THE MULTILINGUAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Strategic support to accelerate
literacy improvement in
Stockholm schools
What has been done in the past?
What is being done now?
The future?
Ann-Christin Lövstedt
The Multilingual Research Institute (Språkforskningsinstitutet)
ann-christin.lovstedt@stockholm.se
The current situation is that…
…compared to their native Swedish peers, immigrant
students, on average, have weaker educational outcomes
at all levels of schooling. Nearing the end of compulsory
education, at age 15, there are very significant
performance disadvantages for immigrant students.
…egalitarian policies
notwithstanding, immigrants
fare poorly, compared to
Swedish natives. Their
educational experience is
not much better than that
of immigrants in other
countries.
OECD Reviews of Migrant Education, 2010
…there has been an
increase in the gap
between children from
highly educated, high
income families and
children from unskilled,
low income and
families.
SCB, 2010
A lot of money has been spent to improve
migrant students’ results
 1999-2004/2005: Metropolitan Policy (Storstadssatsningen). The
government budgeted 2 billion SEK to improve living conditions in
diverse, urban areas. Part of it was spent on education improvements.
 2004-2006 the City of Stockholm budgeted 35 million SEK for
measures to accelerate literacy learning and and close the
achievemnet gap, especially among second language learners and
disadvantaged students.
 The project ”Language and content development in the City of
Stockholm” (”Språk- och kunskapsutveckling i Stockholms stad”) was
given almost 19 million SEK.
Professional
development
Action research
projects
Courses
Mother tongue
Lectures…
Pre-/primary/secondary
schools
A lot of things were done…
Reading
literacy
Mother tongue
support
7 initiatives
14 initiatives
Individualization of
instruction at upper
secondary school
and adult education
8 (action)
research
projects
Action research project
about children’s
language
development in preschools
Action reserach project
about the integration of
language in the content
areas of science and
humanities in secondary
school
Action research
project about
literacy
But in spite of all that, the gap is still there
Gap:
28 percentage
points
Stockholm students meeting the requirements to enter Year 10
(2009)
SIRIS, Skolverket, 2010
The Multilingual Research Institute
2010
1998
- Second Language
Acquisition in general
- L1 support/development
- Intercultural approaches
- (Action) research
- All areas of society
2005
- The language of schooling
- Second language teaching
strategies
- Teachers of Swedish as a
second language + other
teachers
- The education area
- The language of schooling
- Teahing strategies for ALL
teachers
- The language in the
content areas
- Genre pedagogy
- Building capacity of whole
school
- Literacy learning for disadvantaged groups
- Strategic support to preschools and schools
”Language & content” PD offers based on
SFL theory
Level 3:
Reading to Learn
Level 2:
- Mathematics and genre
pedagogy (R2L methodology)
- Science, language and genres
Level 1:
- Scaffolding for Success
with Genre-based Pedagogy
- Introduction to genre-based pedagogy and the
notion of scaffolding
Level 1
 Scaffolding literacy learning (scaffolding strategies) in all subjects
 Introduction to the Genre Approach to writing and supportive
reading strategies across the curriculum
 Using the functional model of language as a tool to analyse and
plan effective literacy instruction
 Building capacity and creating independent school literacy
development through proffessional action learning teams
Teaching-learning cycle (from Rothery 1994)
Level 2
 Understanding the specific language of different subjects
 Teaching strategies (connected to the functional model of
language)
 Building knowledge about language (KAL) that enhances student
learning in all subject areas
Level 3
 An intensive approach to literacy and learning that targets both
reading and writing and can be used in primary, secondary and
tertiary education
 Re-writes the classroom discourse pattern to scaffold the
understanding of age approapriate curriculum texts
 Uses what is learnt from reading as a powerful resource to enable
the writing of high quality, age approaporate texts in all subjects
 Action research based (data collection)
Initiate-ResponseFeedback cycle
Reading to Learn
scaffolding cycle
Initiate
Feedback
Prepare
Respond
Elaborate
Task
Generations of genre based pedagogies (in Australia)
2000s reading across the
curriculum
Reading to Learn
1990s writing across the
secondary curriculum
Write it Right
1980s writing in the
primary school
Writing Project
The Stockholm Reading to Learn Project
2009-2010
 7 schools: low, medium, high
socioeconomic status
 22 teachers
9 generalist teachers
9 subject specialist teachers
4 special needs teachers
 Year levels of students taught
K – Year 3:
5
Year 4 – 6:
6
Year 7 – 9:
9
Year 10 – 12: 2
Data from 58 students
 year 1: 6 students
 year 4: 18 ”
 year 6: 6 ”
 year 7: 6 ”
 year 8: 12 ”
 year 10: 6 ”
 Mainly second language learners
 High, average, low performing
students
Program design
 Time span: A whole school year (September 2009/May 2010)
 PD dates: 4 two-day workshops for the teachers: October, December,
March and May
 PD content: Reading to Learn D. Rose (2009) www.readingtolearn.com.au
 Teacher requirements:




