‘conditioned’ by their own experiences to see reading as a
stand-alone learning area.
I continue to believe that students will learn to read given
the right conditions and that they will learn to read in their own way. Some
will need a lot of careful encouragement while others learn seemingly without
much assistance at all. If young people are surrounded by people who read they
will learn to read. They will learn to ask their own questions and get pointers
from others but this they can do by themselves. The same applies to any area of
learning.
Creating the environment or learning culture and developing
positive relationship with all learners is the essence of personalising
learning – the antithesis of the current standardised approach of the current
Government. Students will learn if immersed in a culture in which people are
communicating regularly with the written word in any form much as they learnt
to walk and talk. Many creative teachers have introduced reading through students
interest in expressing themselves through writing and indeed the best first
real books could well be the books they write ( with assistance if necessary).
It is ironic to realize that schools may be creating reading
failures by their misguided attempts to ‘teach’ their students to read –
failure that will be amplified by current standardised teaching.
By making reading so important those who fall behind will
label themselves as failures. Placed in ability groups by well-meaning teachers
only reinforces children’s perceptions- ‘once a weka always a weka’! Some of
these early reading failures become labelled as behaviour problems as such
students ‘lose the plot’ as they see little meaning in what they are asked to
do. The more pressure placed on these children the worse it gets. Some students
learn to hate reading- and in turn learning itself.
Children learn to read, or learn anything, if they see the
need. They learn by being involved with others on joint tasks. Often students
will help each other and thankfully students are not scared to ask for help from
others. Such help is provided at the point of need not ‘just in case’ which is
the basis of teacher reading programmes. At home many children write and
illustrate their own stories making use of phonetic spelling and asking adults
for help as required.
Every learner is unique. Everyone learns to read, or
anything, in their own way. Only by observing your students can you pick the
moment to provide help but give help lightly as students soon pick up that
teachers have taken over. At this point many students, particularly those who
have experienced failure, withdraw and stop asking for help.
Some children learn exotic words before they can read
simpler ones. Some learn to write before reading. Some learn quickly and others
take many years before they become fluent. Most of all children will learn to
read if something has caught their interest.
I wonder how many personalised creative approaches will be
overlooked in the need for schools to look good by following approved ‘best
practices’ and the need to complete accountability requirements?
Teachers, like their students, can either be encouraged to
be creative or compliant – they can’t be both.
7 comments:
Creativity has all but gone, a delicate flower at best, compliance rules the waves.
I agree with your observations about the learning of reading, and everything else, for that matter. The more that 'experts' decree that each subject area is stand alone, and needs to be quantified, the worse the problem becomes. If someone can prove that reading, writing, maths etc is a separate discipline all by themselves then I will eat my proverbial hat. If learning of each discipline is not totally separate and isolated from others, then how can each discipline be measured?
Your bet that the government will move towards a more standardised system has already been won. We know that contracts were let in late 2011 for the development of 'tools' to assist' teachers in making their 'assessments of achievement.' This includes an online database where 'assessment data' can be entered to ranked against relevant 'standards.' It doesn't take much thinking to extrapolate where this is heading - a national database of all children's 'achievement' over the year, and, hey presto, 'proof' of teacher 'effectiveness.' This kind of thing is also in development in USA.
I am afraid you are right Allan - do school principals appreciate what they are getting into?
Creativity and the natural curiosity of my lovely children is what makes our class interesting, motivating and fun. Not to say there is not the pressure to get them to 'standard' but I believe that what you put your focus on grows so I am working hard within my own thinking to make sure my thinking is focussed on what my children bring that enriches our class.
As you say Jody it all depends on your focus.
I agree that creativity and creating the "temptation" to learn are very important aspects of teaching. I also think frameworks, including the judicious use of quantification can be helpful to teachers. I am not sure it should really be treated as an "either this or that" argument. Surely, there is a middle way that doesn't treat everything as a dichotomy.
I agree that either/or situations are counter productive. The trouble is schools have been pressurised to focus on narrow accountability at the expense of creativity. It is a matter of balance?
Post a Comment