study the R2L modules and CD between the workshops
implement the R2L cycle at least 3 times (lessons) per week
video record some of the R2L lessons
collect data on student achievement (see below)
 Support from project staff:
 school visits between workshops: feedback on video recordings, discussion about
implemention of R2L and assessment of students texts etc.
 Final conference: Dr David Rose and Ass. Prof. Kristina Love as keynote
speakers; teachers presenting workshops on their implementation of R2L
Data collection

Selection of 6 focus students by every teacher: 2 high, 2 medium and 2 low
performing students

Standardised reading comprehension test (DLS) - pre and post program
implementation from every focus student (and the whole class)

Assessment of student texts by the teacher, (factual and narrative genres pre
and post the implementation of R2L) using R2L assessment criteria (David
Rose, 2009)

Data about teachers, schools and students

Ongoing evaluation data at the teacher workshops and during the school
visits: documentation, teachers’ own view points and experiences about the
implementation of R2L, their narratives about student performances etc.
Findings
Development of writing in R2L: narrative
Assessment score
Sample of 20 students from 3 schools
Pre
Post
High
Average
Low
Growth=33%
Growth=37%
Growth=128%
Assessment score
Development of achievement in reading
comprehension test (sample of 26 students in 3 schools)
Pre
Post
Medium
Assessment score
Top and bottom students cohorts averaged
across classes year 4-8 (reading comprehension test)
growth=45%
L pre to post
growth=12%
H pe to post
gap = 52%
gap = 38%
Assessment of growth in Year 10
Eva Oivio, Hässelby gymnasium - new arrivals program
Reading test
results based on
Common
European
Framework of
Reference for
Languages
My dear friend!
I’m worried that I don’t have frends. I don’t foroget
when we climbed trees and xxxx. We play together
with me. I deremed often.When came I Swede i
chenged temperament. Because I was alone all the
time. but maybe know you not how much mis you. I
want back before the life that lived we. When we
contact each other I so glad but now totally saad. I
stop to laugh i thinck you often. Now know I not
where you the life your mobile didn’t answer maybe
spok you I don’t want to stotop contat me and you.
One day will I Somalia hope that we see each other
in Somalia. you are sad after me. I know you are
lonely. I don’t want leave alone. but is war therefore
escap I to Swede
Sweden is peace country I so very glad. I go school
free and food
. Hope I that will the war end. and we see each
other when there
Give my greetings to all friends don’t forgat me. I
miss you much kiss and hug
xxxx= unintelligable
Year 10 Eva Oivio,
Hässelby gymnasium new arrivals program
Pre-program writing
sample
Something I will never forget
It happened in may and the weather was suffocatingly hot and the sun stood in the middle of the sky. I
visted my friends and neigbour before I was going. After that I dressd and I stoodd in fron of the mirror and
saw myself. I was nervous and I was extremely distressal I left my mother and litle brother.
My mother and I hugged each other in bosom a warm and I didn’t let go but I want be left in my mother’s
bosom. We had taken a taxi out from city to airport. My mother was very understandin and she comfort me
that I would retun a dey and we would meet in a ordinar way. She said that everything would be all right and
that it was jus cal if it was something. we passed several the fields and there are no bigg house just huts.The
car turned to the right. We saw a lot of people stod in front of airport some of they return home.
I was in the aircraft and my mother stayed outside in the airport.The planes started to fly. I don’t believe
to see my mother a dey on life. When my mother disappeart in the down in aircraft. I began to dispair my
eyes the tears ran I became worried and felt sorrow in my my heart.
I come another country that was differ from my home country.The country has a heterogeneous
population and the language was different of my language. I come out in Arliland I saw my cousin who waited
for me. We embraced each other.Then drove we awau from Arliland towards home. I felt loneliness and I
thoughd a loit my mother and my little brother. I was in bad in mood
The next day I callade my mother and I felt glad. Aftyer several month I talked her that I would visit her.
Suddenly my mother didn’t want to visit her. I was surprisede. Mother said she was going to come here. I was
very glad to again see my mother and my little brother. After a year ago my mother and brother got their
residence permi in Swedan. I felt big joy. After a wek called and she said that would come tomorrow.The
next day I went to airport and waited them in the airport. I lookedhappy.
Suddenly, I saw my mother coming out of the big door look around her self, her eyes searching, catch sight
of her longed-for daughter. We embraced each other. I felt glad andf safety and sucked in the lovely fragrance
of mother. We looked nicely. In time ended worried and on the contrary I happy when my familj livred I
again.
Year 10 Eva Oivio, Hässelby gymnasium - new arrivals program Post program writing sample
Teacher observations about Successes for Students
Some examples…..
 Students are becoming more literate, that is they are not just
decoding, they are developing deeper understanding
 Good progress students can be taught by anyone – students who
struggle are the challenge for teachers and R2L provides a
methodology for these students
 Students are now implementing the R2L strategies independently
 The achievement gap between the highest and lowest achievers
decreases
 Students understand content of subjects better
 Students are now writing well structured texts and achieving well in
National Tests
Teachers’ comments about their own learning
Some examples….
 Teachers “dare” to use more difficult texts
 Before R2L teachers didn’t have a methodology to work with texts,
students often copied and drew pictures
 Teachers can now use more difficult texts and a wider range of genres eg.
not just simple stories in the primary school
 Previously teachers just hoped that a lot of reading in general would be
enough
 Elaborations take all students understandings to a higher level
 Other teachers can see the difference between students who are doing
R2L and students from other classes who are not
 We are now teaching to the weakest students not just the top ones
Learnings of the project team …
 Teachers need time – besides the workshops – to deepen their knowledge
about R2L and the language in their specific subject areas
 The importance of being explicit and clear about the data collection
 Reading comprehension tests not totally satisfactory (culturally biased)
 It is possible to accelerate the literacy development for all students
 The low performing students enhanced their learning and became more
active learners
 Hard work pays off! Even very experienced teachers articulated that
although it was hard work, it was the most worthwhile PD they had ever
participated in and they had never seen such a dramatic improvement in
student writing before !
 R2L engages all students and gives them access to abstract and theoretical
knowledge from reading. We no longer need to dumb down the curriculum!
Reading to Learn 2010/2011
In Stockholm:
 70 Stockholm teachers in the training program
 22 teachers (from last year’s project) in a R2L Mentor program
In Sigtuna:
 17 secondary teachers from one specific school in another
municipality in the training program
Future needs of Stockholm schools
 Ongoing efforts to build capacity through school-based
Professional Action Learning Teams
 Ongoing support for school-based Literacy Leaders
 Ongoing training of teachers in the R2L methodology
 Professional Development for school leaders to become
effective leaders of literacy and learning
 Further specific literacy Professional Development for teachers
of all subject areas